Yum Lotman talks about Russian culture. YU

Yuri Mikhailovich Lotman (1922 – 1993) – cultural scientist, founder of the Tartu-Moscow semiotic school. The author of numerous works on the history of Russian culture from the point of view of semiotics, he developed his own general theory of culture, set out in the work “Culture and Explosion” (1992).

The text is published according to the publication: Yu. M. Lotman Conversations about Russian culture. Life and traditions of the Russian nobility ( XVIII-early XIX century). St. Petersburg, - “Art - St. Petersburg”. – 1994.

Life and culture

Devoting conversations to Russian life and culture XVIII – beginning of the 19th century, we must first of all determine the meaning of the concepts “life”, “culture”, “Russian culture of the 18th century” – beginning of the 19th century" and their relationships with each other. At the same time, let us make a reservation that the concept of “culture,” which belongs to the most fundamental in the cycle of human sciences, can itself become the subject of a separate monograph and has repeatedly become so. It would be strange if in this book we set out to resolve controversial issues related to this concept. It is very comprehensive: it includes morality, the whole range of ideas, human creativity, and much more. It will be quite enough for us to limit ourselves to that side of the concept of “culture” that is necessary to illuminate our relatively narrow topic.

Culture comes first – a collective concept. An individual can be a carrier of culture, can actively participate in its development, however, by its nature, culture, like language, – a public phenomenon, that is, social.

Consequently, culture is something common to any group – groups of people living at the same time and connected by a certain social organization. From this it follows that culture is form of communication between people and is possible only in a group in which people communicate. (An organizational structure that unites people living at the same time is called synchronous, and we will further use this concept when defining a number of aspects of the phenomenon that interests us).

Any structure serving the sphere of social communication is a language. This means that it forms a certain system signs used in accordance with rules known to members of a given group. We call signs any material expression (words, drawings, things, etc.) that has the meaning and thus can serve as a means conveying meaning.

Consequently, culture has, firstly, a communication and, secondly, a symbolic nature. Let's focus on this last one. Let's think about something as simple and familiar as bread. Bread is material and visible. It has weight, shape, it can be cut and eaten. Bread eaten comes into physiological contact with a person. In this function of it, one cannot ask about it: what does it mean? It has a use, not a meaning. But when we say: “Give us this day our daily bread,” – the word “bread” does not just mean bread as a thing, but has more broad meaning: “food necessary for life.” And when in the Gospel of John we read the words of Christ: “I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger” (John 6:35), then before us – complex symbolic meaning of both the object itself and the word denoting it.

The sword is also nothing more than an object. As a thing, it can be forged or broken, it can be placed in a museum display case, and it can kill a person. This is all – using it as an object, but when, attached to a belt or supported by a baldric placed on the hip, the sword symbolizes a free person and is a “sign of freedom”, it already appears as a symbol and belongs to culture.

In the 18th century, Russian and European noblemen do not carry a sword – hanging on his side is a sword (sometimes a tiny, almost toy ceremonial sword, which is practically not a weapon). In this case the sword – symbol symbol: it means a sword, and a sword means belonging to a privileged class.

Belonging to the nobility also means being bound by certain rules of behavior, principles of honor, even the cut of clothing. We know of cases when “wearing clothes indecent for a nobleman” (that is, peasant dress) or also a beard “indecent for a nobleman” became a matter of concern for the political police and the emperor himself.

Sword as a weapon, sword as part of clothing, sword as a symbol, sign of nobility – all these are different functions of an object in the general context of culture.

In its various incarnations, a symbol can simultaneously be a weapon suitable for direct practical use, or be completely separated from its immediate function. So, for example, a small sword specially designed for parades excluded practical use, actually being a picture of a weapon rather than a weapon. The parade sphere was separated from the battle sphere by emotions, body language and functions. Let us remember the words of Chatsky: “I will go to death as to a parade.” At the same time, in Tolstoy’s “War and Peace” we meet in the description of the battle an officer leading his soldiers into battle with a ceremonial (that is, useless) sword in his hands. The bipolar situation itself “battle” – the game of combat" created a complex relationship between weapons as symbols and weapons as reality. Thus, the sword (sword) becomes woven into the system of symbolic language of the era and becomes a fact of its culture.

We used the expression “centuries-old building of culture.” It is not accidental. We talked about the synchronous organization of culture. But we must immediately emphasize that culture always implies the preservation of previous experience. Moreover, one of the most important definitions of culture characterizes it as the “non-genetic” memory of the collective. Culture is memory. Therefore, it is always connected with history and always implies the continuity of the moral, intellectual, spiritual life of a person, society and humanity. And therefore, when we talk about our modern culture, we, perhaps without knowing it, are also talking about the enormous path that this culture has traveled. This path goes back thousands of years and crosses borders. historical eras, national cultures and immerses us in one culture – culture of humanity.

Therefore, culture is always, on the one hand, – a certain number of inherited texts, and on the other hand – inherited characters.

Symbols of a culture rarely appear in its synchronic cross-section. As a rule, they come from time immemorial and, modifying their meaning (but without losing the memory of their previous meanings), are transmitted to future states of culture. Such simple symbols as circle, cross, triangle, wavy line, more complex: hand, eye, house – and even more complex ones (for example, rituals) accompany humanity throughout its millennia-old culture.

Therefore, culture is historical in nature. Its present itself always exists in relation to the past (real or constructed in the order of some mythology) and to forecasts of the future. These historical connections of culture are called diachronic. As we see, culture is eternal and universal, but at the same time it is always mobile and changeable. This is the difficulty of understanding the past (after all, it is gone, moved away from us). But this is the need to understand a bygone culture: it always contains what we need now, today.

A person changes, and to imagine the logic of the actions of a literary hero or people of the past – but we look up to them, and they somehow maintain our connection with the past, – one must imagine how they lived, what kind of world surrounded them, what their general ideas and moral ideas, their official duties, customs, clothing, why they acted this way and not otherwise. This will be the topic of the proposed conversations.

Having thus determined the aspects of culture that interest us, we have the right, however, to ask the question: does not the expression “culture and life” itself contain a contradiction, do these phenomena lie on different planes? Really, what is everyday life? Life – this is the usual course of life in its real-practical forms; everyday life – these are the things that surround us, our habits and everyday behavior. Everyday life surrounds us like air, and like air, it is noticeable to us only when it is missing or deteriorates. We notice the features of someone else’s life, but our own life is elusive to us – we are inclined to consider it “just life,” the natural norm of practical existence. So, everyday life is always in the sphere of practice; it is the world of things, first of all. How can he come into contact with the world of symbols and signs that make up the space of culture?

Turning to the history of everyday life, we easily distinguish in it deep forms, the connection of which with ideas, with the intellectual, moral, spiritual development of the era is self-evident. Thus, ideas about noble honor or court etiquette, although they belong to the history of everyday life, are inseparable from the history of ideas. But what about such seemingly external features of time as fashions, customs of everyday life, details of practical behavior and objects in which it is embodied? Is it really important for us to know what they looked like? "Lepage fatal trunks" from which Onegin killed Lensky, or – wider – imagine objective world Onegin?

