Letters from the Russian traveler Karamzin direction. On the history of styles of the Russian literary language (“letters from France” d

1. Introduction

3. Differences between sentimentalism and other Russian and European literary movements

4. N.M. Karamzin as a representative of Russian sentimentalism

5. Conclusion

6. Literature

INTRODUCTION

The choice of topic is explained by our interest in the work of N. M. Karamzin as a sentimentalist of Russian literature. Being the largest representative of Russian sentimentalism, he made a huge contribution to literature. Throughout his literary career, which lasted over forty years, Karamzin tried his best to educate the Russian people.

The relevance of the study lies in the fact that Karamzin, as a sentimentalist writer, is still interesting today. Our generation also reads his works with great love and interest.

The purpose and objectives of the course work is to consider sentimentalism as one of the literary movements of the 18th century, as well as to identify the distinctive features between Russian and European sentimentalism. Along with this, the role of Karamzin as a representative of Russian sentimentalism in Russian literature is also assessed.

In the second half of the 18th century. In many European countries, a new literary movement called sentimentalism is spreading. Its appearance was caused by the deep crisis experienced by the feudal absolutist regime. The sentimental literature reflected the mood of broad sections of European society. In terms of ideological orientation, sentimentalism is one of the phenomena of the Enlightenment. The anti-feudal pathos of his works is especially clearly expressed in his preaching of the extra-class value of the human person. The best examples of sentimental literature were recognized as “Sentimental Journey through France and Italy” by Stern, “The Priest of Wakefield” by Goldsmith, “Julia, or the New Heloise” by Rousseau, “The Sorrows of Young Werther” by Goethe.

Unlike the classicists, the sentimentalists declared that the highest value was not the state, but the person, whose needs, in their opinion, should be met state laws and institutions. Enlightenment sentimentalists contrasted the eternal and reasonable laws of nature with the unjust order of the feudal world. In this regard, nature appears in their works not only as an object of contemplation and admiration, but also as the highest measure of all values, including man himself. “By nature,” wrote Rousseau, “people are not kings, not nobles, not rich: everyone is born naked and poor. Begin your study of human nature with what is truly inseparable from it, what constitutes the essence of humanity.” Sentimentalists contrasted the official institutions of the absolutist state with alliances based on natural, family relationships or mutual sympathy: family and friendship. They saw the family as the strongest social unit, and good home education of a child was the key to his future civic virtues. “As if love for one’s neighbor,” Rousseau wondered, “is not the beginning of what he owes to the state... As if a good citizen is not formed by a good son, good husband, good father." The next stage in the formation of human social behavior was considered to be friendship, in which the main role is played by the similarity of views, tastes, and beliefs.

The primary place in the ideas of sentimentalists is occupied by feelings, or, as they said in Russia in the 18th century, sensitivity. From this word (in French sentiment) the literary movement itself received its name. Unlike classicism, the philosophical basis of which was rationalism, sentimentalism was based on the sensationalistic philosophy of the English scientist Locke, who declared sensations to be the starting point of knowledge. Sensitivity is understood by sentimentalists not only as a tool of cognition, but also as an area of ​​emotions, experiences, as the ability to respond to the joys and sufferings of other people, i.e. e.as the basis of social solidarity. In the Dictionary of the Russian Academy, published at the end of the 18th century, the word “sensitivity” was defined as “the quality of a person being touched by the misfortunes of another.”

Like any gift of nature, sensitivity needs education and guidance from parents and mentors. Sensitivity is also influenced by a person’s position in society. People who are accustomed to caring and thinking not only about themselves, but also about others, retain and develop natural sensitivity; those who are protected by wealth or nobility from work and responsibilities quickly lose it and become rude and cruel.

The political structure of society also affects human nature: despotic rule kills sensitivity in people, weakens their solidarity, a free society favors the formation of social emotions. Sensitivity, according to the teachings of sensualist educators, is the basis of “passions”, volitional impulses that prompt a person to various, including and public actions. Therefore, in the best works of sentimentalism, it is not beauty, not tearfulness, but a precious gift of nature that determines its civic virtues.

Sensitivity also underlies the creative method of sentimentalist writers. The classicists typified the moral qualities of people, created generalized characters of the prude, the miser, the braggart, etc. They were not interested in a specific, real person, but in the traits inherent in the type. Main role They had the abstract mind of the writer at work, isolating similar psychological phenomena and embodying them in one character.

The creative method of sentimentalists rests not on reason, but on feelings, on sensations that reflect reality in its individual manifestations. They are interested in specific people with individual destinies. In this regard, real-life persons often appear in works of sentimentalism, sometimes even with their names retained. This does not deprive sentimental heroes of typicality, since their traits are thought of as characteristic of the environment to which they belong.

The discovery by sentimentalists of a new type of worldview was a step in the forward movement literary process. At the same time, its manifestation often acquired an overly external and even exaggerated character in the works of sentimentalists, expressed in exclamations, tears, fainting, and suicide. Sentimentalism is typically characterized by prose genres: story, novel (most often epistolary), diary, “travel,” that is, travel notes that help reveal the inner world of the characters and the author himself.

In Russia, sentimentalism arose in the 60s, but its best works - “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow” by Radishchev, “Letters of a Russian Traveler” and Karamzin’s stories - date back to the last decade of the 18th century. As in other literary movements, the commonality of the creative method of writers does not mean the identity of their political and social views. In Russian sentimentalism, two movements can be distinguished: democratic, represented by the work of A. N. Radishchev and writers close to him - N. S. Smirnov and I. I. Martynov, and more extensive in its composition - the nobility, the prominent figures of which were M. M. Kheraskov, M. N. Muravyov, I. I. Dmitriev, N. M. Karamzin, P. Yu. Lvov, Yu. A. Neledinsky Meletsky, P. I. Shalikov.

