Chernyshevsky's biography is the most important thing. Literary and historical notes of a young technician

Nikolai Gavrilovich Chernyshevsky. Born on July 12 (24), 1828 in Saratov - died on October 17 (29), 1889 in Saratov. Russian utopian philosopher, democratic revolutionary, scientist, literary critic, publicist and writer.

Born in Saratov in the family of a priest, Saratov cathedral archpriest Gabriel Ivanovich Chernyshevsky (1793-1861).

Until the age of 14, he studied at home under the guidance of his father, a well-educated and very religious man, and his cousin, L.N. Pypina. Archbishop Nikanor (Brovkovich) pointed out that with early childhood A French tutor was assigned to him, to whom “in Saratov they attributed the initial direction of young Chernyshevsky.”

Nikolai's erudition amazed those around him. As a child, he even had the nickname “bibliophage,” that is, a book eater. In 1843 he entered the Saratov Theological Seminary. He stayed at the seminary for three years, “being unusually thoroughly developed beyond his years and educated far beyond the seminary course of his peers.” Without graduating, in 1846 he entered St. Petersburg University in the historical and philological department of the Faculty of Philosophy.

Over the years of studying at the university, the foundations of a worldview were developed. The formation of his views was influenced by the circle of I. I. Vvedensky. At this time, Chernyshevsky began to write his first works of fiction. In 1850, having completed the course as a candidate, he was assigned to the Saratov gymnasium and in the spring of 1851 began work. Here the young teacher used his position to preach revolutionary ideas.

In 1853 he met his future wife, Olga Sokratovna Vasilieva, with whom, after the wedding, he moved from his native Saratov to St. Petersburg. By the highest order on January 24, 1854, Chernyshevsky was appointed teacher in the Second cadet corps. Future writer He proved himself to be an excellent teacher, but his stay in the building was short-lived. After a conflict with an officer, Chernyshevsky was forced to resign.

He began his literary activity in 1853 with small articles in the St. Petersburg Gazette and in Otechestvennye Zapiski.

At the beginning of 1854, he moved to the Sovremennik magazine, where in 1855-1862 he was the director along with and, led a decisive struggle to transform the magazine into a tribune of revolutionary democracy, which caused protest from liberal writers (V.P. Botkin, P V. Annenkov and A. V. Druzhinin, I. S. Turgenev), who collaborated in Sovremennik.

On May 10, 1855, at the university, he defended his dissertation “The Aesthetic Relationship of Art to Reality,” which became a great social event and was perceived as a revolutionary speech; in this work, he sharply criticized the aesthetics of idealists and the theory of “art for art’s sake.”

The Minister of Education A. S. Norov prevented the award of an academic degree, and only in 1858, when Norov was replaced as minister by E. P. Kovalevsky, the latter approved Chernyshevsky for a master's degree in Russian literature.

In 1858, he became the first editor of the Military Collection magazine. A number of officers (Serakovsky, Kalinovsky, Shelgunov, etc.) were involved by him in revolutionary circles. Herzen and Ogarev, who sought to lead the army to participate in the revolution, were well aware of this work of Chernyshevsky. Together with them, he is the founder of populism, and is involved in the creation of the secret revolutionary society “Land and Freedom”.

In June 1859, Chernyshevsky went to London to see Herzen for an explanation about the article “Very dangerous!” (“Very dangerous!”), published in Kolokol.

Since September 1861 it has been under secret police surveillance. The chief of gendarmes, Dolgorukov, gives the following characterization of Chernyshevsky: “Suspected of drafting the “Velikoruss” appeal, of participating in the drafting of other appeals, and of constantly arousing hostile feelings towards the government.” Suspected of involvement in the fires of 1862 in St. Petersburg.

In May 1862, the Sovremennik magazine was closed for 8 months.

On June 12, 1862, Chernyshevsky was arrested and placed in solitary confinement in custody in the Alekseevsky ravelin of the Peter and Paul Fortress on charges of drawing up a proclamation “Bow to the lordly peasants from their well-wishers.” The appeal to the “Barsky Peasants” was rewritten by Mikhailov and handed over to Vsevolod Kostomarov, who, as it later turned out, was a provocateur.

In official documentation and correspondence between the gendarmerie and the secret police, he was called “enemy of the Russian Empire number one.” The reason for the arrest was a letter intercepted by the police to N.A. Serno-Solovyevich, in which Chernyshevsky’s name was mentioned in connection with the proposal to publish the banned Sovremennik in London.

The investigation lasted about a year and a half. Chernyshevsky waged a stubborn struggle with the investigative commission. As a protest against the illegal actions of the investigative commission, Chernyshevsky went on a hunger strike, which lasted nine days. At the same time, Chernyshevsky continued to work in prison. During 678 days of arrest, Chernyshevsky wrote text materials in the amount of at least 200 copyright sheets. The most fully-fledged utopian ideals were expressed by the prisoner Chernyshevsky in the novel “What is to be done?” (1863), published in issues 3, 4 and 5 of Sovremennik.

On February 7, 1864, Senator M. M. Karniolin-Pinsky announced the verdict in the Chernyshevsky case: exile to hard labor for 14 years, and then settlement in Siberia for life. reduced the term of hard labor to seven years; in general, Chernyshevsky spent more than twenty years in prison, hard labor and exile.

On May 19 (31), 1864, the civil execution of a revolutionary took place on Horse Square in St. Petersburg. He was sent to the Nerchinsk penal servitude in the Kadai prison; in 1866 he was transferred to the Aleksandrovsky Plant of the Nerchinsk District, in 1867 to the Akatui prison, in 1871 to Vilyuysk. In 1874, he was officially offered release, but he refused to apply for clemency.

The organizer of one of the attempts to free Chernyshevsky (1871) from exile was G. A. Lopatin. In 1875, I. N. Myshkin tried to free Chernyshevsky. In 1883, Chernyshevsky was transferred to Astrakhan (according to some sources, during this period Konstantin Fedorov worked as a copyist for him).

Thanks to the efforts of his son Mikhail, on June 27, 1889 he moved to Saratov, but on October 11 of the same year he fell ill with malaria. Chernyshevsky died at 12:37 at night on October 17 (29), 1889 from a cerebral hemorrhage. On October 20 he was buried in the city of Saratov at the Resurrection Cemetery.

Bibliography of Chernyshevsky:

Chernyshevsky's novels:

1862-1863 - What to do? From stories about new people.
1863 - Stories within a story (unfinished)
1867-1870 - Prologue. A novel from the early sixties. (unfinished)

Chernyshevsky's stories:

1863 - Alferev.
1864 - Small stories.
1889 - Evenings with Princess Starobelskaya (not published)

Literary criticism Chernyshevsky:

1849 - About “Brigadier” Fonvizin. Candidate's work.
1854 - On sincerity in criticism.
1854 - Songs of different nations.
1854 - Poverty is not a vice. Comedy by A. Ostrovsky.
1855 - Works of Pushkin.
1855-1856 - Essays on the Gogol period of Russian literature.
1856 - Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin. His life and writings.
1856 - Poems by Koltsov.
1856 - Poems by N. Ogarev.
1856 - Collected poems by V. Benediktov.
1856 - Childhood and adolescence. War stories of Count L.N. Tolstoy.
1856 - Sketches from peasant life A.F. Pisemsky.
1857 - Lessing. His time, his life and work.
1857 - " Provincial essays» Shchedrin.
1857 - Works of V. Zhukovsky.
1857 - Poems by N. Shcherbina.
1857 - “Letters about Spain” by V. P. Botkin.
1858 - Russian man at rendez-vous. Reflections on reading Mr. Turgenev’s story “Asya”.
1860 - Collection of miracles, stories borrowed from mythology.
1861 - Is this the beginning of a change? Stories by N.V. Uspensky. Two parts.

Journalism of Chernyshevsky:

1856 - Review historical development rural community in Russia Chicherin.
1856 - “Russian conversation” and its direction.
1857 - “Russian conversation” and Slavophilism.
1857 - On land ownership.
1858 - Taxation system.
1858 - Cavaignac.
1858 - July Monarchy.
1859 - Materials for solving the peasant question.
1859 - Superstition and the rules of logic.
1859 - Capital and labor.
1859-1862 - Politics. Monthly reviews of foreign political life.
1860 - History of civilization in Europe from the fall of the Roman Empire to the French Revolution.
1861 - Political and economic letters to the President of the United States of America G. K. Carey.
1861 - About the reasons for the fall of Rome.
1861 - Count Cavour.
1861 - Disrespect for authority. Regarding "Democracy in America" ​​by Tocqueville.
1861 - Bow to the Barsky peasants from their well-wishers.
1862 - As an expression of gratitude, Letter to Mr. Z(ari)nu.
1862 - Letters without an address.
1878 - Letter to the sons of A.N. and M.N. Chernyshevsky.

