DOCSLIB.ORG

Turgenev and the Esthetics of the Whole Man

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Turgenev and the Esthetics of the Whole Man Turgenev and the Esthetics of the Whole Man Charles A. Moser* Read Goethe, Homer and Shakespeare.1 Ivan Ibigenev It was the sense of artistic proportion, the classical restraint combined with the realis- tic idiom, the pictorial brilliance balanced by the insights into human nature, which had the greatest appeal.2 Richard Freeborn In the supercharged ideological atmosphere of the Russia of the 1860s, disputes over the nature of art in general, and literature in particular, aroused high passions difficult for us to comprehend today. During that decade a writer was denied the luxury of purely personal opinions on esthetics. Since the censorship often prevented Russian intellectuals from addressing philosophical and political questions directly, they fought those heady battles out in the arena of artistic literature and the literary criticism dependent upon it. Hugenev's Fathers and Sons (1862) in many ways defined the political * Charles A. Moser, Professor of Slavic at the George Washington University, is the author of several articles and books on the history of Russian as well as Bulgarian literature. His special field of interest is Russian intellectual history in the 1860s. 1 From a letter to M. A. Markovich (Marko Vovchok) of January 1860: Ivan Tbigenev, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii ipisem v28-i tomakh (Moscow-Leningrad, 1960-68), Pis'та, IV, 9. In the body of this article I shall cite this edition, prefixing a volume in the Pis'ma series with a R, and a volume in the Sochineniia series with an S. Unless otherwise indicated, all translations are my own. 2 Richard Freeborn, Turgenev: The Novelist's Novelist (Oxford, 1960), p. 181. 19 issues of the 1860s; Chernyshevsky's What Is To Be Done? of 1863 was immensely influential, not because of its esthetic worth, but because it propounded widely popular social ideas under the cover of fiction; and Dostoevsky's The Possessed (1871-72) was a powerful political summation and esthetic rebuttal to those ideas and the reality they had engendered since their propagation. Many outstanding thinkers of the 1860s devoted at least a portion of their energies to literary criticism, which they transformed into a vehicle of social criticism and philosophical polemics. Generally speaking, the radical camp envisioned the ultimate disappearance of art in a future world where the ideal would be translated into reality, and considered discussion of "esthetics" a means of smuggling into intellectual discourse what they regarded as a discredited and outmoded philosophical dualism, the outcrop- ping of an allegiance to some fantastic, other-worldly viewpoint. The conservative camp, on the other hand, maintained that art should enjoy a unique place in human affairs, that within the esthetic realm could be found an invaluable compass for human strivings. The various critical camps and individual critics tended to emphasize one or another constituent element of esthetics, although they usually did not exclude all others. The radical critics—including Chernyshevsky, Dobrolyu- bov and Pisarev—though the ideas contained within a novel or short story defined its value, although they agreed that a writer should possess some artistic talent. At the extreme, however, their theory equated artistic literature with journalism, or with scholarly writing. Taking exception to this view, certain more immoderate members of the "esthetic camp"— especially the poet Afanasy Fet—maintained that ideas had no place at all in art, which should concern itself solely with beauty. And nearly all critics of the 1860s believed that true art must inevitably embody truth: the remarkable critic Apollon Grigoryev, who died in 1864, devoted many a page to this subject. In fact, the house of esthetics had many mansions: art had numerous components, no single one of which was sufficient to define it. Ivan Turgenev, who was keenly interested in artistic questions, was clearly aware of this. In his views of art he held to a centrist position which recognized the place of each of its constituent elements. Thus his esthetic theory was much less dramatic than that of a Pisarev or a Fet, but it displayed the virtues of reason and balance to which Ttirgenev always adhered in his view of life as well. Hirgenev shared with the esthetic camp a belief in the central importance of art in human affairs, and a dedication to the ideal and to beauty: he once implicitly defined a poet as the "servant of the ideal" (P. V, 44). During the 1860s he repeatedly examined his heart to be certain