The theme of relationships is revealed in the poem "The Bronze Horseman" common man and power. The technique of symbolic opposition of Peter I (the great reformer of Russia, the founder of St. Petersburg) and the Bronze Horseman - a monument to Peter I (the personification of autocracy, senseless and cruel power) is used. Thus, the poet emphasizes the idea that the undivided power of one, even outstanding person cannot be fair. The great deeds of Peter were committed for the good of the state, but were often cruel to the people, to the individual: On the shore of the desert waves He stood, thoughts of great zeros, And looked into the distance.
Before him the River rushed wide; the poor boat was striving for it alone. Along the mossy, marshy shores of Cherneli huts here and there. Shelter of a wretched Chukhonian; And the forest, unknown to the rays In the mist of the hidden sun. Noisy all around.
Pushkin, recognizing the greatness of Peter, defends the right of every person to personal happiness.
The clash of the "little man" - the poor official Yevgeny - with the unlimited power of the state ends with the defeat of Yevgeny: And suddenly he started to run headlong. It seemed to Him that a formidable king. Instantly on fire with anger. His face turned softly... And he runs across the empty square and hears behind him - As if thunder rumbles - Heavy-voiced galloping On the shocked pavement, And, illuminated by the pale moon. Stretch out your hand above. Behind him rushes the Bronze Horseman On a galloping horse; And all night the poor madman.
Wherever he turned his feet, Behind him everywhere the Bronze Horseman With a heavy stomp galloped. The author sympathizes with the hero, but understands that the rebellion of a loner against the "powerful ruler of fate" is insane and hopeless.
- Artistic features of the poem.
The Bronze Horseman is one of Pushkin's most perfect poetic works. The poem is written in iambic tetrameter. The uniqueness of this work lies in the fact that the author overcame the genre canons of a historical poem.
Peter does not appear in the poem as a historical character (he is an "idol" - a statue), nothing is said about the time of his reign. The poet does not refer to the origins of this era, but to its results - to the present: On the porch With a raised paw, as if alive. Guard lions stood, And right in the dark height Above the fenced rock Idol with outstretched hand Sat on a bronze horse. The conflict reflected in the poem is supported stylistically.
The introduction, the episodes associated with the "idol on a bronze horse", are sustained in the tradition of an ode - the most state genre: And he thought; From here we will threaten the Swede. Here the city will be founded To spite the arrogant neighbor. Here we are destined by nature to cut a window into Europe. Stand with a firm foot by the sea. Here on their new waves All the flags will visit us, And we will drink in the open. Where we are talking about Eugene, prosaic prevails: “Marry?
To me? why not? It is hard, of course; But well, I'm young and healthy. Ready to work day and night; Somehow I will arrange for myself a humble and simple shelter And in it I will calm Parasha. Maybe a year or two will pass - I will get a place, I will entrust our family to Parasha And the upbringing of the children ... And we will live, and so we will both reach the coffin Hand in hand, And our grandchildren will bury us ... "
- The main conflict of the poem.
The main conflict of the poem is the conflict between the state and the individual. It is embodied, first of all, in the figurative system: the opposition of Peter and Eugene. The image of Peter is central in the poem. Pushkin gives in The Bronze Horseman his own interpretation of the personality and state activity of Peter.
The author depicts two faces of the emperor: in the introduction, Peter is a man and a statesman: On the shore of desert waves He stood, full of great thoughts, And looked into the distance. He is guided by the idea of the good of the Fatherland, and not by arbitrariness. He understands the historical pattern and appears as a decisive, active, wise ruler. In the main part of the poem, Peter is a monument to the first Russian emperor, symbolizing autocratic power, ready to suppress any protest: Terrible is he in the surrounding darkness! What a thought!
What power is hidden in it! The conflict of history and personality is revealed through the depiction of the fate of an ordinary person. Although researchers do not include Evgeny in the gallery of "little people", nevertheless, we find some typical features of such heroes in this image. The confrontation between man and power, personality and state is an eternal problem, the unambiguous solution of which Pushkin considers impossible. In the poem, the empire is represented not only by Peter, its creator, the embodiment of its titanic will, but also by St. Petersburg.
Unforgettable stanzas about Petersburg best of all make it possible to understand what Pushkin loves in Peter's Creation. All the magic of this northern Petersburg beauty lies in the reconciliation of two opposite principles: I love your cruel winters, Still air and frost. Sledge running along the Neva wide. Girls' faces are brighter than roses, And the brilliance, and the noise, and the talk of the balls, And at the hour of the idle feast The hiss of foamy glasses And the blue flame of punch. I love the warlike liveliness of the Amusing Fields of Mars. Infantry troops and horses Monotonous beauty, In their harmoniously unsteady formation Patchwork of these victorious banners. The radiance of these copper caps.
Shot through and through in battle. I love you, military capital. Your stronghold smoke and thunder. When the full-night queen Grants a son to the royal house. Either Russia triumphs over the enemy again, Or, having broken its blue ice, the Neva carries it to the seas And, smelling spring days, rejoices. Almost all epithets are paired, balancing each other. Cast iron gratings are cut through with a light pattern, the masses of deserted streets are "clear", the needle of the fortress is "bright".
- Heroes of the poem.
In The Bronze Horseman, there are not two heroes (Peter and Eugene - the state and the individual), but three - this is the element of the raging Neva, their common enemy, the image of which is devoted to most of the poem. Russian life and Russian statehood is a continuous and painful overcoming of chaos by the beginning of reason and will. This is the meaning of empire for Pushkin. And Eugene, the unfortunate victim of the struggle between the two principles of Russian life, is not a person, but just a layman, dying under the hoof of the horse of the empire or in the waves of revolution. Eugene is devoid of individuality: At that time, young Eugene came home from the guests ...
We will call our hero by this name. It sounds nice; with him for a long time My pen is also friendly. We don't need his name. Although in past times It may have shone And under the pen of Karamzin It sounded in native legends; But now it is forgotten by light and rumor. Our hero lives in Kolomna; serves somewhere, Is shy of the nobles and does not grieve Nor about the deceased relatives. Not about the forgotten antiquity. Peter I becomes for him that "significant person" who appears in the life of any "little man" to destroy his happiness.
The grandeur, the national scale of the image of Peter and the insignificance, the limitation of the circle of Eugene's personal concerns are emphasized compositionally. Peter's monologue in the introduction (And he thought: “From now on we will threaten the Swede ...”) is opposed to Eugene’s “thoughts” (“What was he thinking about / That he was poor ...”).
