Turgenev's trial with Goncharov. Family archive

“An Extraordinary Story” with Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov. From the memoir essay “An Extraordinary History”: Since 1855, I began to notice some increased attention to me from Turgenev. He often sought conversations with me, it seemed

Monday marks the 200th anniversary of his birth. famous critic(“A Million Torments”, “Notes on the Personality of Belinsky”, “Better Late Than Never”) and the writer Ivan Goncharov, author of the novels “ An ordinary story", "Oblomov", "Cliff", displaying, in full view, pre-reform life Russia XIX century. The streets of many cities in the post-Soviet space are named after him, including in our region (Donetsk and Mariupol). And the term “Oblomovism”, introduced into use thanks to him, is not outdated to this day. Many of us like to wait, lying on the sofa, for happiness to fall on its own... Ivan Aleksandrovich himself was a very active person, he managed to try on many professions.

A merchant's son could become a businessman

The future writer was born in the year of the Russian-French confrontation - 1812 - in Simbirsk, which in the last century was renamed Ulyanovsk - according to true surname another local celebrity, the leader of the revolution, Vladimir Lenin. The large stone house of the Goncharovs (Vanya lived with his older brother and two sisters was not at all bad, because his father and mother belonged to the merchant class) was located in the very center of the city, had an extensive courtyard and garden.

Goncharov was only seven when his father died. Household concerns fell on the mother’s shoulders, and the boy’s godfather, retired sailor Nikolai Tregubov, open-minded, critical of what was happening in Russia at that time. Then there was a private boarding school, a commercial school in Moscow, chosen at the insistence of the mother. However, he was much more interested not in the material, but in the spiritual side of life. Ivan read Karamzin, “fed” Derzhavin, and idolized Pushkin. And, in the end, he persuaded his mother to write a petition to remove him from the list of boarders.

I liked the Faculty of Literature at Moscow University much more. After graduating from university, Ivan went to visit his relatives. Simbirsk, which resembled a huge sleepy village, did not seduce - I was drawn to Moscow and St. Petersburg. But he had to stay late - Governor Zagryazhsky persuaded him to become his secretary. And 11 months later, Goncharov rushed with him to the capital, to the banks of the Neva.

Peter and "Pallada"

Some write that, having no connections, but believing in his talent and luck, Goncharov went to the Foreign Trade Department of the Ministry of Finance and got a job as a translator of foreign correspondence. Others - that there was protection: they say, brother his godfather was a big shot in St. Petersburg. Be that as it may, a civil service began that would last a total of 30 years.

Goncharov recalled how, while working as a “little official-translator,” he learned about Pushkin’s death. “In my modest bureaucratic room, on the shelf, in the first place were his works, where everything was studied, where every line was felt, thought out... And suddenly they came and said that he was killed, that he was no more... It was in the department. “I went out into the corridor and bitterly, unable to control myself, turning to the wall and covering my face with my hands, I cried,” the writer admitted. - Melancholy cut my heart like a knife, and tears flowed at a time when I still didn’t want to believe that he was no longer there, that Pushkin was gone! I could not understand that the one before whom I mentally bowed my knees lay lifeless. And I cried bitterly and inconsolably, as one does upon receiving news of the death of a beloved woman or mother.”

In parallel with his service, Ivan Alexandrovich was engaged in writing, taught the sons of the artist Nikolai Maykov - the future poet Apollo and Valerian - Latin language and Russian literature. There I had plenty of conversations with famous writers, musicians, painters. Then he became a frequent visitor to the House of Writers, where some time later he read his debut novel “An Ordinary History” to Belinsky. The title itself emphasizes that the conflict between “realism” and “romanticism” played out in the work are typical processes of that time. However, like ours. After all, how many of these hellish people are there now, who killed love in the name of a career...

Goncharov also shot powerfully with the cycle of travel essays “Frigate “Pallada”. On this ship, as the secretary of Admiral Putyatin, he conquered Japan, whose residents did not give foreigners the go-ahead to trade. But Russia and the United States rattled their weapons off the coast of the Land of the Rising Sun. And the corresponding agreements were signed. From the first days of that journey, which lasted two and a half years (the writer visited England, South Africa, Indonesia, Japan, China, the Philippines and many small islands and archipelagos of the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Oceans), Goncharov began keeping a detailed travel journal. His materials formed the basis for the future book “Frigate “Pallada”,” which amazed readers with both its rich factual content and style - sharp, tenacious, non-trivial. By the way, this thing went through eight editions during Goncharov’s lifetime - more than any of his novels.