of his devotion to beauty, and always came away satisfied. Thus in 1861 he assured 20 his confidante, Countess Lambert, that he still "retained a living love for the Good and the Beautiful" (P. IV, 184); by middecade, amidst many personal discouragements, he drew consolation from his sense of the beautiful: "It is a blessing that my feeling for beauty has not been extinguished; it is a blessing that I can still rejoice in it, and shed tears over a verse or a melody," he wrote to I. P. Borisov in 1865 (P. V, 334). Years before, in 1850, he had composed—in a letter to another servant of the arts, the singer Pauline Viardot—a brief essay on what he understood by beauty: You ask me what 'The Beautiful' is. It is, despite the action of time, which destroys the form in which it is expressed, always here... because Beauty is the only imperishable thing, and so long as even the smallest remnant of its material form exists, its immortality is ensured. 'The Beautiful' is evident everywhere, it manifests itself even in death. But nowhere does it shine with such power as in the human personality; it is here that it speaks most clearly to the mind, and that is why I always prefer a great musical talent served by an imperfect voice to a good voice which is stupid, the beauty of which is only material.3 This short essay incorporates many elements which remained constant in TUrgenev's conception of art and the beautiful: a sense of the transitoriness of reality and of art; a recognition that beauty cannot be abstract, but must always be expressed in some material form, even if that of the soundwaves created by the human voice; the importance of intelligence in art; and the emphasis on the link between art and the individual human personality. Tbrgenev also recognizes that beauty reveals itself through form, that formless chaos cannot be beautiful. This idea, indeed, is incorporated in Fathers and Sons. Although Bazarov consciously and rationally denigrates esthetics—he once speaks of it as "mouldy"—on an emotional level he discovers that he is unexpectedly susceptible to the power of feminine beauty as embodied in Odintsova. Intellectually he believes in the destruction of the existing order: to put it another way, he advocates the wrecking of social institutions or forms, the spreading of social formless- ness. But after Odintsova rejects him, Bazarov rethinks his philosophy. He who had once negated the ideal of love, now on his deathbed again speaks of his love, and even links love with esthetics: "Love is a form," he says to Odintsova during their last conversation, "and my own personal form is disintegrating" (S.VIII, 395). One might conclude from this passage that at the end Bazarov reconsiders his dedication to overall negation, realizing that reality must exist through forms. Love also seeks to take on form, whereas hatred destroys forms in human affairs. ' Letter to Pauline Viardot of September 1850 (original in French), P. I, 389.1 have used the translation in Freeborn, Turgenev, p. 189. 21 Bazarov's nihilism derives from a dedication to the ideal of the unfettered intellect, a belief that the mind defines our humanity. The argument over the place of the intellect in art was a fierce one during the 1860s. In his correspondence throughout the 1860s Hugenev carried on a continuing debate on this score with his friend Fet, whom he used to call the "high priest (zhrets) of pure art" (P. IV, 155). TUrgenev claimed to value Fet's literary judgments highly, although when Fet announced his dislike for Fathers and Sons Hugenev stubbornly refused to accept his assessment (and was quite right in so doing). ТЪе core of the disagreement between the two men lay in their views of the place of intellect in art. Fet maintained that the intellect had no place in true art, a position which TUrgenev could not accept at all. In 1862 TUrgenev chided Fet because his "detestation of intellect in art has brought you to the most refined intellectualization on the subject." He criticized him for "ostracizing the intellect" in art and for claiming that a work of art should contain nothing more than the "unconscious babbling of a sleeper" (P. IV, 330). By 1865 this argument was still unresolved, as may be seen from a passage TUigenev wrote to Fet on the subject of Tolstoy: In your constant fear of ratiocination (rassuditel'nost'), there is a great deal more of that very ratiocination of which you are so frightened than of any other feeling. It's time to quit praising Shakespeare for being a fool, as you claim; that's just as nonsensical as to claim that some Russian peasant, in between a couple of belches, as if in a dream, had enunciated the final word of civilization (P. VI, 28). In mid-1866 TUigenev was still berating Fet on this topic, scolding him for equating "intellectualizing" (rassuditel'stvo) with what Turgenev regarded as the very positive concepts of "human thought and human knowledge," and for placing an excessive emphasis on "instinct and immediacy" in art (P. VI, 85-86).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Inextricable Link Between Literature and Music in 19Th