Literary critic M. V. Alpatov claims that all critics who wrote about The Bronze Horseman see in it an image of two opposing principles, to which each of them gave his own interpretation. However, M. V. Alpatov believes that the Bronze Horseman is based on a much more complex multi-stage system of images. It consists of the following characters: Peter with his "companions" Alexander, the Bronze Horseman and St. Petersburg. An element that some critics tried in vain to identify with the image of the people.
People. Evgeny. A poet who, without speaking openly, is invariably present as one of the characters. Poem in the assessment of critics and literary critics. “The will of the hero and the uprising of the primitive elements in nature is a flood raging at the foot of the Bronze Horseman; the will of the hero and the same uprising of the primitive elements in the human heart - a challenge thrown in the face of the hero by one of the countless doomed to death by this will - this is the meaning of the poem ”(Dn. Merezhkovsky).
“Pushkin managed to see in the St. Petersburg flood and in the unfortunate fate of the poor official a significant event and reveal in it a range of ideas that go far beyond the described incidents. In this regard, it is natural that Pushkin's poem reflected the poet's experiences associated with the events of the December uprising, as well as with a number of broader problems of Russian and world history and, in particular, the romantic theme of the individual in his relation to society, nature and fate "( M. V. Alpatov). “Pushkin does not reveal in more detail the threat of Yevgeny.
We still don’t know what exactly the madman wants to say with his “You already!”. Does this mean that the "small", "insignificant" will be able to "*already" avenge their enslavement, humiliation by the "hero"? Or that a voiceless, weak-willed Russia will “already” raise its hand against its rulers, who are hard forcing them to test their fatal will? There is no answer ... The important thing is that small and insignificant, the one who recently humbly confessed that "God could give him more mind", whose dreams did not go beyond a modest wish: "I will ask for a place", suddenly felt himself equal to the Bronze Horseman, found in oneself the strength and courage to threaten the “power of the semi-world” ”(V.Ya. Bryusov). “We understand with a confused soul that it is not arbitrariness, but a reasonable will, personified in this Bronze Horseman, who, in an unshakable height, with outstretched hand, as if admiring the city ...
And it seems to us that, in the midst of the chaos and darkness of this destruction, a creative “let it be!” comes from his brass lips, and an outstretched hand proudly commands the enraged elements to subside ... And with a humble heart we recognize the triumph of the general over the particular, without abandoning our sympathy for the suffering of this private...
The monument to Peter I by Falcone has long become a symbol of St. Petersburg and was sung by many Russian poets. Alexander Pushkin dedicated the poem "The Bronze Horseman" to the monument, since then the second, unofficial name has been attached to the monument. Sculpture full of power and dynamics inspired Adam Mickiewicz, Boris Pasternak, Pyotr Vyazemsky, Anna Akhmatova, Osip Mandelstam. The Bronze Horseman left his mark on the work of Valery Bryusov.
The poet wrote the poem "To the Bronze Horseman" in St. Petersburg on January 24-25, 1906. The work was included in the collection "All Melodies", where it opens the cycle "Greetings". In 1909, the publishing house "Scorpion" published a collection of works by Valery Bryusov "Ways and Crossroads". The poem "To the Bronze Horseman" was first printed in it.
In his works, Bryusov often referred to historical events, literary sources, works of painting, sculpture, and architecture. This intellectual feature was characteristic of outstanding poets, but in the work of Valery Bryusov it is expressed especially visibly. Some critics even reproached the poet for such immersion in the world cultural and historical layer. For example, Julius Aikhenvald called Valery Yakovlevich "the thinker of other people's thoughts" and the "stepfather" of ideas.
In fact, Bryusov builds his poetic castles on a solid foundation of history, art and literature. And from an individual approach, these designs do not become less majestic and beautiful. In the poem “To the Bronze Horseman”, describing winter Petersburg, Bryusov draws attention to the harsh architecture of the capital: “Isakiy turns white in the frosty fog”, “the northern city is like a foggy ghost”, “houses rose like crops”. The author also mentions important historical events, such as the Decembrist uprising and the most devastating flood in St. Petersburg in 1824: “bodies lay down on the abandoned army”, “above the dark plain of disturbed waves”. A literary motif is unexpectedly woven into the memory of the flood. Bryusov recalls the hero of Pushkin's novel "Poor Eugene", who "vainly threatens" the monument.
But most importantly actor narrative - the Bronze Horseman himself. Following Pushkin, Bryusov reveals the symbolism of this image. The heaviness and power embodied in the word "copper", as well as the association of rapid movement in the word "horseman" ideally characterize Peter I. His "unchanging" monument "rises on a snowy block" and at the same time flies "through the ages".
The "eternal" statue is opposed by the Bryusovs to the short life of a person. Generations change, people are “shadows in a dream”, even the city is a “foggy ghost”, but the monument to the reformer tsar remains unchanged, trampling the links of the snake.
The poem "To the Bronze Horseman" is not replete with colors and sounds, which is not typical for Bryusov's creative manner. There is almost no color here, there is only the verb "becomes white". True, there is a lot of fog and shadows. The sound appears exclusively in the description of the December events of 1825: "between the screams and the rumble."
The poem "To the Bronze Horseman" is written in four-foot amphibrach with cross-rhyming. The movement is conveyed with the help of a large number of verbs, participles and participles: they pass, speaking, flying, changing, getting up, lying down, stretched, curved.
To achieve greater emotional expressiveness, Bryusov widely used comparisons: “houses, like crops”, “like shadows in a dream”, “as if ... at a review”, as well as epithets: “frosty fog”, “snow-covered block”, “abandoned army” . There are many inversions in the work: “on a snow-covered block”, “with an outstretched hand”, “foggy ghost”, “earth's pole”, “your crops”.
In this poem, Bryusov masterfully created original, capacious images. The "dark plain of tossing waves" represents the flood; "houses like crops" - the growth of the city; "Blood on the snow... could not melt the earth's pole" - the failed uprising of the Decembrists. No less effective in the poem is the antithesis of "daytime twilight."
In his work, Valery Bryusov repeatedly returned to the sculptural symbol of the northern capital. The majestic monument is found in the poems "Three Idols", "Variations on the Theme of the Bronze Horseman", as well as in a critical study of the poem of the same name by Alexander Pushkin. We can safely talk about the consonance of the image created by Falcone, the deep strings of the soul of Valery Bryusov.
- "To the Young Poet", analysis of Bryusov's poem
- "Sonnet to Form", analysis of Bryusov's poem
Chapter 1
Chapter 2. Interpretation of the theme of Peter in the novel by D.S. Merezhkovsky Antichrist.