Memoirs of Chernyshevsky:

1861 - N. A. Dobrolyubov. Obituary.
1883 - Notes about Nekrasov.
1884-1888 - Materials for the biography of N. A. Dobrolyubov, collected in 1861-1862.
1884-1888 - Memories of Turgenev’s relationship with Dobrolyubov and the breakdown of friendship between Turgenev and Nekrasov.

Chernyshevsky's philosophy:

1854 - A critical look at modern aesthetic concepts.
1855 - Aesthetic relations of art to reality. Master's dissertation.
1855 - The Sublime and the Comic.
1885 - Character human knowledge.
1858 - Criticism of philosophical prejudices against common ownership.
1860 - Anthropological principle in philosophy. "Essays on questions of practical philosophy." Essay by P. L. Lavrov.
1888 - Origin of the theory of the beneficence of the struggle for life. Preface to some treatises on botany, zoology and the sciences of human life.

Translations by Chernyshevsky:

1860 - “Foundations of Political Economy by D. S. Mill” (with his own notes).
1861-1863 - “World History” by F. K. Schlosser.
1863-1864 - “Confession” by J. J. Rousseau.
1884-1888 - “The General History of G. Weber” (managed to translate 12 volumes with his articles and comments).

Chernyshevsky Nikolai Gavrilovich, Russian revolutionary and thinker, writer, economist, philosopher. Born into a priest's family. He studied at the Saratov Theological Seminary (1842-45), graduated from the historical and philological department of St. Petersburg University (1850). Ch.'s worldview was mainly formed during his student years under the influence of Russian serfdom and the events of the revolutions of 1848-49 in Europe. The formation of his views was influenced by the classics of German philosophy, English political economy, French utopian socialism (G. Hegel, L. Feuerbach, D. Ricardo, C. Fourier, etc.) and especially the works of V. G. Belinsky and A. I. Herzen. By the time he graduated from university, Ch. was a staunch democrat, revolutionary, socialist and materialist. In 1851-53, Ch. taught Russian language and literature at the Saratov gymnasium, openly expressing his beliefs to the gymnasium students (many of his students later became revolutionaries). In 1853 he moved to St. Petersburg and began collaborating in Otechestvennye zapiski, then in Sovremennik, where he soon took a leadership position.

The basis of Ch.’s worldview was the anthropological principle (see Anthropologism). Based on general concepts about “human nature” and his desire for “his own benefit,” Ch. made revolutionary conclusions about the need to change social relations and forms of ownership. According to Ch., the consistently applied anthropological principle coincides with the principles of socialism.

Taking the position of anthropological materialism, Ch. considered himself a student of Feuerbach, whom he called the father of new philosophy. With the teaching of Feuerbach, in his opinion, “... the development of German philosophy was completed, which, now for the first time having achieved positive solutions, threw off its former scholastic form of metaphysical transcendence and, recognizing the identity of its results with the teaching of the natural sciences, merged with the general theory of natural science and anthropology)" (Poln. sobr. soch., vol. 3, 1947, p. 179). Developing the teachings of Feuerbach, he put forward practice as a criterion of truth, “... this immutable touchstone of any theory...” (ibid., vol. 2, 1949, p. 102). Ch. opposed the dialectical method to abstract metaphysical thinking and was aware of the class and party nature of political theories and philosophical teachings.

In 1855, Ch. defended his master's thesis “Aesthetic relations of art to reality,” which marked the beginning of the development of materialist aesthetics in Russia. Having criticized Hegelian aesthetics, he asserted the social conditioning of the aesthetic ideal and formulated the thesis “beauty is life” (see ibid., vol. 2, p. 10). The sphere of art, according to Ch., is not limited to the beautiful: “what is generally interesting in life is the content of art” (ibid., p. 82). The purpose of art is the reproduction of life, its explanation, “the verdict on its phenomena”; art should be a “textbook of life” (see ibid., pp. 90, 85, 87). Ch.’s aesthetic teaching dealt a powerful blow to the apolitical theory of “art for art’s sake.” Wherein aesthetic issues for Ch. were only a “battlefield”; his dissertation proclaimed the principles of a new, revolutionary direction.

Ch.'s journalistic activity was devoted to the tasks of the struggle against tsarism and serfdom. “... He knew how,” wrote V.I. Lenin, “to influence all the political events of his era in a revolutionary spirit, carrying out - through the obstacles and slingshots of censorship - the idea of ​​a peasant revolution, the idea of ​​​​the struggle of the masses to overthrow all the old authorities" (Full Collected works, 5th ed., vol. 20, p. 175). In 1855-57, Ch. spoke primarily with historical, literary and literary critical articles, defending realistic direction in literature, promoting the service of literature to the interests of the people. He researched the history of Russian journalism and social thought late 20-40s 19th century ("Essays on the Gogol period of Russian literature", 1855-56), developing the traditions of Belinsky's democratic criticism. Analyzing “with adaptation to our home circumstances” the era of Enlightenment in Germany (“Lessing. His time, his life and work,” 1857), Ch. clarified the historical conditions in which literature could become “... the main engine of historical development.. " (Poln. sobr. soch., vol. 4, 1948, p. 7). Ch. highly appreciated A. S. Pushkin and especially N. V. Gogol: he considered N. A. Nekrasov the best modern poet.

From the end of 1857, Ch., having transferred the department of criticism to N. A. Dobrolyubov, concentrated all his attention on economic and political issues. Having joined the magazine campaign to discuss the conditions of the upcoming peasant reform, Ch. in the articles “On New Conditions of Rural Life” (1858), “On Methods of Redemption of Serfs” (1858), “Is Redemption of Land Difficult?” (1859), “The Way of Life of Landowner Peasants” (1859), etc. criticized the liberal-noble reform projects, contrasting them with a revolutionary-democratic solution to the peasant question. He advocated the abolition of landlord ownership of land without any redemption. In December 1858, having finally become convinced of the government’s inability to satisfactorily resolve the peasant question, he warned about the unprecedented ruin of the peasant masses and called for a revolutionary disruption of the reform.

Overcoming anthropologism, Ch. approached a materialist understanding of history. He repeatedly emphasized that “... mental development, like political and anything else, depends on circumstances economic life..." (ibid., vol. 10, 1951, p. 441).

To substantiate his political program, Ch. studied economic theories and, according to K. Marx, “... masterfully showed... the bankruptcy of bourgeois political economy...” (K. Marx and F. Engels, Works, 2nd ed. , vol. 23, p. 17). In the studies “Economic Activity and Legislation” (1859), “Capital and Labor” (1860), “Notes to D. S. Mill’s “Foundations of Political Economy” (1860), “Essays on Political Economy (according to Mill)” (1861 ) and others. Ch. revealed the class character of bourgeois political economy and contrasted it with his own economic “theory of the working people,” which proves “... the need to replace the current economic system with a communist one...” (Poln. sobr. soch., vol. 9, 1949 , p. 262). Ch.'s economic theory was the pinnacle of pre-Marxist economic thought. Ch. rejected the inevitability of exploitation and argued that economic forms (slavery, feudalism, capitalism) were transitory. He considered the criterion for the superiority of one form over another to be the ability to ensure growth in the productivity of social labor. From this position, he criticized serfdom with exceptional depth. Recognizing the relative progressiveness of capitalism, Ch. criticized it for the anarchy of production, for competition, crises, exploitation of workers, for the inability to ensure the maximum possible productivity of social labor. He considered the transition to socialism a historical necessity conditioned by the entire development of mankind. Under socialism, “... separate classes of wage earners and employers of labor will disappear, replaced by one class of people who will be workers and masters together” (ibid., p. 487).

Ch. saw that the Russian economy had already begun to obey the laws of capitalism, but mistakenly believed that Russia would be able to avoid the “ulcer of the proletariat”, because the question of “the nature of changes in Russian economic life” has not yet been resolved. In the articles “On Landed Ownership” (1857), “Criticism of Philosophical Prejudices against Communal Ownership” (1858), “Superstition and Rules of Logic” (1859), etc. Ch. put forward and substantiated the idea of ​​​​the possibility for Russia to bypass the capitalist stage of development and through peasant community to move to socialism. This opportunity, according to Ch., will open up as a result of the peasant revolution. Unlike Herzen, who believed that the socialist system in Russia would develop independently from the patriarchal peasant community, Ch. considered the assistance of industrially developed countries to be an indispensable guarantee of this development. This idea, which became a reality for backward countries with the victory of the October Socialist Revolution in Russia, was utopian in those historical conditions. Along with Herzen, Ch. is one of the founders of populism.

By the beginning of 1859, Ch. became a generally recognized leader, and Sovremennik, which he headed, became a militant organ of revolutionary democracy. Convinced of the inevitability of imminent popular indignation, Ch. focused on the peasant revolution and developed a political program for revolutionary democracy. In a series of articles on the history of France, analyzing revolutionary events, he sought to reveal the leading role of the masses and their interest in fundamental economic changes. In the article “Russian man at rendez-vous” (1858), written about I. S. Turgenev’s story “Asya,” Ch. showed the practical impotence of Russian liberalism. In monthly reviews of international life - "Politics" (1859-62) Ch. relied on historical experience Western Europe to highlight pressing issues of Russian life and indicate ways to resolve them.