    COMPOSERS AS STORYTELLERS: THE INEXTRICABLE LINK BETWEEN LITERATURE AND MUSIC IN 19TH CENTURY RUSSIA A Thesis Presented to The Graduate Faculty of The University of Akron In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Music Ashley Shank December 2010 COMPOSERS AS STORYTELLERS: THE INEXTRICABLE LINK BETWEEN LITERATURE AND MUSIC IN 19TH CENTURY RUSSIA Ashley Shank Thesis Approved: Accepted: _______________________________ _______________________________ Advisor Interim Dean of the College Dr. Brooks Toliver Dr. Dudley Turner _______________________________ _______________________________ Faculty Reader Dean of the Graduate School Mr. George Pope Dr. George R. Newkome _______________________________ _______________________________ School Director Date Dr. William Guegold ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER I. OVERVIEW OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF SECULAR ART MUSIC IN RUSSIA……..………………………………………………..……………….1 Introduction……………………..…………………………………………………1 The Introduction of Secular High Art………………………………………..……3 Nicholas I and the Rise of the Noble Dilettantes…………………..………….....10 The Rise of the Russian School and Musical Professionalism……..……………19 Nationalism…………………………..………………………………………..…23 Arts Policies and Censorship………………………..…………………………...25 II. MUSIC AND LITERATURE AS A CULTURAL DUET………………..…32 Cross-Pollination……………………………………………………………...…32 The Russian Soul in Literature and Music………………..……………………...38 Music in Poetry: Sound and Form…………………………..……………...……44 III. STORIES IN MUSIC…………………………………………………… ….51 iii Opera……………………………………………………………………………..57
    [Show full text]
  • Tolstoy in Prerevolutionary Russian Criticism
    Tolstoy in Prerevolutionary Russian Criticism BORIS SOROKIN TOLSTOY in Prerevolutionary Russian Criticism PUBLISHED BY THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY PRESS FOR MIAMI UNIVERSITY Copyright ® 1979 by Miami University All Rights Reserved Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Sorokin, Boris, 1922­ Tolstoy in prerevolutionary Russian criticism. Bibliography: p. Includes index. 1. Tolstoi, Lev Nikolaevich, graf, 1828-1910—Criticism and interpretation—History. 2. Criticism—Russia. I. Title. PG3409.5.S6 891.7'3'3 78-31289 ISBN 0-8142-0295-0 Contents Preface vii 1/ Tolstoy and His Critics: The Intellectual Climate 3 2/ The Early Radical Critics 37 3/ The Slavophile and Organic Critics 71 4/ The Aesthetic Critics 149 5/ The Narodnik Critics 169 6/ The Symbolist Critics 209 7/ The Marxist Critics 235 Conclusion 281 Notes 291 Bibliography 313 Index 325 PREFACE Leo Tolstoy (1828-1910) has been described as the most momen­ tous phenomenon of Russian life during the nineteenth century.1 Indeed, in his own day, and for about a generation afterward, he was an extraordinarily influential writer. During the last part of his life, his towering personality dominated the intellectual climate of Russia and the world to an unprecedented degree. His work, moreover, continues to be studied and admired. His views on art, literature, morals, politics, and life have never ceased to influence writers and thinkers all over the world. Such interest over the years has produced an immense quantity of books and articles about Tolstoy, his ideas, and his work. In Russia alone their number exceeded ten thousand some time ago (more than 5,500 items were published in the Soviet Union between 1917 and 1957) and con­ tinues to rise.
    [Show full text]
  • 19Th Century
    HUMANITIES INSTITUTE Ayse Dietrich, Ph.D. th RUSSIAN CULTURE – 19 Century Overview Culture refers to the entire way of life of a society. Russian culture, like other cultures in the world, reflects the views, values, traditions, rituals, attitudes and beliefs of its people, defining their evolutionary identity. Starting with Vladimir’s conversion to Christianity, Russian culture not only reflected Christian ideas and values, but also traditional Russian culture, national themes and style. It was the 19th century when creative Russian minds produced independent, original and authentically national works while revolutionary and intellectual life were put under state pressure. VERBAL ARTS Literature Russian writers produced original works, employing national themes and style during