Today we will talk about the era of the 1840s, in which one of the the most important stages Russian realism. We will look at the problems of the natural school, look at its authors and talk about three stages and at the same time three directions of this literary phenomenon XIX century.
in 1841 - Lermontov (Fig. 2),
Rice. 2. M.Yu. Lermontov ()
and one gets the feeling that the literary scene is somewhat empty. But at the same moment, a new generation of writers, who were born around 1820, is rising up to it. In addition, at the same moment the famous critic V.G. moved from Moscow to St. Petersburg. Belinsky (Fig. 3),
Rice. 3. V.G. Belinsky ()
who becomes the main ideological inspirer and leader of this circle of young writers, who, in turn, give birth to new literary direction.
The name of this direction was not immediately determined, although we know it as natural school. Although there are other names: natural movement in literature, Gogol school, Gogol movement in literature. It was meant that N.V. was the teacher and unquestioned authority for these young writers. Gogol (Fig. 4),
Rice. 4. N.V. Gogol ()
who writes almost nothing during this period, is abroad, but he is the author of great works with enormous authority: Petersburg stories, the collection “Mirgorod”, the first volume of “Dead Souls”.
Where does the idea of depicting society in all its details come from? This is precisely the idea promoted by Belinsky and supported by a young circle of writers (Nekrasov (Fig. 5),
Rice. 5. N.A. Nekrasov ()
Turgenev (Fig. 6),
Rice. 6. I.S. Turgenev ()
Dostoevsky (Fig. 7),
Rice. 7. F.M. Dostoevsky ()
Grigorovich (Fig. 8),
Rice. 8. D.V. Grigorovich ()
Druzhinin (Fig. 9),
Rice. 9. A.V. Druzhinin ()
Dahl (Fig. 10)
Rice. 10. V.I. Dal()
etc.). The environment, which is understood very broadly: as a person’s immediate environment, as an era, and as a social organism as a whole, is becoming extremely important for this circle of young writers. So where did the idea of depicting a social organism in all its advantages and disadvantages come from? This idea came from the West: in France and England in the 1830s - early 1840s. works of this kind appeared in droves. And this idea was given birth to by an extraliterary phenomenon. The reason for this is the huge, very important discoveries that were made in the 1820-30s. in the area natural sciences. By that time, the church ban on dissection had somewhat weakened, anatomical theaters had arisen, and an extraordinary amount had been learned about human anatomy and physiology.
Accordingly, if the human body was recognized in such detail, then it became possible to treat many before that time incurable diseases. But a curious transference occurs from the human body to the body of society. And an idea arises: if you study the social organism in all its details, then it will be possible to eliminate the glaring contradictions and cure the social ills of society. A lot of so-called physiologies appear, telling about social groups, about representatives of individual professions, about social types frequently encountered in society. This kind of literature is often published anonymously and resembles investigative journalism. Here, for example, are works published in France: “Physiology of Paris”, “Physiology of a Grisette”, “Physiology of a Married Man”, and it is not about his intimate life, but about how he spends the day, how he communicates with loved ones. The physiology of a shopkeeper, the physiology of a salesman or saleswoman, the physiology of an actress. There were even physiologies dedicated to objects: the physiology of an umbrella, the physiology of a hat, or the physiology of an omnibus. Balzac began working in this genre in France (Fig. 11),
Rice. 11. Honore de Balzac ()
Dickens in England (Fig. 12),
Rice. 12. C. Dickens ()
who devoted a lot of time to researching social ills. And this idea comes to Russia - to study a dysfunctional environment - this is the task that young writers set for themselves under the leadership of Belinsky. Soon the first work appears, the first collective collection, which is a manifesto of this emerging trend. This is “Physiology of St. Petersburg” (Fig. 13).
Rice. 13. Title page of the publication “Physiology of St. Petersburg” (1845) ()
Here are Belinsky’s articles: “Petersburg and Moscow”, “ Alexandrinsky Theater", "Petersburg literature"; and Dahl’s essay “The Petersburg Janitor”, which was published under the pseudonym Cossack Lugansky; and “Petersburg Corners,” an excerpt from Nekrasov’s unwritten novel “The Life and Adventures of Tikhon Trostnikov.” Thus, a direction is formed. It is curious that the name of this direction - “natural school” - was given by its ideological enemy - F.V. Bulgarin (Fig. 14),
Rice. 14. F.V. Bulgarin ()
who was also both an enemy of Pushkin and an opponent of Gogol. In his articles, Bulgarin mercilessly condemned representatives of the new generation, spoke of a base, dirty interest in the unsightly details of social life, and called what young writers were trying to do dirty naturalism. Belinsky picked up this word and made it the motto of the entire movement. Thus, the name of the school, the group of young writers and what they did, gradually became established.