In the article “Anthropological Principle in Philosophy” (1860), systematizing his philosophical views, Ch. outlined the ethical theory of “reasonable egoism.” Ch.'s ethics does not separate personal interest from public interest: “reasonable egoism” is the free subordination of personal gain to a common cause, the success of which ultimately benefits the individual’s personal interest. In the “Preface to Current Austrian Affairs” (February 1861), Ch. directly responded to the peasant reform, pursuing the idea that absolutism could not allow the destruction of feudal institutions and the establishment of political freedom. At the same time, Ch. led a narrow group of like-minded people who decided to appeal to various groups of the population. In the proclamation he wrote, “Bow to the lordly peasants from their well-wishers...” (taken during the arrest of an illegal printing house), he exposed the predatory nature of the peasant reform, warned the landowner peasants against spontaneous isolated actions and called on them to prepare for a general uprising at the signal of the revolutionaries. In the summer of 1861 - in the spring of 1862 Ch. was ideological inspirer and advisor to the revolutionary organization "Land and Freedom". In “Letters without an Address” (February 1862, published abroad in 1874), he put forward an alternative to the Tsar: renunciation of autocracy or popular revolution.

Fearing Ch.'s growing influence, the tsarist government forcibly interrupted his activities. Following the ban on Sovremennik for 8 months, on July 7, 1862, Ch. (who had been under secret police surveillance since September 1861) was arrested and imprisoned in the Alekseevsky Ravelin of the Peter and Paul Fortress. The reason for the arrest was a letter intercepted by the police from Herzen to N.A. Serno-Solovyevich, in which Ch.’s name was mentioned in connection with the proposal to publish the banned Sovremennik in London. In solitary confinement, deprived of the opportunity to engage in current journalism, Ch. turned to fiction. In the novel "What to do?" (1862-63) Ch. described the life of new people - “reasonable egoists” who live by their own labor, arrange family life in a new way, and conduct practical propaganda of the ideas of socialism; created the images of Rakhmetov, the first professional revolutionary in Russian literature, and Vera Pavlovna, a leading Russian woman who devoted herself to socially useful work; promoted the ideas of women's equality and artisanal production. The novel, which predicted the victory of the people's revolution and painted pictures of the future society, was a synthesis of the socio-political, philosophical and ethical views of Chechnya and provided a practical program for the activities of progressive youth. Published due to a censorship oversight in Sovremennik (1863), the novel had a great influence on Russian society and contributed to the education of many revolutionaries. In the Peter and Paul Fortress, Ch. also wrote the story "Alferyev" (1863), "Tales within a Tale" (1863-64), "Small Stories" (1864), etc. In 1864, despite the lack of evidence and brilliant self-defense, Ch. with the help of forgeries and provocation, he was found guilty of “taking measures to overthrow the existing order of government” and was sentenced to 7 years of hard labor and permanent settlement in Siberia. After the ritual of civil execution on Mytninskaya Square (May 19, 1864), Ch. was sent to the Nerchinsk penal servitude (Kadaisky mine; in 1866 transferred to the Aleksandrovsky plant), and in 1871, after serving his term of hard labor, he was settled in the Vilyuisky prison. While in hard labor, he wrote the novel "Prologue" (1867-69; the 1st part was published abroad in 1877), which contained autobiographical features and painted a picture social struggle on the eve of the peasant reform. Among other Siberian works of Ch., the novel “Reflections of Radiance,” the story “The Story of a Girl,” the play “The Mistress of Cooking Porridge,” and others have been preserved (not completely). In these works, Ch. tried to put his revolutionary views into the form of conversations “as if about foreign objects."

Russian revolutionaries made bold attempts to wrest Czechoslovakia out of Siberian isolation (G. A. Lopatin in 1871, I. N. Myshkin in 1875). In 1881, the Executive Committee of Narodnaya Volya, in negotiations with the Sacred Squad, put forward the release of Chechnya as the first condition for ending the terror. Only in 1883 Ch. was transferred to Astrakhan under police supervision, and in June 1889 he received permission to live in his homeland.

In Astrakhan and Saratov, Ch. wrote the philosophical work “The Character of Human Knowledge”, memoirs about Dobrolyubov, Nekrasov and others, prepared “Materials for the biography of N. A. Dobrolyubov” (ed. 1890), translated 111/2 volumes. "General History" by G. Weber, accompanying the translation with his articles and comments. Ch.'s works remained prohibited in Russia until the Revolution of 1905-07.

K. Marx and F. Engels studied Ch.’s works and called him “... a great Russian scientist and critic...”, “... socialist Lessing...” (Works, 2nd ed., vol. 23, pp. 18 and vol. 18, pp. 522). V.I. Lenin believed that Ch. “... took a huge step forward against Herzen. Chernyshevsky was a much more consistent and militant democrat. His writings emanate the spirit of class struggle” (Poln. sobr. soch., 5th ed., vol. 25, p. 94). Ch. came closer to scientific socialism than other thinkers of the pre-Marxist period. Due to the backwardness of Russian life, he was unable to rise to the dialectical materialism of Marx and Engels, but, according to Lenin, he is “... the only truly great Russian writer who managed from the 50s until 1988 to remain at the level integral philosophical materialism..." (ibid., vol. 18, p. 384).

Ch.'s works and the very appearance of a revolutionary, steadfast in his beliefs and actions, contributed to the education of many generations of Russians advanced people. He had a great influence on the development of culture and social thought of the Russian and other peoples of the USSR.

Chernyshevsky Nikolai Gavrilovich (1828-1889)

Russian revolutionary, writer, journalist. He was born in Saratov into the family of a priest and, as his parents expected of him, he studied at a theological seminary for three years. From 1846 to 1850 studied at the historical and philological department of St. Petersburg University. The development of Chernyshevsky was especially strongly influenced by the French socialist philosophers - Henri de Saint-Simon and Charles Fourier.

In 1853 he married Olga Sokratovna Vasilyeva. Chernyshevsky not only loved his young wife very much, but also considered their marriage to be a kind of “testing ground” for testing new ideas. The writer preached absolute equality of spouses in marriage - a truly revolutionary idea for that time. Moreover, he believed that women, as one of the most oppressed groups of the then society, should have been given maximum freedom to achieve true equality. He allowed his wife everything, including adultery, believing that he could not consider his wife as his property. Later, the writer’s personal experience was reflected in the love story of the novel “What to Do.”

In 1853 he moved from Saratov to St. Petersburg, where his career as a publicist began. The name of Chernyshevsky quickly became the banner of the Sovremennik magazine, where he began working at the invitation of N.A. Nekrasova. In 1855, Chernyshevsky defended his dissertation “Aesthetic relations of art to reality,” where he abandoned the search for beauty in the abstract, sublime spheres of “pure art,” formulating his thesis: “The beautiful is life.”

In the late 50s and early 60s, he published a lot, taking advantage of any opportunity to openly or covertly express his views, expecting a peasant uprising after the abolition of serfdom in 1861. For revolutionary agitation, Sovremennik was closed. Soon after this, the authorities intercepted A.I.’s letter. Herzen, who had been in exile for fifteen years. Having learned about the closure of Sovremennik, he wrote to the magazine’s employee, N.L. Serno-Solovyevich and suggested continuing the publication abroad. The letter was used as a pretext, and on July 7, 1862, Chernyshevsky and Serno-Solovyevich were arrested and placed in the Peter and Paul Fortress. In May 1864, Chernyshevsky was found guilty, sentenced to seven years of hard labor and exile to Siberia for the rest of his life; on May 19, 1864, the ritual of “civil execution” was publicly performed on him.

While the investigation was underway, Chernyshevsky wrote his general ledger-novel “What to do.”

Only in 1883 Chernyshevsky received permission to settle in Astrakhan. By this time he was already an elderly and sick man. In 1889 he was transferred to Saratov, and soon after the move he died of a cerebral hemorrhage.

In Soviet biographical literature N.G. Chernyshevsky, along with N.A. Dobrolyubov, was glorified as a talented critic, philosopher, courageous publicist, “revolutionary democrat” and fighter for a bright socialist future of the Russian people. Today's critics, doing the hard work of overcoming historical mistakes that have already been made, sometimes go to the other extreme. Completely overthrowing previous positive assessments of many events and ideas, denying the contribution of this or that individual to the development of national culture, they only anticipate future mistakes and prepare the ground for the next overthrow of newly created idols.

Nevertheless, I would like to believe that in relation to N.G. Chernyshevsky and similar “funers of the world fire”, history has already spoken its final weighty word.

It was the ideas of the utopian revolutionaries, who largely idealized the process of change itself government structure, calling for universal equality and brotherhood, already in the 50s of the 19th century planted the seeds of discord and subsequent violence in Russian soil. By the beginning of the 1880s, with the criminal connivance of the state and society, they sprouted bloody shoots, grew significantly by 1905 and began to sprout rapidly after 1917, almost drowning one sixth of the land in the wave of the most brutal fratricidal war.