the time of tsar Alexander I, a period noted for its literary creativity. Without a doubt the quintessential works of this period are those of A.S. Pushkin. Although European culture is assimilated and debated at this time, in years to come a Slavophile opposition will emerge, challenging western ideas in culture not only nationally and psychologically, but also in the arenas of culture and art. Alexander I’s era was a period of creativity when Russian literature produced independent, original and authentically national works. It was a period in which literature moved from neoclassicism to Romanticism and from the writing of imitative works to ones which would be the basis of a national cultural model. It was only during the reign of Alexander II that Russian writers were able, for the first time, to experience the satisfaction of independent, creative work which was national in both its spirit and its style.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Restoring Wholeness in an Age of Disorder: Europe's Long Spiritual
    1 Restoring Wholeness in an Age of Disorder: Europe’s Long Spiritual Crisis and the Genealogy of Slavophile Religious Thought, 1835-1860 Patrick Lally Michelson September 2008 Many German writers, journalists, and scholars who witnessed the collapse of the Wilhelmine Reich in 1918 interpreted this event as the culmination of a protracted, European-wide crisis that had originated more than a century before in the breakdown of traditional political institutions, socioeconomic structures, moral values, and forms of epistemology, anthropology, and religiosity. For these intellectuals, as well as anyone else who sought to restore what they considered to be Germany’s spiritual vitality, one of the immediate tasks of the early Weimar years was to articulate authentic, viable modes of being and consciousness that would generate personal and communal wholeness in a society out of joint.1 Among the dizzying array of responses formulated at that time, several of the most provocative drew upon disparate, even antagonistic strands of Protestantism in the hope that the proper appropriation of Germany’s dominant confession could help the country overcome its long spiritual crisis.2 1 The Weimar Dilemma: Intellectuals in the Weimar Republic, edited by Anthony Phelan (Manchester University Press, 1985); Dagmar Barnouw, Weimar Intellectuals and the Threat of Modernity (Indiana University Press, 1988); and Intellektuelle in der Weimarer Republik, revised edition, edited by Wolfgang Bialas and Georg G. Iggers (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1997). For impressionistic accounts, see Egon Friedell, A Cultural History of the Modern Age: The Crisis of the European Soul from the Black Death to the World War, 3 vols., translated by Charles Francis Atkinson (New York: A.
    [Show full text]
  • The Drama in Disguise: Dramatic Modes of Narration and Textual Structure in the Mid-Nineteenth-Century Russian Novel
    The Drama in Disguise: Dramatic Modes of Narration and Textual Structure in the Mid-Nineteenth-Century Russian Novel by Kathleen Cameron Wiggins A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Slavic Languages and Literatures in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Irina Paperno Professor Luba Golburt Lecturer Anna Muza Professor Peter Glazer Fall 2011 The Drama in Disguise: Dramatic Modes of Narration and Textual Structure in the Mid-Nineteenth-Century Russian Novel Copyright 2011 by Kathleen Cameron Wiggins 1 Abstract The Drama in Disguise: Dramatic Modes of Narration and Textual Structure in the Mid- Nineteenth-Century Russian Novel By Kathleen Cameron Wiggins Doctor of Philosophy in Slavic Languages and Literatures University of California, Berkeley Professor Irina Paperno, Chair My dissertation investigates the generic interplay between the textual forms of drama and the novel during the 1850s, a fertile “middle ground” for the Russian novel, positioned between the works of Pushkin, Lermontov, and Gogol and the psychological realist novel of the 1860s and 70s. My study begins with Turgenev’s Rudin (1856) and then considers Goncharov’s Oblomov (1859) and Dostoevsky’s Siberian novellas (1859), concluding with an examination of how the use of drama evolved in one of the “great novels” of the 1860s, Tolstoy’s Voina i mir ( War and Peace , 1865-69). Drawing upon both novel and drama theory, my dissertation seeks to identify the specific elements of the dramatic form employed by these nineteenth-century novelists, including dramatic dialogue and gesture, construction of enclosed stage-like spaces, patterns of movement and stasis, expository strategies, and character and plot construction.