Natural school as a phenomenon developed quite quickly, and they usually talk about three stages, or directions, of this school. The first direction is essay. What the young writers did may be reminiscent of investigative journalism. For example, Grigorovich became interested in an everyday phenomenon that seemed mysterious to him - the St. Petersburg organ grinders. Everyone hears their sounds, but where do they come from and where do they go, where do they eat, spend the night, what do they hope for? And Grigorovich literally undertakes a journalistic investigation. He dresses warmly and casually and sets off to wander with the organ grinders. In this way he spent about two weeks and found out everything. The result of this investigation was the essay “St. Petersburg Organ Grinders,” which was also published in “Physiology of St. Petersburg.” V. Dahl became interested in the colorful, in an interesting way Petersburg janitor. In his work of the same name, he describes with great interest both the appearance of this social type and the furnishings of his closet, and does not shy away from even the most unsightly details. For example, Dahl says that the janitor had a towel, but the dogs, who often ran into the closet, constantly mistook this towel for an edible object, it was so dirty and greasy. An excerpt from Nekrasov’s novel “Petersburg Corners” sounded even more vivid and provocative. It begins with a completely journalistic description of such a St. Petersburg phenomenon as the third courtyard. “Do you know what the third courtyard is?” - asks the author. It is said that the first courtyards retain decency and a formal appearance. Then, if you go under the arch, a second courtyard will appear. It is in the shadows, it is a bit dirty and unsightly, but if you look closely, you can see a low arch that resembles a dog hole. And if you squeeze through there, the third courtyard will appear in all its glory. The sun never hits there; these courtyards are decorated with a terrible, stinking puddle. This is exactly the path that Nekrasov’s young hero takes and tries to find a place for himself in a shelter. With anxiety and trepidation he looks at this huge puddle, which completely blocks the entrance to the shelter. The entrance to the shelter looks like a stinking hole. The hero feels that he will not be able to go to the shelter without passing this puddle, over which green flies fly in swarms and which is teeming with white worms. Naturally, such details could not previously serve as a subject for consideration in the literature. Writers of the new generation act fearlessly: they explore life themselves and present the results of their research to the reader. But why are we talking specifically about investigative journalism, why do we call this direction feature writing? Because here, as a rule, there is no artistic plot, the personalities of the characters are not at all interesting to the writer or they fade into the background. It is the nature that is important. The motto of this direction can be chosen as follows: “Such is life. Look, reader, maybe you will be surprised, maybe you will be horrified, but that’s just how life is. It is necessary to know the social organism.” At the same time, one can note a certain mechanistic approach, characteristic of both Western writers and young Russian ones. They imagined society as a kind of organism akin to the human. For example, in French physiologies it was assumed that such an organism had lungs, a circulatory, digestive and even an excretory system. For example, numerous gardens and city parks were declared light; the circulatory system was represented as financial system, which washes all parts of this organism; they compared digestion to the market, which in Paris was called the “Belly of Paris”; Accordingly, the excretory system is the sewerage system. In Paris, young writers ventured into the Parisian sewer and carried out all kinds of research there. In the same way, writers in St. Petersburg ventured on the most risky expeditions in order to find out all the smallest details and flaws of the social organism. Daguerre’s discovery also had a certain influence on sketch prose of the early 1840s (Fig. 15)
photographs in 1839. The first method of photography was named after him: the daguerreotype.
Daguerreotype- This is a photograph taken using the daguerreotype method.
Daguerreotype- This is a method of directly obtaining a positive image when shooting.
The sketch method was sometimes called daguerreotype in Russia, that is, it is a method of direct photographing of existence. A snapshot of life is taken, and then it’s up to the reader how to react to it. The main goal is educational.
But of course fiction does not stand still, and without the author’s attitude it was quite difficult to present all new flaws in reality. The author had to express his inner attitude to what was happening, and readers also expected this.
Therefore, a new direction, or the next stage in the development of the natural school, appears quite quickly - sentimental-natural(1846). The new motto of the direction is the question: “Is this life? Is this how life should be? In 1846, the next landmark publication was published: “Petersburg Collection”.
Rice. 16. Title page of the publication “Petersburg Collection” (1846) ()
The most important works for writers of this trend are the famous “The Overcoat” by Gogol and “The Station Agent” by Pushkin. These are the examples with which I wanted to be equal, but not everyone succeeded. Young writers sought to depict the life of a small, unhappy, oppressed person. As a rule, this was a St. Petersburg official. Gradually, images of peasants also appeared (Grigorovich’s story “Anton the Miserable,” where sorrows rain down on the unfortunate peasant, like cones on poor Makar), from all sides. But it seemed to young writers that Gogol in his “Overcoat” treated Akaki Akakievich Bashmachkin somewhat harshly and not entirely humanely. We see a whole series of misfortunes that haunt Gogol’s hero, but we do not see how the hero relates to the world, to life, we do not see his thoughts, we are not present inside the soul of this character. Young writers wanted to somehow soften and “stamp” this image. And a whole series of works appears in which a small official also suffers and suffers in a huge, cold, inhumane city, but he develops attachments to, say, his wife, his daughter, his dog. In this way, young writers wanted to strengthen the humanistic side of the story. But in practice it turned out that they could not reach Gogol’s heights. After all, for Gogol it’s not so important what his hero feels, but that he is a man, he is our brother and has the right to warmth, to a place where no one will touch him. Akaki Akakievich does not have such a niche - he dies from the cold, from the indifference of the surrounding world. This is Gogol’s idea, but in numerous essays and stories of a sentimental-natural direction, everything looks somewhat simpler and more primitive.
A huge exception against this background is the story of F.M. Dostoevsky “Poor People”, published in the “Petersburg Collection”. Largely thanks to this story, the collection gained enormous popularity and was published in an incredible edition of 5,000 copies at that time, which sold out very quickly. So the hero of the story “Poor People” Makar Devushkin is a petty official. He is poor, homeless, he rents not a room, but a corner in the kitchen, where there is fumes, a stench, where the screams of guests bother him. It would seem that we should only feel pity for him. But Dostoevsky poses the question completely differently: his little people are, of course, poor, but poor in the absence of money, but mentally and spiritually these people are rich. They are capable of high self-sacrifice: they are ready to give their last without hesitation. They are capable of self-development: they read books, think about the fate of the heroes of Gogol and Pushkin. They are able to write to each other beautiful letters, after all, this story is in letters: Varenka Dobroselova writes the letters, and Makar Devushkin answers her. Thus, Dostoevsky, in a sense, immediately stepped over the rather narrow boundaries of the sentimental-natural direction. It is not just sympathy for the characters that evokes his story, but deep respect for them. And the powerful of this world turn out to be spiritually poor in this story.