Peter and Alexei” and the Pushkin tradition.64
Chapter 3 "The Bronze Horseman" A.S. Pushkin in the context of Andrei Bely's novel
Petersburg”: to the problem of literary receptions.137
Dissertation Introduction 2002, abstract on philology, Poleshchuk, Lyudmila Zenonovna
The topic of this dissertation is "Pushkin's tradition (the poem "The Bronze Horseman") in the work of Russian symbolists: V. Bryusov, D. Merezhkovsky, A. Bely". Its relevance is due to the fact that with a relatively deep degree of study of the problem "Pushkin and Blok" - in the monographs of Z.G. , Andrey Bely - turned out to be insufficiently studied. Meanwhile, the Symbolists themselves raised the problem of the genesis and apprenticeship of Pushkin. The same Bryusov declared: "My poetry was born from Pushkin's."
We emphasize that the exclusion of Alexander Blok from this series of names is due to the fact that the refraction in the work of Blok of the Pushkin tradition (“The Bronze Horseman”) in its historiosophical and reminiscent aspect is deeply and multifacetedly studied in the monograph by K.A. Medvedeva "The problem of the new man in the work of A. Blok and V. Mayakovsky: Traditions and innovation" (Medvedeva, 1989. P. 20-128).
In the dissertation essay, we turn mainly to Bryusov the critic, leaving out of the scope of the study his artistic work, which was sufficiently studied in the indicated aspect in the works of N.K. Piksanov, D.E. Maksimov, E. Polotskaya, K.A. N.A. Bogomolova, O.A. Kling and others.
But, unfortunately, the literary-critical Pushkinian cannot be considered sufficiently studied even now. In our opinion, even Bryusov's well-known article "The Bronze Horseman", Merezhkovsky's articles about Pushkin require a new, more in-depth reading and analysis. Without a thorough study of the Pushkin heritage of the Symbolists, a deep understanding of the originality of their work as an integral aesthetic and philosophical system cannot be achieved.
It should be noted that, in general, the study of the phenomenon of tradition in the literature of the "Silver Age" is one of the the most pressing problems modern literary criticism.
In a number of studies of Pushkinists - M.P. Alekseeva, D.D. Blagogo, S.M. Bondi, Yu.N. Tynyanov, B.V. Tomashevsky, G.A. Gukovsky, V. Zhirmunsky, N.V. Izmailova, Yu.V. Manna, G.P. Makogonenko, N.K. Piksanova, JI.B. Pumpyansky, MA. Tsyavlovsky, I.L. Feinberg, N.Ya. Eidelman, B.JI. Komarovich, Yu.M. Lotman, Z.G. Mints, E.A. Maymina, V.M. Markovich, B.C. Nepomniachtchi, S.A. Kibalnik - the problem of typology and specifics of the refraction of Pushkin's tradition is posed. Works on the work of the Symbolists - K.M. Azadovsky, A.S. Ginzburg, V.E. Vatsuro, P. Gromova, L.K. Dolgopolova, D.E. Maksimova, L.A. Kolobaeva, A.D. Ospovat and R.D. Timenchik, N.A. Bogomolova, K.A. Medvedeva, S.A. Nebolsina, V.V. Musatov, E. Polotskaya, N.N. Skatova, V.D. Skvoznikova, Yu.B. Borev, O.A. Kling, I. Paperno - contain the most valuable observations about the symbolist perception of Pushkin's tradition. Along with this, the phenomenon of the Pushkin tradition was covered in the works of representatives of Russian religious philosophy and the clergy - V.V. Rozanova, S.L. Frank, S. Bulgakov, I.A. Ilyina and others.
The need for a new understanding of the Pushkin tradition was realized by the Symbolists primarily in terms of their future literary development, as well as in the context of studying the work of their literary predecessors - F.I. Tyutchev, N.V. Gogol, F.M. Dostoevsky, I.S. Turgenev, following the Pushkin tradition.
The symbolists were close to Dostoevsky's idea that Pushkin, with his "worldwide responsiveness", embodied the essence of the Russian soul, significantly expanded the boundaries of artistic knowledge. The process of understanding the Pushkin tradition at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries became an integral part of spiritual life, the leading artistic, research, and even life principle of Russian literature. The Symbolists develop a cult of Pushkin as a kind of forerunner of the Symbolists. In an effort to create a new synthetic culture, the Symbolists in Pushkin's work saw a new way of understanding the world, the richest source of eternal plots and images, the quintessence of Russian and European culture.
The appeal to Pushkin was inspired by the philosophical, aesthetic and myth-making aspirations of the Symbolists, who perceived Pushkin's work as a kind of aesthetic standard. On the other hand, in the literature of symbolism, its own version of the “Petersburg myth”1 took shape, the soil for which was the “Petersburg myth” of nineteenth-century writers, at the origins of which was Pushkin’s The Bronze Horseman. This poem in a symbolist reading, as it were, contained a philosophical setting for unraveling the most important issues of Russian history, culture, and national identity. That is why the Symbolists in their "Petersburg texts" often turned to this work.
The myth was understood by the symbolists as the most vivid expression of the essence of the creative principles of the world and culture. The mythologization of culture, the revival of the mythological type of thinking leads to the emergence of "texts-myths", where myth plays the role of a deciphering code, and images and symbols are the essence of mythologemes - "folded metonymic signs of integral plots"2.
The object of our study is the phenomenon of Pushkin's tradition (in this case, we limit ourselves to his one - final - work - the poem "The Bronze Horseman"), refracted in the "Petersburg" prose of the Symbolists, including their literary-critical essays, affecting the personality and work of Pushkin.
The subject of our research is limited to D.S. Merezhkovsky’s own “Petersburg” novels “The Antichrist. Peter and Alexei” and A. Bely “Petersburg”, as well as literary-critical articles by V. Bryusov (and first of all, the article “The Bronze Horseman”), D. Merezhkovsky (including the article “Pushkin”, the treatise “L. Tolstoy and Dostoevsky”), Andrei Bely (primarily his work “Rhythm as Dialectics and The Bronze Horseman”, “Symbolism as a World View”).
