History of Russian literature of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Literature of the late 19th – early 20th centuries general characteristics Characteristics of literature of the late 19th and early 20th centuries

Russian literature of the late 19th - early 20th centuries (1890 - 1917).

The last decade of the 19th century opens a new stage in Russian and world culture. Over the course of about a quarter of a century - from the early 90s to October 1917 - literally all aspects of Russian life were radically updated - economics, politics, science, technology, culture, art. Compared to the social and relative literary stagnation of the 80s, the new stage of historical and cultural development was distinguished by rapid dynamics and acute drama. In terms of the pace and depth of changes, as well as the catastrophic nature of internal conflicts, Russia at this time is ahead of any other country.

Therefore, the transition from the era of classical Russian literature to the new literary time was distinguished by the far from peaceful nature of general cultural and intraliterary life, a rapid - by the standards of the 19th century - change in aesthetic guidelines, and a radical renewal of literary techniques. Russian poetry was renewed especially dynamically at this time, again - after the Pushkin era - coming to the forefront of the country's general cultural life. Later, this poetry earned the name “poetic renaissance” or “silver age.” Having arisen by analogy with the concept of the “golden age”, which traditionally denoted the “Pushkin period” of Russian literature, this phrase was initially used to characterize the peak manifestations of poetic culture of the early 20th century - the work of A. Blok, A. Bely, I. Annensky, A. Akhmatova, O. Mandelstam and other brilliant masters of words. However, gradually the term “Silver Age” began to define the entire artistic culture of Russia in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. To this day, such word usage has become entrenched in literary criticism.

What was new compared to the 19th century at the turn of the two centuries was, first of all, man’s perception of the world. The understanding of the exhaustion of the previous era grew stronger, and conflicting assessments of the socio-economic and general cultural prospects of Russia began to appear. The common denominator of ideological disputes that flared up in the country towards the end of the last century was the definition of a new era as an era border: the previous forms of life, work, and political organization of society were irretrievably a thing of the past; the system of spiritual values ​​itself was decisively revised. Crisis- the key word of the era, which wandered through magazine journalism and literary critical articles (words similar in meaning “revival”, “turning point”, “crossroads”, etc. were often used)

Fiction, which traditionally for Russia has not stood aside from public passions, quickly became involved in the discussion of current issues. Her social engagement was reflected in the titles of works characteristic of this era. “Without a Road”, “At the Turning” - V. Veresaev calls his stories; “The Decline of the Old Century” - echoes the title of the chronicle novel by A. Amphitheaters; “At the last line,” M. Artsybashev responds with his novel. Awareness of the crisis of the time, however, did not mean recognition of its futility.

On the contrary, most wordsmiths perceived their era as a time of unprecedented achievements, when the importance of literature in the life of the country increased sharply. That is why so much attention began to be paid not only to creativity itself, but also to the worldview and social position of writers, their connections with the political life of the country. In the writing community, there arose a desire to consolidate with writers, philosophers, and workers of related arts who were close to them in their worldview and aesthetics. Literary associations and circles played a much more prominent role in this historical period than in the previous few decades. As a rule, new literary movements at the turn of the century developed from the activities of small writers' circles, each of which united young writers with similar views on art.

Quantitatively, the writing environment has grown noticeably compared to the 19th century, and qualitatively - in terms of the nature of education and life experience of writers, and most importantly - in terms of the diversity of aesthetic positions and levels of skill - it has become seriously more complex. In the 19th century, literature had a high degree of ideological unity; it has developed a fairly clear hierarchy of literary talents: at one stage or another, it is not difficult to identify masters who served as reference points for an entire generation of writers (Pushkin, Gogol, Nekrasov, Tolstoy, etc.).

The legacy of the Silver Age is not limited to the work of one or two dozen significant literary artists, and the logic of the literary development of this era cannot be reduced to a single center or the simplest scheme of successive directions. This heritage is a multi-tiered artistic reality in which individual literary talents, no matter how outstanding they may be, turn out to be only part of that grandiose whole, which received such a broad and “lax” name - the Silver Age.