After the trip, Goncharov did not remain in the Department of the Ministry of Finance for long. He managed to get a position as a censor. The position for a writer was strange, because he had to emasculate the works of his colleagues. However, if the master was burdened, he didn’t show it. By that time, he had already published the novel “Oblomov”, becoming more than famous. Everyone found something of their own in this work: some reviled the couch potato Oblomov, others saw in his position almost a protest against the vanity of all-consuming progress.

In mid-1862, Ivan Alexandrovich was invited to the position of editor of the Severnaya Pochta newspaper, the mouthpiece of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. He worked there for about a year and was then appointed a member of the press council. Goncharov actively defended the government, caused a lot of trouble to Nekrasov’s Sovremennik and Pisarev’s Russkiy Slovo, criticized the nihilists, and wrote about the “pathetic and dependent doctrines of materialism, socialism and communism.” According to his nephew’s fiancée, Elizaveta Goncharova (nee Umanets), on the master’s desk “there was a large, luxurious, silver, gilded inkwell, with enamel and inlays; the entire writing set and candlesticks are a gift from the emperor Alexandra III(it seems that he was very flattered by the attention of the sovereign, and he willingly told the details of the very celebration of this offering).”

Suffering over the "Cliff"

Literary critic and memoirist Pavel Annenkov, who was in close relationships with many writers, recalled a quarrel that broke out between the two Ivans - Goncharov and Turgenev: “Upon returning from his trip around the world, or even earlier, Goncharov read some part of the novel he had written to Turgenev and told him the content of this work. When “The Noble Nest” appeared, Turgenev was surprised to hear that the author of the novel, which later appeared under the title “The Precipice,” found a striking similarity in the plots, which he expressed to Turgenev personally. The same thing happened with the advent of “On the Eve.”

Enraged by the accusation of plagiarism, Turgenev demanded arbitration. “To your suggestion that I am concerned about your successes, let me smile, and that’s all,” Goncharov replied. But he agreed to the trial. That one took place on March 29, 1860 in his apartment. Among the judges there were people who treated both writers equally well. Including Annenkov. The verdict was as follows: “The works of Turgenev and Goncharov, as having arisen on the same Russian soil, should therefore have several similar provisions, coincidentally coincide in some thoughts and expressions, which justifies and excuses both sides.”

Goncharov was pleased, but Turgenev told him that their friendly relations “will end from this moment.” They made peace only four years later - at the funeral of one of the experts, Druzhinin, right in front of the journalist’s open coffin. But there was never the same good relationship between them.

At the end of 1867, Ivan Alexandrovich retired, completely concentrating on his third novel, “The Precipice,” which he wrote for 20 years. Sometimes he called it “the child of my heart,” sometimes “an inconvenient task that, like a millstone, hangs around my neck and prevents me from turning around.” But still he survived. True, after finishing the novel, I quickly gave up.

Sick and lonely, Goncharov often fell into depression and complained that he could not quickly respond to events modern life. IN creatively best years were already behind him, nothing had stuck together in his personal life - he had never been married. “I have no relatives,” he admitted. “There are relatives by blood, but I don’t attach any value to them.” What kind of relatives are these, what is close to me about them? Strangers, but close in thought and feelings, can be more dear to me than blood - only such kinship I value and value it highly.”

In September 1891, he caught a cold and died three days later from pneumonia at the age of eightie. The writer was buried at the New Nikolskoye Cemetery of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra. On August 27, 1956, in connection with the liquidation of this shelter for the dead, Goncharov’s ashes were transferred to the Literatorskiye Mostki Volkov Cemetery and buried near the graves of Grigorovich and... Turgenev, with whom he quarreled so much during his lifetime.

They will present books and open a three-story museum

More than a hundred events were dedicated to the 200th anniversary of Goncharov in Ulyanovsk. In the regional scientific library the exhibition “Goncharov’s spells are getting stronger” was launched, where, in particular, you can see his unfinished works, handwritten book writer's grandfather, find out how local residents celebrated the anniversary of Ivan Alexandrovich 100 years ago. VI takes place from June 12 to 21 theater festival"Goncharov's Heroes on the Modern Stage." After loud notices about the appalling state of the monument to the classic, it was hastily restored (and work on sealing seams and cleaning rust began only this month).