Thus, the first two directions appeared quite quickly, and after them the third direction, or the third stage in the development of the natural school, appeared. The issue of environment is still important for the writer, but now the idea appears to shine a brighter light on the hero himself. The third level is the level big story, or novel. And here Russian literature makes a world-class discovery: the introduction of a hero of the Onegin-Pechorin type into Gogol’s milieu. The Gogol environment is the environment that is generously and vividly depicted in Gogol's works. And into such a gray, hopeless environment, a bright, educated, intelligent hero is introduced, who has retained the rudiments of conscience. Those. a hero similar to Onegin or Pechorin. With such a connection, the following will arise: the environment will torment and crush the hero. And then the plot can go in two directions. First direction. The hero holds firm and does not yield to the environment in anything, and the environment is fate, life, which is given to a person only once. The hero refuses to deal with vulgar people, to serve in a department where they do meaningless and vulgar things, he wants to prove himself somehow, but the situation is such that the hero cannot prove himself. And at some point the hero may come to the conclusion that life was in vain, he was unable to accomplish anything, he was unable to defeat the environment, although he remained true to his beliefs and ideals. He turns into a smart uselessness. And it’s bitter for the hero to realize such an ending own life. All this is the problematic of the novel by A.I. Herzen "Who is to blame?" (Fig. 17)
Rice. 17. Cover of the edition of the novel “Who is to Blame?” ()
Second direction. The hero feels complete hopelessness and hopelessness to follow his pure youthful ideals. Still, life is stronger, and he has to give in and reconcile. It seems to the hero that he remains true to himself, but the environment comes inexorably and at some point suppresses the hero so much that he disappears as a person, he has turned into the same vulgarity as those around him. Sometimes the hero understands this, and sometimes he is not even able to understand the terrible transformation that has happened to him. This is the problematic of the novel by I.A. Goncharova " An ordinary story"(Fig. 18).
Rice. 18. Cover of the edition of the novel “An Ordinary Story” ()
Both of these novels were published in 1847 and mark the beginning of the third stage of the natural school.
But we are talking about the natural school in relation to the 1840s. And at the end of the 40s, a whole series of events took place: Belinsky dies, Dostoevsky finds himself under arrest and sentenced to execution, but then exiled to the distant Omsk prison. And it turns out that writers are now going their own way and the most important classics are already creating a certain direction for themselves. Therefore, we say that the time for apprenticeship, common labor and the development of ideology falls precisely in the 40s of the 19th century.
References
- Sakharov V.I., Zinin S.A. Russian language and literature. Literature (basic and advanced levels) 10. - M.: Russian Word.
- Arkhangelsky A.N. and others. Russian language and literature. Literature (advanced level) 10. - M.: Bustard.
- Lanin B.A., Ustinova L.Yu., Shamchikova V.M. / ed. Lanina B.A. Russian language and literature. Literature (basic and advanced levels) 10. - M.: VENTANA-GRAF.
- Internet portal Km.ru ( ).
- Internet portal Feb-web.ru ().
Homework
- Make a table of the main stages of development of a natural school.
- Compose comparative characteristics romantic and naturalistic literature based on brief analysis most significant works these two periods.
- * Write an essay-reflection on the topic “The ideological confrontation between Bulgarin and Belinsky.”
History of the "Natural School"
Vissarion Belinsky
The term “Natural school” was first used by Thaddeus Bulgarin as a disparaging description of the work of Nikolai Gogol’s young followers in “Northern Bee” dated January 26, but was polemically rethought by Vissarion Belinsky in the article “A Look at Russian Literature of 1847”: “natural”, then eat the unartificial, the strict true picture reality. Belinsky developed the idea of the existence of a literary “school” of Gogol, which expressed the movement of Russian literature towards realism, earlier: in the article “On the Russian story and the stories of Mr. Gogol” in 1835. The main doctrine of the “natural school” was the thesis that literature should be an imitation of reality. Here one cannot help but see analogies with the philosophy of the leaders of the French Enlightenment, who proclaimed art as a “mirror public life", whose duties were to "expose" and "eradicate" vices.
The formation of the “Natural School” dates back to -1845, when a group of writers (Nikolai Nekrasov, Dmitry Grigorovich, Ivan Turgenev, Alexander Herzen, Ivan Panaev, Evgeny Grebenka, Vladimir Dal) united under the ideological influence of Belinsky in the journal “Otechestvennye zapiski”. Somewhat later, Fyodor Dostoevsky and Mikhail Saltykov published there. These writers also appeared in the collections “Physiology of St. Petersburg” (1845), “Petersburg Collection” (1846), which became the program for the “Natural School”.
The natural school in the expanded use of the term, as it was used in the 40s, does not denote a single direction, but is a largely conditional concept. The Natural School included such diverse writers as Turgenev and Dostoevsky, Grigorovich, Goncharov, Nekrasov, Panaev, Dal and others. The most general signs on the basis of which the writer was considered to belong to the Natural School were the following: socially significant topics that captured more wide circle than even a range of social observations (often in the “low” strata of society), a critical attitude to social reality, realism artistic expression, who fought against the embellishment of reality, self-sufficient aesthetics, and romantic rhetoric.