When starting to study the literature of the Silver Age, one cannot do without a brief overview of the social background of the turn of the century and the general cultural context of this period (“context” - the environment, the external environment in which art exists).

Socio-political features of the era.

By the end of the 19th century, the crisis in the Russian economy intensified. The roots of this crisis are in the too slow reform of economic life, which began back in 1861. A more democratic post-reform order, according to the government's plans, was supposed to intensify the economic life of the peasantry, make this largest group of the population mobile and more active. This is how it gradually happened, but the post-reform processes had a downside: from 1881, when the peasants had to finally pay off their debts to their former owners, the rapid impoverishment of the village began. The situation became especially acute during the famine years of 1891-1892. The inconsistency of the transformations became clear: having freed the peasant in relation to the landowner, the reform of 1861 did not liberate him in relation to the community. Until the Stolypin reform of 1906, the peasants were never able to separate from the community (from which they received land).

Meanwhile, the self-determination of the largest political parties that emerged at the turn of the century largely depended on one or another attitude towards the community. The leader of the liberal Cadet Party, P. Milyukov, considered the community a kind of Asian mode of production, with the despotism and over-centralization it generated in the political structure of the country. Hence the recognition of the need for Russia to follow the pan-European path of bourgeois reforms. Back in 1894, the prominent economist and political figure P. Struve, who later also became a liberal, concluded one of his works with the famous phrase: “Let’s admit our lack of culture and let’s go to school for capitalism.” It was a program for the evolutionary development of the country towards a European-style civil society. However, liberalism did not become the main program of action for the numerically expanded Russian intelligentsia.

The position that was more influential in the public consciousness went back to the so-called “legacy of the 60s” - the revolutionary democratic ideology and the revolutionary populist ideology that was successor to it. N. Chernyshevsky, and later P. Lavrov and N. Mikhailovsky considered the role of the Russian community to be positive. These supporters of a special, “Russian socialism” believed that the community with its spirit of collectivism was the real basis for the transition to a socialist form of economic management. Important in the position of the “sixties” and their spiritual heirs were a sharp opposition to autocratic “tyranny and violence”, political radicalism, and a focus on decisive changes in social institutions (little attention was paid to the real mechanisms of economic life, which is why their theories acquired a utopian overtones). For most of the Russian intelligentsia, however, political radicalism has traditionally been more attractive than a thoughtful economic program. It was the maximalist political tendencies that ultimately prevailed in Russia.

By the end of the century, the “railroads” for the development of capitalism in the country had already been laid: in the 90s, industrial production tripled, a powerful galaxy of Russian industrialists emerged, and industrial centers grew rapidly. Mass production of industrial goods was being established, and telephones and cars were part of the everyday life of the wealthy. Huge raw material resources, a constant influx of cheap labor from the countryside and free access to the capacious markets of the economically less developed countries of Asia - all this foreshadowed good prospects for Russian capitalism.

Relying on the community in this situation was historically short-sighted, as Russian Marxists tried to prove. In their struggle for socialism, they relied on industrial development and the working class. Marxism since the mid-90s. quickly wins the moral support of various groups of intellectuals. This was reflected in such psychological traits of the Russian “educated layer” as the desire to join the “progressive” worldview, distrust and even intellectual contempt for political caution and economic pragmatism. In a country with an extremely heterogeneous social structure, such as Russia at that time, the tilt of the intelligentsia towards the most radical political trends was fraught with serious upheavals, as the development of events showed.