Today the anniversary envelope will be canceled, and on Sunday the traditional XXXIV All-Russian Potter's Festival will be held in Vinnovskaya Roshcha Park (poetry and music will be performed).

On Monday, the three-story Goncharov Historical and Memorial Center-Museum will be inaugurated. The first vernissage “Heroes of I.A. Goncharov in illustrations” will take place there Russian artists" On the same day, the regional government will present the International literary prize writer's name.

June 20 All-Russian state library of Foreign Literature presents publications released specially for the 200th anniversary of the writer’s birth: literary biography Goncharov, created by the famous French writer Henri Troyat, classic journalism in Russian and German languages, photo albums.

CLIO– Case No. 2 is being heard about a quarrel Turgenev Ivan Sergeevich With Goncharov Ivan Alexandrovich. Called as a witness in the case.

Goncharov! Tell us about the reasons for your quarrel with Turgenev.

GONCHAROV(stands up) - The reasons for my break with Turgenev are my own in detail outlined in extensive manuscript, which I called "An Extraordinary Story" with the subtitle "true incident." Before my death, I handed over this manuscript, converted and sealed with five wax seals, to Sofya Aleksandrovna Nikitenko for safekeeping with a transmittal note in which I asked her to publish the manuscript only after my and Turgenev’s death, or even better not to publish it at all, but to transfer it for safekeeping to the Russian public library for the edification of posterity.

Editor's note NM: For more information about this manuscript, see the end of the page.

Opening the court hearing, you, turning to Turgenev, quite rightly deigned to note that all his literary squabbles somehow do not fit with his face, full of good nature and benevolence, or with his literary creations, full of grace. This is the whole point, that his impressive appearance and elegance of style deceived everyone, and he took advantage of it perfectly. And I also fell for this bait. Only later did I become convinced that Turgenev was essentially an actor first and foremost. He always plays, even when he is alone. There is nothing sincere in him, from the heart. But he is a wonderful actor. And he played all his life. But it’s good to play on the theater stage. But in life, playing is a shame, because it means basing your life on a lie. That’s how Turgenev did it. He is an actor, a liar, and also a literary thief.

It must be said that Turgenev is not devoid of literary talent. He is an excellent miniaturist. All his short stories, especially “Notes of a Hunter,” are written as if in watercolors. But he is absolutely incapable of large canvases, of broad and deep generalizations. For this he lacked either intelligence or observation. Well, you won’t get far with small stories, no matter how good they are. That’s why Pushkin advised Gogol, after his “Evenings on a Farm near Dikanka,” to write something major. And he himself gave him the themes of both “The Inspector General” and “Dead Souls”.

And vanity, which is characteristic of every actor and with which Turgenev was stuffed like a bag of dust, made him imagine himself as a general from Russian literature. And for such an important rank you must also have a corresponding track record, i.e. it was necessary to have not only small stories, but also major things.

But how to create them when there is no corresponding talent for this? It’s very simple to steal the theme, images, types, plot and development of a novel from another; all this, to cover up the tracks, mix, hastily concoct and, most importantly, get ahead of the robbed writer by publishing his work in print. That's what Turgenev did with me.

Thanks to the service and also my laziness (“Oblomovism”), I wrote my big novels for a very long time. “The Cliff” took me twenty years. In addition, I was deprived of a sense of self-criticism; I myself could not firmly say to myself whether my writing was good or bad. Therefore, I often read my manuscripts to my literary colleagues, including Turgenev, and eagerly listened to their opinions.

My first suspicion about Turgenev arose when I read him “ Spring waters”, and saw that he took a lot from my “Ordinary History”. But I harbored this suspicion within myself. I must say that I read to Turgenev not only individual scenes from “The Precipice,” but also told him the entire outline and entire development of the novel, which I had not yet written.

Turgenev listened to me greedily. And suddenly it appears in print one after another, and of course before I published “The Precipice” - “The Noble Nest”, “Fathers and Sons” and “On the Eve”.

Reading them, I clearly saw that all these were chips from my “Cliff”.

Without having my own ideas in my head and without carefully observing the Russian social life, since he constantly lived abroad, Turgenev organized a real hunt for my literary works and even thoughts. No wonder he was an excellent hunter.

In his letters to me, he always asked me what I was working on, what I had written and what I intended to write. And from my answers he drew material for his stories.