Unlike Western European sentimentalism, where the main social conflict was represented by the relationship between the third estate and the aristocracy, in Russian sentimentalism the antagonists became the serf peasant and the serf-owner landowner. Representatives of the democratic movement, sympathizing with the serfs, persistently emphasize their moral superiority over the serfs. In their works, the sensitivity of the peasants is contrasted with the spiritual coarsening and cruelty of the landowners. Sentimentalist democrats do not idealize the life of peasants and are not afraid to show its anti-aesthetic details: dirt, poverty. The sensitivity of the characters is presented here most widely and variedly - from tenderness and joy to anger and indignation. One of its manifestations may be severe retribution against one's offenders.

Noble sentimentalists also talk about the moral superiority of the peasants over the landowners, but the facts of violence, heartlessness and arbitrariness of the serf owners are presented in their works as an exception, as a kind of delusion of the offender, and most often end with his sincere repentance. They write with great pleasure about kind, humane landowners, about the harmonious relations between them and the peasants. Noble sentimentalists consistently avoid rude traits peasant life. Hence the well-known touch of pastoralism in the village scenes they depict. The range of sensitivity of the heroes here is much poorer than in democratic sentimentalism. Villagers are generally kind, loving, humble and obedient. And yet it would be wrong to call noble sentimentalism a reactionary phenomenon. Its main goal is to restore the trampled human dignity of the serf peasant in the eyes of society, to reveal his spiritual wealth, to portray family and civic virtues. And although the writers of this movement did not dare to raise the question of the abolition of serfdom, their activities prepared public opinion To solve this problem, Russian sentimentalism went through four stages in its development, which are united by the use of the same creative method by sentimentalist writers, and are separated by different degrees of its depth and perfection. In this case, the following pattern is observed: from the first stage to the third, the creative method is enriched, and in the fourth it becomes impoverished.

The boundaries of the first stage from 1760 to 1775. In 1760, the magazine “Useful Amusement” appeared, which rallied around young sentimentalist poets - A. A. Rzhevsky, S. G. Domashnev, V. D. Sankovsky, A. V. Naryshkin and some others. The head of this group was M. M. Kheraskov. The continuation of "Useful Amusement" (1760-1762) were the magazines "Free Hours" (1763), "Innocent Exercise" (1763) and "Good Intention" (1764). Prose works of this period are represented by the novel “Letters of Ernest and Doravra” by F. A. Emin, “The Diary of One Week” by A. N. Radishchev and “The Matinees of a Lover” by V. A. Levshin; dramatic ones - “tearful” plays by M. M. Kheraskov, V. I. Lukin.

The sentimental-educational creative method does not yet reveal all its possibilities during this period. The authors are currently only interested in love, friendship and family issues. The critical edge of the sentimental method is directed only against social life and injustice. The peasants, although they evoke sympathy, are not the main characters of the works and, more often than not, are only the object of a compassionate attitude toward themselves in the remarks of ideal nobles. This is the period of the birth of Russian sentimentalism. Therefore, authors often borrow genres from previous classic literature (Anacreontic ode, idyll) or use ready-made European models (“New Héloise” by Rousseau, “The Mot, or the Virtuous Deceiver” by Detouches, “The Have Nots” by Mercier).

The second stage of Russian sentimentalism begins in 1776 and continues until 1789. In 1776, N. P. Nikolev wrote the sentimental comic opera “Rosana and Lyubim,” which laid the foundation for a number of similar works. It is in this genre that, first of all, the creative method of sentimentalist writers is further deepened. In their best examples the sentimental comic opera addresses the social contradictions of feudal Russia. At the heart of the conflict in such plays are the facts of landlord tyranny over virtuous, “sensitive” peasants, who for the first time appear as the main characters, superior in spiritual development to their offenders. In the same year, 1776, there were sharp changes in the lyrics of the talented sentimentalist poet M. N. Muravyov, who, after the classic collection “Odes” (1775), switched to sentimental poetry. In his work, in comparison with the “Kheraskovites” poets, his interest in the private life and public virtues of the common man, including the peasant, deepens.

The third period (1789-1796) is the most vibrant and fruitful in the history of Russian sentimentalism. His successes are closely connected with the fate of the Russian Enlightenment, which in these years was especially revived under the influence of the revolution that began in France. “The first years of the revolution...” points out historian M. M. Strange, “were years of great social upsurge in Russia.” The French Revolution in the early stages of its development “was accepted by the Russian intelligentsia with almost unanimous enthusiasm” . The revitalization of social thought had a beneficial effect on the development of enlightenment, which, in turn, was not slow to affect sentimental literature.

During this period, sentimental-educational literature reveals its capabilities to the greatest extent. It raises topical social and political issues: the extra-class value of the human person, the laws of nature and the political system of the state, the revolutionary reorganization of society. This period is characterized by the predominance of prose works - stories, novels, sentimental travels. It was at this time that Radishchev’s best works were created - “The Life of Fyodor Vasilyevich Ushakov” and “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow.” Since 1791, Karamzin’s stories and “Letters of a Russian Traveler” have been published. The best magazines appear: “Moscow Journal” by Karamzin and “A Pleasant and Useful Pastime of Time” by Podshivalov, “Reading for Taste, Reason and Feelings.”