Russian Marxism was initially a heterogeneous phenomenon: in its history, sharp divisions clearly prevailed over convergence and consolidation, and factional struggle almost always overwhelmed the framework of intellectual discussions. The so-called legal Marxists initially played a significant role in giving Marxism an attractive appearance. In the 90s, they polemicized in the open press with the populists (among the talented polemicists was the above-mentioned P. Struve). They professed Marxism as primarily an economic theory, without global claims to planning the destinies of all mankind. Believing in evolutionism, they considered it unacceptable to deliberately provoke a revolutionary explosion. That is why after the revolution of 1905 - 1907. The former legal Marxists finally separated themselves from the orthodox wing of the movement, which, despite the external anti-populist position, absorbed many of the deep-seated attitudes of revolutionary populism.

Poetry at the end of the 19th century was called the “poetic renaissance” or “silver age”.

Gradually, the term “Silver Age” began to be attributed to that part of Russian artistic culture that was associated with symbolism, acmeism, “neo-peasant” and partly futuristic literature.

Literary directions:

1. Realism - continues to develop (L. Tolstoy, Chekhov, Gorky, etc.)

2.Modernism - from French. the words “newest, modern.” Modernists believed in the divine transformative creative role of art.

Symbolism is a literary artistic movement that considered the purpose of art to be an intuitive comprehension of world unity through symbols.

This is the first and largest movement of modernism. The beginning of self-determination was laid by D.S. Merezhkovsky (1892). He called mystical content, symbols and the expansion of artistic impressionability.

V. Bryusov became the leader of symbolism. BUT symbolism turned out to be a heterogeneous movement; several independent groups took shape within it. In Russian symbolism, it is customary to distinguish 2 main groups of poets: “senior” symbolists (Bryusov, Balmont, Sologub, Kuzmin, Merlikovsky, Gippius) and “younger” symbolists (Blok, Bely, Ivanov).

In the publishing life of the Symbolists, there were two groups: St. Petersburg and Moscow. This turned into a conflict.

The Moscow group (Liber Bryusov) considered the main principle of literature to be “art for art’s sake.”

Petersburgskaya (Merezhkovsky, Zippius) defended the priority of religious and philosophical searches in symbolism. They considered themselves genuine symbolists and considered their opponents decadents.

Characteristic:

polysemy

full significance of the subject plan of the image

concentration of the absolute in the individual

Music: the second most important aesthetic category of symbolism

The relationship between the poet and his audience: the poet addressed not everyone, but the reader-creator.

Acmeism is a modernist movement (from the Greek tip, pinnacle, highest degree, pronounced qualities). This movement declared specifically sensory perception of the external world, returning the word to its original non-symbolic meaning.

At the beginning of their path, the Acmeists were close to the Symbolists, then associations appeared: 1911 - the Workshop of Poets.

Russian literature of the late 19th - early 20th centuries

Poetry at the end of the 19th century was called the “poetic renaissance” or “silver age”.

Gradually, the term “Silver Age” began to be attributed to that part of Russian artistic culture that was associated with symbolism, acmeism, “neo-peasant” and partly futuristic literature.

Literary directions:

1. Realism - continues to develop (L. Tolstoy, Chekhov, Gorky, etc.)

2.Modernism - from French. the words “newest, modern.” Modernists believed in the divine transformative creative role of art.

Symbolism is a literary artistic movement that considered the purpose of art to be an intuitive comprehension of world unity through symbols.

This is the first and largest movement of modernism. The beginning of self-determination was laid by D.S. Merezhkovsky (1892). He called mystical content, symbols and the expansion of artistic impressionability.

V. Bryusov became the leader of symbolism. BUT symbolism turned out to be a heterogeneous movement; several independent groups took shape within it. In Russian symbolism, it is customary to distinguish 2 main groups of poets: “senior” symbolists (Bryusov, Balmont, Sologub, Kuzmin, Merlikovsky, Gippius) and “younger” symbolists (Blok, Bely, Ivanov).

In the publishing life of the Symbolists, there were two groups: St. Petersburg and Moscow. This turned into a conflict.

The Moscow group (Liber Bryusov) considered the main principle of literature to be “art for art’s sake.”