Belinsky highlights the realism of the “natural school”, arguing the most important feature the “truth” and not the “falsehood” of the image; he pointed out that “our literature... from rhetorical sought to become natural, natural.” Belinsky emphasized the social orientation of this realism as its peculiarity and task when, protesting against the self-purpose of “art for art’s sake,” he argued that “in our time, art and literature, more than ever, have become an expression public issues" The realism of the natural school in Belinsky’s interpretation is democratic. The natural school does not appeal to ideal, fictitious heroes - “pleasant exceptions to the rules”, but to the “crowd”, to the “mass”, to ordinary people and, most often, to people of “low rank”. All sorts of “physiological” essays, widespread in the 1840s, satisfied this need to reflect a different, non-noble life, even if only in a reflection of external, everyday, superficial life. Chernyshevsky especially sharply emphasizes as the most essential and main feature of the “literature of the Gogol period” its critical, “negative” attitude towards reality - “literature of the Gogol period” is here another name for the same natural school: specifically to Gogol - the author of “Dead Souls”, “The Inspector General” ", "Overcoats" - Belinsky and a number of other critics erected a natural school as the founder. Indeed, many writers who belong to the natural school experienced the powerful influence of various aspects of Gogol’s work. Such is his exceptional power of satire on the “vile Russian reality”, the severity of his presentation of the problem of the “small man”, his gift for depicting the “prosaic essential squabbles of life”. In addition to Gogol, writers of the natural school were influenced by such representatives of Western European literature as Dickens, Balzac, George Sand.
The “Natural School” aroused criticism from representatives of different directions: it was accused of being partial to “low people”, of “dirty philosophy”, of political unreliability (Bulgarin), of a one-sided negative approach to life, of imitation of the latest French literature. The “Natural School” was ridiculed in Pyotr Karatygin’s vaudeville “The Natural School” (1847). After Belinsky's death, the very name “natural school” was banned by censorship. In the 1850s, the term “Gogolian direction” was used (the title of N. G. Chernyshevsky’s work “Essays on the Gogolian period of Russian literature” is typical). Later, the term “Gogolian direction” began to be understood more broadly than the “natural school” itself, using it as a designation critical realism.
Directions
In the view of contemporary criticism, the natural school was thus a single group united by the above-mentioned general features. However, the specific socio-artistic expression of these characteristics, and therefore the degree of consistency and relief of their manifestation, were so different that the natural school as a whole turns out to be a convention. Among the writers included in it, the Literary Encyclopedia identifies three movements.
In the 1840s, disagreements had not yet become acute. So far, the writers themselves, united under the name of the natural school, were not clearly aware of the full depth of the contradictions separating them. Therefore, for example, in the collection “Physiology of St. Petersburg,” one of the characteristic documents of the natural school, the names of Nekrasov, Ivan Panaev, Grigorovich, and Dahl appear side by side. Hence the convergence in the minds of contemporaries of urban sketches and stories of Nekrasov with the bureaucratic stories of Dostoevsky. By the 1860s, the division between writers classified as belonging to the natural school would sharply worsen. Turgenev will take an irreconcilable position in relation to “Sovremennik” by Nekrasov and Chernyshevsky and will define himself as an artist-ideologist of the “Prussian” path of development of capitalism. Dostoevsky will remain in the camp that supports the dominant order (although democratic protest was also characteristic of Dostoevsky in the 1840s, in “Poor People,” for example, and in this regard he had connecting threads with Nekrasov). And finally, Nekrasov, Saltykov, Herzen, whose works will pave the way for the wide literary production of the revolutionary part of the commoners of the 1860s, will reflect the interests of “peasant democracy” fighting for the “American” path of development of Russian capitalism, for the “peasant revolution”.
designation that arose in the 1840s. in Russia literary movement, associated with the creative traditions of N.V. Gogol and the aesthetics of V.G. Belinsky. The term “natural school” was first used by F. V. Bulgarin as a negative, disparaging characteristic of the work of young writers, but then was picked up by V. G. Belinsky himself, who polemically rethought its meaning, declaring the main goal of the school “natural”, i.e. .not a romantic, strictly truthful depiction of reality.
The formation of the natural school dates back to 1842–45, when a group of writers (N. A. Nekrasov, D. V. Grigorovich, I. S. Turgenev, A. I. Herzen, I. I. Panaev, E. P. Grebenka , V.I. Dal) united under the ideological influence of Belinsky in the journal Otechestvennye zapiski. Somewhat later, F. M. Dostoevsky and M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin published there. Soon, young writers released their programmatic collection “Physiology of St. Petersburg” (1845), which consisted of “physiological essays” representing live observations, sketches from life - the physiology of life in a big city, mainly the life of workers and the St. Petersburg poor (for example, “Petersburg janitor "D. V. Grigorovich, "Petersburg organ grinders" by V. I. Dahl, "Petersburg corners" by N. A. Nekrasov). The essays expanded readers' understanding of the boundaries of literature and were the first experience of social typification, which became a consistent method of studying society, and at the same time presented a holistic materialist worldview, with the affirmation of the primacy of socio-economic relations in the life of the individual. The collection opened with an article by Belinsky, explaining the creative and ideological principles of the natural school. The critic wrote about the need for mass realistic literature, which “in the form of travels, trips, essays, stories would introduce various parts boundless and diverse Russia...". Writers must, according to Belinsky, not only know Russian reality, but also correctly understand it, “not only observe, but also judge.” The success of the new association was consolidated by the “Petersburg Collection” (1846), which was distinguished genre diversity, included artistically more significant things and served as a kind of introduction to readers of new literary talents: F. M. Dostoevsky’s first story “Poor People” was published there, Nekrasov’s first poems about peasants, stories by Herzen, Turgenev and others. Since 1847, the organ of the natural school The Sovremennik magazine became the editors of which were Nekrasov and Panaev. It publishes “Notes of a Hunter” by Turgenev, “Ordinary History” by I. A. Goncharov, “Who is to Blame?” Herzen, “The Entangled Case” by M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin and others. A statement of the principles of the natural school is also contained in Belinsky’s articles: “Answer to the “Moscowite””, “A Look at Russian Literature of 1840”, “A Look at Russian Literature of 1847” ." Not limiting themselves to describing the urban poor, many authors of the natural school also began to depict the countryside. D. V. Grigorovich was the first to open this topic with his stories “The Village” and “Anton the Miserable,” which were very vividly received by readers, followed by Turgenev’s “Notes of a Hunter,” peasant poems by N. A. Nekrasov, and Herzen’s stories.