However, the two types of household details and phenomena identified above are closely related. The world of ideas is inseparable from the world of people, and ideas – from everyday reality. Alexander Blok wrote:

Accidentally on a pocket knife

Find a speck of dust from distant lands –

And the world will appear strange again...

“Specks of dust from distant lands” of history are reflected in the texts that have been preserved for us – including in “texts in everyday language.” By recognizing them and being imbued with them, we comprehend the living past. From here – the method of offering the reader “Conversations about Russian culture” – see history in the mirror of everyday life, and illuminate small, sometimes seemingly scattered household details with the light of large historical events.

In what ways Is there an interpenetration of life and culture? For objects or customs of “ideologized life” this is self-evident: the language of court etiquette, for example, is impossible without real things, gestures, etc., in which it is embodied and which belong to everyday life. But how are those endless objects of everyday life that were mentioned above connected with culture, with the ideas of the era?

Our doubts will be dispelled if we remember that All The things around us are included not only in practice in general, but also in social practice, they become, as it were, clots of relations between people and in this function they are capable of acquiring a symbolic character.

In Pushkin’s “The Miserly Knight,” Albert waits for the moment when his father’s treasures pass into his hands in order to give them “true,” that is, practical use. But the baron himself is content with symbolic possession, because gold is for him – not yellow circles for which you can buy certain things, but a symbol of sovereignty. Makar Devushkin in Dostoevsky’s “Poor People” invents a special gait so that his holey soles are not visible. Leaky sole – real object; as a thing, it can cause trouble to the owner of the boots: wet feet, colds. But to an outside observer, a torn sole – This sign, the content of which is Poverty, and Poverty – one of the defining symbols of St. Petersburg culture. And Dostoevsky’s hero accepts the “view of culture”: he suffers not because he is cold, but because he is ashamed. It's a shame – one of the most powerful psychological levers of culture. So, everyday life, in its symbolic sense, is part of culture.

But there is another side to this question. A thing does not exist separately, as something isolated in the context of its time. Things are connected. In some cases, we mean a functional connection and then we talk about “unity of style.” The unity of style is the belonging, for example, of furniture, to a single artistic and cultural layer, a “common language” that allows things to “speak to each other.” When you walk into a ridiculously furnished room filled with items of all different styles, you feel as if you are in a market where everyone is shouting and no one is listening to anyone else. But there may be another connection. For example, you say: “These are my grandmother’s things.” Thus, you establish a certain intimate connection between objects, due to the memory of a person dear to you, of his long-gone time, of his childhood. It is no coincidence that there is a custom of giving things as a keepsake. – things have memory. These are like words and notes that the past conveys to the future.

On the other hand, things powerfully dictate the gestures, style of behavior and, ultimately, the psychological attitude of their owners. So, for example, since women began to wear trousers, their gait has changed, it has become more sporty, more “masculine”. At the same time, there was an invasion of typically “male” gestures into female behavior (for example, the habit of crossing one’s legs high when sitting – the gesture is not only masculine, but also “American”; in Europe it was traditionally considered a sign of indecent swagger). An attentive observer may notice that the previously sharply different manners of laughter between men and women have now lost their distinction, and precisely because women in the mass have adopted the masculine manner of laughter.

Things impose a behavior on us because they create a certain cultural context around them. After all, you need to be able to hold an ax, a shovel, a dueling pistol, a modern machine gun, a fan or the steering wheel of a car in your hands. In the old days they said: “He knows how (or does not know how) to wear a tailcoat.” It’s not enough to have your tailcoat sewn by the best tailor – To do this, it is enough to have money. You must also be able to wear it, and this, as the hero of Bulwer-Lytton’s novel “Pelham, or a Gentleman’s Adventure” reasoned, – a whole art that is given only to a true dandy. Anyone who has held both a modern weapon and an old dueling pistol in his hand cannot help but be amazed at how well, how well the latter fits in the hand. You can't feel its heaviness – it becomes, as it were, an extension of the body. The fact is that ancient household items were made by hand, their shape was perfected over decades, and sometimes centuries, the secrets of production were passed on from master to master. This not only produced the most convenient form, but also inevitably turned the thing into the history of a thing in memory of the gestures associated with it. The thing, on the one hand, gave the human body new capabilities, and on the other – included a person in tradition, that is, both developed and limited his individuality.

However, everyday life – this is not only the life of things, it is also customs, the entire ritual of daily behavior, that structure of life that determines the daily routine, the time of various activities, the nature of work and leisure, forms of rest, games, love ritual and funeral ritual. The connection between this aspect of everyday life and culture requires no explanation. After all, it is in it that those features are revealed by which we usually recognize our own and the stranger, a person of a particular era, an Englishman or a Spaniard.

Custom has another function. Not all laws of behavior are recorded in writing. Writing dominates in the legal, religious, and ethical spheres. However, in human life there is a vast area of customs and decency. “There is a way of thinking and feeling, there is a darkness of customs, beliefs and habits that belong exclusively to some people.” These norms belong to culture, they are enshrined in forms of everyday behavior, everything that is said about: “this is customary, this is decent.” These norms are transmitted through everyday life and are closely related to the sphere of folk poetry. They become part of the cultural memory.

Questions to the text:

1. How does Y. Lotman define the meaning of the concepts “life” and “culture”?

2. What, from the point of view of Y. Lotman, is the symbolic nature of culture?

3. How does the interpenetration of life and culture occur?

4. Prove using examples from modern life that the things around us are included in social practice, and in this function they acquire a symbolic character.

Microhistory

Yu. M. Lotman

CONVERSATIONS ABOUT RUSSIAN CULTURE

Life and traditions of the Russian nobility (XVIII - early XIX centuries)

In loving memory of my parents Alexandra Samoilovna and Mikhail Lvovich Lotman

The publication was published with the assistance of the Federal Target Program for Book Publishing of Russia and the International Foundation “Cultural Initiative”.

“Conversations about Russian Culture” belongs to the pen of the brilliant researcher of Russian culture Yu. M. Lotman. At one time, the author responded with interest to the proposal of “Arts - SPB” to prepare a publication based on a series of lectures that he gave on television. He carried out the work with great responsibility - the composition was specified, the chapters were expanded, and new versions appeared. The author signed the book for inclusion, but did not see it published - on October 28, 1993, Yu. M. Lotman died. His living word, addressed to an audience of millions, was preserved in this book. It immerses the reader in the world of everyday life of the Russian nobility of the 18th - early 19th centuries. We see people of a distant era in the nursery and in the ballroom, on the battlefield and at the card table, we can examine in detail the hairstyle, the cut of the dress, the gesture, the demeanor. At the same time everyday life for the author - a historical-psychological category, a sign system, that is, a kind of text. He teaches to read and understand this text, where the everyday and the existential are inseparable.

"Meeting motley chapters", whose heroes were outstanding historical figures, reigning persons, ordinary people of the era, poets, literary characters, is connected together by the thought of the continuity of the cultural and historical process, the intellectual and spiritual connection of generations.

In a special issue of the Tartu “Russian Newspaper” dedicated to the death of Yu. M. Lotman, among his statements recorded and saved by colleagues and students, we find words that contain the quintessence of his last book: “History passes through a person’s House, through his private life. It is not titles, orders or royal favor, but the “independence of a person” that turns him into a historical figure.”