He constantly sent his henchmen to me, like Annenkov, to find out something about my work. They found out, thanks to my gullibility, and immediately reported to him in detail, and he immediately processed my material into some of his own literary work.

When I lived in Marienbad, in a hotel, Turgenev even sent two of his sycophants, who settled in the same corridor with me, and during my absence, they snuck into my room, took my manuscripts out of the chest of drawers, hastily copied them, and then handed them over to me. Turgenev. I discovered this because the manuscripts were not lying the way I had placed them. After that, I began to lock my manuscripts in a suitcase.

Turgenev did not go abroad at all because of Pauline Viardot, as he told everyone. This was a secondary reason . main reason was to take away my stolen property with impunity and use it there in freedom, i.e. process my material into your stories and novels. The whole vileness of his behavior lies in the fact that he published his novels before I had time to finish and publish my extensive novels. And it turned out that it was he who said the first word, and I seemed to have borrowed it from him.

Turgenev always followed in my footsteps, and the reading public might get the impression that I was following in his footsteps. Here, I ask you to pay attention to the dates of writing my novels and their publication, and to the dates of publication of Turgenev’s novels: in 1847 in Sovremennik I published “Ordinary History ", and in 1848 Turgenev published "Spring Waters". I wrote “Oblomov” for fifteen years - from 1844-1859. and printed it in 1859 in Otechestvennye zapiski. At the same time I also wrote “The Precipice”, which I published in full only in 1869. But I read both of my novels to many people, including Turgenev, at the very beginning of their creation. And Turgenev, listening and remembering my presentation, baked novels himself, like pancakes. He published: “Rudina” in 1855, “Noble Nest” in 1858, “On the Eve” in 1859, “Fathers and Sons” in 1861 and “Smoke” in 1867. In twelve years, five novels!

And as soon as my material was exhausted and he couldn’t get anything else out of me, he last novel“Nov”, which by the way is worthless, was released only in 1876, i.e. nine years after Smoke. In addition, Turgenev, having become close friends abroad with the local writers - Flaubert, the Goncourt brothers, Zola, the German Jew Auerbach, presented himself as the only brilliant Russian writer, as a general from Russian literature. He took care of translating his works into French, and on the contrary, he erased the translations of my novels. Furthermore, currying favor with the “enlightened Europeans,” he shared with them the literary materials he had stolen from me. Read carefully “Dacha on the Rhine” by Auerbach, “ Madame Bovary" And " Education sentimentale"Flaubert, and you will see that all this is my material from “Cliff”, processed in a Western European manner.

I affirm that if I had not retold Turgenev my “Cliff” in its entirety and in detail, then there would not have been “The Noble Nest”, “On the Eve”, “Fathers and Sons” and “Smoke” in our literature, or “Dacha” on the Rhine" - in German, nor " Madame Bovary" And " Education sentimentale"- in French, and maybe many other works that I have not read and do not know.

I understand that it is very difficult for me, perhaps even impossible, to legally prove my accusation of Turgenev of literary theft. Moreover, he, as an experienced writer, did a great job of covering up the traces of his theft. But if you instruct experienced literary critics to read my and Turgenev’s novels carefully and in parallel, I have no doubt that they will be convinced that Turgenev is all his own. literary material stole from me.

(Goncharov sits down in a chair).

CLIO- Witness Nikitenko Alexander Vasilievich, go to the table and tell everything you know about the quarrel between Turgenev and Goncharov.

NIKITENKO– In 1860, Turgenev gave a banquet on the occasion of the publication of his novel “On the Eve,” for which he received 4,000 rubles. Dudyshkin and I were also invited to this banquet. When Dudyshkin came to the banquet, he laughed and spoke about his meeting on Nevsky Prospect with Goncharov:

“I'm coming here. On the way I meet Goncharov and tell him I’m going to a banquet with Turgenev on the occasion of his receiving 4,000 rubles. for printing "On the Eve". Goncharov answered me: “Tell Turgenev that he is organizing a banquet with my money, because he stole his novel from my “Cliff.” Laughing, I answered him that I would definitely tell him.”

And he passed it on. Of course, Dudyshkin acted very frivolously. His story caused outrage in Turgenev, and he then wrote a letter to Goncharov, in which he quoted Dudyshkin’s words, and demanded that Goncharov explain himself to an authoritative literary commission that would determine the truth or falsity of his statements. For his part, Turgenev proposed a commission consisting of the following: Annenkov, Druzhinin, Dudyshkin and Nikitenko. In case of refusal, Turgenev wrote to Goncharov that he would be forced challenge him to a duel. The letter was written in restrained terms, quite correctly.