Human nature is such that sometimes entire nations tend to retain the memory of already accomplished national catastrophes for a long time, to experience and evaluate their disastrous consequences, but not always and not everyone manages to remember where it all began? What was the reason, the beginning? What was the “first little pebble” that rolled down the mountain and led to a destructive, merciless avalanche?.. Today’s schoolchild is required to “go through” the works of the previously banned M. Bulgakov, memorize the poems of Gumilyov and Pasternak, and list the names of heroes in history lessons White Movement, but it is unlikely that he will be able to answer anything intelligible about the current “anti-heroes” - Lavrov, Nechaev, Martov, Plekhanov, Nekrasov, Dobrolyubov or the same Chernyshevsky. Today N.G. Chernyshevsky is included in all the “black lists” of names that have no place on the map of our homeland. His works have not been republished since Soviet times, because they are the most unclaimed literature in libraries, and the most unclaimed texts on Internet resources. Such “selectivity” in shaping the picture of the world among the younger generation, unfortunately, makes our ancient and recent past more and more unpredictable every year. So let's not make it worse...

Biography of N.G. Chernyshevsky

early years

N.G. Chernyshevsky was born in Saratov into the family of a priest and, as his parents expected of him, he studied at a theological seminary for three years (1842–1845). However, for the young man, like for many of his peers who came from a spiritual background, seminary education did not become the path to God and the church. Rather, on the contrary, like many seminarians of that time, Chernyshevsky did not want to accept the doctrine of official Orthodoxy that was instilled in him by his teachers. He abandoned not only religion, but also recognition of the existing order in Russia as a whole.

From 1846 to the 1850s, Chernyshevsky studied at the historical and philological department of St. Petersburg University. During this period, a circle of interests developed that would subsequently determine the main themes of his work. In addition to Russian literature, the young man studied the famous French historians - F. Guizot and J. Michelet - scientists who made a revolution in historical science XIX century. They were among the first to look at historical process not as a result of the activities of exclusively great people - kings, politicians, military men. French historical school mid-19th century put the masses at the center of her research - a view, of course, already at that time close to Chernyshevsky and many of his like-minded people. No less important for the formation of views younger generation Western philosophy also became part of the Russian people. Chernyshevsky’s worldview, formed mainly during his student years, was formed under the influence of the works of classics of German philosophy, English political economy, French utopian socialism (G. Hegel, L. Feuerbach, C. Fourier), the works of V.G. Belinsky and A.I. Herzen. Among the writers, he highly appreciated the works of A.S. Pushkina, N.V. Gogol, but, oddly enough, considered N.A. to be the best modern poet. Nekrasova. (Maybe because there hasn’t been any other rhyming journalism yet?..)

At the university, Chernyshevsky became a convinced Fourierist. All his life he remained faithful to this most dreamy of the doctrines of socialism, trying to link it with the political processes that took place in Russia during the era of the reforms of Alexander II.

In 1850, Chernyshevsky successfully completed the course as a candidate and left for Saratov, where he immediately received a position as a senior teacher at the gymnasium. Apparently, already at this time he was dreaming more about the coming revolution than teaching his students. In any case, the young teacher clearly did not hide his rebellious sentiments from the schoolchildren, which inevitably caused dissatisfaction with his superiors.

In 1853, Chernyshevsky married Olga Sokratovna Vasilyeva, a woman who later aroused the most controversial feelings among her husband’s friends and acquaintances. Some considered her an extraordinary person, a worthy friend and inspiration for the writer. Others sharply condemned her for frivolity and disregard for her husband’s interests and creativity. Be that as it may, Chernyshevsky himself not only loved his young wife very much, but also considered their marriage to be a kind of “testing ground” for testing new ideas. In his opinion, new free life it was necessary to bring it closer and prepare it. First of all, of course, one should strive for revolution, but liberation from any form of slavery and oppression, including family, was also welcomed. That is why the writer preached absolute equality of spouses in marriage - a truly revolutionary idea for that time. Moreover, he believed that women, as one of the most oppressed groups of the then society, should be given maximum freedom to achieve true equality. This is exactly what Nikolai Gavrilovich did in his family life, allowing his wife everything, including adultery, believing that he cannot consider his wife as his property. Later, the writer’s personal experience was undoubtedly reflected in the love line of the novel “What is to be done?” For a long time it appeared in Western literature under the name “Russian triangle” - one woman and two men.

N.G. Chernyshevsky got married, against the will of his parents, not even able to withstand the period of mourning for his recently deceased mother before the wedding. The father hoped that his son would stay with him for some time, but in the young family everything was subordinated only to the will of Olga Sokratovna. At her insistent request, the Chernyshevskys hastily move from provincial Saratov to St. Petersburg. This move was rather like an escape: an escape from parents, from family, from everyday gossip and prejudices to a new life. Chernyshevsky's career as a publicist began in St. Petersburg. At first, however, the future revolutionary tried to work modestly in the public service - he took the place of a Russian language teacher in the Second Cadet Corps, but lasted no more than a year. Captivated by his ideas, Chernyshevsky, obviously, was not too demanding and diligent in educating military youth. Left to their own devices, his charges did almost nothing, which caused a conflict with the officer-educators, and Chernyshevsky was forced to leave the service.

Aesthetic views of Chernyshevsky

Chernyshevsky's literary activity began in 1853 with small articles in St. Petersburg Vedomosti and Otechestvennye Zapiski. Soon he met N.A. Nekrasov, and at the beginning of 1854 switched to permanent job to the Sovremennik magazine. In 1855 - 1862, Chernyshevsky was one of its leaders along with N.A. Nekrasov and N.A. Dobrolyubov. In the first years of his work at the magazine, Chernyshevsky concentrated mainly on literary problems– the political situation in Russia in the mid-fifties did not provide an opportunity to express revolutionary ideas.

In 1855, Chernyshevsky took the master’s exam, presenting as a dissertation the argument “Aesthetic relations of art to reality,” where he abandoned the search for beauty in the abstract, sublime spheres of “pure art,” formulating his thesis: “beauty is life.” Art, according to Chernyshevsky, should not revel in itself - be it beautiful phrases or paints subtly applied to the canvas. A description of the bitter life of a poor peasant can be much more beautiful than wonderful love poems, since it will benefit people...

The dissertation was accepted and allowed to be defended, but Chernyshevsky was not given a master's degree. IN mid-19th century century, obviously, there were different requirements for dissertation works than now, only scientific activity, even humanitarian, always involves research and testing (in in this case– proof) of its results. There is no trace of either the first or the second in the dissertation of the philologist Chernyshevsky. Abstract thoughts of the applicant about materialistic aesthetics and revision philosophical principles approach to assessing “beautiful” in the scientific community was perceived as complete nonsense. University officials even regarded them as a revolutionary performance. However, Chernyshevsky's dissertation, rejected by his fellow philologists, found a wide response among the liberal-democratic intelligentsia. The same university professors - moderate liberals - thoroughly criticized in magazines the purely materialistic approach to the problem of understanding goals and objectives contemporary art. And that was a mistake! If discussions about the “benefits of describing the bitter life of the people” and calls to make it better had been completely ignored by “experts”, it is unlikely that they would have caused such heated discussions in the artistic environment of the second world. half of the 19th century century. Perhaps Russian literature, painting, musical art would have subsequently avoided the dominance of “lead abominations” and “people’s groans”, and the whole history of the country would have taken a different path... Nevertheless, after three and a half years, Chernyshevsky’s dissertation was approved. IN Soviet time it became almost a catechism for all adherents of socialist realism in art.

Chernyshevsky also developed his thoughts on the relationship of art to reality in “Essays on the Gogol period of Russian literature” published in Sovremennik in 1855. The author of “Essays” spoke excellent Russian literary language, which even today looks modern and is easily perceived by the reader. His critical articles written lively, polemically, interestingly. They were enthusiastically received by the liberal democratic public and the literary community of those days. Having analyzed the most outstanding literary works previous decades (Pushkin, Lermontov, Gogol), Chernyshevsky viewed them through the prism of his own ideas about art. If the main task of literature, as well as art in general, is a truthful reflection of reality (according to the method of the singer-akyn: “what I see is what I sing”), then only those works that fully reflect the “truth of life” can be recognized "good". And those in which this “truth” is lacking are considered by Chernyshevsky as fabrications of aesthetic idealists that have nothing to do with literature. Chernyshevsky took the work of N.V. as an example of a clear and “objective” depiction of social ills. Gogol - one of the most mystical and to this day unsolved Russians writers of the 19th century century. It was Chernyshevsky, following Belinsky, who labeled him and other authors completely misunderstood by democratic criticism as “severe realists” and “exposers” of the vices of Russian reality. Within the narrow framework of these ideas, the works of Gogol, Ostrovsky, and Goncharov were examined by domestic literary scholars for many years, and then included in all school textbooks on Russian literature.