    [Show full text]
  • Marx/Engels Letters Marx/Engels Letters
    Marx/Engels Letters Marx/Engels Letters Collections of Correspondence Engels to Marx 1844-82 Marx to Engels 1859-77 Engels to August Bebel 1873-91 Marx to Ruge 1843 Heinrich Marx to son Karl Marx 1836-38 Jenny Von Westphalen to Karl Marx 1839-43 Engels to Nikolai-on Danielson 1879-93 Marx to Dr. Kugelmann 1868-71 Marx or Engels to Sorge 1870-94 Miscellaneous Documents 1818-41 Individual Correspondence 1830s Marx to father in Trier http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/letters/index.htm (1 of 5) [26/08/2000 00:28:15] Marx/Engels Letters November 10, 1837 1840s Marx to Carl Friedrich Bachman April 6, 1841 Marx to Oscar Ludwig Bernhard Wolf April 7, 1841 Marx to Dagobert Oppenheim August 25, 1841 Marx To Ludwig Feuerbach Oct 3, 1843 Marx To Julius Fröbel Nov 21, 1843 Marx and Arnold Ruge to the editor of the Démocratie Pacifique Dec 12, 1843 Marx to the editor of the Allegemeine Zeitung (Augsburg) Apr 14, 1844 Marx to Heinrich Bornstein Dec 30, 1844 Marx to Heinrich Heine Feb 02, 1845 Engels to the communist correspondence committee in Brussels Sep 19, 1846 Engels to the communist correspondence committee in Brussels Oct 23, 1846 Marx to Pavel Annenkov Dec 28, 1846 1850s Marx to J. Weydemeyer in New York (Abstract) March 5, 1852 1860s http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/letters/index.htm (2 of 5) [26/08/2000 00:28:15] Marx/Engels Letters Marx to Lasalle January 16, 1861 Marx to S. Meyer April 30, 1867 Marx to Schweitzer On Lassalleanism October 13, 1868 1870s Marx to Beesly On Lyons October 19, 1870 Marx to Leo Frankel and Louis Varlin On the Paris Commune May 13, 1871 Marx to Beesly On the Commune June 12, 1871 Marx to Bolte On struggles witht sects in The International November 23, 1871 Engels to Theodore Cuno On Bakunin and The International January 24, 1872 Marx to Bracke On the Critique to the Gotha Programme written by Marx and Engels May 5, 1875 Engels to P.
    [Show full text]
  • Shakespearean Canon in the Russian Literature at the Turn of the 18Th
    374 ЗНАНИЕ. ПОНИМАНИЕ. УМЕНИЕ 2015 — №3 AD LITTERAM DOI: 10.17805/zpu.2015.3.35 Shakespearean Сanon in the Russian Literature at the Turn of the 18th–19th Centuries* N. V. ZAKHAROV (MOSCOW UNIVERSITY FOR THE HUMANITIES) The article is concerned with the problem of formation of the Shakespearean canon in the new Russian literature at the turn of the 18th–19th centuries. We define the Shakespearean canon as a corpus of original works by the British genius and adequate interpretations of his texts in theater, criticism, cinema, art, cultures of different countries and peoples. The author analyzes Alexander Sumarokov’s adaptation of “Hamlet” (1748). It was a typical neoclassical play based on Pierre>Antoine de La Place’s translation of Shakespeare (“Thйatre Anglois”, 1745–1748). However, in the author’s opinion, it was Sumarokov who introduced “Hamlet” to the Russian theatrical and reading public. The earliest mention of Shakespeare reached Russia via translations and re>translations of French and German publications. Even in the early 19th century his works would frequently be translated to Russian from French Classicist adaptations by Jean>Franc,ois Ducis (1733–1816): “Lear” by Nikolay Gnedich and “Othello” by Ivan Velyaminov were published in 1808; Stepan Viskovatov translated “Hamlet” in 1811 and Petr Korsakov adapted “Macbeth” in 1815. The influence of Shakespeare on Mikhail Muravyov is a good example of formation of the “cult of Shakespeare” and his canon in the late 18th century. Along with historian Nikolay Karamzin, Muravyov became one of the first serious admirers of Shakespeare and popularizers of his canon in Russia.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hedgehog and the Fox: an Essay on Tolstoy's View of History
    THE HEDGEHOG AND THE FOX An Essay on Tolstoy’sViewofHistory To the memory of Jasper Ridley A queer combination of the brain of an English chemist with the soul of an Indian Buddhist. E. M. de Vogu¨ e´ 1 i There is a line among the fragments of the Greek poet Archilo- chus which says: ‘The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.’2 Scholars have differed about the correct interpretation of these dark words, which may mean no more than that the fox, for all his cunning, is defeated by the hedgehog’sone defence. But, taken figuratively, the words can be made to yield a sense in which they mark one of the deepest differences which divide writers and thinkers, and, it may be, human beings in general. For there exists a great chasm between those, on one side, who relate everything to a single central vision, one system, less or more coherent or articulate, in terms of which they understand, think and feel – a single, universal, organising principle in terms of which alone all that they are and say has significance – and, on the other side, those who pursue many ends, often unrelated and even contradictory, connected, if at all, only in some de facto way, for some psychological or physiological cause, related to no moral or aesthetic principle. These last lead lives, perform acts and entertain ideas that are centrifugal rather than centripetal; their thought is scattered or diffused, moving on many levels, seizing upon the 1 Le Roman russe (Paris, 1886), p.