Goncharov responded to this letter with consent and also agreed with the composition of the commission. The meeting was scheduled at Goncharov’s apartment. The first word was given to Goncharov.

He, apparently embarrassed, spoke crumpled and unconvincingly about the fact that “Spring Waters”, and “The Noble Nest”, and “On the Eve” were taken by Turgenev from his “Ordinary History” and from the manuscript of “The Precipice”, which he read to Turgenev . As proof, Goncharov cited the following common images and scenes in these novels: “in “The Precipice,” Vera is given to Volokhov, and in him, Elena is given to the Bulgarian Insarov. By the way, he took the name Elena from me, since at first my Vera was Elena. My grandmother is described, and his grandmother is described in “The Noble Nest,” only my grandmother is much better written than his.”

Turgenev calmly and with dignity denied Goncharov’s accusation and said that the commonality of ideas, images and positions does not at all prove that one borrows from another, but only proves that we live at the same time, breathe the same air and observe the same phenomena, but Each one presents them in his own way.

We, the commission, all four of us, convinced Goncharov that he and Turgenev had completely different literary talents, that they both represented exceptional value in Russian literature and that none of them needed to borrow from each other. The commission unanimously recognized that Goncharov was wrong.

Then Turgenev stood up, took his hat and, turning to Goncharov, said: “From now on, I ask you not to count me among your friends.” And left.

But we also had to eliminate Goncharov’s phrase, transmitted through Dudyshkin, about Turgenev’s banquet at Goncharov’s expense. Goncharov said that it was a joke on his part, and he admits that it was incorrect, and Dudyshkin said that Goncharov did not authorize him to convey this phrase to Turgenev, but he did it on his own initiative. Based on these statements, the commission recognized this phrase as if it had not been uttered, and thus the reason for the duel was eliminated.

CLIO– Well, did Goncharov agree with the Commission’s conclusion?

NIKITENKO– He did not object to our conclusion, but, apparently, in his heart, he remained with his previous opinion. And later he directly said that all members of the commission were Turgenev’s henchmen and therefore could not give a different conclusion.

In general, Goncharov became more and more suspicious over the years. In all his interlocutors, he saw Turgenev's spies and spies, who allegedly sought to extract from him what he was writing in order to convey this to Turgenev. As a result of his state of mind, Goncharov stopped being in society and retired to his single apartment. When Turgenev appeared on the banks of the Neva, Goncharov said: “An evil Chechen is crawling to the shore...”

Even Stasyulovich, editor of Vestnik Evropy, who was Goncharov’s closest friend, with whom he constantly consulted and in whose magazine he published, even Goncharov suspected him of passing on to Turgenev everything he heard from him. And he stopped visiting him. This state of mind Goncharov could not be called completely normal during this period.

CLIO- Nikitenko, take your place. Turgenev, you have the last word.

TURGENEV– I will not justify myself in the accusations brought against me by Goncharov for two reasons: firstly, because I consider it beneath my dignity, and secondly, because not just some commission, but the entire reading public, maybe as many as you want to compare my and Goncharov’s works, and none of them would think of suspecting me of borrowing from Goncharov. At least in the hundred years that have passed since the publication of our works, nowhere, not a single word of literary criticism has been said about this. And a century is a sufficient period to test the integrity of our writings. Yes, in the end, that's not the point What it is written, but in that How written. Ze style l‘ est l‘ homme la meme chos, say the French.

But I must refute Goncharov’s other accusation with facts. This is an accusation that, while living abroad, I pushed myself into the background, or completely overshadowed it.

Yes, due to the fact that I lived abroad and was on friendly terms with all the most prominent foreign writers, mainly by the French, I unwittingly became an intermediary between our and Western European literatures. And I valued this responsible role very highly, and least of all cared about popularizing my works. On the one hand, I was constantly concerned about translating Russian works into French, and on the other, I tried to acquaint Russia with French literature. To do this, I arranged for Zola to become a permanent correspondent for Vestnik Evropy, where he published his articles for several years.