The fourth and final period (1797-1811) is a time of gradual decline of Russian sentimentalism, caused by the weakening of the educational movement of the 18th century. under the influence of Russian and European reaction. The recent glory of sentimentalism is supported only by Karamzin with his stories in Vestnik Evropy and young Zhukovsky. But Karamzin since 1803 moves away from fiction and begins work on the “History of the Russian State.” The work of most sentimentalists is characterized by epigonic repetition. This period ends with the Patriotic War of 1812, which caused a new social upsurge in Russia, which had a beneficial effect on the new literary direction - romanticism.

For Russia at the beginning of the 19th century. characterized by a rapid chronological alignment of artistic stages with the corresponding Western European stages. Russian classicism lagged behind French - the most striking and powerful form of classicism - by almost a century. Russian sentimentalism lagged behind Western European sentiment by only a few decades, having picked up and continued its last, fading echoes, which gave A. Veselovsky the basis to talk about a single “era of sensitivity” for all of Europe. Subsequent artistic movements (romanticism and realism), as well as their varieties, arose and took shape in Russia at the same time or almost simultaneously with the corresponding movements in the West. .

Thus, the main channel of the Russian literary revolution in the first half of the century was the same as in the West: sentimentalism, romanticism and realism. But the appearance of each of these stages was extremely unique, and this originality was determined by both the close interweaving and merging of already known elements, and the emergence of new ones - those that Western European literature did not know or almost did not know.

The fusion of elements resulted from the density of artistic movements, which caused their interpenetration. Russian sentimentalism (like Western European), placing feeling at the forefront, led to a revaluation of reason; at the same time, he, perhaps even more actively than his Western European counterpart, appropriated the heritage of previous and often rejected systems. So, for example, the concept of educated and correct taste - the property of classicism - formed the axis of Karamzin’s aesthetics, and the idea of ​​civic and personal education - the criterion of the Enlightenment - permeated many works of the era of sentimentalism, including such as Karamzin’s “Letters of a Russian Traveler”. But at the same time, Russian sentimentalism also adopted the sharp, bright colors of Sturm and Drang (manifested in the psychological depiction central character, and in stylistic expression), and the mysterious tones of pre-romanticism (in a broader sense, pre-romanticism is called sentimentalism in general), the extreme situations of the “Gothic novel”.

And for a long time, the Russian romanticism that developed later was characterized by interaction not only with the traditions of Sturm and Drang or the Gothic novel, but also with the Enlightenment. The latter especially complicated the appearance of Russian romanticism, because, like Western European romanticism, it cultivated the idea of ​​autonomous and original creativity and acted under the sign of anti-Enlightenment and anti-rationalism. In practice, he often crossed out or limited his original guidelines.

It should also be taken into account that sentimentalism was the dominant trend in Russian literature, but by no means the only one: in addition, sentimentalism itself was heterogeneous, consisting of different literary movements and schools. There was no clarity in the terminology, many concepts “were brought from outside and were only applied to certain phenomena..... By “romanticism” they sometimes meant the German or English influence in general, which replaced the French, and the names of Schiller, Goethe and even Lessing. And if romanticism appeared after sentimentalism, then this does not mean from sentimentalism.

You can protect yourself from extremes and find the “golden mean” in understanding the Russian literary process of the early 19th century if you refuse direct analogies with European literatures. The Western European concepts of “classicism,” “baroque,” ​​“sentimentalism,” or the aesthetic categories “sublime,” “tragic,” and others never coincided with Russian phenomena, but the names were borrowed as long as analogies were permissible. By the 19th century, the originality of Russian literature had developed to such an extent that the next literary era had no direct analogy in European literature and could not obtain an adequate definition from there. This is exactly the case with the literature of the first thirds of the XIX century. However, it will not be possible to completely abandon European analogies, since it began in the 18th century. The process of Europeanization of Russian culture has not yet been completed. In addition, many works of the first third of the 19th century. are translations from Byron, Thomas Gray, Parni, Villevois; in prose, Russian romantics argue with Herder, the Schlegel brothers, Schelling. Thus, using the European terms “romanticism”, “classicism”, “sentimentalism”, etc. one should remember their Russian identity.

Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin is the largest representative of Russian sentimentalism. In his work the artistic possibilities of this literary movement were most fully and vividly revealed. Karamzin, like Radishchev, adhered to the views of the Enlightenment, but they were of a more moderate nature. In politics, he was a supporter of an enlightened monarchy, which does not prevent him from sympathizing with the republican system, provided that the path to it did not lead through revolution. Among the educational ideas closest to Karamzin are the condemnation of despotism and the idea of ​​​​the extra-class value of the human person.

Karamzin's literary activity began in the mid-80s of the 18th century. and ended in 1826, that is, in total it lasted over forty years and underwent a number of significant changes. The early period of the writer’s work dates back to the second half of the 80s of the 18th century, when young Karamzin became one of the members of the Rosicrucian Masonic lodge, headed by N. I. Novikov. Like his new comrades, he receives a Masonic name - Lord Ramsay. Karamzin considers closeness to the Freemasons as a happy gift of fate. On behalf of his mentors, he is engaged in translations of moral and religious works. One of them was the book of the Swiss poet Haller “On the Origin of Evil.” Together with his friend, also a Freemason, A. A. Petrov, he edits the first children's magazine in Russia " Children's reading for the heart and mind" (1785-1789), where his story "Eugene and Julia" was placed. The influence of the Freemasons is felt in Karamzin’s increased interest in religious and moralistic problems. However, unlike the devout Masons, Karamzin at this time was strongly influenced by sentimental and pre-romantic literature, as evidenced primarily by the works he translated: Thomson’s “The Seasons,” Gesner’s idyll “The Wooden Leg,” Lessing’s drama “Emilia Galotti.” He is also familiar with the works of Rousseau, Klopstock, Jung, Wieland, Richardson and Stern.

