Geography
Using biographical dictionaries of Russian writers and resources. Directory "Faithful Sons of the Fatherland: Writers of Russia - Participants of the Great Patriotic War." Publishing house "Voenizdat". M.G. Gribanov. Questions and tasks

Using biographical dictionaries of Russian writers and resources. Directory "Faithful Sons of the Fatherland: Writers of Russia - Participants of the Great Patriotic War." Publishing house "Voenizdat". M.G. Gribanov. Questions and tasks

This Dictionary is part of the system of encyclopedic works devoted to Russian verbal culture. It characterizes all types of creative writing: prose, poetry, drama, children's literature, literary criticism and literary criticism.

It meets the basic principles of modern science about the historical path of Russian literature in the twentieth century. This path was, as it were, foreseen by the last classics of the previous century, A. Chekhov and L. Tolstoy, who met the new century with anxiety and hope, also related to culture. (Strictly speaking, it would be necessary to include these names in this edition, but still they are the flesh of the nineteenth century.) Both were fully confirmed.

Using this Dictionary, it is possible to compile a martyrology of writers of the 20th century that is much more gigantic compared to the famous martyrology of A. Herzen. Not only the history of Russia turned out to be tragic, but also the fate of its literary artists. Even those who were apparently prosperous and not rejected by the authorities (M. Gorky, M. Sholokhov, A. Fadeev, I. Ehrenburg, K. Simonov, etc.) were not spared drama.

On the other hand, one of the confirmations of the hope of the great writers of the past was the flourishing of Russian literature, which, despite everything, generally retained its aesthetic freedom. Of the Russian literary artists of the 20th century, more than a hundred writers are world figures. IN quantitatively this is much more than what the “golden age” of Russian literature gave.

Political regimes in the 20th century did not like culture. Not only the one that directly opposed the authorities, but also the one that was on the side of the existing system: in in this case feared her relative independence. Therefore, for example, after Patriotic War 1941-1945, which was won partly thanks to literature that shaped the patriotic feelings of the people, one of the first political actions of the government was the trial of writers, and soon of artists representing other types of art. II is the general motive for condemning artists so dissimilar in their worldview and style as A. Akhmatova and M. Zoshchenko - they think and behave independently.

Defending yourself fiction in the second half of the 20th century, she appealed to the people and at the same time protected them from the regime. It is no coincidence that her main aesthetic achievement during this period was the so-called “village prose”, prepared by the great poetic experience of A. Tvardovsky and represented by such names as F. Abramov, S. Zalygin, V. Astafiev, B. Mozhaev, V. Rasputin, V. . Belov and, naturally, A. Solzhenitsyn.

The dictionary denies cemetery, “memorial” motives regarding Soviet literature. Not to mention its classics, one cannot help but admit that even many writers from the Russian diaspora matured within its boundaries. New famous names, who have declared themselves in the last decade, are to a greater extent the heirs of the previous long stage in the history of culture of the 20th century than it seems to modern criticism.

D. S. Likhachev said that the history of culture is not its progress: it is the accumulation of culture. Rejecting the metonymic view of literature, when a part of an artistic phenomenon is presented as its whole, the Dictionary tries to present the overall positive aesthetic result of everything accumulated in the history of our national literature. The “components” of this result are very different in value and artistic content, but there are also internal connecting threads between them, which is quite understandable: culture is one.

The dictionary can be perceived as a continuation of the multi-volume dictionary “Russian Writers. 1800-1917", carried out by the publishing house "Big Russian Encyclopedia" (four volumes published). But the proposed publication also has specific structural features: it can be called “the author’s encyclopedia.” Of course, all the traditional genre and content qualities of dictionary entries, their bibliographic “norms” are present here, but there are individual authorial styles and analytical approaches to the material. The conventional definition of the publication as an “author's encyclopedia” explains some of its content and structural aspects. The editorial board took into account the author's terminological characteristics of historical events. For example, “October 1917”: both “revolution” and “coup” - especially since this discord was common for that time, including among the Bolsheviks (J.V. Stalin entitled his anniversary article in the newspaper “ Pravda" in 1918: "October Revolution").