But as V. Nabokov, one of the most attentive and sensitive critics of Chernyshevsky’s legacy, later noted, the author himself was never a “realist” in the literal sense of the word. The ideal nature of his worldview, prone to creating various kinds of utopias, constantly required Chernyshevsky to force himself to look for beauty not in his own imagination, but in real life.

The definition of the concept of “beautiful” in his dissertation is completely as follows: “The beautiful is life; beautiful is the being in whom we see life as it should be according to our concepts; “Beautiful is the object that shows life in itself or reminds us of life.”

What exactly this “real life” should be like, perhaps the dreamer Chernyshevsky himself had no idea. Chasing a ghostly “reality,” which seemed to him an ideal, he did not call on his contemporaries, but persuaded, first of all, himself to return from the imaginary world, where he was much more comfortable and interesting, into the world of other people. Chernyshevsky most likely failed to do this. Hence his “revolution” as an ideal end in itself, and his utopian “dreams” about fair society and universal happiness, and the fundamental impossibility of productive dialogue with realistically thinking people.

"Contemporary" (late 1850s - early 60s)

Meanwhile, the political situation in the country at the end of the 1850s changed fundamentally. The new sovereign, Alexander II, having ascended the throne, clearly understood that Russia needed reforms. From the first years of his reign, he began preparations for the abolition of serfdom. The country lived in anticipation of change. Despite the persistence of censorship, the liberalization of all aspects of society has fully affected the means mass media, causing the emergence of new periodicals of various kinds.

The editors of Sovremennik, whose leaders were Chernyshevsky, Dobrolyubov and Nekrasov, of course, could not remain aloof from the events taking place in the country. In the late 50s and early 60s, Chernyshevsky published a lot, taking advantage of any occasion to openly or covertly express his “revolutionary” views. In 1858-1862, the journalistic (Chernyshevsky) and literary-critical (Dobrolyubov) departments took first place in Sovremennik. The literary and artistic department, despite the fact that Saltykov-Shchedrin, N. Uspensky, Pomyalovsky, Sleptsov and other famous authors were published in it, faded into the background during these years. Gradually, Sovremennik became the organ of representatives of revolutionary democracy and ideologists of the peasant revolution. The noble authors (Turgenev, L. Tolstoy, Grigorovich) felt uncomfortable here and forever withdrew from the editorial activities. Chernyshevsky became the ideological leader and most published author of Sovremennik. His sharp, polemical articles attracted readers, maintaining the publication's competitiveness in changing market conditions. During these years, Sovremennik acquired the authority of the main organ of revolutionary democracy, significantly expanded its audience, and its circulation continuously grew, bringing considerable profits to the editors.

Modern researchers recognize that the activities of Sovremennik, headed by Chernyshevsky, Nekrasov and Dobrolyubov, had a decisive influence on the formation of literary tastes and public opinion in the 1860s. It gave birth to a whole generation of so-called “nihilists of the sixties”, which found a very caricatured reflection in the works of the classics of Russian literature: I.S. Turgenev, F.M. Dostoevsky, L.N. Tolstoy.

Unlike the liberal thinkers of the late 1850s, the revolutionary Chernyshevsky believed that the peasants should receive freedom and allotments without any ransom, since the power of the landowners over them and their ownership of the land was not fair by definition. Moreover, the peasant reform was supposed to be the first step towards a revolution, after which private property will disappear altogether, and people, appreciating the beauty of joint work, will live united in free associations based on universal equality.

Chernyshevsky, like many of his other like-minded people, had no doubt that the peasants would eventually share their socialist ideas. They considered the peasants’ commitment to the “peace”, a community that resolved all major issues, to be proof of this village life, and formally considered the owner of all peasant land. The community members, according to the revolutionaries, had to follow them to a new life, despite the fact that to achieve the ideal, of course, it was necessary to carry out an armed coup.

At the same time, neither Chernyshevsky himself nor his radical supporters were at all embarrassed by the “side” phenomena that, as a rule, accompany any coup or redistribution of property. The general decline of the national economy, hunger, violence, executions, murders and even a possible civil war were already foreseen by the ideologists of the revolutionary movement, but for them the great goal always justified the means.

It was impossible to openly discuss such things on the pages of Sovremennik, even in the liberal environment of the late 50s. Therefore, Chernyshevsky used many ingenious methods in his articles to deceive the censor. Almost any topic he took on, be it a literary review or an analysis of a historical study about the Great French Revolution, or an article on the situation of slaves in the United States, he managed to explicitly or covertly link it with his revolutionary ideas. The reader was extremely interested in this “reading between the lines,” and thanks to his bold game with the authorities, Chernyshevsky soon became the idol of revolutionary-minded youth who did not want to stop there as a result of liberal reforms.

Confrontation with the authorities: 1861-1862

What happened next is perhaps one of the most difficult pages in the history of our country, evidence of a tragic misunderstanding between the authorities and the majority of educated society, which almost led to civil war and national disaster already in the mid-1860s...

The state, having freed the peasants in 1861, began preparing new reforms in almost every area of ​​government activity. And the revolutionaries, largely inspired by Chernyshevsky and his like-minded people, were waiting for a peasant uprising, which, to their surprise, did not happen. From here, young impatient people made a clear conclusion: if the people do not understand the need for a revolution, they need to explain this, call on the peasants to take active action against the government.

The beginning of the 1860s was the time of the emergence of numerous revolutionary circles that strived for vigorous action for the benefit of the people. As a result, proclamations began to circulate in St. Petersburg, sometimes quite bloodthirsty, calling for an uprising and the overthrow of the existing system. From the summer of 1861 to the spring of 1862, Chernyshevsky was the ideological inspirer and adviser to the revolutionary organization “Land and Freedom”. From September 1861 he was under secret police surveillance.

Meanwhile, the situation in the capitals and throughout the country has become quite tense. Both the revolutionaries and the government believed that an explosion could occur at any moment. As a result, when fires started in St. Petersburg in the sweltering summer of 1862, rumors immediately spread throughout the city that this was the work of “nihilists.” Supporters of tough actions immediately reacted - the publication of Sovremennik, which was reasonably considered a disseminator of revolutionary ideas, was suspended for 8 months.

Soon after this, the authorities intercepted a letter from A.I. Herzen, who had been in exile for fifteen years. Having learned about the closure of Sovremennik, he wrote to the magazine’s employee, N.A. Serno-Solovyevich, proposing to continue publication abroad. The letter was used as a pretext, and on July 7, 1862, Chernyshevsky and Serno-Solovyevich were arrested and placed in the Peter and Paul Fortress. However, no other evidence was found that would confirm the close ties of the Sovremennik editorial board with political emigrants. As a result, N.G. Chernyshevsky was charged with writing and distributing the proclamation “Bow to the lordly peasants from their well-wishers.” Scientists to this day have not come to a common conclusion about whether Chernyshevsky was the author of this revolutionary appeal. One thing is clear - the authorities did not have such evidence, so they had to convict the accused on the basis of false testimony and falsified documents.

In May 1864, Chernyshevsky was found guilty and sentenced to seven years of hard labor and exile to Siberia for the rest of his life. On May 19, 1864, the ritual of “civil execution” was publicly performed over him - the writer was taken to the square, hanging a board on his chest with the inscription “ state criminal", broke a sword over his head and forced him to stand for several hours, chained to a pole.

"What to do?"

While the investigation was underway, Chernyshevsky wrote his main book in the fortress - the novel “What is to be done?” The literary merits of this book are not very high. Most likely, Chernyshevsky did not even imagine that she would be assessed as truly piece of art, will be included in the school curriculum on Russian literature (!) and will force innocent children to write essays about Vera Pavlovna’s dreams, compare the image of Rakhmetov with the no less magnificent caricature of Bazarov, etc. For the author - a political prisoner under investigation - at that moment it was most important to express his ideas. Naturally, it was easier to put them in the form of a “fantasy” novel than a journalistic work.

The plot of the novel centers on the story of a young girl, Vera Rozalskaya, Vera Pavlovna, who leaves her family to free herself from the oppression of her oppressive mother. The only way To take such a step at that time there could have been marriage, and Vera Pavlovna entered into a fictitious marriage with her teacher Lopukhov. Gradually, a real feeling arises between the young people, and the marriage from fictitious becomes real, however, life in the family is organized in such a way that both spouses feel free. Neither of them can enter the other's room without his permission, each respects the human rights of his partner. That is why, when Vera Pavlovna falls in love with Kirsanov, a friend of her husband, Lopukhov, who does not consider his wife as his property, stages his own suicide, thus giving her freedom. Later, Lopukhov, under a different name, will live in the same house with the Kirsanovs. He will not be tormented by either jealousy or wounded pride, since he values ​​the freedom of the human person most of all.