The publishing house thanks the State Hermitage and the State Russian Museum, which provided engravings stored in their collections free of charge for reproduction in this publication.

INTRODUCTION:

Life and culture

Having devoted conversations to Russian life and culture of the 18th - early 19th centuries, we must first of all determine the meaning of the concepts “life”, “culture”, “Russian culture of the 18th - early 19th centuries” and their relationships with each other. At the same time, let us make a reservation that the concept of “culture,” which belongs to the most fundamental in the cycle of human sciences, can itself become the subject of a separate monograph and has repeatedly become so. It would be strange if in this book we set out to resolve controversial issues related to this concept. It is very comprehensive: it includes morality, the whole range of ideas, human creativity, and much more. It will be quite enough for us to limit ourselves to that side of the concept of “culture” that is necessary to illuminate our relatively narrow topic.

Culture, first of all, - collective concept. An individual can be a carrier of culture, can actively participate in its development, nevertheless, by its nature, culture, like language, is a social phenomenon, that is, social.

Consequently, culture is something common to a collective - a group of people living simultaneously and connected by a certain social organization. From this it follows that culture is form of communication between people and is possible only in a group in which people communicate. (An organizational structure that unites people living at the same time is called synchronous, and we will further use this concept when defining a number of aspects of the phenomenon that interests us).

Any structure serving the sphere of social communication is a language. This means that it forms a certain system of signs used in accordance with the rules known to the members of a given group. We call signs any material expression (words, drawings, things, etc.) that has the meaning and thus can serve as a means conveying meaning.

Consequently, culture has, firstly, a communication and, secondly, a symbolic nature. Let's focus on this last one. Let's think about something as simple and familiar as bread. Bread is material and visible. It has weight, shape, it can be cut and eaten. Bread eaten comes into physiological contact with a person. In this function of it, one cannot ask about it: what does it mean? It has a use, not a meaning. But when we say: “Give us this day our daily bread,” the word “bread” does not just mean bread as a thing, but has a broader meaning: “food necessary for life.” And when in the Gospel of John we read the words of Christ: “I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger” (John 6:35), then we have before us a complex symbolic meaning of both the object itself and the word denoting it.

The sword is also nothing more than an object. As a thing, it can be forged or broken, it can be placed in a museum display case, and it can kill a person. This is all - the use of it as an object, but when, attached to a belt or supported by a baldric placed on the hip, the sword symbolizes a free person and is a “sign of freedom”, it already appears as a symbol and belongs to culture.

In the 18th century, a Russian and European nobleman does not carry a sword - a sword hangs on his side (sometimes a tiny, almost toy ceremonial sword, which is practically not a weapon). In this case, the sword is a symbol of a symbol: it means a sword, and the sword means belonging to a privileged class.

A sword as a weapon, a sword as a part of clothing, a sword as a symbol, a sign of nobility - all these are different functions of an object in the general context of culture.

In its various incarnations, a symbol can simultaneously be a weapon suitable for direct practical use, or be completely separated from its immediate function. So, for example, a small sword specially designed for parades excluded practical use, in fact it was an image of a weapon, not a weapon. The parade sphere was separated from the battle sphere by emotions, body language and functions. Let us remember the words of Chatsky: “I will go to death as to a parade.” At the same time, in Tolstoy’s “War and Peace” we meet in the description of the battle an officer leading his soldiers into battle with a ceremonial (that is, useless) sword in his hands. The very bipolar situation of “fight - game of battle” created a complex relationship between weapons as a symbol and weapons as a reality. Thus, the sword (sword) becomes woven into the system of symbolic language of the era and becomes a fact of its culture.

And here’s another example, in the Bible (Book of Judges, 7:13–14) we read: “Gideon has come [and hears]. And so, one tells the other a dream, and says: I dreamed that round barley bread was rolling through the camp of Midian and, rolling towards the tent, hit it so that it fell, knocked it over, and the tent fell apart. Another answered him, “This is none other than the sword of Gideon...” Here bread means sword, and sword means victory. And since the victory was won with the cry “The sword of the Lord and Gideon!”, without a single blow (the Midianites themselves beat each other: “the Lord turned the sword of one against another in the whole camp”), then the sword here is a sign of the power of the Lord, and not of military victory .

So, the area of culture is always the area of symbolism.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Examination on the discipline

"Culturology"

based on the book by Lotman Yu.M.

"Conversations about Russian culture"

Part 1 1.1 Biography of Yu.M. Lotman

1.2 Main works of Yu.M. Lotman

1.4 Contributions to the study of culture

Part 2. Brief abstract “Conversations about Russian culture”

Bibliography

Part 1

1.1 Yuri Mikhailovich Lotman

Yuri Mikhailovich Lotman was born on February 28, 1922 into a family of Petrograd intellectuals, in famous house at the beginning of Nevsky Prospekt, where the Wolf-Beranger confectionery was located in Pushkin's time. His father was a famous lawyer, then a legal adviser at a publishing house. Mother worked as a doctor. He was the youngest in the family; besides him there were three sisters. Everyone lived amicably, very poorly, but cheerfully. Yuri Lotman graduated with honors from the famous Peterschule in Petrograd, which was distinguished by a high level of humanitarian education

The literary circle of friends of Lydia’s older sister influenced her choice of profession. In 1939, Yuri Mikhailovich entered the philological faculty of Leningrad University, where famous professors and academicians then taught: G.A. Gukovsky read an introduction to literary criticism, M.K. Azadovsky - Russian folklore, A.S. Orlov - ancient Russian literature, I.I. Tolstoy - ancient literature. In the folklore seminar V.Ya. Proppa Lotman wrote his first term paper. Classes at the University continued in the Public Library, and this laid the foundation for Lotman’s colossal ability to work. In addition, there were student jobs, cargo work at the port, free chef lectures at enterprises, dates and parties.

In October 1940, Lotman was drafted into the army. The fact that he became a career military man even before the start of the Great Patriotic War may have saved his life. The unit in which Lotman served was transferred to the front line in the very first days and was in fierce battles for almost four years. Yuri Mikhailovich crossed the entire European part of the country with the retreating army, from Moldova to the Caucasus, and then advanced west, all the way to Berlin, and was in the most desperate situations. Under shelling and bombing, he received orders and medals for his bravery and perseverance in battle, but fate was surprisingly kind to him: he was not even wounded, only once severely shell-shocked.

At the end of 1946, Lotman was demobilized and continued his studies at Leningrad University. Most of all, the student who resumed his studies was attracted by the special courses and special seminars of N.I. Mordovchenko, who was then working on his doctoral dissertation on Russian literary criticism first quarter of the 19th century. Already in his student years, Yuri Mikhailovich made his first scientific discoveries. In the manuscript department of the State public library them. M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. In the notebook of the freemason Maxim Nevzorov, he found a copy of the program document of one of the early Decembrist secret societies, the Union of Russian Knights, the founders of which were Count M.A. Dmitriev-Mamonov and M.F. Orlov. The found source had long been known by the title “Brief Instructions to Russian Knights”, it was mentioned in correspondence, appeared in the investigative files of the Decembrists, but researchers searched in vain for the text itself, the document was already considered lost. Lotman published an article about the find along with the found document in Vestnik Leningradskogo university."