We also considered it necessary to agree with the author’s definition of the scope of a particular article; as a rule, it was dictated not only (and sometimes not so much) by the significance of the object of encyclopedic consideration, but by the degree of study of the “subject” or current awareness of it (for example, articles about D. Bedny, A. Bezymensky). And also - the manner of presentation of one or another author of the article, which the editorial board sought to preserve, thus presenting not only a panorama of literature of the 20th century, but also a range of different research approaches and stylistic features of modern analysts literary process. This last circumstance partly clarifies the question of the addressee of the publication. It is intended both for all those who are interested in Russian literature of the 20th century, and for its researchers. The creators of the Dictionary hope that this book will serve as meaningful material for the future scientific history Russian literature of the outgoing century - and at the same time will make fascinating reading for the narrowest circle of readers, including schoolchildren and students. This is not surprising for a book whose authors include such literary names as S. Zalygin, L. Ozerov, F. Iskander, A. Borshchagovsky, as well as major literary scholars and critics, who initiated this publication. Some of them themselves became the objects of encyclopedic narration.

The structure of the articles could not but be affected by the great difference in the literary experience of the authors and their belonging to different literary “guilds”. The Dictionary, in essence, makes an attempt to unite two, strictly speaking, unequal “departments”: literary criticism with its historical “magnanimity”, mandatory for science, and literary criticism, free from this (which is not its shortcoming, but its very nature). But the author-critics tried to avoid journalistic biases (one of the typical examples is A. Bocharov’s articles about the literary antipodes: V. Grossman and V. Kozhevnikov), although, of course, some ideological preferences could not help but be reflected in the text.

The authors did not use the material to substantiate their current cultural and sociological concepts. They assumed that it was self-sufficient and valuable for its historical quality. The informational and analytical principle of the publication can be called “unifying”. That is, creating a kind of pantheon of Russian literary literature of the outgoing century, writers, literary scholars, and critics saw in this the opportunity for creative harmony, which the modern literary community really needs. Everyone is aware of this social and moral need. In Russian literature of the 20th century, which, for all its differences (and not only in the sense of aesthetic quality), had in its best examples, as already said, one thing in common - relative freedom from the dictates of external circumstances. The need for its encyclopedic characterization follows from common task of our time: to expand the information space of knowledge about the past cultural development of Russia, which allows at least small degree predict its near and distant future.

The publication's dictionary was based on two criteria: the artistic level of the works and the significance of the names of their authors - in the national and world consciousness. They did not always coincide, these criteria, but in any literary experience - great or not so significant - one or another sign was present.

This Dictionary is not academic, like the mentioned volumes of the well-known publication “Russian Writers. 1800-1917”, and is not saturated with large source data (in particular, archival ones) - this is a matter of the near future.

Naturally, not all worthy writers of the 20th century are represented here. And many of those described no longer satisfy the current positive aesthetic perception. But here is a biographical history of Russian literature as it was in the great and tragic century. Many authors of articles were and remain active participants in literary history - the more justified their right to participate in this publication looks.

Readers may point out the absence in the Dictionary of articles about such wonderful writers as G. Aigi, V. Bykov, Ch. Aitmatov and others. Many of their texts were created in Russian, their contribution to Russian literature and Russian culture in general is very significant. But the main source of their creativity is in their national spiritual element: Chuvash, Belarusian, Kyrgyz, etc. As a rule, they began to write in their native language and the subject of their stories was the life of their national homeland. Therefore, in the modern artistic world they, first of all, represent their national literature. The examples of V. Nabokov and I. Brodsky do not refute this position: the main principles of their work lie within the framework of specifically Russian artistic phenomena.

We were working on the Dictionary different stages. Initially, it was created, so to speak, on a voluntary basis, with little financial support from the Open Society Institute, in the private publishing house Rendezvous-AM (editor-in-chief S. A. Nadeev). Famous authors did not complain about the meager fees. Three or four people were involved in the editorial work, also on a voluntary basis (a special role in editing the texts belonged to I. I. Nikolaeva, who passed away shortly before the publication of the Dictionary).

Some articles were created almost on a competitive basis: two or three authors, and sometimes more, provided different texts about one writer - most often, a major one. Sometimes living writers helped in clarifying biographical data (A. Solzhenitsyn and others).