    [Show full text]
  • Winnovative HTML to PDF Converter for .NET
    The bust of Dostoevsky on his grave DOSTOEVSKY The Mantle of the Prophet 1871-1881 JOSEPH FRANK Princeton University Press Copyright © 2002 ISBN 0-6911-1569-9 This final volume, like my first, is dedicated to my wife, Marguerite, my lifelong companion, critic, and inspiration. And to our daughters Claudine and Isabelle, and grandchildren Sophie and Henrik. CONTENTS List of Illustrations ix Preface xi Transliteration and Texts xv PART I: A NEW BEGINNING Chapter 1: Introduction 3 Chapter 2: A Quiet Return 14 Chapter 3: Grazhdanin: The Citizen 38 Chapter 4: Narodnichestvo: Russian Populism 65 Chapter 5: The Diary of a Writer, 1873:1 87 Chapter 6: The Diary of a Writer, 1873: II 103 Chapter 7: At Bad Ems 120 Chapter 8: A Literary Proletarian 130 Chapter 9: Notes for A Raw Youth 149 Chapter 10: A Raw Youth: Dostoevsky's Trojan Horse 171 PART II: A PERSONAL PERIODICAL Chapter 11: A New Venture 199 Chapter 12: A Public Figure 215 Chapter 13: Intimations of Mortality 235 Chapter 14: The Diary of a Writer, 1876-1877 254 Chapter 15: Toward The Brothers Karamazov 282 Chapter 16: The Jewish Question 301 Chapter 17: Turgenev, Tolstoy, and Others 320 Chapter 18: Stories and Sketches 338 part III: "with words to sear the hearts of men" Chapter 19: Resurrection and Rebellion 361 Chapter 20: Man in the Middle 377 Chapter 21: A New Novel—and a Feuilleton 390 Chapter 22: The Great Debate 407 Chapter 23: Rebellion and the Grand Inquisitor 426 Chapter 24: A Last Visit 443 Chapter 25: An Impatient Reader 460 Chapter 26: Terror and Martial Law 475 Chapter 27:
    [Show full text]
  • Regatul Romaniei
    RegatulRomaniei file:///C:/Programele%20Mele/IstorieRomania1/RegatulRomaniei/Regat... Regatul României Visul unirii tuturor românilor sub un singur steag a frământat mințile conducătorilor încă din cele mai vechi timpuri, dar alianțele militare și interesele de ordin comercial nu au fost în favoarea simplificării relațiilor dintre diferitele formațiuni statale. În vechime, țările românești au negociat protecția celor două mari imperii ale romanilor, apoi începând cu secolul al XIII-lea au întreținut legături de prietenie și ajutor mutual cu Polonia și Lituania. Din secolul al XV-lea, ca state vasale Imperiului Otoman dar sub protecția directă a Hanatului Crimeei, s-a pus problema formării unui eyalat turcesc comun. Proiectul a fost însă refuzat cu dârzenie, ca urmare a divergențelor de ordin religios. Ca o soluție de compromis, sultanii au permis independența religioasă a celor trei principate, în schimbul dependenței economice. Situația de criză a intervenit o dată cu revoluția și apoi războiul de independență purtat de greci și sârbi. Sub aripa ocrotitoare a Bisericii Ortodoxe Răsăritene, creștinii din toate țările Balcanice au ridicat la început glasul, apoi armele, cerând vehement ieșirea din situația de compromis religios. Ca rezultat, boierii și dragomanii greci au fost maziliți, iar mănăstirile filiale ale celor de la Muntele Athos au fost secularizate. În urma grecilor au rămas nenumăratele lor rude născute din alianțe cu casele boierești autohtone, practic aproape toată crema boierimii. Pentru a umple vidul administrativ rămas s-a hotărât instituirea unei locotenențe domnești, ajutată de o Adunare Constituantă a fruntașilor celor două țări. În ambele principate, toate sufragiile au fost întrunite în anul 1859 de Colonelul Alexandru Ioan Cuza, cu funcția de Ministru de Război, fost deputat de Galați și fost șef al Miliției de la Dunărea de Jos.