Note that the concept of "prose" among the Symbolists extended not only to works of art, but also on literary - critical articles, even - on historical research. Our use of the term "prose" in the dissertation
1 See works: MintsZ.G. On some "neomythological" texts in the work of Russian symbolists // Uchen, notes of Tartu University. Issue. 459. Tartu, 1979, p. 95; Toporov V.N. Myth. Ritual. Symbol. Image: Research in the field of mythopoetic.-M.: Progress-Culture, 1995.S.368-400; Dolgopolov JI.K. The myth of Petersburg and its transformation at the beginning of the century // Dolgopolov J1.K. At the turn of the century. About Russian literature late XIX beginning of the 20th century. - JL: Owls. writer, 1977, pp. 158-204; Titarenko S. D. Myth as a universal symbolist culture and the poetics of cyclic forms // Silver Age: philosophical, aesthetic and artistic searches. - Kemerovo, 1996. S. 6; Chepkasov A.V. Neo-mythologism in the work of D.S. Merezhkovsky in the 1890-1910s// Abstract of the dissertation. -Tomsk, 1999; Iliev S.P. The evolution of the myth about Petersburg in the novels of Merezhkovsky ("Peter and Alexei") and Andrei Bely ("Petersburg") // D.S. Merezhkovsky. Thought and word. -M.: Heritage, 1999. S. 56-72; Prikhodko I.S. Merezhkovsky's "Eternal Companions" (On the Problem of the Mythologization of Culture). // D.S. Merezhkovsky. Thought and word. C198. corresponds to the symbolist word usage in the sense of artistic and literary-critical texts.
The choice of these prose works of the Symbolists is dictated by the fact that in them the Pushkin tradition is accommodated in the poem "The Bronze Horseman". And this is not at all accidental. Firstly, the Symbolists themselves singled out The Bronze Horseman as the most significant, relevant work for their modernity. "The Bronze Horseman" - we are all in the vibrations of his copper, "- such is Blok's written statement. This means that in the "air of time" at the turn of the epochs, all the problems and artistic solutions of Pushkin, embodied in this poem, acquired increased relevance for the symbolists. Secondly, the principles of Pushkin's historicism in The Bronze Horseman turned out to be so concentrated and philosophically significant that the Symbolists most of all in their interpretations of the personality, the elements, the historical path of Russia, the theme of St. in understanding the past as well as in understanding the present. Therefore, the poem "The Bronze Horseman" received such a wide response in artistic creativity and critique of the symbolists. However, the problem of understanding and holistic interpretation of Pushkin's "The Bronze Horseman" in symbolist prose remains, in our opinion, not fully studied.
Hence, the purpose of the work is to reveal the patterns of the symbolist perception of Pushkin's work and the receptive transformation of Pushkin's historical, philosophical and artistic tradition (the poem "The Bronze Horseman") in the symbolist articles about Pushkin and the "Petersburg" novels of Merezhkovsky and Andrei Bely. The goal is to solve the following tasks:
1) To analyze the literary-critical "Pushkinian" of Bryusov, Merezhkovsky, Bely and others in order to identify the role of Pushkin in the philosophical and aesthetic self-determination of the Symbolists.
2) Analyze Merezhkovsky's novel Antichrist. Peter and Alexei”, revealing at the same time the religious and philosophical attitudes and aesthetic and poetic principles of the symbolist writer in comparison with Pushkin’s poem “The Bronze Horseman”.
2 Mints Z.G. On some "neomythological" texts in the work of Russian symbolists // Uch. app.
3) Isolate the reminiscent layer from The Bronze Horseman in Andrei Bely's novel Petersburg and the methods of receptive refraction of Pushkin's historicism in the poetics of the novel.
The methodological basis of the dissertation is literary studies devoted to the problems of the historical and cultural tradition, and in particular, Pushkin's (works by L.K. Dolgopolov, Yu.M. Lotman, L.A. Kolobaeva, L.V. Pumpyansky, S.A. Nebolsin , V.V. Musatova). An important methodological guide in the analysis of the reminiscent layer of the "Bronze Horseman" for us was the above-mentioned monograph by K.A. Medvedeva (Vladivostok, 1989).
The Pushkin tradition, in our understanding, revealed in itself, first of all, a unique connection, interdependence of historical and spiritual experience people and - the artist's understanding of it as a representative of the culture of his time (also "the turn of the eras": the end of the 18th - the beginning of the 19th century). In this regard, we see the main driving force the development of Pushkin's creativity in its realistic tendency and the historicism of Pushkin associated with it. And at the next "turn of the eras" of the late XIX - early XX century, the symbolists' comprehension of the Pushkin tradition in its essence was extremely complicated both by the circumstances of the time (deepening of the gap between the "people and the intelligentsia"), and by the contradictory aesthetic, social positions of the Symbolists, their eschatological aspirations, expectation and a premonition of universal catastrophes.
It should be noted that Bryusov, Merezhkovsky, Andrey Bely turned to topics relevant to their time and problems raised by Pushkin. But the most difficult thing for them was to comprehend that “enduringly valuable” that was the essence of the Pushkin tradition, as we understand it, that is, comprehending the unique connection of the experience of history, the spiritual life of the people with the experience of culture as a phenomenon of “enlightenment”, consciousness of the “enlightened mind”, cultural figure of the turn of the XVIII-XIX centuries.
Depending on the formulation of the problem, we turned to the historical-cultural, comparative-historical and comparative-typological methods of research.
University of Tartu. Issue. 459. - Tartu, 1979. P. 95.
The scientific novelty of the work is determined by the outlined problems and research methodology. The proposed perspective of the topic reveals a "cross-cutting" historical and philosophical tradition from Pushkin's "golden" to the modernist "silver" age. The dissertation systematically analyzes the attitude of the symbolists to the Pushkin tradition, declared in The Bronze Horseman. This made it possible to illuminate in a new way the refraction of the category of Pushkin's historicism, his ideas about the relationship between the individual and the state, the role of the individual in history; to reveal the specifics of the implementation of Pushkin's artistic experience in the aesthetic consciousness of the Symbolists and in the poetics of the "Silver Age".
The scientific and practical significance of the work is determined by the fact. that it covers a wide layer of insufficiently studied problems of literary and historical perception and typological proximity of thematically similar literary texts. The methodology for analyzing the identification of reminiscent motifs in specific texts can be used when writing generalizing works on the phenomenon of literary tradition.
The results of the study can be used when reading general and special courses on the history of Russian literature, compiling teaching aids on the works of Pushkin, poets of the "silver" age for students of philology, language teachers.
Approbation of the main provisions of the dissertation was received in reports and speeches at 10 international, interuniversity and regional conferences from 1997 to 2001 in Vladivostok (FENU), Komsomolsk-on-Amur (KSPI), Ussuriysk (USPI), Neryungri (YSU), in the special course "Russian Symbolism", read for philology students at FENU.
Work structure. The dissertation consists of an introduction, three chapters, the material in which is distributed in accordance with the tasks set, a conclusion and a list of references.