At the final stage, already at the Great Russian Encyclopedia publishing house, work on the Dictionary acquired a qualitatively new character, the publication’s dictionary was significantly expanded, and its information base was strengthened (here a special role belonged to Doctor of Philology G. V. Yakusheva). The work of professional encyclopedic bibliographers and proofreaders also contributed to the correction of detected factual errors and inaccuracies.

The study of Russian literature of the 20th century in the encyclopedic genre is just beginning. It will undoubtedly continue. Future encyclopedists will have to evaluate a huge number of new names, and then it will become clear what place Russian literary literature of the twentieth century occupied in the spiritual life of Russia and the world.

The dictionary “Russian Writers of the 20th Century” will become a significant milestone in the history of Russian science and culture and simply a gift for all connoisseurs of great Russian literature.

December 14, 1825 The Decembrist uprising took place on Senate Square. One of the leaders was K.F. Ryleev. His name is forever included in the annals of Russian history. An integral part of Ryleev’s life was his literary and civil work. Kondraty Fedorovich Ryleev was born on September 18, 1895. in the village of Batov, Sofia district, Petersburg province. The small estate brought in little income, and the parents could not give the future poet an excellent education and upbringing. Ryleev's father, lieutenant colonel of the Estland regiment, having retired, managed the Kyiv estate of the Galitsyn princes. He treated his son coldly, and by nature he was stingy and cruel. But Ryleev’s mother was cordial and kind, and her son became attached to her. In 1801. the boy was sent to the First Cadet Corps, where he spent thirteen years. Here friendships were made, literary interests were awakened, and civic feelings and concepts arose. The world at that time was filled with anxiety and expectation. It came in Russia short time liberalism - “The Alexander Days are a wonderful beginning.” The Tsar's promises to grant a constitution and free the peasants foreshadowed significant changes. 1814 Ensign Ryleev went abroad as part of an artillery brigade. He saw Poland, Germany, and Switzerland. Later, in his testimony at the investigation, Ryleev admitted: “I initially became infected with the love of freedom during campaigns in France in 1814 and 1815. Upon returning to his homeland at the end of 1815 and until the end of 1818, Ryleev served as an officer in the Ostrogozh district Voronezh province. Here he met the daughter of a local landowner, Natalya Mikhailovna Tevyashova, whom he married in January 1819. In Ostrogozhsk, Ryleev continued to write poetry. The young poet imitates Zhukovsky and Batyushkov and the elegiac poetry they created at school. The Ostrogozh period was the time of mastering the style and forms of psychological lyrics. In 1818, Ryleev retired. Many honored officers left the army, in which drill, shagistics, and cruelty to soldiers were imposed. “For the current service,” Ryleev wrote to his mother, “scoundrels are needed.” After his marriage, the poet first left for Batovo, and then, in the autumn of 1820, settled in St. Petersburg. This is where his civic and literary career began. Ryleev’s ideological and literary maturation was facilitated by major international and domestic events. Upon his arrival in St. Petersburg, Ryleev met prominent writers and journalists, and in April 1821. on the recommendation of A.A. Delvig was accepted into the Free Society of Lovers of Russian Literature, which gathered leading writers. The further development of these principles in Ryleev’s work occurs in 1821-1823 not in odes and elegies, but in thoughts. Dumas were the transitional genre that helped Ryleev combine civic thought and personal experiences. The poet wanted to awaken civic feelings in the noble youth, instill in them love for the fatherland and hatred of despotism, incite them to active and conscious action, ignite historical examples.. Ryleev demanded unconditional dedication from the younger generation. In 1823, Ryleev was accepted into the Northern Society of I.I. Pushchin. In 1824, after a meeting with P.I. Pestel noticeably deepened Ryleev's revolutionary sentiments. If in 1821 - 1823 the poet still believed in enlightened absolutism, then from 1824 he defended the republican form of government and with all his heart wished for the death of autocracy. The arrival of Ryleev immediately revived the secret organization of the Decembrists. Soon the poet's personal merits were recognized by everyone, and he entered the supreme body of society - the Duma, rallying around himself an influential and radical group of republicans. In November 1825, Alexander the First suddenly died. The Decembrists decided to use the right moment for an armed uprising. At the poet’s apartment, one meeting followed another. Ryleev, having soberly assessed the situation, found that the Decembrists were not ready to perform. He showed exceptional resourcefulness and perseverance, outlining practical measures. The uprising was defeated. Ryleev was arrested and imprisoned Peter and Paul Fortress. After a painful investigation, the poet, among the five Decembrists, was sentenced to execution by quartering, but then it was replaced by hanging. In the early morning of July 13 (25), 1826, “great citizen” - that’s what Decembrist A.V. called Ryleev. Poggio was executed. With the death of Ryleev, his civic passion did not fade, his poetic voice did not stop. The traditions of Ryleev’s martial poetry, saturated with great social ideas and feelings, nourished Russian literature. And today Ryleev’s work is remembered and loved, for it - to use the expression of Alexander Blok - “has grown into the Russian heart with its roots”