In 1950, Lotman graduated from the university, but as a Jew his path to graduate school was closed. (an anti-Semitic campaign was rampant in the country). Yuri Mikhailovich managed to find work in Estonia, he became a teacher and then head of the department of Russian language and literature at the Tartu Teachers' Institute. Certain bodies that theoretically had nothing to do with science and pedagogy, but were in charge of almost everything, turned Lotman into a “restricted traveler” and blocked him from traveling abroad - but the scientist’s works still crossed the border. They were translated into dozens of languages and made the author’s name world famous.

In 1952, Lotman defended his work at Leningrad University candidate's thesis about the creative relationship between Radishchev and Karamzin.

From 1954 until the end of his life, Yuri Mikhailovich worked at the University of Tartu. In 1961 he defended his doctoral dissertation. In 1960-1977 he headed the department of Russian literature at Tartu State University. The famous literary critic Zara Grigorievna Mints became Lotman’s wife, and children appeared in the family.

Yu.M. Lotman was distinguished by his incredible capacity for work; he managed to head the department, study the Estonian language, and prepare new special courses. Give lectures, write scientific works, organize conferences. Lotman is the author of 800 scientific works, including many fundamental monographs. He was a world famous scientist, Laureate Pushkin Prize Russian Academy of Sciences, corresponding member of the British Academy, academician of the Norwegian, Swedish, Estonian academies. He was vice-president of the World Association of Semiotics. He possessed encyclopedic erudition combined with a depth of professional knowledge. Literature and history, cultural studies and semiotics are only the briefest description of those vast spaces to which the work, energy, abilities, intelligence, and feelings of this wonderful researcher and amazing person were applied.

Yu.M. Lotman made a great contribution to the study of the history of Russian culture. According to his books about A.S. Pushkin, M.Yu. Lermontov, N.V. Gogol. N.M. Many generations of students studied at Karamzin. Each book represents a significant event in the history of culture, because it differs from other works on literary criticism in its original approach and depth of analysis, in its combination of cultural history and the history of the soul.

Freed in recent years from prohibitions and restrictions, Yuri Mikhailovich has traveled almost the entire Western world, making presentations at various conferences and giving lectures at universities.

Confined to hospitals, having lost his sight, he studied until his last days. The last book, “Culture and Explosion,” was created under dictation - this is a kind of testament of the author.

1.2 Main works of Yu.M. Lotman

The article “Radishchev and Mabli” 1958 opened a large series of works by the scientist devoted to Russian-Western European cultural relations.

The complex of Karamzin's works by Lotman is one of the most significant in his heritage.

At the same time, Lotman studied the life and work of writers and public figures of the early 19th century.

In 1958, thanks to the rector of the University of Tartu F.D. Clement began to publish “Works on Russian and Slavic mythology” new series“Scientific Notes” which included many of Lotman’s works.

While working on his doctoral dissertation, Lotman began to thoroughly study the Decembrists, Pushkin, and Lermontov.

“The main stages in the development of Russian realism” 1960.

“The origins of the “Tolstovian movement” in Russian literature in 1830.” 1962

“Ideological structure of “The Captain's Daughter” 1962

The pinnacle of Lotman’s Pushkinianism are 3 books: “A novel in verse by Pushkin “Eugene Onegin” Special course. Introductory lectures to the study of text"

“Pushkin’s novel “Eugene Onegin” Commentary. Teacher's Manual"

"Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin. Biography of the writer. A manual for students"

"On the metalanguage of typological descriptions of culture"

“Simeotics of cinema and problems of film aesthetics.”

“Lectures on structural poetics. Issue 1. introduction, theory of verse"

"Structure of a literary text"

"Inside Thinking Worlds"

“Selected Articles” in 3 volumes, which collect scientific works on simeotics, typology of culture, on the text as a semiotic problem, on culture and behavioral programs, semiotic space, semiotics of various types of arts, the semiotic mechanism of cultural transmission.

1.3 Belonging to a scientific school

Lotman became interested in structuralism and semiotics very early, on the verge of 1950-1960. This interest was facilitated by his constant attraction to new methods, theoretical mindset and aversion to the vulgar sociological method (imposed from above)

Semiotics, the study of signs and sign systems, arose before World War II. IN different areas Theoretical superstructures began to be created: among linguists - metalinguistics, among philosophers - metatheory, among mathematicians - metamathematics. Human culture filled with signs, the further it develops, the more complex signs operates. The multi-story nature and complexity of sign systems gave rise to the birth of semiotics.

Structuralism is a branch of simeotics. Which studies the relationship between signs. The main stimulus for its development was the emergence of electronic computing technology - the need to create mathematical linguistics. Lotman is the creator of literary structuralism. He took the main methodological and methodological prerequisites of linguistic innovators: the division of the studied text into content and expression, and plans into a system of levels (syntactic, morphological phonetic) within the level - division into correlating and opposing elements, and studied the structure of the text in two aspects: syntagmatic and paradigmatic.

1.4 Contributions to the study of culture

Credit to Yu.M. Lotman is to reveal the sign-symbolic nature of culture and the mechanisms of its transmission based on the application of the semiotic method and information theory.

Semiotics of culture - the main direction of cultural studies

research. It promotes a deeper understanding of cultural texts and reveals the mechanisms of cultural continuity. Reveals the sign-symbolic nature of cultural languages, promotes dialogue between cultures of different countries and peoples.

Hthere are2 . Brief summary“Conversations about Russian culture. Life and traditions of the Russian nobility (18th - early 19th centuries)"

Introduction: Life and culture.

Culture has a communicative and symbolic nature. Culture is memory. A person changes, and in order to imagine the logic of the actions of a literary hero or people of the past, one must imagine how they lived, what kind of world surrounded them, what were their general ideas and moral ideas, their official duties, customs, clothes, why they acted this way, and not otherwise. This will be the topic of the proposed conversations.

Culture and everyday life: doesn’t the expression itself contain a contradiction, don’t these phenomena lie on different planes? What is everyday life?

Everyday life is the normal course of life in its real-practical forms. Seeing history in the mirror of everyday life, and illuminating small, isolated everyday details with the light of major historical events is the method offered to the reader in “Conversations on Russian Culture.”

Everyday life, in its symbolic sense, is part of culture. Things have memory, they are like words and notes that the past transmits to the future. On the other hand, things can powerfully dictate the gestures, style of behavior and, ultimately, the psychological attitude of their owners, since they create a certain cultural context around them.

However, everyday life is not only the life of things, it is also customs, the entire ritual of daily behavior, the structure of life that determines the daily routine, the time of various activities, the nature of work and leisure, forms of recreation, games, love ritual and funeral ritual.

History is bad at predicting the future, but good at explaining the present. The time of revolutions is ahistorical, and the time of reforms turns people to think about the roads of history. True, history has many facets, and we still remember the dates of major historical events and biographies of historical figures. But how did they live? historical people? But it is in this nameless space that the real story most often unfolds. Tolstoy was deeply right: without knowledge of simple life there is no understanding of history.

People act according to the motives and impulses of their era.