When one of the French critics decided to go to Russia to personally meet Russian writers and then give his impressions about them, and turned to me for recommendations, I gave him letters of recommendation to all more or less famous Russian writers, including to Goncharov and Dostoevsky, with whom at that time I had a complete break. I wrote to Dostoevsky that our breakup does not prevent me from recognizing it main force in Russian literature, and therefore I ask him to receive Mr. N and introduce him "with your life and works." Despite our antagonism with Leo Tolstoy, I made every effort to quickly and the best translations his writings on foreign languages, and I can be proud that I was the first to introduce Leo Tolstoy to Europe. Goncharov was also translated into French, but not much. He himself is to blame for this, or rather, his laziness, because he either did not respond to proposals for translation, or answered vaguely.

Although I broke away from Russia, I never ceased to be Russian and I never betrayed Russian interests, especially the interests of Russian literature, to anyone.

CLIO– Case No. 2 about the quarrel between Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev and Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov, I consider completed. Based testimony and explanations of the parties, Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev on charges of starting a quarrel with Ivan Alexandrovich Goncharov, be considered acquitted by the court of History.

Goncharov in his petition to form a commission to investigate the facts of Turgenev borrowing from him - Goncharov - materials for his works refuse for the following reasons. Firstly, such a commission already existed in 1860 and made a unanimous decision refuting Goncharov’s accusation of Turgenev. And, secondly, over the hundred-year period that has passed since the writing of the novels by Goncharov and Turgenev, literary criticism, who carefully studied the work of both authors, never discovered any borrowings by Turgenev from Goncharov.

Goncharov's spread of rumors that Turgenev stole themes and characters from him for his novels is considered false and defamatory of good literary name Turgenev and on this basis subject Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov to public censure.

The painful state of Goncharov’s psyche (mania), which the witness Nikitenko mentioned, cannot serve as an excuse for him, since this mania manifested itself in Goncharov’s declining years, and he expressed his accusations of Turgenev for theft in the prime of his strength and his literary talent.

“Noise, excitement on Parnassus, Everyone on Parnassus is in alarm,” wrote the poet Dmitry Minaev in the poem “Parnassian Verdict,” dedicated to the arbitration court that took place in the spring of 1860. Court with with great difficulty helped avoid a duel between Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov and Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev. The reason for the conflict is accusations of plagiarism.

In the summer of 1878, the first international congress of writers was held in Paris. It was dedicated to copyright protection. Since many periodicals V various countries They forgot to pay royalties to the authors. Often they left the plot, but changed the names of the characters and the location of the action. At this congress, Russia was represented only by Ivan Turgenev and the young playwright Pyotr Boborykin.

Ivan Sergeevich was elected vice-president of the congress. L. N. Tolstoy, F. M. Dostoevsky, Ya. P. Polonsky and I. A. Goncharov refused to come to the congress. Partly due to reluctance to meet Turgenev. Many whom the author of “Notes of a Hunter” respected did not want to meet him. Goncharov openly accused Turgenev of plagiarism.

The landowner Turgenev looked down on the merchant's son, Goncharov. Common-law wife Nikolai Nekrasov - Avdotya Panaeva, recalled how Goncharov and Turgenev met in Belinsky’s house. Goncharov took “Notes of a Hunter” with him on a round-the-world expedition on the frigate “Pallada”. And Turgenev spoke of Goncharov with condescending lordliness - “he studied Goncharov, and came to the conclusion that at heart an official and his horizons are limited to petty interests, that there are no impulses in his nature, that he is completely satisfied with his meager world and is not interested in any social questions, he is even somehow afraid to talk about them, so as not to lose the good intentions of the official. Such a person will not go far. Look, he will get stuck on his first work."

Ivan Goncharov had to build a career solely thanks to his hard work and intelligence. The minor official became a censor, then a confidant of the Minister of Public Education with the rank of full state councilor, and ended his career as a member of the Council of Ministers for Printing Affairs.

After graduating from the Faculty of Literature at Moscow University in 1834, Ivan Alexandrovich was given a very modest salary in the Department of Foreign Trade of the Ministry of Finance in St. Petersburg; he had to work as a tutor for the Maykovs, who brought him into their salon and introduced him to relatives and friends. The environment in which he found himself was aristocratic, in this circle it was customary not to show his poverty and experiences, to treat evenly both those who were higher in position and those who were lower.

In 1846, Ivan Goncharov’s novel “An Ordinary History” was read to Vissarion Belinsky; the critic did not really like the novel. And Nikolai Nekrasov approved the novel and soon published it in the Sovremennik magazine.