Conclusion of scientific work dissertation on the topic "Pushkin's tradition (the poem "The Bronze Horseman") in the work of Russian symbolists: V. Bryusov, D. Merezhkovsky, A. Bely"
Conclusion
Let's summarize the results of the study. Pushkin's tradition played a huge role in the "symbolist" space of the "Silver Age", performing the function of an aesthetic prism that refracted all the key problems of existential-historical being at the "turn of the century". The phenomenon of the Pushkin tradition is one of the most important constants that ensure the unity of the philosophical, historical and artistic "picture of the world" of the Symbolists. For recent appeal to The Bronze Horseman was motivated by Pushkin's formulation of the problem of historicism. At the same time, this problem has become a kind of "stumbling block" in the symbolist projections of the tragic situations embodied in Pushkin's poem onto living reality. Russian history(a novel by D.S. Merezhkovsky) and modernity (a novel by Andrei Bely). From this conjugation of life and art, a kind of new artistic and historical vision of the "world order" was born. At the same time, the conflict collisions of Pushkin's "The Bronze Horseman" played the role of some "archetypal keys" to the symbolist comprehension of history and modernity. The range of interpretations of Pushkin's historicism, expressed in his poem, was determined by how a particular artist interpreted the issue of individual freedom (the highest value in the symbolist ethical and aesthetic system) and historical necessity (assuming an autocratic-state organization of the life of a nation). The axiological relevance of the problem of historicism was determined by the eschatological nature of the era.
The tragic insolubility of the conflict between the individual and the state, free will and historical conditioning at the beginning of the 20th century led to the symbolist appeal to Pushkin's poem both at the level of its philosophical and journalistic comprehension, and at the level of receptive inclusion of ideas, images, plot and compositional elements of The Bronze Horseman in motive structure of his novels. At the same time, the antinomy and ambivalence of the philosophical and ethical conflict given in the original source, both in Merezhkovsky and Bely, was preserved, embodied in the poetics of antitheses, figurative oxymorons, duality, semantic inversions, etc. All this
List of scientific literature Poleshchuk, Lyudmila Zenonovna, dissertation on the topic "Russian literature"
1. Azadovsky K.M., Maksimov D.E. Bryusov and "Scales" (On the history of the publication) // Valery Bryusov. - M.: Nauka, 1976. - Literary heritage, v. 85.S.296.
2. Averintsev S.S. Byzantium and Russia: Two types of spirituality. Art. 2nd. Law and mercy // New world. 1988. No.> 9. S. 234-235.
3. Aikhenwald Yu. Silhouettes of Russian writers. Issue. 1. -M., 1908. S. 92-93.
4. Alexander Blok and Andrey Bely. Correspondence. M., 1940. - S. 7.
5. Altman M.S. Pushkin's reminiscence in Blok // Philologica. Studies in language and literature. L., 1970. - S. 350-355.
6. Amfiteatrov A. Russian writer and Roman emperor // Amfiteatrov A.V. Literary album. St. Petersburg, 1904.
7. Anastasy (Gribanovsky), Metropolitan Pushkin and his attitude to religion and the Orthodox Church // A.S. Pushkin: the path to Orthodoxy. M., 1996. -S.66.
8. Antsiferov N.P. Soul of Petersburg: Essays. L .: Lira, 1990. - S. 64.66.
9. Arkhangelsky A.N. Poetic story by A.S. Pushkin "The Bronze Horseman". -M.: Higher school, 1990. S. 8-44.
10. Yu.Akhmatova A.A. Pushkin and the Neva Seashore // Anna Akhmatova. About Pushkin. Articles and notes. Ed. 3rd, rev. and supplemented. -M.: Book, 1989. S. 153.
11. Anchugova T. For tomorrow of Russian poetry! (To the 100th anniversary of the birth of Bryusov) // Siberian Lights, 1973, No. 12. P. 152.
12. Bakhtin N.M. Merezhkovsky and history // D.S. Merezhkovsky: pro et contra. - St. Petersburg: RKhGI, 2001.-S. 362-365.
13. Belinsky V.G. Sobr. op. in 3 vols. T. 3. M.: Gosizdat. Artistic lit., 1948. - S. 603-609.
14. Bely A. Apocalypse in Russian poetry // Bely A. Symbolism as a world outlook. M.: Respublika, 1994. S. 411-412.
15. Bely A. Meadow green // Symbolism as a world outlook. On the latest theoretical disputes in the field of the artistic word. -M.: Respublika, 1994. -S. 167.332.
16. Bely A. Gogol's Mastery. M.: MALP, 1996. - 351 p.
17. Bely A. Rhythm as dialectics and "The Bronze Horseman": Research. M.: Federation, 1929.-S. 175-191.
18. Bely A. Rhythm and reality // Bely A. From the unpublished legacy of Andrei Bely / Publ. E.I. Chistyakova // Culture as an aesthetic problem. -M, 1985. S. 142.
20. Bely A. Symbolism. Book of articles. M., 1910. - S. 382-383.
21. Bely A. On fiction / / Russian speech. 1990. No. 5. S. 49-53.
22. Berdyaev N.A. New Christianity (D.S. Merezhkovsky) // D.S. Merezhkovsky: pro et contra. St. Petersburg: RKhGI, 2001. - S. 331-354.
23. Bernice G. Rosenthal (USA). Merezhkovsky and Nietzsche (On the history of borrowings) // Merezhkovsky D.S. Thought and word. M.: Heritage, 1999. -S. 119-136.
24. Blagoy D.D. Sociology of Pushkin's creativity. M., 1931. - S, 268-269.
25. Blagoy D. Pushkin's Mastery. -M., 1995. S. 220.
26. Good D. From Cantemir to the present day. T. 2. -M .: Khudozh. lit., 1973. S. 406433.
27. Blok A.A. Complete (academic) coll. op. and letters in 20 vols. V. 5 (Poems and poems 1917-1921). M.: Nauka, 1999. - S. 96 (568 e.).
28. Blok A.A. Sobr. op. in 7 vols. T. 5. M.-L., 1962. - S. 334-335.
29. Blokovsky collection (1). Scientific works. Conf., dedicated to, studied, life and work of A.A. Blok. Tartu, 1964. - S. 377.
30. Bogomolov N.A. Life among poems // Valery Bryusov. Among the verses. 18941924: Manifestos, articles, reviews. M.: Sov. writer, 1990. - S. 5-6.
31. Borev Yu. The art of interpretation and evaluation: The experience of reading the Bronze Horseman. M.: Sov. writer, 1981. - S. 289-290.
32. Bryusov V.Ya. My Pushkin: Articles, research, observations. -M.: GIZ, 1929. -318 p.
33. Bryusov V.Ya. Sobr. op. in 7 vols. -M.: Artist. lit., 1975. T. 7.
34. Bryusov V. In work on Pushkin // Literary archive. Materials on the history of literature and social movement. M. - L., 1938. - S. 302.