The new, sentimental-enlightenment period, as stated above, begins in 1789 and lasts until the summer of 1793. And by the beginning of this period, i.e. in 1789 Karamzin broke with the Freemasons. The writer himself subsequently explains his decision by saying that he was irritated by the “ridiculous rituals” and the mystery of Masonic meetings. But the reason turned out to be deeper. Even before his trip abroad, Karamzin firmly decided to start publishing his own magazine, which would fully correspond to his new literary tastes. In 1789-1790, the writer travels through Western Europe. Returning to Russia, he published the monthly “Moscow Journal” (1791 -1792), in which he published “Letters of a Russian Traveler”, the stories “Poor Liza”, “Natalia, the Boyar’s Daughter”, as well as translations of works by Western European authors.

“Letters of a Russian Traveler” opens the sentimental and educational stage of Karamzin’s work. They were published first in the Moscow Journal, then in the Almanac Alaya. A completely separate publication was published in 1797-1801. The material presented in “Letters” is extremely diverse: there are pictures of nature, meetings with famous writers and scientists of Europe, and descriptions of historical and cultural monuments. The educational nature of Karamzin’s thinking is especially clearly outlined when assessing the social system of the countries he visited. The author's obvious disapproval is caused by feudal Germany. Karamzin is annoyed by the intrusive control of police officials. In Berlin, he is presented with a long list of questions that must be answered in writing. In Prussia, the dominance of the military is striking. “The local garrison,” Karamzin writes about Konigsberg, “is so numerous that uniforms catch your eye everywhere.” The captain, with whom the author entered into a conversation, complained about the lack of military action: “It’s time to fight again - our soldiers lay on their sides.” Karamzin points out the squalor of social life in the German principalities. The arrival of the king’s relative, the “stadtholder,” as the author disparagingly calls her, in Berlin turns into an event of national importance: a military parade is held, residents take to the streets, and an orchestra plays. “It was impossible not to laugh at this farce,” notes Karamzin. Court life draws even great writers into its orbit. In Weimar, Karamzin finds neither Wieland, nor Herder, nor Goethe at home. The news that they were all in the palace causes him indignation.

Karamzin writes completely differently about Switzerland, which for the enlighteners, especially for Rousseau, was a clear example of republican order. “So, I’m already in Switzerland,” the traveler reports, “in a country of picturesque nature, in a land of silence and prosperity.” The author explains the prosperity of Swiss landowners by the fact that they “pay almost no taxes and live in complete freedom.” In Zurich he talks with great approval about “ girls' school”, in which the daughters of rich and poor parents sit side by side, which makes it possible to “respect the dignity, not the wealth” of a person. Karamzin, in the spirit of Montesquieu and Rousseau, sees the reason supporting the republican system in Switzerland in the strict ascetic morals of the inhabitants, among whom even the richest do not keep more than one servant.

The head of Russian sentimentalism N.M. Karamzin carried out at the end of the 18th - beginning of the 19th centuries. reform of literary language styles. He proclaimed and confirmed by his own literary practice the principles of the so-called “new syllable”. Its essence boiled down to simplifying written speech, liberating it from “Slavicism,” ponderous bookishness, scholastic pomposity, characteristic of the works of classicism. The merits of N. M. Karamzin are generally recognized. According to Belinsky, he “created an educated literary language in Rus'” and managed to “make the Russian public want to read Russian books.”

But Karamzin’s reform had many weaknesses. An ideologist of sentimentalism that reconciles social contradictions, he focused mainly on the language of the elite, on the elegant secular style of speech adopted in noble salons. To the writers of the Karamzin school, folk words and expressions seemed low and obscene. In this sense, Karamzin’s judgments about the words birdie and guy are indicative. In a letter to the poet I. I. Dmitriev, he noted: “One man says birdie and guy: the first is pleasant, the second is disgusting. With the first word, I imagine a red summer day, a green tree in a flowering meadow, a bird’s nest, a fluttering robin or warbler and a deceased peasant , who looks at nature with quiet pleasure and says: “Here is a nest! here's a birdie!" At the second word, a stout man appears in my thoughts, scratching himself in an indecent manner or wiping his wet mustache with his sleeve, saying: "Ay, guy! What kind of kvass!” We must admit that there is nothing interesting for our soul here.”

Mannered expressions, very far from simple, artless language, were a characteristic feature of the literature of that time. Instead of
in order, for example, to say the sun, they wrote the luminary of the day, the nose was coyly called the gates of the brain, the eyes - the paradise of the soul, winter was called the formidable queen of cold, the simple word shoemaker was replaced by the artificial expression humble artisan. At that time, the taste of the “society lady” became the trendsetter of stylistic norms.
Caring about elegance and sophistication of speech (by the way, the word sophistication itself first appeared in “Letters of a Russian Traveler” by N.M. Karamzin), Karamzinist writers, although sometimes opposed foreign language dominance, in their literary practice Still, they were overly keen on foreign, especially French, words and expressions. Indeed, in those days, not only the royal court sought to copy Versailles. Gallomania also took over the life of noble estates. Let us remember that not only Onegin “could perfectly express himself and write in French,” but also Pushkin’s provincial Tatyana wrote a letter to Onegin in French and in general “had difficulty expressing herself in her native language.”
Some “Europeanist” writers then completely rejected Church Slavonic words, which, as we already know, at one time played an important cultural role in the formation and development of the Russian literary language. Denying the Lomonosov principle of combining Church Slavonicisms with simple folk speech, they not only cultivated the “noble” French style, but also proclaimed a program for transforming the Russian language according to the type and model of Western European languages. Such a position, naturally, could not but cause opposition.
At the beginning of the 19th century, he became the inspirer of the fight against Karamzin’s “new style” and an opponent of all innovations and borrowings. Admiral A. S. Shishkov, who for some time held the post of Minister of Public Education and President of the Russian Academy. Shishkov was a passionate and convinced champion of antiquity; everything new in the language seemed to him to be malicious corruption. Ancient monuments, folklore and, of course, book and Church Slavonic texts served as models of Russian speech for him. He attacked foreign words especially fiercely. Moreover, his intolerance towards “linguistic foreignness” and unbridled purism (as the desire for language frequency is called) had largely ideological roots. An ardent monarchist, Shishkov believed that, along with French words, the harmful trends of the French Revolution were penetrating Russia. For example, the word republic, as he wrote, resembles: “cut the public:”