The 18th century is the time when the features of the new Russian culture, the culture of the new time, to which we also belong, were taking shape. !8 - early 19th century - this Family album of our culture today, its home archive.

History is not a menu where you can choose dishes to suit your taste. This requires knowledge and understanding. Not only to restore the continuity of culture, but also to penetrate the texts of Pushkin and Tolstoy.

We will be interested in the culture and life of the Russian nobility, the culture that gave rise to Fonvizin, Derzhavin, Radishchev, Novikov, Pushkin, Lermontov, Chaadaev...

Part 1.

People and ranks.

Among the various consequences of Peter's reforms, the creation of the nobility as the state and culturally dominant class is not the least important. Even earlier, the erasure of the differences between the estate and the patrimony began, and the decree of Tsar Fyodor Alekseevich in 1682, which heralded the destruction of localism, showed that the dominant force in the maturing state order would be the nobility.

The psychology of the service class was the foundation of the self-awareness of the nobleman of the 18th century. It was through service that he recognized himself as part of the class. Peter 1 in every possible way stimulated this feeling both by personal example and by a number of legislative acts. Their pinnacle was the Table of Ranks - it was the implementation general principle Peter's new statehood - regularity. The report card divided all types of service into military, civil and court; all ranks were divided into 14 classes. Military service was a privileged position; 14 classes in military service gave the right to hereditary nobility. Civil service was not considered noble for commoners. The Russian bureaucracy, being an important factor in state life, left almost no trace in spiritual life.

Russian emperors were military men and received military upbringing and education; they were accustomed from childhood to look at the army as an ideal organization. In the life of the nobility there was a “cult of the uniform.”

A person in Russia, if he did not belong to the tax-paying class, could not help but serve. Without service it was impossible to obtain a rank; when filling out the papers, it was necessary to indicate the rank; if there was none, they signed “Minor.” However, if the nobleman did not serve, his relatives arranged for him fictitious service and long-term leave. Simultaneously with the distribution of ranks, there was a distribution of benefits and honors. The place of rank in the service hierarchy was associated with the receipt of many real privileges.

The system of orders, which arose under Peter the Great, supplanted the previously existing types of royal awards - instead of an award-thing, an award-sign appeared. Later, a whole hierarchy of orders was created. In addition to the system of orders, one can name a hierarchy, in a certain sense opposed to ranks, formed by a system of nobility. The title of count and baron appeared.

The cultural paradox of the current situation in Russia was that the rights of the ruling class were formulated in the same terms that Enlightenment philosophers used to describe the ideal of human rights. This was at a time when peasants were practically reduced to the status of slaves.

Women's World.

The character of a woman correlates in a very unique way with the culture of the era. This is the most sensitive barometer public life. Women's influence is rarely seen in its own right historical problem. Of course, the women's world was very different from the men's, primarily in that it was excluded from the sphere civil service. A woman's rank was determined by the rank of her husband or father, if she was not a courtier.

By the end of the 18th century, a completely new concept appeared - a women's library. Remaining the same world of feelings, children's and household, the women's world becomes more spiritual. Women's life began to change rapidly in the era of Peter the Great. Peter 1 changed not only state life, but also home life. Artificiality reigned in fashion. Women spent a lot of time changing their appearance. The ladies flirted and led an evening lifestyle. Floats on the face and games with a fan created a language of coquetry. evening make-up required a lot of cosmetics. It was fashionable to have a lover. Family, farming, and raising children were in the background.

And suddenly important changes occurred - romanticism was born, it became accepted to strive for nature, the naturalness of morals and behavior. Paul! tried to stop fashion - simplicity of clothing was promoted by the era of the French Revolution. Dresses appeared that later became known as Onegin dresses. Paleness has become an obligatory element of female attractiveness - a sign of the depth of heartfelt feelings.

The world of women played a special role in the destinies of Russian romanticism. The Age of Enlightenment raised the issue of protecting women's rights.

Women's character at the end of the 18th century was shaped by literature. It is especially important that the woman constantly and actively assimilated the roles that poems and novels assigned her, so it is possible to evaluate the everyday and psychological reality of their lives through the prism of literature.

The end of the era we are interested in created three types female images: the image of an angel who accidentally visited the earth, demonic character and a female heroine.

Feminine oeducation in the 18th and early 19th centuries

Knowledge has traditionally been considered the privilege of men - women's education has become a problem for her place in a society created by men. The need for female education and its nature became the subject of controversy and was associated with a general revision of the type of life, the type of way of life. As a result, it arose educational institution- Smolny Institute with broad program. The training lasted 9 years in isolation. Education was superficial, with the exception of languages, dancing and handicrafts. Court toys were made from Smolyans. Smolyankas were famous for their sensitivity; their sentimental unpreparedness for life was evidence of their innocence. Exalted behavior was not a lack of sincerity - it was the language of the time.

The Smolny Institute was not the only women's scientific institution. Private boarding schools arose, they were foreign and the level of education was low. Languages and dances were systematically taught. The third type of female education is home education. It was limited to languages, the ability to behave in society, dance, sing, play a musical instrument and draw, as well as the rudiments of history, geography and literature. With the start of going out into the world, training stopped.

The type of Russian educated woman began to take shape by the age of 30 in the 18th century. However, in general female education The 18th and early 19th centuries did not have its own lyceum, nor the Moscow or Dorpat universities. The type of highly spiritual Russian woman developed under the influence of Russian literature and culture of the era.

Part 2.

Dancing was an important structural element of noble life. In the life of a Russian metropolitan nobleman, time was divided into two halves: staying at home (as a private person) and in the assembly, where public life was realized.

The ball was an area opposite to service and an area of public representation. The main element of the ball as a social and aesthetic event was dancing. Dance training began at the age of 5. Long-term training gave young people confidence in movements, freedom and ease in posing, which influenced the mental structure of a person. Grace was a sign good upbringing. The ball began with a polonaise, the second ballroom dance- waltz (in the 20s it had a reputation for being obscene), the center of the ball is the mazurka. Cotillion is a type of quadrille, one of the dances that concludes the ball, a dance game. The ball had a harmonious composition, obeyed strict laws and was opposed to two extreme poles: a parade and a masquerade.

Matchmaking. Marriage. Divorce.

Marriage ritual in noble society The 18th and early 19th centuries bear traces of the same contradictions as all everyday life. Traditional Russian customs came into conflict with ideas about Europeanism. Violation of parental will and abduction of the bride were not part of the norms of European behavior, but were a common place in romantic plots. Family relationships in serf life are inseparable from the relationship between the landowner and the peasant woman; this is an obligatory background, without which the relationship between husband and wife becomes incomprehensible. One of the manifestations of the oddities of life of this era were serf harems.

The ever-increasing gap between the way of life of the nobility and the people causes a tragic attitude among the most thoughtful part of the nobles. If in the 18th century a cultured nobleman sought to distance himself from folk everyday behavior, then in the 19th century a counter-directional impulse arose.

Noble weddings retained a certain connection with the tradition of getting married in the fall, but translated it into the language of Europeanized mores.

One of the innovations of post-Petrine reality was divorce. For a divorce, a decision was required from the consistory - the spiritual office. A rare and scandalous form of divorce was often replaced by a practical divorce: the spouses separated, divided their possessions, after which the woman received her freedom.