However, the love affair of the novel “What is to be done?” is not exhausted. Having told the reader about how to overcome difficulties in human relations, Chernyshevsky also offers his own version of solving economic problems. Vera Pavlovna starts a sewing workshop, organized on the basis of an association, or, as we would say today, a cooperative. According to the author, it was no less important step to the restructuring of all human and social relations than liberation from parental or marital oppression. What humanity must come to at the end of this road appears to Vera Pavlovna in four symbolic dreams. So, in the fourth dream, she sees a happy future for people, arranged as Charles Fourier dreamed of it: everyone lives together in one large beautiful building, works together, relaxes together, respects the interests of each individual, and at the same time works for the good of society.

Naturally, revolution was supposed to bring this socialist paradise closer. The prisoner of the Peter and Paul Fortress, of course, could not write openly about this, but he scattered hints throughout the text of his book. Lopukhov and Kirsanov are clearly associated with the revolutionary movement, or, in any case, sympathize with it.

A person appears in the novel, although not called a revolutionary, but singled out as “special.” This is Rakhmetov, leading an ascetic lifestyle, constantly training his strength, even trying to sleep on nails to test his endurance, obviously in case of arrest, reading only “major” books so as not to be distracted by trifles from the main task of his life. The romantic image of Rakhmetov today can only evoke Homeric laughter, but many mentally healthy people of the 60s and 70s of the 19th century sincerely admired him and perceived this “superman” almost as an ideal personality.

The revolution, as Chernyshevsky hoped, was supposed to happen very soon. On the pages of the novel, from time to time a lady in black appears, grieving for her husband. At the end of the novel, in the chapter “Change of scenery,” she no longer appears in black, but in pink, accompanied by a certain gentleman. Obviously, while working on his book in a cell in the Peter and Paul Fortress, the writer could not help but think about his wife, and hoped for his early release, knowing full well that this could only happen as a result of the revolution.

The emphatically entertaining, adventurous, melodramatic beginning of the novel, according to the author’s calculations, should not only attract a wide mass of readers, but also confuse the censorship. Since January 1863, the manuscript was transferred in parts to the investigative commission in the Chernyshevsky case (the last part was transferred on April 6). As the writer expected, the commission saw only a love story in the novel and gave permission for publication. The Sovremennik censor, impressed by the “permissive” conclusion of the investigative commission, did not read the manuscript at all, transferring it without changes into the hands of N.A. Nekrasov.

The censorship oversight was, of course, soon noticed. The responsible censor Beketov was removed from office, but it was too late...

However, the publications “What to do?” preceded by one dramatic episode, known from the words of N.A. Nekrasov. Having taken the only copy of the manuscript from the censors, editor Nekrasov, on the way to the printing house, somehow mysteriously I lost it and did not immediately discover the loss. But it was as if Providence itself wanted Chernyshevsky’s novel to see the light of day! With little hope of success, Nekrasov placed an advertisement in the Gazette of the St. Petersburg City Police, and four days later some poor official brought a bundle with the manuscript directly to the poet’s apartment.

The novel was published in the magazine Sovremennik (1863, No. 3-5).

When the censorship came to its senses, the issues of Sovremennik, in which “What is to be done?” were published, were immediately banned. But the police were unable to seize the entire circulation that had already been sold out. The text of the novel in handwritten copies spread across the country at the speed of light and caused a lot of imitations. Of course, not literary ones.

Writer N.S. Leskov later recalled:

The date of publication of the novel “What is to be done?”, by and large, should be included in the calendar of Russian history as one of the darkest dates. For a kind of echo of this “brainstorming” is heard in our minds to this day.

Towards the relatively “innocent” consequences of the publication “What is to be done?” can be attributed to the emergence in society of acute interest in women's issue. In the 1860s there were more than enough girls who wanted to follow the example of Verochka Rozalskaya. “Fictitious marriages with the aim of liberating generals and merchants’ daughters from the yoke of family despotism, in imitation of Lopukhov and Vera Pavlovna, became an everyday phenomenon of life,” claimed a contemporary.

What was previously considered ordinary debauchery was now beautifully called “following the principle of reasonable selfishness.” Already by the beginning of the 20th century, the ideal of “free relationships” derived in the novel led to the complete leveling family values in the eyes of educated youth. The authority of parents, the institution of marriage, the problem of moral responsibility to loved ones - all this was declared to be “relics” that were incompatible with the spiritual needs of the “new” person.

A woman’s entry into a fictitious marriage was in itself a courageous civil act. As a rule, such a decision was based on the most noble thoughts: to free oneself from the family yoke in order to serve the people. Subsequently, the paths of liberated women diverged depending on each of them’s understanding of this ministry. For some, the goal is knowledge, to have their say in science or to become an educator of the people. But another path was more logical and widespread, when the fight against family despotism directly led women into the revolution.

A direct consequence of “What to do?” the later revolutionary theory of the general’s daughter Shurochka Kollontai about a “glass of water” comes forward, and the poet V. Mayakovsky, who for many years composed “ Triple Alliance"with the Brik spouses, made Chernyshevsky’s novel his reference book.

“The life described in it echoed ours. Mayakovsky seemed to consult with Chernyshevsky about his personal affairs and found support in him. “What should I do?” was last book, which he read before his death...",- recalled Mayakovsky’s cohabitant and biographer L.O. Brik.

However, the most important and tragic consequence The publication of Chernyshevsky’s work became an indisputable fact that a countless number of young people of both sexes, inspired by the novel, decided to become revolutionaries.

Anarchist ideologist P.A. Kropotkin stated without exaggeration:

The younger generation, brought up on a book written in a fortress by a political criminal and banned by the government, turned out to be hostile to the tsarist government. All the liberal reforms carried out “from above” in the 1860s and 70s failed to create the basis for a reasonable dialogue between society and the authorities; they were unable to reconcile radical youth with Russian reality. The “nihilists” of the 60s, under the influence of Vera Pavlovna’s “dreams” and the unforgettable image of the “superman” Rakhmetov, smoothly evolved into the same revolutionary “demons” armed with bombs who killed Alexander II on March 1, 1881. At the beginning of the 20th century, taking into account the criticism of F.M. Dostoevsky and his thoughts about the “tear of a child”, they had already terrorized the whole of Russia: with almost impunity they shot and blew up grand dukes, ministers, major government officials, in the words of the long-deceased Marx, Engels, Dobrolyubov, Chernyshevsky, they conducted revolutionary agitation among the masses...

Today, from the height of centuries, one can only regret that the tsarist government did not realize in the 1860s to completely abolish censorship and allow every bored graphomaniac to create works like “What is to be done?” Moreover, the novel had to be included in the educational program, forcing high school students and students to write essays on it, and “Vera Pavlovna’s fourth dream” had to be memorized for reproduction in the exam in the presence of a commission. Then it would hardly have occurred to anyone to print the text “What to do?” in underground printing houses, distribute it in lists, and even more so – read it...

Years in exile

N.G. Chernyshevsky himself practically did not participate in the stormy social movement of subsequent decades. After the ritual of civil execution on Mytninskaya Square, he was sent to the Nerchinsk penal servitude (Kadai mine on the Mongolian border; in 1866 transferred to the Aleksandrovsky plant in the Nerchinsk district). During his stay in Kadai, he was allowed a three-day visit with his wife and two young sons.

Olga Sokratovna, unlike the wives of the “Decembrists,” did not follow her revolutionary husband. She was neither an associate of Chernyshevsky, nor a member of the revolutionary underground, as some Soviet researchers tried to present at the time. Mrs. Chernyshevskaya continued to live with her children in St. Petersburg, did not shy away from social entertainment, and started affairs. According to some contemporaries, despite her stormy personal life, this woman never loved anyone, so for the masochist and henpecked Chernyshevsky, she remained an ideal. In the early 1880s, Olga Sokratovna moved to Saratov, and in 1883 the spouses were reunited after 20 years of separation. As a bibliographer, Olga Sokratovna provided invaluable assistance in working on the publications of Chernyshevsky and Dobrolyubov in St. Petersburg magazines of the 1850-60s, including Sovremennik. She managed to instill in her sons, who practically did not remember their father (when Chernyshevsky was arrested, one was 4, the other 8 years old), deep respect for the personality of Nikolai Gavrilovich. Younger son N.G. Chernyshevsky Mikhail Nikolaevich did a lot to create and preserve the now existing Chernyshevsky house-museum in Saratov, as well as to study and publish the creative heritage of his father.

In the revolutionary circles of Russia and political emigration, the aura of a martyr was immediately created around N.G. Chernyshevsky. His image became almost a revolutionary icon.

Not a single student gathering was complete without mentioning the name of the sufferer for the cause of the revolution and reading his banned works.

“In the history of our literature...- G.V. Plekhanov later wrote, - there is nothing more tragic than fate N. G. Chernyshevsky. It’s hard to even imagine how much severe suffering this literary Prometheus proudly endured during that long time when he was so methodically tormented by the police kite...”

Meanwhile, no “kite” tormented the exiled revolutionary. Political prisoners at the time of the present hard labor were not fulfilled, and in material terms life for Chernyshevsky in hard labor was not particularly difficult. At one time he even lived in a separate house, constantly receiving money from N.A. Nekrasov and Olga Sokratovna.