35. Bryusov V.Ya. Lyceum poems by Pushkin. According to the manuscripts of the Moscow Rumyantsev Museum and other sources. To the criticism of the text. M.: Scorpion, 1907. S. 3-19.
36. Bryusov V.Ya. Initial editions, versions, programs, plans for publishing the complete works of Pushkin // RGALI. Fund 56, op. 2, units ridge 71. p. 3.
37. Bryusov V.Ya. The plan of the course of lectures read in the literary studio: "Pushkin's period and its significance in Russian literature" // RGALI. Fund 56, op. 2, units ridge 37. 2 p. l.
38. Bryusov V.Ya. RGALI. Fund 56, op.2, item ridge 32. 1p.l.
39. Bryusov V. Ya. Pushkin and Baratynsky. M.: University Printing House, 1900. -S. one.
40. Bryusov V. From my life: Autobiographical and memoir prose. M.: Terra, 1994.-S. 24.
41. Bryusov V. From the letter of I.L. Shcheglov-Leontiev (1904). Publication N.L. Stepanova // Literary archive. Issue. 1. Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1938. - P. 80.
42. Bryusov V.Ya. Letters to P.P. Pertsov 1894-1896 (On the history of early symbolism) // Texts and materials. Issue. III. M.: Gosud. academician artistic Sciences, 1927.-82 p.
43. Bryusov Readings 1962. Yerevan: Publishing house Yerevan, state. ped. Institute, 1963. -S. 366-400.
44. Bryusov Readings 1963. Yerevan: Yerevan State Publishing House. ped. inst-t, 1964. -572 p.
45. Bulgakov S.N. Apocalyptic and socialism (Religious and philosophical parallels) // Bulgakov S.N. Op. in 2 vols. Vol. 2: Selected Articles. M., 1993. - S. 430-431.
46. Burkhart D. Semantics of space. Semantic analysis of the poem "The Bronze Horseman" by Pushkin. Per. G. Gergett // University Pushkin Collection. Rep. Ed. B.V. Kataev.-M.: MGU, 1999. -S.195, 197.
47. Burkhart D. On the semiotics of space: “Moscow text” in the “Second (dramatic) symphony” by Andrei Bely // Moscow and “Moscow” by Andrei Bely: Sat. articles. M.: Russian. state humanit. un-t, 1990. - S. 72-90.
48. Burlakov N.S. Valery Bryusov. Essay on creativity. M.: Enlightenment, 1975. -S. 201.
49. Veidle V.V. Bryusov after many years // Mochulsky K. Valery Bryusov. -Paris: Ymca-Press, 1962. S. 1-5.
50. Vetlovskaya V.E. Russian literature and folklore. Second half of the 19th century. -L, 1982.-S. 31-32.
51. Volynsky A. Literary notes// Northern Bulletin. 1893, No. 3. -S.112.
52. Vorontsova T.V. Pushkin and Merezhkovsky. "Own in a stranger" in the trilogy "Christ and the Antichrist" // Pushkin and Russian culture: Works of young scientists. Issue. 2. -M.: Dialogue of Moscow State University, 1999. S. 120-121.
53. Vorontsova T.V. The concept of history in the trilogy by D.S. Merezhkovsky "Christ and Antichrist". Abstract dis. cand. philol. Sciences. -M., 1998.
54. Memories of Andrei Bely / Comp. and intro. Art. V.M. Piskunov. M.: Respublika, 1995. - 591 p.
55. Vygotsky L.S. Literary notes: "Petersburg". A novel by Andrei Bely. - "New Way", 1916, No. 47. S. 27-32.
56. Galitsina V.N. Pushkin and Blok // Pushkin collection. Pskov, 1962. - S.57-93.
57. Gasparov B.M. Pushkin's poetic language as a fact of the history of the Russian literary language. SPb., 1999. S. 292-293. (Original ed.: Wiener Slawistischer Almanach. Sonderband 27. Wien, 1992).
58. Gindin S.I. Bryusov's unfulfilled plan (to the study of the literary and critical heritage of the poet) // Questions of Literature. 1970. No. 9. P. 200.
59. Ginzburg A.S. Pushkin and Bryusov // Young Guard, 1934. No. 10.
60. Gippius Merezhkovskaya Z.N. From the book: Dmitry Merezhkovsky // Questions of Literature. 1990, No. 5. - S. 241-246.
61. Grinevich P. Reader's Notes ("Resurrected Gods") // Russian Wealth. 1900. No. 4.
62. Gromov P. Blok, his predecessors and contemporaries. M. - L., 1966. - S. 1822.
63. Dal V.I. On beliefs, superstitions and prejudices of the Russian people. St. Petersburg, 1994. S. 115.
64. Dvortsova N. Prishvin and Merezhkovsky // Questions of Literature. 1993. Issue. III. -WITH. 118.
65. Dilaktorskaya O.G. Petersburg story of Dostoevsky. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 1999. -352 p.
66. Dolgopolov JI. K. Andrei Bely and his novel "Petersburg": Monograph. JL: Owls. writer, 1988. - 416 p.
67. Dolgopolov JI.K. At the turn of the century. On Russian literature of the late 19th early 20th century. L.: Owls. writer, 1977. - S. 158-204, 253.
68. Dolgopolov L.K. Symbolism of personal names in the works of Andrei Bely // Cultural heritage Ancient Russia. M., 1976.
69. Dolgopolov L.K. Beginning of acquaintance. On the personal and literary fate of Andrei Bely // Andrei Bely. Problems of creativity: Articles, memoirs, publications: Collection. -M.: Sov. writer, 1988.-p.25-103.
70. Dolgopolov L.K. Creative history and historical and literary significance of A. Bely's novel "Petersburg" // Bely A. "Petersburg". Moscow: Nauka, 1981 - 527 p.
71. Ermilova E.V. Theory and figurative world of Russian symbolism. -M.: Nauka, 1989. -S. 214; 150-151.
72. Zhirmunsky V. Valery Bryusov and the legacy of Pushkin. Pb., 1922. S. 81.
73. Ivanitsky A.I. About the subtext of the poem by A.S. Pushkin "The Bronze Horseman" // Russian Language Abroad. M., 1993. No. 2. - S. 77.
74. Ivanov E.P. Rider. Something about the city of Petersburg // A.S. Pushkin: pro et contra. The personality and creativity of A. Pushkin in the assessment of Russian thinkers and researchers. St. Petersburg: RKHGI, 2000.