Promoting Gogol's realism, Belinsky wrote that the natural school more consciously than before used the method of critical depiction of reality inherent in Gogol's satire. At the same time, he noted that this school “was the result of the entire past development of our literature and a response to the modern needs of our society.” In 1848, Belinsky already argued that the natural school occupies a leading position in Russian. literature.
The desire for facts, for accuracy and reliability put forward new principles of plotting - not novelistic, but essayistic. Popular genres in the 1840s become essays, memoirs, travel, short stories, social, everyday and socio-psychological stories. The socio-psychological novel also begins to occupy an important place (the first, completely belonging to the natural school, are “Who is to Blame?” by A. I. Herzen and “Ordinary History” by I. A. Goncharov), which flourished in the second half. 19th century predetermined the glory of the Russian. realistic prose. At the same time, the principles of the natural school are transferred to poetry (poems by N. A. Nekrasov, N. P. Ogarev, poems by I. S. Turgenev) and drama (I. S. Turgenev). The language of literature is enriched by the language of newspapers, journalism and professionalism and is weakened by the widespread use of colloquialisms and dialectisms by writers.
The natural school was subjected to a wide variety of criticism: it was accused of being partial to “low people,” of “mudophilia,” of political unreliability (Bulgarin), of a one-sided negative approach to life, of imitation of the latest French literature. Great definition
Incomplete definition ↓
Natural school
Natural school
NATURAL SCHOOL - a contemptuous nickname thrown by F. Bulgarin to the Russian literary youth of the 40s. and then rooted in the criticism of that time, already without any negative connotation (see, for example, V. Belinsky, A Look at Russian Literature of 1846). Having arisen in an era of increasingly aggravated contradictions between the serfdom and the growth of capitalist elements with the development of the process of bourgeoisization of landowners' households, the so-called. N. sh. with all its social heterogeneity and contradictions, it reflected the growth of liberal and democratic sentiments, which manifested themselves differently in different class groups.
N. sh. in the expanded application of the term, as it was used in the 40s, it does not denote a single direction, but is a largely conditional concept. To N. sh. classified as heterogeneous according to their class basis and artistic appearance writers like Turgenev and Dostoevsky, Grigorovich and Goncharov, Nekrasov and Panaev, etc. The most general characteristics on the basis of which a writer was considered to belong to the N. school were the following: socially significant topics that covered a wider circle, than even a circle of social observations (often in the “low” strata of society), a critical attitude towards social reality, realism of artistic expression, which fought against embellishment of reality, self-sufficient aesthetics, and romantic rhetoric. Belinsky highlights the realism of N. sh., asserting that the most important feature is the “truth” and not the “falsehood” of the image; he pointed out that “our literature... from rhetorical, sought to become natural, natural.” Belinsky emphasized the social orientation of this realism as its peculiarity and task when, protesting against the self-purpose of “art for art’s sake,” he argued that “in our time, art and literature, more than ever, have become an expression of social issues.” Realism N. sh. in Belinsky's interpretation it is democratic. N. sh. refers not to ideal, fictional heroes - “pleasant exceptions to the rules”, but to the “crowd”, to the “mass”, to ordinary people and, most often, to people of “low rank”. Common in the 40s. all sorts of “physiological” essays satisfied this need to reflect a different, non-noble life, even if only in a reflection of the external, everyday, superficial. Chernyshevsky especially sharply emphasizes as the most essential and main feature of the “literature of the Gogol period” its critical, “negative” attitude to reality - “literature of the Gogol period” is here another name for the same N. school: specifically to Gogol - the author of “Dead Souls”, “The Inspector General”, “Overcoats” - like the founder, N. Sh. was erected. Belinsky and a number of other critics. Indeed, many writers classified as N. sh., experienced the powerful influence of various aspects of Gogol’s work. Such is his exceptional power of satire on the “vile Russian reality”, the severity of his presentation of the problem of the “small man”, his gift for depicting the “prosaic essential squabbles of life”. In addition to Gogol, they influenced the writers of N. Sh. such representatives of Western European petty-bourgeois and bourgeois literature as Dickens, Balzac, George Sand.
The novelty of the social interpretation of reality, although different for each of these groups, led to hatred of N. sh. on the part of writers who fully supported the bureaucratic regime of the feudal-noble monarchy (N. Kukolnik, F. Bulgarin, N. Grech, etc.), for the abuse of naturalistic details who dubbed the writers N. sh. "dirtphiles".