conclusion

Thus, sentimentalism, as a new literary movement, emerged in the second half of the 18th century. made a huge contribution to world literature. Originating in the 60s in Russia, sentimentalism played an important role in the life of Russian literature. Sensitivity formed the basis of many works by writers of this period. Having examined and analyzed the works of sentimentalists, we find that the highest measure of all values ​​in their works is nature; they contrast it with the unjust order of feudal society. The sentimentalists considered the highest of feelings to be a person’s ability to respond to the joys and sufferings of others.

Considering creativity largest representative Russian sentimentalism - N. M. Karamzin, we want to note that it is in his work that the artistic possibilities of this direction are most clearly and fully revealed. His novel “Letters of a Russian Traveler” paints colorful pictures of nature and describes historical and cultural monuments. He evaluates the social system of the countries he visits. Reading about the countries described in the “letters” we find that he speaks most positively about Switzerland, and is not satisfied with the situation that prevails in Germany. Other works created by Karamzin’s pen are also based on “sensibility”. Thus, Karamzin, as a representative of sentimentalism, left a bright mark in Russian literature and the works he created will live in literature forever.

LITERATURE

• 1. Dughie G.

Sentimentalism in historical works N. M. Karamzin. - vol. I. 1962.

• 2. Ivanov I.

Karamzin direction and its ideological content. St. Petersburg: 1898

• 3. Ivanov-Razumnik

Sentimentalism and romanticism (Karamzin, Zhukovsky, Pushkin Bestuzhev. Marlinsky. St. Petersburg: 1908

• 4. Kanunova F. Z

On the evolution of sentimentalism N. M. Karamzin Tomsk; 1962,

• 5. Konunova F.Z.

On the evolution of sentimentalism by N. M. Karamzin (“People’s Posadnitsa”) - Tomsk; N 50, 1965

• 6. Konunova F.Z.

The evolution of Karamzin's sentimentalism. Tomsk; 1967

• 7. Kafanova O.B.

N.M. Karamzin and Western European theater /Russian literature and foreign art/ - Leningrad; 1986

• 8. Kafanova O.B.

N.M. Karamzin - translator of the genre. Tomsk; 1982

• 9. Kochetkova N.D.

Russian sentimentalism - "Science"; 1978

10. Savelyeva L.I.

Antiquity in the poetry of classicism and sentimentalism: Karamzin, Dmitriev. Kazan: 1980

Ivanov-Razumnik Sentimentalism and Romanticism (Karamzin, Zhukovsky, Pushkin Bestuzhev. Marlinsky. St. Petersburg: 1908 p. 48

Ibid page 52

Sheter I. Romanticism. Prehistory and periodization. M.; 1973 p.52

Ivanov I. Karamzin direction and its ideological content. St. Petersburg: 1898, page 60

Dugi G. Sentimentalism in the historical works of N. M. Karamzin. - vol. I. 1962 p.248

Karamzin's greatest creation was himself, his life, his spiritual personality. It was through this that he had a great moral influence on Russian literature. Yu.M. Lotman

In the second half of the 18th century, a theory emerged in Europe according to which human morals could be corrected by awakening sensitivity in people. Works began to be valued depending on how much they were able to touch the reader and encourage him to commit virtuous deeds. This is how a new direction emerges in literature, replacing classicism - sentimentalism.

The name of the direction comes from the French word sentiment - “feeling”. The principles of sentimentalism are as follows.

1) If classicism appealed to the reader’s mind, then sentimentalism addressed his feelings.

2) The hero of sentimental literature is not a generalized, but an extremely individualized image, with his own unique inner world.

3) The hero of sentimental literature is a commoner, a native of the people. This circumstance made him closer to the mass reader.

4) In sentimental literature, as in music, emotionality plays an important role. Of key importance in sentimental works are landscapes that set the reader in a certain emotional mood and indirectly reflect the author’s attitude towards events or characters, as well as interjections, exclamations, and rhetorical questions.

The most important discovery of sentimentalism was psychologism - attention to human behavior, internal state, spiritual manifestations. Sentimentalism as a direction quickly exhausted itself, but the psychologism it founded remained in literature.

Preferential genres sentimental literature - elegy, message, epistolary novel, love story, travel notes.

Leading sentimental writers in the West there were Samuel Richardson, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Laurence Stern. In Russia - Mikhail Nikitich Muravyov, Nikolai Alexandrovich Lvov, Vasily Vasilyevich Kapnist, Ivan Ivanovich Dmitriev, Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin.

N.M. Karamzin born on December 12, 1766 on his father’s estate near Simbirsk (now Ulyanovsk). Karamzin's distant ancestor was the Tatar Khan Kara-Murza. From the age of twelve he studied in one of the Moscow boarding schools; at the age of 16, at the insistence of his father, he entered military service in the St. Petersburg Preobrazhensky Regiment, but at the age of 17 he already retired and settled in Moscow, where he met publishers and journalists Nikolai Novikov and Alexei Kutuzov. In collaboration with them, since 1784 he published the literary magazine “Children's Reading for the Heart and Mind.”