75. Ivanov Vyach. By the stars. SPb., 1909. - S. 37-38.
76. Izmailov N.V. "The Bronze Horseman" A.S. Pushkin // A.S. Pushkin "The Bronze Horseman". L.: Nauka, 1978. S. 227-242.
77. Iliev S.P. The evolution of the myth about Petersburg in the novels of Merezhkovsky ("Peter and Alexei") and Andrei Bely ("Petersburg") // D.S. Merezhkovsky. Thought and word. M.: Heritage, 1999. - S. 56-72.
78. Ilyin I.A. Creativity Merezhkovsky // Ilyin I.A. Lonely artist. -M., 1993.-S. 139.
79. Ilyin I.A. Creativity Merezhkovsky // Moscow, 1990, No. 8. S. 186-196.
80. Ilyin I. Merezhkovsky-artist // D.S. Merezhkovsky: pro et contra. St. Petersburg: RKhGI, 2001.-p. 374-389.
81. History of Russian literature in 4 vols. T. 4. Literature of the late XIX - early XX century (1881-1917). - L.: Nauka, 1983. - 500 p.
82. Kozhevnikova N.A. On the types of repetition in the prose of A. Bely // Lexical units and organization of the structure of a literary text. Kalinin, 1983. - S. 52-70.
83. Kozhevnikova N.A. Streets, lanes, curves, houses in Andrey Bely's novel "Moscow" // Moscow and "Moscow" by Andrey Bely: Collection of articles / Ed. ed. M.L. Gasparov. -M.: Russian. state humanit. un-t, 1999.-p.90-113.
84. Kibalnik S.A. The Artistic Philosophy of Pushkin. St. Petersburg: Academ, Sciences. Petropolis, 1999. -200 p.
85. Kiseleva L.F. Pushkin in the world of Russian prose. -M.: Heritage, 1999.-362p.
86. Kling O.A. Grotesque as a way of symbolic transformation of reality (A. Bely) // Fiction and Russian literature of the XX century. M., 1994.
87. Kolobaeva L.A. Merezhkovsky novelist // Izv. Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Ser. lit. and language. T. 50. No. 5. -M., 1991. - S. 447-449.
88. Kolobaeva L.A. Total unity of the artistic world. (Merezhkovsky-novelist) // Merezhkovsky D.S. Thought and word. M.: Heritage, 1999. - S. 5-19.
89. Komarovich V.L. About the "Bronze Horseman" // Literary contemporary, 1937, No. 2.-S. 205.
90. Koreneva M.Yu. Merezhkovsky and German culture // At the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. From the history international relations Russian literature: Sat. scientific works.-L.: Nauka, 1991.- S. 56.63.
91. Krasnov G.V. The poem "The Bronze Horseman" and its traditions in Russian poetry // Boldin Readings. Gorky, 1997. - S. 98.
92. Kuzmin M.A. Tsarevich Alexei // Conventions: Articles on Art. Tomsk, 1996.-p. 77-78.
93. Lavrov A.V. Memoir trilogy and memoir genre by Andrey Bely // White Andrey. At the turn of two centuries. Memories: In 3 books. Book. 1. -M.: Artist. lit., 1989, p. 9.
94. Litvin E.S. V.Ya. Bryusov about Pushkin // Bryusov readings of 1963. - Yerevan, 1964. S. 202-227.
95. Literary archive: no. 1. ANSSSR.-M.-L., 1938.-S. 304-351.
96. Literary encyclopedic dictionary /LES/. M.: Sov. encyclopedia, 1987.-p. 322.
97. Likhachev D.S. Foreword // Andrey Bely "Petersburg". M.: Nauka, 1981. -S. 3-5.
98. Likhachev D.S. About the Russian intelligentsia // New World. 1993, No. 2.- S. 6-8.
99. Lee Hyun-suk "The Bronze Horseman" by Pushkin in the context of A. Bely's novel "Petersburg" (to the problem of intertextuality) // Candidate, dissertation. -M.: MGU, 1998.- 178 p.
100. Losev A.F. Essays on ancient symbolism and mythology.-M., 1993.-S.27-38.
101. Lotman Yu.M. Symbolism of St. Petersburg and the problem of city semiotics // Lotman Yu.M. Selected articles: In 3 vols. 2. Tallinn: Alexandra, 1992. - S. 921.
102. Lotman Yu.M., Mints Z.G. Images of natural elements in Russian literature (Pushkin Dostoevsky - Blok) // Pushkin. - St. Petersburg: Art - St. Petersburg, 1995.-S. 814-820.
103. Lyubimova E.N. Trilogy "Christ and Antichrist" // D.S. Merezhkovsky. Sobr. op. in 4 volumes. T. 2. M., 1990. - S. 762.
104. Makarovskaya G.V. "The Bronze Horseman": Results and problems of the study. - Saratov: Publishing house of Saratov, un-va, 1978.
105. Maksimov D.E. Bryusov. Poetry and position. L.: Owls. writer, 1969.-239p.
106. Maksimov D.E. Bryusov-critic // V. Bryusov. Sobr. op. in 7 vols. T. 6. M: Khudozh. lit., 1975.-S. 5-8.
107. Maksimov D.E. About the novel-poem of Andrey Bely "Petersburg". On the issue of catharsis // Russian poets of the beginning of the century: Essays. L.: Owls. writer, 1986.- S. 326.
108. Makogonenko G.P. Creativity A.S. Pushkin in the 1830s (1833-1836). L.: Khudozh.lit., 1982.-S. 175.
109. Malchukova T.G. Antique and Christian traditions in the poetry of A.S. Pushkin. Abstract dissertation (.) Doctor of Philology, Sciences. Novgorod, 1999. -70 p.
111. Markovich V.M. Petersburg stories N.V. Gogol: Monograph. L.: Artist. lit., 1989.-S. 105-106.
112. Medvedeva K.A. The problem of the new man in the work of A. Blok and V. Mayakovsky: Traditions and innovation. Vladivostok: Dalnevost Publishing House. unta, 1989. -292 p.
113. Medvedeva K.A. Bryusov as a researcher of the "Bronze Horseman" // One Hundred Years of the Silver Age: Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference: Neryungri, May 23-25, 2001 / Scientific. ed. B. S. Bugrov, L. G. Kihney. M.: MAKS Press, 2001. - 244 p.
114. Medvedeva K.A. Article by V.Ya. Bryusov "The Bronze Horseman" (to the assessment of a Pushkin critic) // Problems of Slavic culture and civilization: Collection of articles. Ussuriysk: UGPI, 2001. - S. 181 -182.
115. Meilakh B.S. Pushkin. Essay on life and creativity. M.
116. Merezhkovskiy D.S. Pushkin //D. Merezhkovsky. Eternal companions. Pushkin. 3rd ed. SPb.: Ed. M.V. Pirozhkova, 1906. - 90 p.