In the view of contemporary critics N. sh. So. arr. was a single group united by the common features noted above. However, the specific social and artistic expression of these characteristics, and therefore the degree of consistency and relief of their manifestation, were so different that N. sh. as a whole it turns out to be a convention. Among the writers who were included in it, it is necessary to distinguish three movements.
The first, represented by the liberal, capitalizing nobility and the social strata adjacent to it, was distinguished by the superficial and cautious nature of its criticism of reality: this was either harmless irony in relation to certain aspects of noble reality or a beautiful-hearted one appealing to good feelings and a noble-limited protest against serfdom. The range of social observations of this group is not wide and familiar. It is still limited to the manor's estate. The significant news is a detailed display of the types of peasants and their lives. Writers of this movement N. sh. (Turgenev, Grigorovich, I. I. Panaev) often depict the estate and its inhabitants with intonations of light ridicule, either in a poem (“The Landowner”, “Parasha” by Turgenev, etc.) or in a psychological story (works by I. I. Panaev). A special place was occupied by essays and stories from peasant life (“Village” and “Anton Goremyk” by Grigorovich, “Notes of a Hunter” by Turgenev), although not free from the lordly sentimental “pity” of the peasant, from the humanistic sweetening of peasant types and aesthetic depiction of rural nature. Realism in the works of writers of this group is a noble realism, devoid of sharpness and courage in denying the evils of the surrounding reality, infected with the desire to aestheticize life, to smooth out its contradictions. The writers of this group continue the line of liberal-noble literature of the 20-30s. only at a new stage and do not bring with them anything qualitatively new in the social and artistic sense. This is the literature of the ruling class represented by its advanced group, taking into account new phenomena in social life and trying to adapt to them through amendments to the existing system.
Another current of the N. highway. relied primarily on the urban philistinism of the 40s, disadvantaged, on the one hand, by the still tenacious serfdom, and on the other, by growing industrial capitalism. A certain role here belonged to F. Dostoevsky, the author of a number of psychological novels and stories (“Poor People”, “Double”, etc.). The work of writers of this movement is undoubtedly distinguished by much greater originality, the novelty of social issues, the novelty of the world they depict - petty bureaucracy, urban philistinism, etc., which became the central object here artistic image. Socially oriented realism addressed to “low” reality, the denial of certain aspects of social reality, these features of the qualitatively new “original” literature of N.S., opposed to the literature of the ruling class, seem to be given in the works of this movement of N.S., for example. in "Poor People" by Dostoevsky. But already at this stage, the literature of this group in its unexpanded form contained those contradictions that did not remove it from the influence and alliance with ruling class: instead of a decisive and consistent struggle with existing reality, it contains sentimental humanism, humility, and later religion and an alliance with reaction; instead of depicting the essential aspects of social life, there is a deepening into the chaos and confusion of the human psyche.
Only the third current in the N. Highway, represented by the so-called. “raznochintsy”, ideologists of revolutionary peasant democracy, gives in his work the clearest expression of the tendencies that were associated by contemporaries (Belinsky) with the name N. sh. and opposed the noble aesthetics. These tendencies manifested themselves most fully and sharply in Nekrasov (urban stories, essays - “Petersburg Corners”, etc. - especially anti-serfdom poems). A burning, flagellating protest against the serf lordship, the dark corners of urban reality, the simple depiction of which is a sharp accusation against the rich and well-fed, heroes from the “low” classes, the merciless exposure of the underside of reality and the erasing from it of the aesthetic embellishments of noble culture, manifested in the images and style of his works, make Nekrasov a true representative of the ideological and artistic features associated by contemporaries with the name N. sh. Herzen (“Who’s to blame?”) and Saltykov (“A Confused Affair”) should also be included in this group, although the tendencies typical for the group are expressed less sharply in them than in Nekrasov, and will reveal themselves in full later.
So. arr. in the motley conglomerate of the so-called N. sh. one must see different and, in certain cases, hostile class currents. In the 40s the disagreements have not yet become acute. So far, the writers themselves, united under the name N. sh., were not clearly aware of the full depth of the contradictions separating them. Therefore, for example on Sat. “Physiology of St. Petersburg,” one of the characteristic documents of N. Sh., we see next to the names of Nekrasov, Iv. Panaev, Grigorovich, Dahl. Hence the convergence in the minds of contemporaries of urban sketches and stories of Nekrasov with the bureaucratic stories of Dostoevsky. By the 60s. the class division between writers classified as N. sh. will sharply worsen. Turgenev will take an irreconcilable position in relation to the “Contemporary” of Nekrasov and Chernyshevsky and define himself as an artist-ideologist of the “Prussian” path of development of capitalism. Dostoevsky will remain in the camp that supports the dominant order (although democratic protest was also characteristic of Dostoevsky in the 40s, in “Poor People,” for example, and in this regard he had connecting threads with Nekrasov). And finally, Nekrasov, Saltykov, Herzen, whose works will pave the way for broad literary production of the revolutionary part of the commoners of the 60s, reflect the interests of peasant democracy fighting for the “American” path of development of Russian capitalism, for the peasant revolution.