In 1789 he sold the estate and went on a trip to Europe, following which he wrote sentimental piece "Letters of a Russian Traveler" , which brought him fame as a writer. In July 1790, he returned to Russia and began publishing his own magazine, Moskovsky Vestnik, where he published his own works, among others. In April 1792, when his friend and colleague Nikolai Novikov was arrested, he wrote "Ode to Grace" , addressed to Catherine II. The Empress did not execute Novikov, but she did not pardon her either, ordering him to be imprisoned for 15 years in the Shlisselburg fortress, where he spent 4 years until Catherine’s death. Her son and heir to the throne, Paul the First, freed Novikov as soon as he ascended the throne.

In 1792, Karamzin expected huge success associated with the publication of the story "Poor Lisa" , which amazed contemporaries with the story of tragic selfless love and insidious, albeit unintentional, betrayal. Sad notes are woven into the narrative from the very first sentences of the story, when the author draws a realistic, but very sad landscape near Moscow. Lisa, a pure and honest girl, becomes a victim of her own strong feelings. Falling in love with the nobleman Erast, she foresees trouble, but this only strengthens her love. Erast is a hero full of good intentions, wanting an honest relationship with Lisa, but everything about him is sincere, but fragile. His betrayal causes the death of Lisa and the death of her mother from grief.

Since 1803, by decree of Alexander the First, Karamzin was appointed court historiographer. The result of his historical studies was the publication of a 12-volume "History of the Russian State" , written over a period of twenty-three years based on a thorough study of all available historical documents: chronicles, state charters, diplomatic correspondence and archival records. Karamzin dedicated his work to Emperor Alexander the First, writing the famous phrase in the dedication: “The history of the people belongs to the king.”

Karamzin's sentimentalism appears for the first time in " Letters from a Russian traveler ", which were definitely written under the influence of the English writer Stern. “Incomparable Stern,” writes Karamzin in one of his letters, “at what university did you learn to feel so tenderly?” Sensitivity, the cult of nature, a certain idealization of life, all this was then completely new in Russian literature; it must be said that the mood of sentimentalism suited Karamzin’s mental make-up - it’s not for nothing that he himself calls “Letters of a Russian Traveler” (see also their analysis) “the mirror of his soul.”

Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin. Portrait by Tropinin

For the first time, “Letters of a Russian Traveler” were published in the “Moscow Journal”, then they were published as a separate book. These letters are compiled from the author’s travel notes.

In every country, in every city through which he passed, Karamzin paid attention mainly to the intellectual attractions of literature, science and art; – a lot of space is devoted to describing the beauties of nature, the character and morals of the inhabitants, as well as one’s own reflections caused by new impressions. Often these descriptions and reflections are written in such sentimental terms that they seem funny to us; but we must remember in what era they were written, remember that these were the first steps in a new literary direction that replaced the school of false classicism.

Karamzin. Letters from a Russian traveler. Radio play

Karamzin began his journey from Germany. In Konigsberg, he visited the famous philosopher Kant and had a long conversation with him on the most sublime philosophical and religious topics. Citing some words and opinions of Kant, Karamzin exclaims: “honorable husband! forgive me if I disfigured your thoughts in these lines!”

Arriving in Weimar, Karamzin’s first priority was to inquire: “Is it here? Wieland? Is Herder here? Is Goethe here? “But he didn’t get to see Goethe.” The poet Wieland at first somehow reluctantly and distrustfully accepted the Russian writer unfamiliar to him on his first visit, but Karamzin managed to overcome this distrust and charm German poet with its ardent sincerity.

“I came to Wieland at the appointed time. His small, beautiful children surrounded me on the porch. Father is waiting for you, said one. Come to him, the two said together. We will see you off, said the fourth. I kissed them together and went to their father.

“Forgive me,” he said as he entered, “if my visit yesterday was not entirely pleasant for you. I hope that you will not consider impudence to be the result of the enthusiasm generated in me by your wonderful writings.” “You don’t need to apologize,” he answered, “I’m glad that this passion for poetry spreads so far, while it disappears in Germany.” Here we sat down on a canapé. A conversation began, which became more interesting for me minute by minute.”

Saying goodbye to Karamzin, Wieland hugged and kissed him.

In Dresden, Karamzin describes with delight and admiration the beauty of the Elbe, the view opening from the city park onto the fields and distances, illuminated by the evening sun: “I looked and enjoyed,” he writes, “I looked, rejoiced and even cried: what usually happens when my heart is very, very happy! He took out paper and a pencil and wrote: dear nature! and not a word more!..”

Now such sensitivity is funny to us, but Karamzin was quite sincere; the beauty of nature was reflected in his soul. Elsewhere he writes: “As the sky was clear, so was my soul.”

In letters from Switzerland this sentimental expression of the cult of nature reaches highest point: “I’m already enjoying Switzerland, dear friends,” writes Karamzin. In one particularly beautiful place on the road, not far from Basel, he asked the horses to stop: “I jumped out of the carriage, fell on the flowering bank of the Rhine, and was ready to kiss the ground in delight. Happy Swiss! Do you thank heaven every day, every hour for your happiness, living in the arms of lovely Nature?

It seems to a sentimental writer that people living in the beautiful frame of nature must themselves be beautiful. Even in Germany, he admits this: “the young peasant woman with a staff was for me an Arcadian shepherdess.” Here in Switzerland, he would like to become a “shepherd” himself. Talking to two young peasant women somewhere in the Alpine meadows, he expressed to them his desire to share their simple life, close to nature, “to milk the cows with them.” The Swiss shepherdesses laughed merrily in response to his words.