Only Moscow and St. Petersburg are represented in the directory. Although the subtitle of the directory contains a link to the whole of Russia.

The compiler limited all biographical information about writers to only one front-line period. Chief Editor reference book, Ivan Kolos believes that this is enough “for the reader to see where, from what fate of the writers their books grew.”

In general, the idea was the most noble - to immortalize all front-line writers, but the execution turned out to be useless.

- Biographical Dictionary "Russian Writers of the 20th Century". P.I. Nikolaev.

In his brief preface, the compiler Pyotr Nikolaev especially notes the achievements of the so-called “village” prose.

The dictionary includes Kurchatkin and Lichutin, Esin and Makanin, Prokhanov and Krupin. But there are no Anatoly Afanasyev and Vladimir Gusev, Ruslan Kireev and Ernst Safonov.

The compiler has not forgotten the postmodernist poets and all meta-metaphysicists. He included Parshchikov and Alexander Eremenko, Prigov and Vsevolod Nekrasov in the dictionary. And for some reason traditional poetry is given selectively. In particular, for some reason Nikolai Dmitriev and Gennady Krasnikov “dropped out”.

The dictionary selectively represents a new generation that has loudly declared itself in the last five to ten years: Pietsukh, Klech, Pelevin, Slapovsky.

And how the material is presented in P. Nikolaev’s dictionary. Perhaps this is the first publication about Russian writers of the 20th century that meets almost all the mandatory attributes of a biographical reference book and at the same time preserves the style features of the authors of dictionary entries. Almost all articles are very voluminous, information-rich and readable.

- Directory "100 poets of the 19th - 20th centuries". Chelyabinsk publishing house "Ural LTD". E.S. Abramovsky.

Judging by the selection of names, Elena Abramovskikh is more attracted to the avant-garde. She found a place for Vertinsky, Okudzhava, but for some reason “forgot” about the main brawler of the Soviet literary era Yevtushenko, remembered Kharms, but read Tvardovsky, appreciated Brodsky, but missed Yuri Kuznetsov. Each article by the Abramovskys begins with a one-line, or maximum two-line epigraph (for Zabolotsky, she chose the words of A. Tarkovsky: “Not a man, but a skull of the century”). Then there is a short introduction - just one sentence, in which, in a fairly figurative form, an attempt is made to express the essence of the poet or, at worst, to somehow indicate his contribution to world culture. As it was done about Akhmatova: “Don’t disgrace my name!” - her father told her when he learned about her poems. And the “17-year-old crazy girl” chose a Tatar surname, which became a symbol of women’s destiny in Russia. Then the entire biography of the hero is divided into four or five periods with their own names, the key moments of each period are searched for (a significant poetic line, some personal story, a fateful meeting or something else), and in one or two paragraphs and preferably in an expressive form it is given characteristics of each life stage. And as a result, the image of, for example, Daniil Kharms appears visibly. Abramovskikh read his fate this way. As always, she left the antics of her childhood without unnecessary comments, only one or two significant facts. And then the first stage. Abramovskikh called it: "1922 - 1925: Man-Performance." Then: “Since 1925: Faces and masks”; "1925 - 1928: A gathering of friends abandoned by fate." Then passions heat up: "1926 - 1929: The collision of the oak with the sage." And here is the near denouement: “1930 - 1942: A poet forgotten by heaven.” The final lines of the terrible drama: "In August 1941 year Harms was arrested (for the second time); having feigned madness, he was placed in mental asylum Novosibirsk prison, where he died." The author immediately limited herself to the volume: she devoted exactly two book pages to each poet, and not a line more. Hence the strict principles of selection and construction of material.