Moreover, the tsarist government was so merciful to its political opponents that it allowed Chernyshevsky to continue his literary activities in Siberia. For performances that were sometimes staged at the Aleksandrovsky Factory, Chernyshevsky composed short plays. In 1870, he wrote the novel “Prologue,” dedicated to the life of revolutionaries in the late fifties, immediately before the start of reforms. Here, under fictitious names, real people of that era were brought out, including Chernyshevsky himself. “Prologue” was published in 1877 in London, but in terms of its impact on the Russian reading public, it was, of course, much inferior to “What is to be done?”

In 1871, his term of hard labor ended. Chernyshevsky was supposed to move into the category of settlers who were given the right to choose their place of residence within Siberia. But the chief of gendarmes, Count P.A. Shuvalov insisted on settling him in Vilyuysk, in the harshest climate, which worsened the writer’s living conditions and health. Moreover, in Vilyuysk at that time, from decent stone buildings there was only a prison in which the exiled Chernyshevsky was forced to settle.

The revolutionaries for a long time did not give up trying to rescue their ideological leader. At first, members of the Ishutin circle, from which Karakozov came, thought about organizing Chernyshevsky’s escape from exile. But Ishutin’s circle was soon defeated, and the plan to save Chernyshevsky remained unfulfilled. In 1870, one of the outstanding Russian revolutionaries, German Lopatin, who was closely acquainted with Karl Marx, tried to save Chernyshevsky, but was arrested before he reached Siberia. The last attempt, amazing in its courage, was made in 1875 by the revolutionary Ippolit Myshkin. Dressed in the uniform of a gendarmerie officer, he appeared in Vilyuisk and presented a forged order to hand over Chernyshevsky to him to escort him to St. Petersburg. But the false gendarme was suspected by the Vilyui authorities and had to flee for his life. Shooting back from the chase sent after him, hiding for days in forests and swamps, Myshkin managed to escape almost 800 miles from Vilyuisk, but he was still captured.

Did Chernyshevsky himself need all these sacrifices? I think no. In 1874, he was asked to submit a petition for pardon, which, no doubt, would have been granted by Alexander II. A revolutionary could leave not only Siberia, but Russia in general, go abroad, and reunite with his family. But Chernyshevsky was more seduced by the aura of a martyr for the idea, so he refused.

In 1883, the Minister of the Interior, Count D.A. Tolstoy petitioned for Chernyshevsky's return from Siberia. Astrakhan was assigned as his place of residence. A transfer from cold Vilyuysk to a hot southern climate could have a detrimental effect on the health of the elderly Chernyshevsky, and even kill him. But the revolutionary moved safely to Astrakhan, where he continued to be an exile under police supervision.

All the time he spent in exile, he lived on funds sent by N.A. Nekrasov and his relatives. In 1878, Nekrasov died, and there was no one else to support Chernyshevsky. Therefore, in 1885, in order to somehow financially support the struggling writer, friends arranged for him to translate the 15-volume “General History” by G. Weber from the famous publisher and philanthropist K.T. Soldatenkova. Chernyshevsky translated 3 volumes per year, each containing 1000 pages. Until volume 5, Chernyshevsky still translated literally, but then he began to make large cuts in original text, which he did not like for its outdatedness and narrow German point of view. In place of the discarded passages, he began to add a series of ever-expanding essays own composition, which naturally caused the publisher’s displeasure.

In Astrakhan, Chernyshevsky managed to translate 11 volumes.

In June 1889, at the request of the Astrakhan governor, Prince L.D. Vyazemsky, he was allowed to settle in his native Saratov. There, Chernyshevsky translated another two-thirds of Weber’s 12th volume; it was planned to translate Brockhaus’s 16-volume “Encyclopedic Dictionary,” but excessive work strained the senile body. A long-standing illness - catarrh of the stomach - has worsened. Having been ill for only 2 days, Chernyshevsky, on the night of October 29 (according to the old style - from October 16 to 17), 1889, died of a cerebral hemorrhage.

Chernyshevsky's works remained prohibited in Russia until the revolution of 1905–1907. Among his published and unpublished works are articles, stories, novels, plays: “Aesthetic relations of art to reality” (1855), “Essays on the Gogol period of Russian literature” (1855 - 1856), “On land ownership” (1857), “A Look at the Internal Relations of the United States” (1857), “Criticism of Philosophical Prejudices against Communal Ownership” (1858), “Russian Man on a Rendez-Vous” (1858, regarding the story “Asya” by I.S. Turgenev), “About new conditions of rural life" (1858), "On methods of ransoming serfs" (1858), "Is redemption of land difficult?" (1859), “The arrangement of life of the landowner peasants” (1859), “Economic activity and legislation” (1859), “Superstition and the rules of logic” (1859), “Politics” (1859 - 1862; monthly reviews of international life), “Capital and labor" (1860), "Notes to the "Fundamentals of Political Economy" by D.S. Mill" (1860), "Anthropological principle in philosophy" (1860, presentation of the ethical theory of "reasonable egoism"), "Preface to current Austrian affairs" (February 1861), "Essays on political economy (according to Mill)" (1861), " Politics" (1861, about the conflict between the North and South of the USA), "Letters without an address" (February 1862, published abroad in 1874), "What to do?" (1862 - 1863, novel; written in the Peter and Paul Fortress), "Alferyev" (1863, story), "Tales within a story" (1863 - 1864), "Small stories" (1864), "Prologue" (1867 - 1869, novel ; written in hard labor; the 1st part was published abroad in 1877), “Reflections of Radiance” (novel), “The Story of a Girl” (story), “The Mistress of Cooking Porridge” (play), “The Character of Human Knowledge” (philosophical work ), works on political, economic, philosophical topics, articles about the work of L.N. Tolstoy, M.E. Saltykova-Shchedrina, I.S. Turgeneva, N.A. Nekrasova, N.V. Uspensky.

Chronicle of life and creativity
Nikolai Gavrilovich Chernyshevsky
(1828-1889)

1828 — July 12 (24)- from the Saratov archpriest, dean member of the consistory Gabriel Ivanovich Chernyshevsky son Nikolai is born.

Nikolai Gavrilovich’s father is the son of a deacon from the village of Chernysheva, Chembarsky district, Penza province. He received his last name upon entering the Penza seminary after the name of his native village. After the death of the Saratov archpriest of the Sergius Church E.I. Golubev, at the insistence of the governor, to appoint the “best student” from among those who graduated from the seminary to replace the deceased (at that time Chernyshevsky’s father worked as a teacher at the seminary), he moved to Saratov and became the new archpriest and married daughters of the deceased - Evgenia Egorovna Golubeva- mother of Nikolai Gavrilovich.

1835 — summer- Beginning of studies under the guidance of his father.

1836 — December - Chernyshevsky's admission to the Saratov Theological School.

1842 — September— Chernyshevsky was enrolled in the Saratov Theological Seminary.

1846 — May - Chernyshevsky moves from Saratov to St. Petersburg to enter the university. This summer, Chernyshevsky successfully passes the exams and enters the historical and philological department of the Faculty of Philosophy of St. Petersburg University. IN August, after starting classes at the university, Chernyshevsky meets the poet M. L. Mikhailov, a future revolutionary and employee of Sovremennik.

1848 — since the spring of this year, Chernyshevsky has begun to take an interest in the progress revolutionary events in Western European countries, in particular in France. After meeting and communicating with Petrashevets A. V. Khanykov begins to study the works of the French utopian socialist Fourier. Conversations with Khanykov strengthen Chernyshevsky’s thoughts about the proximity and inevitability of revolution in Russia.

1850 - upon graduation, Chernyshevsky becomes a literature teacher in the 2nd St. Petersburg Cadet Corps.

1851-1853 - having been appointed to the Saratov gymnasium as a senior teacher of Russian literature, Chernyshevsky moved to Saratov in the spring of 1851. In 1853 he met there O. S. Vasilyeva, whom he will soon marry. IN May leaves with her for St. Petersburg. Begins cooperation with the magazine " Domestic notes" She is working on her master’s thesis “Aesthetic relations of art to reality.” Secondary admission as a literature teacher to the 2nd St. Petersburg Cadet Corps. in autumn Chernyshevsky meets N. A. Nekrasov and starts working at Sovremennik.

1854 - Chernyshevsky’s articles are published in the Sovremennik magazine: about novels and stories M. Avdeeva, “On sincerity in criticism”, on comedy A. N. Ostrovsky“Poverty is not a vice”, etc.

1855 — May— defense of Chernyshevsky’s master’s thesis “Aesthetic relations of art to reality” at the university. In issue No. 12 of Sovremennik, Chernyshevsky’s first article from the series “Essays on the Gogol period of Russian literature” appears.

1856 - acquaintance and friendship with N. A. Dobrolyubov. N. A. Nekrasov, going abroad for treatment, transfers his editorial rights to Sovremennik to Chernyshevsky.