Petersburgskaya (Merezhkovsky, Zippius) defended the priority of religious and philosophical searches in symbolism. They considered themselves genuine symbolists and considered their opponents decadents.

Characteristic:

polysemy

full significance of the subject plan of the image

concentration of the absolute in the individual

Music: the second most important aesthetic category of symbolism

The relationship between the poet and his audience: the poet addressed not everyone, but the reader-creator.

Acmeism is a modernist movement (from the Greek tip, pinnacle, highest degree, pronounced qualities). This movement declared specifically sensory perception of the external world, returning the word to its original non-symbolic meaning.

At the beginning of their path, the Acmeists were close to the Symbolists, then associations appeared: 1911 - the Workshop of Poets.

Composition

Goal: to familiarize students with the general characteristics and originality of Russian literature of the 19th century. from the point of view of history and literature; give an idea of ​​the main trends in literature of the late XIX - early XX centuries; show the significance of Russian literature of this period in the development of the Russian and world literary process; to cultivate a sense of belonging and empathy for the history of Russia, love for its culture. equipment: textbook, portraits of writers and poets of the turn of the century.

Projected

Results: students know the general characteristics and originality of Russian literature of the 19th century. from the point of view of history and literature; have an idea of ​​the main trends in literature of the late 19th - early 20th centuries; determine the significance of Russian literature of this period in the development of the Russian and world literary process. lesson type: lesson on learning new material.

DURING THE CLASSES

I. Organizational stage

II. Updating basic knowledge Checking homework (frontal)

III. Setting the goals and objectives of the lesson.

Motivation for learning activities

Teacher. The twentieth century began at zero o'clock on January 1, 1901 - this is its calendar beginning, from which world art of the 20th century counts its history. It does not follow from this, however, that at one moment a general revolution took place in art, establishing a certain new style of the 20th century. Some of the processes that are essential for the history of art originate in the last century.

The last decade of the 19th century. opens a new stage in Russian and world culture. Over the course of about a quarter of a century - from the early 1890s to October 1917 - literally every aspect of Russian life changed radically: economics, politics, science, technology, culture, art. Compared to the social and, to some extent, literary stagnation of the 1880s. The new stage of historical and cultural development was distinguished by rapid dynamics and acute drama. In terms of the pace and depth of changes, as well as the catastrophic nature of internal conflicts, Russia at that time was ahead of any other country. Therefore, the transition from the era of classical Russian literature to the new literary time was accompanied by far from peaceful processes in general cultural and intraliterary life, which were unexpectedly fast by the standards of the 19th century. - a change in aesthetic guidelines, a radical update of literary techniques.

The legacy of the turn of the 19th–20th centuries. is not limited to the work of one or two dozen significant literary artists, and the logic of literary development of this time cannot be reduced to a single center or the simplest scheme of successive directions. This heritage is a multi-tiered artistic reality in which individual literary talents, no matter how outstanding they may be, are only part of a grandiose whole. When starting to study the literature of the turn of the century, one cannot do without a brief overview of the social background and general cultural context of this period (“context” is the environment, the external environment in which art exists).

IV. Working on the topic of lesson 1. teacher's lecture

(Students write theses.)

Literature of the late XIX - early XX centuries. existed and developed under the powerful influence of a crisis that gripped almost all aspects of Russian life. The great realist writers of the 19th century, who were ending their creative and life paths, managed to convey their sense of the tragedy and disorder of Russian life of this time with enormous artistic power: l. N. Tolstoy and A. P. Chekhov. Continuers of the realistic traditions of I. a. Bunin, A. I. Kuprin, l. N. Andreev, A. N. Tolstoy, in turn, created magnificent examples of realistic art. However, the plots of their works became more and more disturbing and gloomy from year to year, the ideals that inspired them became more and more unclear. The life-affirming pathos characteristic of Russian classics of the 19th century gradually disappeared from their work under the weight of sad events.

At the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. Russian literature, which previously had a high degree of ideological unity, became aesthetically multi-layered.