2002 - Three-volume "Russian Humanitarian Encyclopedic Dictionary". St. Petersburg State University together with the humanitarian publishing center "Vlados" at the Moscow Pedagogical State University.

The dictionary contains more than 10 thousand entries, including over three hundred entries dedicated to Russian writers of the 20th century.

In the article with the letter "A" it is immediately evident that the compilers and publishers, according to the once sadly established tradition, have little knowledge of the realities literary life last decade, but at least they did not forget to mention the most significant characters from the history of Russian literature of the 1960s - 1980s. The scientists introduced the front-line soldiers to F. Abramov, V. Astafiev and E. Asadov. Rural prose is personified by M. Alekseev, urban prose by V. Aksyonov. There are fashionable poets of the sixties (in the person of B. Akhmadulina). Literary scholars (M.P. Alekseev, S. Averintsev, I. Andropov, M. Azadovsky) and playwrights (A. Arbuzov, S. Aleshin) are not reliable. There was also a place for Gulag victims (A. Aldan-Semyonov) and dissidents (A. Amalrik, Yu. Aleshkovsky). It’s great that the old guard has not been forgotten (V. Azhaev, M. Aliger, P. Antokolsky). Well, of the relatively new names, only one poet, Yu. Arasov, was included in the dictionary (and not so much for poetry, but for scripts for good films by Sokurov). Not all articles are, of course, equal. Very rare, but still found factual errors. Let's say Mich. Alekseev took charge of the Moscow magazine not in 1986, but almost two decades earlier. But there are more comments of a different kind. The authors of the dictionary not only do not know how Russian literature has developed in the last ten years (otherwise how to explain the absence, for example, in the article about Astafiev of references to his novel "Cursed and Killed" and the story " Cheerful soldier"; for encyclopedists, it seems, last work The writer became "The Sad Detective" written in 1986), they have little idea what happened even in the 1970s - 1980s (judging by the dictionary, Aldan-Semyonov did not create anything after the first book of the novel "Red and White" was published in 1969 ).

A. Ananyev with his “Years without War”, S. Antonov with “Ravines” and I. Akulov with “Cool Kasyan” were not included in the dictionary.

Of course, this to some extent reduces the completeness of the publication.

However, as I studied dictionary entries beginning with other letters of the alphabet, the mood began to change. There are no articles about Yu. Bondarev, D. Balashov, L. Borodin, K. Vorobyov, T. Glushkova, An. in the directory compiled by famous doctors of science. Ivanov, V. Kondratiev, St. Kunyaev, Y. Kuznetsov, V. Krupina, V. Lichutin, G. Markov, B. Mozhaev, E. Nosov, V. Pikula, Y. Polyakov, A. Prokhanov, V. Soloukhin, I. Stadnyuk, N. Starshinov. Although these writers are far from the last rank.

Most of the articles devoted to Russian writers of the 20th century are written in a dry style. curriculum vitae, without any assessment of creativity and life actions. And only a little over two dozen articles are replete with negative reviews and remarks of a negative nature. This will be clear if we read the names of the writers about whom negative judgments are made: E. Isaev, A. Prokofiev, V. Kataev, N. Gribachev, A. Sofronov, M. Sholokhov. Most of the reproaches addressed to these writers are fair. We must honestly admit: Yegor Isaev is a bad, useless poet. Yes, absolutely right, Alexander Prokofiev “in the 60s spoke out against the young poets A. Voznesensky, E. Yevtushenko and others, and later - against I. Brodsky.” Valentin Kataev “in politics, however, did not allow himself any free-thinking and, being a member of the CPSU since 1958, obediently fulfilled all its demands (for example, he signed a letter inspired by the authorities and published on August 31, 1973 condemning A. Solzhenitsyn).” By the way, why is the dictionary entry listing almost all of Kataev’s creations, except for the 1980 story “Werther has already been written?”

Literary magazines are also presented in a very biased and biased manner in the dictionary. It is clear that " New world"from the time of Tvardovsky is described in pathetic tones and exclusively as a fighter against conservative and neo-soilist tendencies.