    [Show full text]
  • Forms of the Peasant: Aesthetics and Social Thought in Russian Realism, 1847-1877
    Forms of the Peasant: Aesthetics and Social Thought in Russian Realism, 1847-1877 by Jennifer Jean Flaherty A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Slavic Languages and Literatures in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in Charge: Professor Irina Paperno, Chair Professor Luba Golburt Professor Victoria Frede Spring 2019 Forms of the Peasant: Aesthetics and Social Thought in Russian Realism, 1847-1877 © 2019 By Jennifer Jean Flaherty Abstract Forms of the Peasant: Aesthetics and Social Thought in Russian Realism, 1847-1877 by Jennifer Jean Flaherty Doctor of Philosophy in Slavic Languages and Literatures University of California, Berkeley Professor Irina Paperno, Chair At the center of this dissertation’s inquiry is Russian realism’s construction of what I call “the form of the peasant.” Created by writers, this mythic image emerged in tandem with the movement’s signature formal innovations in narrative perspective, poetic voice, and descriptive style. It also gave shape to the very ideas of history, national identity, subjectivity, and language which defined Russian realism as a literary movement. The three chapters approach several major texts – Ivan Turgenev’s Zapiski okhotnika [Notes from a Hunter] (1847-1852), Lev Tolstoy’s “Utro pomeshchika” (1852-1856) and Anna Karenina (1874-1877), and Nikolai Nekrasov’s Komu na Rusi zhit’ khorosho [Who in Russia Can Live well] (1866-1877) – from a historical and formalist perspective, offering a history of realist forms in the social and intellectual context from which they emerge and to which they contribute. Close readings of narrative and poetic teXts are performed alongside analyses of a range of theoretical texts that are central to Russian social thought in the mid-nineteenth century, including works by Vissarion Belinsky, Nikolai Chernyshevsky, Nikolai Dobroliubov, Alexander Potebnia, and G.
    [Show full text]
  • Xxv Шекспировские Чтения 2014 Аннотации Докладов 14–18 Сентября 2014 Г
    XXV ØÅÊÑÏÈÐÎÂÑÊÈÅ ×ÒÅÍÈß 2014 АННОТАЦИИ ДОКЛАДОВ 25TH SHAKESPEARE READINGS 2014 PAPER ABSTRACTS 14–18 ñåíòÿáðÿ 2014 ã. September 14–18, 2014 Москва НАУЧНЫЙ СОВЕТ «ИСТОРИЯ МИРОВОЙ КУЛЬТУРЫ» РАН Шекспировская комиссия ИНСТИТУТ МИРОВОЙ ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ им. А. М. Горького РАН ГОСУДАРСТВЕННЫЙ ИНСТИТУТ ИСКУССТВОЗНАНИЯ МОСКОВСКИЙ ГУМАНИТАРНЫЙ УНИВЕРСИТЕТ Институт фундаментальных и прикладных исследований РОССИЙСКИЙ УНИВЕРСИТЕТ ТЕАТРАЛЬНОГО ИСКУССТВА — ГИТИС ВСЕРОССИЙСКАЯ ГОСУДАРСТВЕННАЯ БИБЛИОТЕКА ИНОСТРАННОЙ ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ им. М. И. Рудомино МЕЖДУНАРОДНАЯ АКАДЕМИЯ НАУК (IAS) XXV ШЕКСПИРОВСКИЕ ЧТЕНИЯ 2014 АННОТАЦИИ ДОКЛАДОВ 14–18 сентября 2014 г. 25TH SHAKESPEARE READINGS 2014 PAPER ABSTRACTS September 14–18, 2014 Москва 2014 ББК 83ЮЗ (4 Вел) Ш41 XXV Шекспировские чтения 2014 : «Шекспир в русско-английском культурном диалоге» (25th Shakespeare Readings 2014 : Shakespeare Mirrored: A Look at Cultural Relationship) : Сборник аннотаций докладов. — М. : Изд-во Моск. гуманит. ун-та, 2014. — 203 с. Сборник аннотаций докладов Международной научной конференции «XXV Шекспировские чтения 2014: Шекспир в русско-английском культур- ном диалоге» (25th Shakespeare Readings 2014 : Shakespeare Mirrored: A Look at Cultural Relationship). Для исследователей теории культуры и истории мировой литературы, студентов, аспирантов и преподавателей. Издание осуществлено при финансовой поддержке Российского гуманитарного научного фонда (РГНФ), проект № 14-04-14012г. Редакционная коллегия: А. В. Бартошевич (председатель), Н. В. Захаров (составление, перевод) В. С. Макаров (перевод,
    [Show full text]