In 1852, Goncharov was appointed secretary of Vice Admiral Evfimy Putyatin and sailed with the frigate Pallada trip around the world. In 1855, he returned to St. Petersburg by land, across all of Russia from the coast of the Sea of ​​Okhotsk. In April " Domestic notes"published the first essay about this journey. Citizens of Russia learned for the first time about the life of Japan and many other countries. A year later, Goncharov becomes a censor. He helps many of his friends - Pisemsky, Lazhechnikov, Dostoevsky. ... Writers prefer to be friends with him. Including Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev, who often comes to visit him.

In his autobiographical novel “An Extraordinary History” - about the relations between writers of the 1840-1870s, Ivan Goncharov wrote - “Since 1855, I began to notice some kind of increased attention to me from Turgenev.” During one of the conversations, Goncharov shared with Turgenev the idea of ​​a new novel. He told everything in detail: characters, episodes, plot. About a certain artist Raisky, who came to provincial town to his distant relative who lives with two granddaughters. One - Varya - strong-willed, charming, religious.

In the winter of 1858, Turgenev invited friends to his place to listen to a new novel. And presented it at home reading - “The Noble Nest”. Goncharov did not come to dinner, but later. And he said that he was not invited. Turgenev was surprised and objected that he had invited everyone. When they started reading the novel, Ivan Aleksandrovich noticed similarities with his novel “The Cliff”. Goncharov recognizes his Raisky in Lavretsky, and his Varya in Liza. He understands the reason why he was not invited to read.

The censor is outraged and demands that several scenes, the idea of ​​which belonged to him, be removed from the novel. Turgenev admits that there are some similarities. And I agree to fulfill the requirement. The listeners were surprised. Ivan Sergeevich denied borrowing the plot, but agreed to exclude some scenes from the novel. When Goncharov came home, he threw out the chapter about Raisky’s ancestors from the manuscript. The chapter was quite lengthy. Goncharov decided not to create a scandal, but during meetings he would throw out the phrase: “I’m giving this to you! I still have a lot.”

But from then on, he began to look for his own subjects in Turgenev’s works. After the publication of the novel "On the Eve", Ivan Alexandrovich openly accused Turgenev of stealing other people's ideas. The writers exchanged threatening letters. Turgenev demanded that a “literary arbitration court” be appointed, otherwise he threatened to challenge him to a duel.

“To your suggestion that I am concerned about your successes, let me smile, and that’s all,” Goncharov replied. But he agreed to the trial. The judges were to be Annenkov, Druzhinin, Nikitenko and Dudyshkin - publicists. They found themselves in the most difficult situation on the one hand, Goncharov is not only a censor who cannot be offended, but also a friend, on the other hand, Turgenev is also a famous friend. As Dmitry Minaev writes in the poem “Parnassian Sentence”:

He, like me, is an old writer,

He recently published a novel,

Where is the plot and story plan?

It was ingloriously stolen from me...

I have a hero in consumption,

He has a portrait of the same;

My name is Elena,

He has Elena too,

All his faces are the same

Like in my novel, they walk

They drink, chat, sleep and love...

This impudence surpasses

All sorts of measures...

The judges ruled " Solomon's solution" - no one is to blame, an accidental coincidence. “The works of Turgenev and Goncharov, which arose on the same Russian soil, should therefore have several similar provisions, coincidentally coincide in some thoughts and expressions, which justifies and excuses both sides."

Your business, and punished

Your enemy will be evil.

And for that he, by our power,

Will be at the theater soon

Play the role of the merchant silently

Wordless in "The Inspector General".

You - just like for a novel

You don't have a plot again -

You will go to the government account

Travel around the world.

That's right, the best creation

You will write on the road.

So we decide on Parnassus

Me, Minerva and all the gods."

Turgenev was satisfied with the verdict. But he said that he would never deal with Goncharov again. Ivan Alexandrovich did not forgive the insult. He left his memoirs for his descendants - “An Extraordinary Story” - where he outlined the events in detail. Four years later, the writers met on a sad occasion. One of the experts, Alexander Druzhinin, was buried. “Reconciliation of the parties” took place on January 21, 1864 - but Goncharov was never able to forgive Turgenev. And Turgenev wrote to Goncharov: “We, too, are the last Mohicans...”.