I remember that the works of Blok, Gorky or Bunin were always assessed not only by how these writers reacted to the October Revolution of 1917. Everyone was also interested in the aesthetics of their books. Speaking about the “New World”, the authors of the dictionary describe in detail how the authorities persecuted and expelled Tvardovsky. That's right, that's how it happened in life. But it is not clear why the article O The magazine "Young Guard" only mentioned in passing that Anatoly Nikonov was leaving his post. And in the article about “Our Contemporary” not a word is said at all about the persecution that S. Vikulov’s first deputy, Yuri Seleznev, was subjected to in the early 1980s - for daring to immediately publish V. Krupin’s story “Forty” in one issue day", articles by V. Kozhinov and A. Lanshchikov and a passable, but someone at the top did not like the review by S. Semanov.

Dictionaries are created for this purpose, so that people can find truthful information in them. In this case, the authors chose a different method: fraud and omission. Let's say that for some reason they were embarrassed to mention that after the death of V. Kozhevnikov, the magazine "Znamya" was headed by the poet Yu. Voronov for two years before the arrival of G. Baklanov. Baklanov left Znamya in 1993, and for nine years now the critic S. Chuprinin has been the “main standard-bearer.” But these facts are not in the article about “Banner”. There is complete silence in the dictionary about who replaced Tvardovsky in the New World. After all, Zalygin did not come out of nowhere in 1986. The 16-year period of the magazine from the departure of Tvardovsky to the appearance of Zalygin can be assessed differently, but it was, and the helm was then alternately held by Kosolapov, S. Narovchatov and intelligence officer V. Karpov, who, the more years pass after the war, the more in his interviews captures "tongues". By the way, after Zalygin, “New World” was headed by critic A. Vasilevsky.

It seems that bias is the main distinguishing feature of the Russian Humanitarian Encyclopedic Dictionary.

In the same way, domestic historians, philologists and northern experts are subjectively represented in the dictionary. After all, this is nonsense: world-famous historians Boris Rybakov, A. Okladnikov and Nikolai Pokrovsky were not included in the dictionary. The great linguist Academician Oleg Trubachev and the greatest Slavist Vladimir Toporov are not in the dictionary. Of the first tier of northern scholars, V. Avrorin, G. Menovshchikov, and Val were not included in the dictionary. Chernetsov, P. Skorik, S. Stebnitsky and O. Sunik.

Officially, the reference book is called "Russian Humanitarian Encyclopedic Dictionary". The emphasis is on the word "Russian". This means that the editors wanted to represent all of Russia.

In fact, it would be nice for such publications to mark the authorship of each article. Otherwise, we have to scold the entire editorial board of the dictionary along with its consultants en masse for the biased selection of personalities and the mistakes made. But among the consultants of this dictionary there are many decent people, including the late Yu. Lotman and A. Panchenko.

And the third remark concerns the article bibliography. It remains unclear to me why it is in the certificates about N. Zabolotsky and B. Zaitsev, but is absent in the articles about E. Zamyatin or A. Platonov. It seems that when the dictionary was just being compiled, the left hand did not know what the right hand was doing. Well general conclusion like this: it seems that academic and university sciences have lost their potential. Anyway, so humanitarian encyclopedic dictionaries are not compiled.

Using Internet resources and materials from biographical dictionaries, Russian writers of the 19th century, prepare an oral report on the life and work of Fryleeva, thank you in advance

Answers:

Kondraty Fedorovich Ryleev was born on September 18, 1795. After graduation cadet corps he took part in the foreign campaigns of the Russian army in 1814-1815, where he first began to think about the ideal free life. K. F. Ryleev - member Northern Society, one of the leaders of the Decembrist uprising. He was one of the creators of the popular almanac "Polar Star", which published romantic works, the main idea of which was the idea of citizenship. Ryleev’s poems “Voinarovsky”, “Nalivaiko”, his thoughts are full of political associations. We can say that for Ryleev, turning to history served as the reason for his decision modern problems, an opportunity to speak out on topics that were relevant but taboo in the literature of that time. Ryleev was executed in 1826 among five Decembrists - participants and organizers of the uprising on Senate Square.

Questions and tasks

What new did you learn about I. S. Turgenev from the article prepared based on the materials of N. Bogoslovsky’s book “Turgenev”?
Using biographical dictionaries “Russian Writers” and Internet resources, prepare an oral report about life path writer.