The home life of an 18th century nobleman developed as a complex interweaving of customs approved folk tradition, religious rituals, philosophical freethinking, Westernism, influencing the break with the surrounding reality. This disorder, which acquired the character of ideological and everyday chaos, had positive side. To a large extent, the youth of the culture, which had not yet exhausted its capabilities, was manifested here.

Russian dandyism.

Originating in England, dandyism included a national opposition to French fashions, which caused violent indignation among English patriots at the end of the 18th century. Dandyism took on the color of romantic rebellion. It was focused on extravagance of behavior, a demeanor offensive to society, swaggering gestures, demonstrative shocking - forms of destruction of secular prohibitions were perceived as poetic. Karamzin in 1803 described the curious phenomenon of the fusion of rebellion and cynicism, the transformation of egoism into a kind of religion and a mocking attitude towards the principles of vulgar morality in everything. In the prehistory of Russian dandyism, one can note the so-called Khripuns. Tightening the belt until it rivaled a woman's waist gave the military fashionista the appearance of a strangled man and justified his name as a wheezer. Glasses played a big role in the dandy’s behavior; the lorgnette was perceived as a sign of Anglomania. The decency of the 18th century in Russia forbade those younger in age or rank to look at their elders through glasses: this was perceived as impudence. Another characteristic feature Dandyism is a pose of disappointment and satiety. Dandyism is primarily a behavior, not a theory or ideology. Inseparable from individualism and dependent on observers, dandyism constantly oscillates between a claim to rebellion and various compromises with society. His limitations lie in the limitations and inconsistency of fashion, in the language of which he is forced to speak with his era.

Card game.

The card game has become a kind of life model. The function of a card game reveals its dual nature: cards are used for fortune telling (predictive, programming functions) and for playing, that is, it represents an image of a conflict situation. She is not comparable to others fashion games that time. A significant role here was played by the fact that the card game covers two various types conflict situations - commercial and gambling.

The first are considered as decent, for respectable people, surrounded by an aura of comfort of family life, the poetry of innocent entertainment, the second - entailed an atmosphere of infernity, and are met with decisive moral condemnation. It is known that gambling in Russia at the end of the 18th century was formally prohibited as immoral, although it practically flourished, became a universal custom of noble society and was actually canonized. Card games and chess are, as it were, antipodes of the gaming world. Gambling games are structured in such a way that the player is forced to make a decision without actually having any information. Thus he plays with Chance. The intersection of the principles of regular statehood and arbitrariness creates a situation of unpredictability and the mechanism of a gambling card game becomes the image of statehood. In Russia the most common were Pharaoh and Stoss- games in which biggest role chance played. The strict normalization that penetrated the private life of the people of the empire created a psychological need for explosions of unpredictability. It is no coincidence that desperate outbreaks of card games inevitably accompanied the eras of reaction: 1824, 25, 1830. Card terminology rapidly penetrated into other spheres of culture. The problem of the card game was made for contemporaries as a symbolic expression of the conflicts of the era. Cheating became almost an official profession and noble society regarded dishonest card playing, albeit with condemnation. But it is much more lenient than refusing to shoot in a duel, for example. Cards were a synonym for a duel and an antonym for a parade. These two poles delineated the border of the noble life of that era.

Duel.

A duel according to certain rules in order to restore honor. The assessment of the degree of insult - minor, bloody, fatal - must be correlated with the assessment from the social environment. The duel began with a challenge, after which the opponents were not supposed to enter into communication, the offended person discussed the severity of the offense inflicted on him with the seconds and a written challenge (cartel) was sent to the enemy. The seconds had to make every effort to reconcile, they also worked out the conditions of the duel and formalized them in writing . A duel in Russia was a criminal offense, became the subject of legal proceedings, the court sentenced duelists to death, which for officers was replaced by demotion to soldiers and transfer to the Caucasus.

The government had a negative attitude towards duels; in official literature, duels were persecuted as a manifestation of the love of freedom. Democratic thinkers criticized the duel, saw in it a manifestation of the class prejudice of the nobility and contrasted noble honor with human honor, based on Reason and Nature.

The art of living.

1. Art and non-artistic reality are not comparable. Classicism.

2. the second approach to the relationship between art and reality. Romanticism.

Art as a field of models and programs.

3. Life acts as an area of modeling activity, creating patterns that art imitates. Can be compared with realism.

Theater played a special role in the culture of the early 19th century on a pan-European scale. Specific forms of stage performance leave the theater stage and take over life. The everyday behavior of a Russian nobleman of the late 18th and early 19th centuries is characterized by the attachment of the type of behavior to a specific stage area and a tendency towards intermission - a break during which the theatricality of behavior is reduced to a minimum. The distinction between everyday and theatrical behavior is characteristic. However, noble behavior as a system presupposed certain deviations from the norm, which were equivalent to intermissions. Behavior constrained by decency and a system of theatrical gestures gave rise to a desire for freedom: hussar behavior, attraction to a dirty life, breakthroughs into the world of gypsies. The more strictly life is organized, the more attractive the most extreme forms of everyday rebellion are. The soldier's stiffness under Nicholas 1 was compensated by wild revelry. An interesting indicator of the theatricality of everyday life is that amateur performances and home theaters were perceived as a departure from the world of insincere life of light into the world of genuine feelings. The persistent desire to comprehend the laws of life through the prism of the most conventional forms is indicative. theatrical performance- masquerade, puppet comedy, farce. Considering the spectacular culture of the early 19th century, one cannot ignore military actions and the antithesis of battle - the parade.

There are eras when art powerfully invades everyday life, aestheticizing the everyday flow of life. This invasion has many consequences. Only against the backdrop of the powerful invasion of poetry into the life of the Russian nobility at the beginning of the 19th century is the colossal phenomenon of Pushkin understandable and explainable. Driven by the laws of custom, the everyday life of an ordinary nobleman of the 18th century was plotless. The view of real life as a performance made it possible to choose the role of individual behavior and filled with anticipation of events. It is precisely the model of theatrical behavior that turns a person into actor, freed him from automatic power group behavior, custom.

Theater and painting are two poles, mutually attractive and mutually repulsive. Opera gravitated more towards painting, drama towards emphasized theatricality, ballet was complexly located in this space. Different types of art created different realities, and life, which strived to become a copy of art, absorbed these differences. Only in conditions of a functional connection between painting and theater could such phenomena as, for example, the Yusupov theater (change of Gonzaga scenery to special music) and live paintings arise. A natural consequence of the rapprochement between theater and painting is the creation of a grammar of performing arts.

People realize themselves through the prism of painting, poetry, theater, cinema, circus and at the same time see in these arts the most complete, as if in focus, expression of reality itself. In such eras, art and life merge together without destroying the spontaneity of feeling and the sincerity of thought. Only by imagining a man of that time can we understand art and at the same time, only in the mirrors of art do we find the true face of a man of that time.

The summary of the journey.

Death takes the personality out of the space reserved for life: from the realm of the historical and social, the personality moves into the realm of the eternal. By the middle of the 18th century, death had become one of the leading literary themes. The Petrine era was marked by the idea of group existence; human death seemed insignificant in the face of state life. For people of the pre-Petrine era, death was only the end of life, which was accepted as inevitable. The end of the 18th century reconsidered this issue and, as a consequence, an epidemic of suicides.