So. arr. not all of these trends, which were included by contemporaries in the concept of N. sh., can with equal right be spoken of as representatives of new trends that oppose noble literature in its ideological and artistic features and express new stage in the development of social reality. Features of N. sh. in the content given by Belinsky and Chernyshevsky as a democratic reality associated with the denial of feudal reality and the struggle against noble aesthetics, they are most sharply presented by Nekrasov and his group. It is this group that can be called the exponent of the principles of the new aesthetics, already put forward in Belinsky’s criticism. Others either come to support the existing system or, like the Turgenev-Grigorovich group, embody, albeit at a new stage, the principles of that noble aesthetics that representatives of revolutionary democracy are fighting against. This contrast will reveal itself with all convincingness later, in the 60s, when the literature of revolutionary peasant democracy sharply opposes the noble camp. See “Russian Literature”, section on the 40s. Bibliography:
Chernyshevsky N. G., Essays on the Gogol period of Russian literature (several ed.); Cheshikhin-Vetrinsky, Forties, art. in "History of Russian literature of the 19th century century", part 2, M., 1910; Belinsky V.G., A look at Russian literature 1847, “Complete collection. works.”, Edited by S. A. Vengerov, vol. XI, P., 1917; His, Reply to the “Moscowite” (regarding Gogol’s natural school), in the same place; Beletsky A., Dostoevsky and the natural school in 1846, “Science in Ukraine”, Kharkov, 1922, No. 4; Tseitlin A., The Tale of Dostoevsky’s Poor Official, M., 1923; Vinogradov V., The Evolution of Russian Naturalism, “Academia”, L., 1928. See also the literature on the decree. in the text by writers.
Literary encyclopedia. - At 11 t.; M.: Publishing House of the Communist Academy, Soviet encyclopedia, Fiction. Edited by V. M. Fritsche, A. V. Lunacharsky. 1929-1939 .
Natural school
A designation that arose in the 1840s. in Russia, a literary movement associated with the creative traditions of N.V. Gogol and aesthetics by V.G. Belinsky. The term “natural school” was first used by F.V. Bulgarin as a negative, disparaging characteristic of the work of young writers, but then was picked up by V. G. Belinsky himself, who polemically rethought its meaning, proclaiming the main goal of the school to be “natural,” that is, a non-romantic, strictly truthful depiction of reality.
The formation of the natural school dates back to 1842-45, when a group of writers (N.A. Nekrasov, D.V. Grigorovich, I.S. Turgenev, A.I. Herzen, I.I. Panaev, E. P. Grebenka, V. I. Dahl) united under the ideological influence of Belinsky in the magazine “ Domestic notes" Somewhat later, F.M. was published there. Dostoevsky and M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. Soon, young writers released their programmatic collection “Physiology of St. Petersburg” (1845), which consisted of “physiological essays” representing live observations, sketches from life - the physiology of life in a big city, mainly the life of workers and the St. Petersburg poor (for example, “Petersburg janitor "D. V. Grigorovich, "Petersburg organ grinders" by V. I. Dahl, "Petersburg corners" by N. A. Nekrasov). The essays expanded readers' understanding of the boundaries of literature and were the first experience of social typification, which became a consistent method of studying society, and at the same time presented a holistic materialist worldview, with the affirmation of the primacy of socio-economic relations in the life of the individual. The collection opened with an article by Belinsky, explaining the creative and ideological principles of the natural school. The critic wrote about the need for mass realistic literature, which would “in the form of travel, trips, essays, stories, introduce us to various parts of boundless and diverse Russia...”. Writers must, according to Belinsky, not only know Russian reality, but also correctly understand it, “not only observe, but also judge.” The success of the new association was consolidated by the “Petersburg Collection” (1846), which was distinguished by genre diversity, included artistically more significant things and served as a kind of introduction to readers of new literary talents: F. M. Dostoevsky’s first story “Poor People” was published there, Nekrasov’s first poems about peasants, stories by Herzen, Turgenev, etc. Since 1847, the magazine “ Contemporary", the editors of which were Nekrasov and Panaev. It publishes “Notes of a Hunter” by Turgenev, “Ordinary History” by I.A. Goncharova, “Who is to blame?” Herzen, “The Entangled Case” by M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin and others. A statement of the principles of the natural school is also contained in Belinsky’s articles: “Answer to the “Moscowite””, “A Look at Russian Literature of 1840”, “A Look at Russian Literature of 1847” ." Not limiting themselves to describing the urban poor, many authors of the natural school also began to depict the countryside. D. V. Grigorovich was the first to open this topic with his stories “The Village” and “Anton the Miserable,” which were very vividly received by readers, followed by Turgenev’s “Notes of a Hunter,” peasant poems by N. A. Nekrasov, and Herzen’s stories.
Promoting Gogol's realism, Belinsky wrote that the natural school more consciously than before used the method of critical depiction of reality inherent in Gogol's satire. At the same time, he noted that this school “was the result of the entire past development of our literature and a response to the modern needs of our society.” In 1848, Belinsky already argued that the natural school occupies a leading position in Russian. literature.
The desire for facts, for accuracy and reliability put forward new principles of plotting - not novelistic, but essayistic. Popular genres in the 1840s become essays, memoirs, travel, short stories, social, everyday and socio-psychological stories. The socio-psychological novel also begins to occupy an important place (the first, completely belonging to the natural school, are “Who is to Blame?” by A. I. Herzen and “Ordinary History” by I. A. Goncharov), which flourished in the second half. 19th century predetermined the glory of the Russian. realistic prose. At the same time, the principles of the natural school are transferred to poetry (poems by N. A. Nekrasov, N. P. Ogarev, poems by I. S. Turgenev) and drama (I. S. Turgenev). The language of literature is enriched by the language of newspapers, journalism and professionalism and is reduced due to the widespread use by writers vernacular and dialectisms.