Karamzin arrived in France just when the revolution. But in his letters he hardly talks about political events. Rebellion, anger and violence, always associated with revolution, were alien to his soul and outraged it. In France, as in other countries, he was interested in historical monuments and was interested in French culture. He devotes several warm words to the memory of Jean Jacques Rousseau, whom he values ​​very highly and who had such a great influence on Karamzin’s own way of thinking.

In one letter, Karamzin speaks about the character of the French: “I’ll say - fire, air, - and the character of the French is described. I don’t know a smarter, more fiery, more windy people...” What he likes about the French is their courtesy, impetuosity, and ability to get carried away. But most of all, Karamzin appreciated the theater in France: “The character of the French, he writes, is expressed mainly in their love for the theater. The German must be studied in his academic study, the Englishman at the stock exchange, the Frenchman at the theatre.”

Karamzin often visited theaters, saw many French plays and above all values ​​French comedy, which he considers incomparable; but he did not really like the French tragedies, he criticizes the performance of French tragic actors and, of course, puts Shakespearean tragedies incomparably higher. About Shakespeare, Karamzin says in one letter from England: “In dramatic poetry, the English have nothing excellent except the works of one author; but this author is Shakespeare, and the English are rich!”

As already mentioned, the fascination with Shakespeare was a characteristic feature of the 18th century and was a protest against French rationalist philosophy. “It’s easy to laugh at him (Shakespeare),” continues Karamzin, “not only with Voltaire, but also with the most ordinary mind; whoever does not feel its beauty, I do not want to talk or argue with. Funny Shakespeare critics are like impudent boys who surround a strangely dressed person on the street and shout: how funny, what an eccentric. Greatness, truth of character, entertaining adventure, revelation human heart and the great thoughts scattered in the dramas of British genius will always be their magic for people with feeling. I don’t know another poet who would have such a comprehensive, fertile, inexhaustible imagination.”

- “Oh, Shakespeare, Shakespeare! – writes Karamzin in another letter. – Who knew the human heart as well as you! Who presented all the madness of slander more convincingly than you!”

Karamzin truly admires Shakespeare.

Comparing London with Paris, Karamzin says: “London is beautiful! What a difference from Paris! There is enormity and nastiness (a hint of the dirt of Parisian streets), here there is simplicity with amazing cleanliness; there luxury and poverty are in eternal opposition, here there is uniformity of general prosperity; there are chambers from which pale people in torn rags are crawling; here Health and Contentment emerge from small brick houses with a noble and calm appearance.” But in general, it is clearly felt in the letters from England that the French are more sympathetic to Karamzin than the British. He appreciates the enlightenment of the British, appreciates many things in their state structure, especially legislation, but remains cold. Speaking about the character of the English, Karamzin explains their coldness and tendency to “spleen” - the bad English climate, fog, gray sky and... excessive love for comfort. As a truly Russian man, he was burdened by some of the dryness and coldness of the British, but this does not prevent him from giving full justice to their enlightenment.

In all Karamzin’s letters, a bright thread runs through his love for his homeland, for everything Russian. Sincerely admiring everything he sees abroad, he does not forget Russia for a minute, and therefore his last letter from Kronstadt to way back: "Shore! fatherland! I bless you! I’m in Russia, and in a few days I’ll be with you, my friends!.. I stop everyone, I ask questions only so that I can speak Russian and hear Russian people.”

For contemporaries, “Letters of a Russian Traveler” were interesting because they introduced readers to Europe.

G. P. Makogonenko

Nikolai Karamzin and his "Letters of a Russian Traveler"

A new and largely individual construction was also central work Karamzin - “Letters of a Russian Traveler”, the only thing he wrote before “History” that was large in volume. Travel notes were one of the most common genres of sentimental literature throughout Europe. Stern’s brilliant book “A Sentimental Journey through France and Italy” (1768) created success for this genre. And in Russia, the two most significant works of the period of sentimentalism - Radishchev’s book and Karamzin’s “Letters” - belong to this genre. The main setting of all sentimental travel is to show society and nature through the prism of the personal experiences of the author-traveler.

But within this genre it is possible to indicate varieties that are largely dissimilar to each other. On the one hand, this is, for example, Stern’s “Sentimental Journey,” in which the material of observations and descriptions is absorbed by the lyrics, the self-disclosure of the psychology of the hero-author. The idealistic indifferentism and indifference to the outside world of the extreme individualist-aesthete determines Stern’s deliberately arrogant position. On the other hand, travelers like Dupaty (Letters on Italy, 1785) are fascinated by the opportunity to combine into one book, thanks to a convenient compositional form, both abundant factual informational material and advanced ideological propaganda, of course, in the refraction of sentimental individualism. In sentimental travels, the contradictory elements of bourgeois individualism of the 18th century fought, the objective world came into conflict with a closed personality, and the more militant the worldview was characteristic of the author of the book and his entourage, the more the objective principle won. In this sense, both the efficiency and ideological sharpness of the French type of sentimental travel, which was created on the approaches to the great bourgeois revolution, are characteristic. Radishchev's “Travel” adjoins the tradition of the French, not Stern; but it is completely independent. It does not provide almost any informative, educational material (on geography, history, etc.), but is entirely built on “external” material. The center of gravity of this material is politics, social relations, ideas.