The theme of death - voluntary sacrifice on the altar of the fatherland - is increasingly heard in the statements of members of the secret society. The tragic turn of ethical issues in the last years before the Decembrist uprising changed the attitude in the duel. The post-Decembrist period significantly changed the concept of death in the cultural system. Death brought true scale to career and state values. The face of the era was also reflected in the image of death. Death gave freedom and it was sought in the Caucasian War, in a duel. Where death took over, the power of the emperor ended.

Part 3.

"Chicks of Petrov's Nest"

Ivan Ivanovich Neplyuev, an apologist for the reform, and Mikhail Petrovich Avramov, a critic of the reform, came from an old noble family and occupied high positions under Peter1. Neplyuev studied abroad, worked in the Admiralty, was an ambassador in Constantinople, in Turkey. After the death of Peter, he was persecuted and was assigned to Orenburg, where he developed vigorous activity. In the Elizabethan era - a senator, under Catherine he was very close to the reigning person. Until his last days he remained a man of the Petrine era.

Abramov entered the service of the Ambassadorial Prikaz for 10 years and was associated with it all his life. At 18 - secretary of the Russian ambassador in Holland. In 1712 - director of the St. Petersburg printing house, published Vedomosti and many useful books. Neplyuev was an example of a man of exceptional integrity, who did not know division and was never tormented by doubts. In full contact with time, he devoted his life to practical government activities. Abramov's personality was deeply divided; his practical activity collided with utopian dreams. Having created an idealized image of antiquity in his imagination, he proposed innovative reforms, considering them to be a defense of tradition. After the death of Peter1 - exile to Kamchatka. For his projects he found himself in the Secret Chancellery more than once. Died in prison. He belonged to those who invented utopian projects for the future and utopian images of the past, just to avoid seeing the present. If they had gained power, they would have stained the country with the blood of their opponents, but in the real situation they would have shed their own blood.

The era of splitting people into dogmatists-dreamers and cynics-practitioners

Age of heroes.

People last third The 18th century, with all the diversity of natures, was marked by one common feature - the desire for a special individual path, specific personal behavior. They amaze with the unexpectedness of bright individuals. Time gave birth to heroes of selfless dedication and reckless adventurers.

A.N. Radishchev is one of the most mysterious figures in Russian history. He had extensive knowledge in law, geography, geology, and history. In Siberian exile, he inoculated local residents with smallpox. He was excellent with a sword, rode horseback, and was an excellent dancer. Serving at customs, he did not take bribes; in St. Petersburg he seemed like an eccentric. The “encyclopedist” was convinced that fate had made him a witness and participant in the new creation of the world. He believed that it was necessary to cultivate heroism and for this purpose all philosophical concepts that could be relied upon could be used. Radishchev developed a unique theory of the Russian revolution. Slavery is unnatural and the transition from slavery to freedom was conceived as an instantaneous nationwide action. From the publication of “Journeys from St. Petersburg to Moscow” he expected not literary, but historical events. Radishchev created neither a conspiracy nor a party; he placed all his hope in the truth. The thought arose about the blood of a philosopher preaching the truth. People will believe, Radishchev believed, those words for which they paid with their lives. Heroic suicide became the subject of Radishchev's thoughts. Preparedness for death elevates the hero above the tyrant and transports a person from their ordinary life into the world of historical deeds. In this light, his own suicide appears in an unconventional light.

The trial and exile found Radishchev a widower. Sister of E.A.'s wife Rubanovskaya was secretly in love with her sister’s husband. It was she who saved Radishchev from torture by bribing the executioner Sheshkovsky. Later she preceded the feat of the Decembrists and, although customs categorically prevented marriage with a close relative, she married Radishchev.

Radishchev strove to subordinate his entire life and even death to the doctrines of philosophers. He forced himself into the norms philosophical life and at the same time, by force of will and self-education, he made such a life a model and program real life. lotman culture russian nobility

A.S. Suvorov is an extraordinary commander with high military qualities and the ability to control the souls of soldiers, a man of his era, the era of heroic individualism. Contradictory behavior was fundamental for Suvorov. In clashes with the enemy, he used it as a tactical technique. Starting to play, he began to play, his behavior had childish traits that were inconsistently combined with his behavior and thoughts

military theorist and philosopher. Some saw this as a behavioral tactic, others as barbarism and treachery in the character of the commander. Changing masks was one of the features of his behavior. It is known that Suvorov did not tolerate mirrors; his tactics included the glory of a person. Not reflected in mirrors. Suvorov’s actions did not imply spontaneous adherence to temperament and character, but their constant overcoming. From birth he was frail and in poor health. At the age of 45, by order of his father, he married the powerful, large and beautiful V.I. Prozorovskaya. After breaking up with his wife, Suvorov kept his daughter and then sent her to the Smolny Institute. He did not accept the French Revolution; until the end of his life he remained a man for whom the idea of changing the political order was incompatible with a sense of patriotism.

Suvorov and Radishchev are people who belong, as it were, to the two poles of their era.

Two women.

Memoirs of Princess N.B. Dolgorukaya and A.E. Karamysheva - covers the period from the 30s to the 80s of the 18th century and illuminates the family life of the nobles. The life and tragedy of Princess Natalya Borisovna became a plot that worried many poets. From the Sheremetev family, Natalya married I.A. Dolgoruky, favorite of Peter 2. After the death of the Tsar, they were exiled to Siberia. In difficult conditions it manifested itself noble character Dolgoruky, life made her wise, but did not break her. A deep religious feeling became the restrictive basis of life and everyday behavior. The loss of all the material values of life gave rise to an intense outbreak of spirituality. In Siberia, Prince Ivan was tortured and quartered. Natalya was returned with her sons and, having raised the children, she became a nun.

Memoirs of A.E. Labzina (Karamysheva) - a naively photographic reproduction of reality. Karamyshev is an outstanding scientist, he taught at the Mining Academy, he is close to Potemkin, but his devotion to science led him to the White Sea, into difficult living conditions, where he developed vigorous activity in organizing mines. Anna Evdokimovna was raised by her husband in the spirit of the Enlightenment; he was helped by the writer Kheraskov. The experiment in natural education consisted of isolation, strict control of acquaintances, and reading. She wasn't even allowed to to my husband, besides he was always busy with work. But Karamysheva was convinced that he spent his time wallowing in debauchery. Karamyshev separated moral sense from sexual desire and having received a 13-year-old girl as his wife, he did not perceive her for a long time. Karamyshev introduced his wife to freethinking and freethinking, but he did it with vigor. He suggested having a lover in order to introduce his wife to freedom - emphasizing that he loved her. With the same straightforwardness, he weaned her from fasting. His enlightenment was a sin for her; they were separated by the border of moral untranslatability. The conflict of mutual blindness of opposing cultures, the drama is that 2 people loved each other, separated by a wall of misunderstanding. Labzina's memoirs are an edifying play, following the canons of hagiographical stories.

People of 1812.