The natural school was subjected to a wide variety of criticism: it was accused of being partial to “low people”, of “mudophileness”, of political unreliability (Bulgarin), of a one-sided negative approach to life, of imitation of the latest French literature.
From the second floor. 1850s the concept of “natural school” is gradually disappearing from literary usage, since the writers who once formed the core of the association either gradually cease to play a significant role in literary process, or go further in their artistic quests, each in their own way, complicating the picture of the world and philosophical issues their early works(F. M. Dostoevsky, I. S. Turgenev, I. A. Goncharov, L. N. Tolstoy). Nekrasov, a direct successor to the traditions of the natural school, becomes more and more radical in his critical depiction of reality and gradually moves to the position of revolutionary populism. It can be said, therefore, that the natural school was the initial phase of the formation of Russian. 19th century realism
Literature and language. Modern illustrated encyclopedia. - M.: Rosman. Edited by prof. Gorkina A.P. 2006 .
N.V. Gogol was the head and founder of the “natural school”, which became the cradle of a whole galaxy of great Russian writers: A., I. Herzen, I. S. Turgenev, N. A. Nekrasov, I. A. Goncharov, M.E.-Saltykov-Shchedrin and others. F. M. Dostoevsky wrote: “We all came out of Gogol’s “The Overcoat”,” emphasizing the leading role of the writer in the “natural school.” The author of “Dead Souls” was the successor of A. S. Pushkin, continued what he started and “ Stationmaster" And " Bronze Horseman» theme of the “little” man. It can be said that throughout his entire life creative path N.V. Gogol consistently revealed two themes: love for a “little” person and exposing the vulgarity of a vulgar person.
An example of how the first of these themes is reflected is the famous “Overcoat”. In this work, which was completed in 1842. Go-gol showed the whole tragedy of the situation of the poor commoner, the “little” man, for whom the goal of life, the only dream, is the acquisition of things. In “The Overcoat,” the author’s angry protest is heard against the humiliation of a “little” man, against injustice. Akaki Akakievich Bashmachkin is a quiet and inconspicuous man, a zealous worker, he suffers constant humiliation and insults from various “ significant persons”, younger and more successful colleagues. New overcoat for this insignificant official it is an unattainable dream and a difficult concern. Denying himself everything, Bashmachkin acquires an overcoat. But the joy was short-lived, he was robbed. The hero was shocked, he fell ill and died. The author emphasizes the typicality of the character; at the beginning of the work he writes: “So, one official served in one department.” N.V. Gogol's story is built on the contrast between the inhumane environment and its victim, whom the author treats with love and sympathy. When Bashmachkin asks young officials not to laugh at him, his “penetrating words rang with other words: I am your brother.” It seems to me that with this phrase Gogol not only expresses his own life position, but also tries to show inner world character. In addition, this is a reminder to readers of the need for a humane attitude towards others. Akaki Akakievich is not able to fight injustice; only in unconsciousness, almost in delirium, was he able to show dissatisfaction with the people who so rudely humiliated him and trampled on his dignity. The author speaks out in defense of the insulted “little” man. The ending of the story is fantastic, although it also has real motivations: a “significant person” is driving along an unlit street after drinking champagne, and he could have imagined anything. The ending of this work made an indelible impression on readers. For example, S.P. Stroganov said: “What a terrible story by Gogolev, “The Overcoat,” because this ghost on the bridge simply drags the overcoat from each of us’s shoulders.” The ghost tearing off his overcoat on the bridge is a symbol of the unrealized protest of a humiliated person, of impending revenge.
The theme of the “little” man is also revealed in “Notes of a Madman.” This work tells the typical story of the modest official Poprishchin, spiritually crippled by life in which “everything that is best in the world goes to either the chamber cadets or the generals. You find some poor wealth and you think of getting it by hand, but the chamber cadet or the general snatches it from you.” The hero could not bear the injustice, endless humiliation and went crazy. The titular adviser Poprishchin is aware of his own insignificance and suffers from it. Unlike the main character of “The Overcoat,” he is a self-loving, even ambitious person; he wants to be noticed and play some prominent role in society. The more acute his torment, the greater the humiliation he experiences, the freer his dream becomes from the power of reason. The story “Notes of a Madman” thus presents a terrifying discord between reality and the dream, which leads the hero to madness, the Death of the Personality... Akakiy Bashmachkin and Poprishchin are victims of the system that existed at that time in Russia. But we can say that such people always turn out to be victims of any bureaucratic machine. , The second theme of N.V. Gogol’s work is reflected in such works as “Old World Landowners”, “How Ivan Ivanovich Quarreled with Ivan Nikiforovich”, in the wonderful poem “ Dead Souls"and in many others.
The exposure of the vulgarity of society, which began in “Petersburg Tales,” was later continued in the collection “Mirgorod” and in “ Dead souls" All these works are characterized by such an image technique as sharp contrast external beauty and internal ugliness of the heroes. It is enough to recall the image of Pavel Ivanovich Chichikov or Ivan Ivanovich. In his works, N.V. Gogol sought to ridicule everything bad that surrounded him. He wrote that “even those who are no longer afraid of anything are afraid of laughter.” At the same time, he tried to show the influence of the environment on the formation of a person, his formation as a person.
We can say that N.V. Gogol was a moralist writer, believing that literature should help people understand life and determine their place in it. He sought to show readers that the world around us was organized unfairly, just as A.S. Pushkin encouraged “good feelings” in people.
The themes started by N.V. Gogol” were later continued in different ways by writers of the “natural school”.