Karamzin’s “Letters” differ significantly from the genre type of Radishchev’s “Travel”, and also differ from Stern’s book. The subjective principle is characteristic to a large extent of Karamzin’s book, but it does not absorb all the material in the book. Karamzin reports in his “Letters” a huge amount of specific information about the culture, life, art, and people of the West. The information task is brought to the fore in his book. A Stern-type trip could be written from the comfort of your room. On the contrary, “Letters of a Russian Traveler” includes many genuine observations and a lot of book material. These are not at all the letters that Karamzin occasionally wrote to his friends in Moscow during his stay in the West. V.V. Sipovsky in the above study proved this with complete clarity; he proved that “Letters” is a book written largely in Moscow, based on notes made by Karamzin abroad, and on the basis of the many book sources he used. Karamzin not only thoroughly became acquainted with the artistic, political, philosophical, and historical literature of the West, setting out to introduce Russian readers to the West; He specially studied extensive literature about the places he visited, and drew a lot of information and observations from this literature into his book.

Thus, Karamzin carried out a great deal of scientific work on collecting materials, supplementing his personal observations, for the “Letters.” This factuality and scientific character distinguishes his book from a number of other sentimental travels, foreign and Russian. “Letters of a Russian Traveler” became for the Russian reader an entire encyclopedia of Western life and culture. Karamzin talks in detail in his book about the political life of Western states, for example, about the English parliament, about jury trials in England, about English prisons, he also shows the social life of Germany, Switzerland, France, England; he talks about Western science and scientists, about modern trends in philosophical and social thought in general.

V.V. Sipovsky writes:

“In Switzerland, he becomes close to the local residents, going to the local circles for parties, taking an ardent part in local interests and entertainment. In Paris, he is in a hurry to get acquainted with the “salons” that were already dying out at that time, but at the same time he is also interested in the tavern; in England he is a guest in the family of a wealthy Englishman and also pays close attention to public life. He studies the life of Europe in theatres, in palaces, in universities, at country festivities, in monasteries, on a noisy street, in a scientist’s office and in a quiet family environment... Parisian salon ladies, witty abbots, street loudmouths, poets, artists, scientists, Prussian officers, English merchants, German students - all this motley, noisy crowd attracts Karamzin’s attention and from all this abundant field he collects a rich harvest, without getting lost from the abundance of material, finding in everything the essential, characteristic... Sometimes small features do not escape his attention , insignificant, but for some reason attracted his attention.

The economic life of the West also interests him: the financial situation of the peasants, economic prosperity or poverty of the population - all this awakens his thoughts, calls for considerations, comparisons, conclusions... He glances briefly at the ethnographic features of European peoples. Their typical features, customs and morals, costumes - all this is sometimes noted by Karamzin on the pages of his notebook... The cities, large and small, through which his path lay - all attracted his attention. He studies these cities both from books and with the help of direct impressions. Karamzin also treated the past of Western Europe with great attention and love. He himself stated in his “Letters” that he loves to look at “the remains of antiquities”, “signs of past centuries”, he loves to “look at the monuments of famous people and imagine their deeds.”

Karamzin devotes a lot of space to descriptions of nature. Everywhere he visited, he tried to get acquainted with outstanding cultural figures and writers, and in “Letters” he talks in detail about his conversations with them, gives their living portraits, and reports on their writings.

Karamzin gives descriptions of art monuments, museums, statues, libraries, etc. And to this day his book represents a precious collection of information about Europe at the end of the 18th century.

Thus, “Letters” is not only a “sentimental” journey. Educational and even educational role this book was extremely great. After reading it, every Russian person became familiar with the main phenomena Western culture, became related to them. This was also due to the fact that Karamzin himself wrote about the West not at all as a provincial, not as a writer for whom the West was exotic and new. Karamzin completely overcame in his “Letters” cultural separatism, which was alien to some noble figures of his time. He came to Europe as a European, for whom all the great achievements of the peoples of the West are not “strangers, but his own,” for whom his own Russian culture is inextricably linked with the heritage of the West. At the same time, he was completely oriented not in just one Western national culture, but in all of them together. He knows well what he needs to take from Switzerland and what from England. He was a true envoy of Russian culture to the West, and he showed that Russian culture is high enough to stand next to Western culture, moreover, that it is fused with it. It is not for nothing that Karamzin’s works were very widely known in the West. “Letters of a Russian Traveler” were published twice in German (1800 and 1804), in French (incompletely in 1815, fully only in 1866), in English (1803), in Polish (1802), in Dutch (1804 ). Whole line Karamzin's stories and essays were translated and appeared in print in many languages ​​in 1797-1826. “History of the Russian State” was published in French, German, English, Greek, and Polish.

Karamzin’s “Europeanism” is one of his great merits. The deep organic unification in his consciousness of the Russian principle with the pan-European one prepared the internationalism of Pushkin’s purely Russian culture.

All the extensive information material is united in “Letters of a Russian Traveler” by the personality of the author himself - the hero of the book. Everything that was said above about the subjectivism of Karamzin’s stories applies to his “Letters.” Karamzin shows all the objective material, huge and varied, not in itself, but as his personal experience. Karamzin’s attitude to the problem of personality, character, to showing reality, nature, life in “Letters” is fundamentally the same as in “Julia” or “Sierra Morena”. And here the difference between his “Letters” and Radishchev’s “Travel” appears. For Radishchev, objective reality subjugates the personality; for Karamzin it’s the other way around. For Radishchev, the social theme is the main one. For Karamzin, the main thing is individuality, “I,” aesthetic and intellectual culture. Radishchev studies reality in order to change it, Karamzin - in order to know it, taste the wonderful fruits of culture, and enjoy them. The revolutionary-democrat Radishchev could not agree with Karamzin on the essence of the artistic method, although the unity of the era and the flow of style brought them together in individual features of this style. It is no coincidence that Karamzin describes the West in his book, and Radishchev describes his homeland. Karamzin is afraid to talk about the most important thing, the most terrible thing. Radishchev dares to do anything, to the truth to the end.