The Patriotic War blew up the lives of all classes of Russian society. However, the experience of these events was not uniform. A large number of Moscow residents fled to the provinces, those who had estates went there, and more often to those close to them provincial cities. A distinctive feature of 1812 was the erasing of sharp contradictions between metropolitan and provincial life. Many, cut off from their estates occupied by the French, found themselves in dire straits. Many families found themselves scattered throughout Russia.

The rapprochement between the city and the province, so noticeable in Moscow. It had almost no effect on the life of St. Petersburg, but he was not separated from the experiences of this time. Protected by Wittgenstein's army, in relative safety he had the opportunity to comprehend events in some historical perspective. It was here that such epochally important ideological phenomena as the independent patriotic magazine “Son of the Fatherland” arose, which in the future became the main publication of the Decembrist movement. The first shoots of Decembrism took shape here, in the conversations of officers returning from military campaigns.

Decembrist in everyday life.

The Decembrists showed significant creative energy in creating a special type of Russian person. Specific, unusual behavior in a noble circle significant group young people who, due to their talents, origin, family and personal connections and career prospects, are in the center of public attention, influenced an entire generation of Russian people. The ideological and political content of the noble revolutionism gave rise to special character traits and a special type of behavior

The Decembrists were people of action. This reflected their focus on a practical change in the political existence of Russia. The Decembrists were characterized by a constant desire to express their opinion bluntly, without recognizing the established ritual and rules secular behavior. The emphasized non-secularism and tactless speech behavior was defined in circles close to the Decembrists as Spartan, Roman behavior. The Decembrist, by his behavior, abolished hierarchy and stylistic diversity act, the distinction between oral and written speech was abolished: the high orderliness and syntactic completeness of written speech were transferred to oral use. The Decembrists cultivated seriousness as a norm of behavior. Awareness of oneself as a historical figure forced one to evaluate one’s life as a chain of plots for future historians. It is characteristic that everyday behavior became one of the criteria for selecting candidates for society; on this basis, a kind of chivalry arose, which determined the moral charm of the Decembrist tradition in Russian culture and did a poor job in tragic conditions (the Decembrists were not psychologically prepared to act in conditions legalized meanness).The Decembrists were romantic heroes.

The feat of the Decembrists and its truly great significance for the spiritual history of Russian society are well known. The act of the Decembrists was an act of protest and challenge. It was Russian literature that was “to blame,” which created the idea of a female equivalent of the heroic behavior of a citizen, and the moral norms of the Decembrist circle, which required a direct transfer of the behavior of literary heroes into life.

At the beginning of the 19th century, a special type of riotous behavior appeared, which was perceived not as the norm for military leisure, but as a variant of freethinking. The world of revelry became an independent sphere, immersion in which excluded service. Introducing to free-thinking was thought of as a holiday, and in a feast and even an orgy the realization of the ideal of freedom was seen. But there was another type of freedom-loving morality - the ideal of stoicism, Roman virtue, heroic asceticism. Abolishing the division of everyday life into areas of service and recreation, which was dominant in noble society, the liberalists wanted to turn all life into a holiday, the conspirators into service. All types of secular entertainment were severely condemned by the Decembrists as a sign of spiritual emptiness. The hermitage of the Decembrists was accompanied by an unambiguous and open contempt for the usual pastime of the nobleman. The cult of brotherhood based on the unity of spiritual ideals, the exaltation of friendship. The revolutionaries of the next stages often believed that the Decembrists talked more than they acted. However, the concept of action is historically changeable and the Decembrists can be called practitioners. The creation of a completely new type of person for Russia, the contribution of the Decembrists to Russian culture turned out to be enduring. The Decembrists introduced unity into human behavior, but not by rehabilitating life’s prose, but by passing life through the filters of heroic texts, and simply abolished what was not subject to inclusion on the tablets of history.

Instead of the conclusion: “Between the double abyss...”

We want to understand the history of the past and the works of fiction of previous eras, but at the same time we naively believe that it is enough to pick up a book that interests us, put a dictionary next to us, and understanding is guaranteed. But every message consists of two parts: what is said and what is not said, because it is already known. The second part is omitted. The contemporary reader easily restores it himself, based on his life experience... In past eras, without special study, we are aliens.

The history reflected in one person, in his life, everyday life, gesture, is isomorphic with the history of humanity, they are reflected in each other and are known through each other.

Part 3.

“Conversations on Russian Culture” devoted to the study of the life and traditions of the Russian nobility of the 18th and early 19th centuries are of undoubted interest. This is the time when Russia embarked on the path of modernization and enlightened absolutism. This process began with the reforms of Peter I, which covered many areas of society. After the death of Peter 1, his reform course was continued by Catherine2. Under her, the educational reform was continued, science, literature and socio-political thought were further developed - the establishment of democratic traditions. Under Alexander1, a fairly large political opposition was formed in society for the first time. arise secret societies. Taking advantage of the death of Alexander1, the Decembrists decided to seize power on December 14, 1825 and proclaim the introduction of a constitution. The uprising was brutally suppressed. Already at the beginning of the century, Russian conservatism was emerging as a political movement. A distinctive feature of Nicholas's reign was the desire of the authorities to extinguish opposition sentiments with the help of the theory of official nationality. In the formation of national self-awareness and national culture, a large role belongs to the best representatives of the nobility and the emerging intelligentsia. Yu.M. Lotman immerses the reader in the everyday life of this class, allowing him to see people of that era in the service, on military campaigns, to reproduce the rituals of matchmaking and marriage, and to gain insight into the peculiarities women's world and personal relationships, understand the meaning of masquerades and card games, dueling rules and the concept of honor.

For a long time, noble culture remained outside scientific research. Lotman sought to restore the historical truth about the meaning noble culture, which gave Fonvizin and Derzhavin, Radishchev and Novikov, Pushkin and the Decembrists, Lermontov and Chaadaev, Tolstoy and Tyutchev. Belonging to the nobility had distinctive features: obligatory rules of behavior, principles of honor, cut of clothing, official and domestic activities, holidays and entertainment. The entire life of the nobility is permeated with symbols and signs. Revealing its symbolic nature, the thing enters into dialogue with modernity, discovers connections with history and becomes priceless. The history of culture must necessarily be connected with feelings, be visible, tangible, audible, then its values enter the human world and are fixed in it for a long time.

Listliterature

1.Ikonnikova S.N. History of cultural theories: Textbook. In 3 hours. Part 3 History of cultural studies in persons / Ikonnikova S.N., St. Petersburg State University of Culture and Arts. - St. Petersburg, 2001. - 152 p.

2. Lotman Yu.M. Pushkin./ Yu.M. Lotman, introductory article B.F. Egorov, art. D.M. Plaksin.- St. Petersburg: Art- St. Petersburg, 1995.-847 p.

3. Lotman Yu.M. Conversations about Russian culture: Life and traditions of the Russian nobility (18th-early 19th centuries). - St. Petersburg: Art, 1996.-399 p.

4. The world of Russian culture. Encyclopedic dictionary / ed. A.N. Myachin.-M.: Veche, 1997.-624 p.

5. Radugin A.A. History of Russia: Textbook for Universities / comp. And responsible editor. A.A. Radugin.-M.: Center, 1998.-352 p.

Posted on Allbest.ru

...