Realism at the turn of the century continued to be a large-scale and influential literary movement.

The most brilliant talents among the new realists belonged to the writers who united in the 1890s. to the Moscow circle “Sreda”, and in the early 1900s. who formed the circle of regular authors of the publishing house “Znanie” (one of its owners and actual leader was M. Gorky). In addition to the leader of the association, over the years it included L. N. Andreev, I. a. Bunin, V.V. Veresaev, N. Garin-Mikhailovsky, a. I. Kuprin, I. S. Shmelev and other writers. With the exception of I. a. There were no major poets among Bunin's realists; they showed themselves primarily in prose and, less noticeably, in drama.

Generation of realist writers of the early 20th century. received as an inheritance from A. P. Chekhov's new principles of writing - with much greater authorial freedom than before, with a much wider arsenal of artistic expression, with a sense of proportion obligatory for the artist, which was ensured by increased internal self-criticism.

In literary criticism, it is customary to call, first of all, three literary movements that declared themselves in the period 1890–1917 as modernist. These are symbolism, acmeism and futurism, which formed the basis of modernism as a literary movement.

In general, Russian culture of the late XIX - early XX centuries. amazes with its brightness, wealth, and abundance of talents in various fields. And at the same time, it was the culture of a society doomed to destruction, a premonition of which could be traced in many of her works.

2. familiarization with the textbook article on the topic of the lesson (in pairs)

3. Heuristic conversation

Š What new styles and trends appeared in Russian culture at the turn of the 19th–20th centuries? How were they related to a specific historical setting?

♦ What historical events of the late XIX - early XX centuries. influenced the destinies of Russian writers, were reflected in works of literature?

♦ What philosophical concepts had an impact on Russian literature at the turn of the 19th–20th centuries? what explains the special interest of writers in the philosophy of a. Schopenhauer, F. Nietzsche?

♦ How did the craving for irrationalism, mysticism, and religious quest manifest itself in Russian literature of this time?

♦ is it possible to say that at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. Is realism losing the role of the dominant literary process that belonged to it in the 19th century?

♦ How do the traditions of classical literature and innovative aesthetic concepts compare in the literature of the turn of the century?

♦ What is the uniqueness of A.’s late work? P. Chekhov? How justified is judgment a. Bely that a. P. Chekhov “most of all a symbolist”? What features of Chekhov's realism allow modern researchers to call the writer the founder of absurd literature?

♦ What character did the literary struggle take at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries? Which publishing houses, magazines, almanacs played a particularly important role in the development of Russian literature?

♦ How is the problem of the relationship between man and the environment solved in Russian literature at the turn of the century? What traditions of the “natural school” were developed in the prose of this time?

♦ What place did journalism occupy in the literature of this period? What problems were especially actively discussed on the pages of magazines and newspapers during these years?

V. Reflection. Summing up the lesson

1. “Press” (in groups)

The teacher’s general word - thus, the deep aspirations of the modernist movements that conflicted with each other turned out to be very similar, despite the sometimes striking stylistic dissimilarities, differences in tastes and literary tactics. That is why the best poets of the era rarely confined themselves to a particular literary school or movement. Almost a rule of their creative evolution has become the overcoming of directional frameworks and declarations that are narrow for the creator. Therefore, the real picture of the literary process at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. is determined to a much greater extent by the creative individuals of writers and poets than by the history of trends and movements.

VI. Homework

1. Prepare a message “the turn of the 19th–20th centuries. in the perception... (one of the representatives of Russian art of this time)", using memoir prose by A. Bely, Yu. P. Annenkov, V. F. Khodasevich, Z. N. Gippius, M. I. Tsvetaeva, I. V. Odoevtseva, and other authors.

2. individual task (3 students). Prepare “literary business cards” about the life and work of M. Gorky:

Autobiographical trilogy (“Childhood”, “In People”, “My Universities”);

“We sing glory to the madness of the brave!” (“Song of the Falcon”);