1857 — in No. 6 of Sovremennik an article about “Provincial Sketches” is published M. E. Saltykova-Shchedrina. In second half of the year Chernyshevsky, having transferred the literary-critical department of the magazine to Dobrolyubov, begins to develop philosophical, historical and political-economic issues on the pages of Sovremennik, in particular, the question of the upcoming liberation of peasants from serfdom.

1858 — Chernyshevsky becomes editor of the Military Collection. In No. 1 of Sovremennik, the article “Cavaignac” was published, in which he harshly denounces the liberals for betraying the people’s cause. In issue No. 2 of Sovremennik there is an article “On the new conditions of rural life.” The magazine “Athenaeus” (Part III, No. 18) published the article “Russian man at the rendez-vous.” In No. 12 of Sovremennik there is an article “Criticism of philosophical prejudices against communal ownership.”

1859 - in the magazine “Sovremennik” (from No. 3) Chernyshevsky begins to publish systematic reviews of European political life under the general title “Politics”. IN June Chernyshevsky goes to London to A. I. Herzen for an explanation about the article “Very dangerous!” (“Very dangerous!”), published in Kolokol. Upon returning from London he leaves for Saratov. IN September returns to St. Petersburg.

1860 - Chernyshevsky’s article “Capital and Labor” is published in issue No. 1 of Sovremennik. From the second issue of Sovremennik, his translation of “Foundations of Political Economy” begins to appear. J. S. Mill, accompanied by deep critical comments. In issue No. 4 of Sovremennik, Chernyshevsky’s article “The Anthropological Principle in Philosophy” was published, which is one of the most famous declarations of materialism in Russian literature.

1861 — a trip to Moscow to participate in a meeting of St. Petersburg and Moscow editors on the issue of problems and mitigation of censorship. In issue 6 of Sovremennik, the article “Polemical Beauty” appears - Chernyshevsky’s original response to the attacks of reactionary and liberal writers on his article “The Anthropological Principle in Philosophy.” IN August famous provocateur Vsevolod Kostomarov through his brother, transmits two handwritten proclamations to the Third Department: “To the lordly peasants” (author N. G. Chernyshevsky) and “Russian soldiers” (author N. V. Shelgunov). In the fall, according to an eyewitness A. A. Sleptsova, Chernyshevsky discusses measures to organize secret society"Land and Freedom". The police establish systematic surveillance of Chernyshevsky and give secret instructions to the governors not to issue Chernyshevsky a foreign passport.

1862 — Chernyshevsky is present at the opening of the Chess Club in St. Petersburg, which had the goal of uniting representatives of the progressive public of the capital. Censorship prohibits the publication of Chernyshevsky’s “Letters without an Address,” since the article contains sharp criticism of the peasant “reform” and the socio-political picture of life in Russia. IN March Chernyshevsky speaks at a literary evening in the Ruadze Hall with a reading on the topic “Meeting Dobrolyubov.” In June, Sovremennik will be closed for eight months. July 7 Chernyshevsky was arrested and imprisoned in the Peter and Paul Fortress.

1864 — May 19 A public “civil execution” of Chernyshevsky took place on Mytninskaya Square in St. Petersburg and subsequent exile to Siberia. IN August Chernyshevsky arrives at the Kadai mine (Transbaikalia).

1865-1868 - the period of work on the novel “Prologue of the Prologue”, “Levitsky’s Diary” and “Prologue”.

1866 — in August O. S. Chernyshevskaya with son Mikhail comes to Kadaya for a meeting with N. G. Chernyshevsky. IN September Chernyshevsky was sent from the Kadai mine to the Aleksandrovsky plant.

1871 — in February revolutionary populist arrested in Irkutsk German Lopatin, who came to Russia from London with the aim of liberating Chernyshevsky. IN December Chernyshevsky is transferred from the Aleksandrovsky plant to Vilyuysk.

1875 - attempt I. N. Myshkina release Chernyshevsky.

1883 — Chernyshevsky is being sent from Vilyuysk to Astrakhan under police supervision.

1884-1888 - Chernyshevsky conducts extensive literary activity in Astrakhan. He wrote “Memoirs of Turgenev’s relationship with Dobrolyubov”, articles “The Nature of Human Knowledge”, “The Origin of the Theory of Beneficence of the Struggle for Life”, prepared “Materials for the Biography of Dobrolyubov”, translated from German language eleven volumes of “General History” G. Weber.

1889 - Chernyshevsky is allowed to move to Saratov, where he goes to end of June.

October 17 (29) Chernyshevsky, after a short illness, dies of a cerebral hemorrhage.

Places of residence in St. Petersburg:

June 19 - August 20, 1846 — apartment building Prilutsky - Embankment of the Catherine Canal (now Griboyedov Canal), 44;

August 21 -December 7, 1846- Vyazemsky apartment building - Embankment of the Catherine Canal (now Griboyedov Canal), 38, apt. 47;

1847-1848 - Friederiks's house - Vladimirskaya street, 13;

1848— Solovyov’s apartment building — Voznesensky Prospekt, 41;

September 20, 1849 - February 10, 1850- apartment of L.N. Tersinskaya in the apartment building of I.V. Koshansky - Bolshaya Konyushennaya street, 15, apt. 8;

1853-1854 - apartment of I. I. Vvedensky in the Borodina apartment building - Embankment of the Zhdanovka River, 7;

End of June 1860 - June 7, 1861- apartment building of V.F. Gromov - 2nd line of Vasilyevsky Island, 13, apt. 7;

June 8, 1861 - July 7, 1862— Esaulova’s apartment building — Bolshaya Moskovskaya street, 6, apt. 4.

Works by N. G. Chernyshevsky

Novels

1862-1863 - What to do? From stories about new people.

1863 - Stories within a story (unfinished).

1867-1870 — Prologue. A novel from the early sixties (unfinished).

Stories

1863 - Alferev.

1864 - Small stories.

Literary criticism

1850 — About “Brigadier” Fonvizin. Candidate's work.

1854 - On sincerity in criticism.

1854 - Songs of different nations.

1854 - Poverty is not a vice. Comedy by A. Ostrovsky.

1855 - Works of Pushkin.

1855-1856 — Essays on the Gogol period of Russian literature.

1856 - Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin. His life and writings.

1856 - Poems by Koltsov.

1856 - Poems by N. Ogarev.

1856 — Collected poems by V. Benediktov.

1856 - Childhood and adolescence. War stories of Count L.N. Tolstoy.

1856 — Sketches from peasant life by A. F. Pisemsky.

1857 - Lessing. His time, his life and work.

1857 - “Provincial Sketches” by Shchedrin.

1857 - Works of V. Zhukovsky.

1857 - Poems by N. Shcherbina.

1857 - “Letters about Spain” by V. P. Botkin.

1858 - Russian man at rendez-vous. Reflections on reading Mr. Turgenev’s story “Asya”.

1860 - Collection of miracles, stories borrowed from mythology.

1861 - Is this the beginning of a change? Stories by N.V. Uspensky. Two parts.

Journalism

1856 - Review of the historical development of the rural community in Russia by Chicherin.

1856 - “Russian conversation” and its direction.

1857 - “Russian conversation” and Slavophilism.

1857 - On land ownership.

1858 - Taxation system.

1858 - Cavaignac.

1859 - Materials for solving the peasant question.

1859 - Superstition and the rules of logic.

1859 - Capital and labor.

1859-1862 - Politics. Monthly reviews of foreign political life.

1860 - History of civilization in Europe from the fall of the Roman Empire to the French Revolution.

1861 - Political and economic letters to the President of the United States of America G. K. Carey.

1861 - About the reasons for the fall of Rome.

1861 - Count Cavour.

1861 - To the Barsky peasants from their well-wishers.

1862 - Letter of gratitude to Mr. Z<ари>Well.

1862 - Letters without an address.

1861 - N. A. Dobrolyubov. Obituary.

1878 — Letter to the sons of A. N. and M. N. Chernyshevsky.

Memoirs

1883 - Memories of Nekrasov.

1884-1888 - Materials for the biography of N. A. Dobrolyubov, collected in 1861-1862.

1884-1888 - Memories of Turgenev’s relationship with Dobrolyubov and the breakdown of friendship between Turgenev and Nekrasov.

Philosophy and aesthetics

1854 - A critical look at modern aesthetic concepts.

1855 - Aesthetic relations of art to reality. Master's dissertation.

1855 - The sublime and the comic.

1855 - The nature of human knowledge.

1858 - Criticism of philosophical prejudices against common ownership.

1860 - Anthropological principle in philosophy. "Essays on questions of practical philosophy." Essay by P. L. Lavrov.

1888 - Origin of the theory of the beneficence of the struggle for life. Preface to some treatises on botany, zoology and the sciences of human life.

Translations

1860 - “Foundations of Political Economy by D. S. Mill.” With your notes.

1884-1888 - “General History of G. Weber.” With your articles and comments.