117. Merezhkovsky D.S. Pushkin // Merezhkovsky D.S. L. Tolstoy and Dostoevsky. Eternal companions. M.: Respublika, 1995. - S. 487-522.
118. Merezhkovsky D. Pushkin // Pushkin in Russian Philosophical Criticism. M.: Book, 1990.-p. 144.
119. Merezhkovsky D.S. On the reasons for the decline and new trends in modern Russian literature // Sokolov A.G., Mikhailova M.V. Russian literary criticism of the end of the beginning of the century: an anthology. - M., 1982.-S.266.
120. Merezhkovsky D.S. M.Yu. Lermontov. Poet of superhumanity // Merezhkovsky D.S. In the stillness. M., 1991. - S. 312.
121. Merezhkovsky D.S. Ivanych and Gleb // Acropolis: Select. lit.-critical articles. -M., 1991.-S. 227-246.
122. Merezhkovsky D.S. Secret of the West. Atlantis Europe. - Belgrade, 1931. - S. 18.
123. Minsky N. Testaments of Pushkin II World of Art. 1899, No. 13-14 S.21-36.
124. Mints Z.G. On some "neomythological" texts in the work of Russian symbolists // Uch. app. University of Tartu. Issue. 459. Blok's collection of Sh. Tartu, 1979.-S. 95.
125. Mints Z.G. At the origins of the Symbolist Pushkin // Pushkin Readings: Tartu-Tallinn, 1987. P. 72-76.
126. Mints Z.G., Bezrodny M.V., Danilevsky A.A. "Petersburg text" and Russian symbolism // Uch. app. Tartu University. Issue. 664. Semiotics of the city and urban culture. Tartu, 1984. - S. 81.
127. Mints Z.G. Blok and Pushkin // Uch. app. Tartu University. T. XXI. Literary criticism. Tartu, 1973.-p. 142.
128. Mints Z.G. About the D.S. trilogy Merezhkovsky "Christ and Antichrist". Comments //Merezhkovsky D.S. Christ and Antichrist. Reprint reproduction of the 1914 edition. In 4 volumes. T. 4.-M .: Book, 1990. S. 598-636.
129. Myths of the peoples of the world in 2 vols. T. 1. M.: Russian Encyclopedia, 1982. - S. 92.
130. Mochulsky K.V. Block. White. Bryusov. -M.: Respublika, 1997. 479 p.
131. Mochulsky K. Andrey Bely. Tomsk: Aquarius, 1997. - S. 150-155.
132. Musatov V.V. Pushkin tradition in Russian poetry of the first half of the 20th century (A. Blok, S. Yesenin, V. Mayakovsky). M.: Prometheus, 1991. - S. 832.
133. Nebolsin S.A. Classical tradition and the problem of creative activity. /Pushkin and modernism/. Candidate, dissertation -M.: IMLI, 1979. 165 p.
134. Unpublished Pushkin. St. Petersburg, 1994. - S. 34.
135. Neklyudova M.G. Traditions and innovation in Russian art of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. M.: Art, 1991. - 396 p.
136. Nepomniachtchi B.C. Poetry and fate: Articles and notes about Pushkin. M.: Sov. writer., 1983. - 368 p.
137. Niva Georges. Andrey Bely // History of Russian literature: XX century. Silver Age / Ed. J. Niva. M .: Progress - Litera, 1995. - S. 106127.
138. Nikitina M.A. Precepts of Realism in the Novels of Senior Symbolists. "Christ and Antichrist" Dm. Merezhkovsky, “Small Demon” by F. Sologub // Connection of Times: The Problem of Continuity in Russian Literature in the Late 19th and Early 20th Centuries. -M., 1992.-S. 207-214.
139. Nikolyukin A.N. Merezhkovsky phenomenon // D.S. Merezhkovsky: pro et contra. St. Petersburg: RKHGI, 2001. - S. 7-29.
140. Novikov L.A. Stylistics of Andrei Bely's ornamental prose. M.: Nauka, 1990.- 181 p.
141. Odoevtseva IV On the banks of the Neva: Literary materials. M.: Artist. lit., 1989.-S. 117.
142. Orlitsky Yu.B. "Anapestic" "Petersburg" and "iambic" "Moscow"? // Moscow and "Moscow" by Andrei Bely: Sat. articles. / Rev. ed. M.L. Gasparov. -M.: Russian. state humanit. un-t, 1999. S. 200-212.
143. Ospovat A.L., Timenchik R.D. "It's a sad story to keep.": About the author and readers of The Bronze Horseman. M.: Book, 1985. - S. 139-147.
144. Otradin M.V. Petersburg in Russian poetry of the 18th - early 20th century // Petersburg in Russian poetry (XVIII - early 20th century): Poetic anthology. - L .: Publishing house of Leningrad University, 1988. S. 5.
145. Paperno I. Pushkin in the life of a man of the Silver Age // Contemporary American Pushkin Studies. Collection of articles / Ed. MIND. Todd III SPb., Academic. project, 1999. - 334 p.
146. Paperny V.M. Andrey Bely and Gogol // Uch. app. Tartu University. Issue. 683. Works on Russian and Slavic philology. Tartu, 1986. - S. 59-60.
147. Pertsov P.P. D. Merezhkovsky. Eternal Companions // World of Art. 1899, No. 10, May. Dep. II.-S. 114-116.
148. Pertsov P.P. Bryusov at the beginning of the century // Banner, 1940, No. 3. P. 248.
149. Piksanov N.K. Preface // Bryusov V. My Pushkin: Articles, research, observations. -M.-L.: GIZ, 1929-318 p.
150. Piskunov V. The second space of A. Bely's novel "Petersburg" // Questions of Literature. 1987, No. 10. S. 141.
151. Piskunova S., Piskunov V. Comments on A. Bely's novel "Petersburg" // Bely A. Op. in 2 tg. T. 2. Prose. M.: Artist. lit., 1990.- S. 635.
152. Piskunova S., Piskunov V. Culturological utopia of Andrey Bely // Questions of Literature. 1995. Issue. 3. S. 225.
153. Povartsov S.N. The trajectory of the fall (On the literary and aesthetic concepts of D. Merezhkovsky) // Questions of Literature. 1986, No. 11. S. 169, 175.
154. Polotskaya E. Articles about Pushkin // V. Bryusov. Sobr. op. in 7 tt. T. 7. M.: Khudozh. lit., 1975. - S. 442-450.
155. Polyakova S.V. From observations on the poetics of the novel "Petersburg". Real equivalents of characters // S.V. Polyakov "Oleynikov and about Oleinikov" and other works on Russian literature. St. Petersburg: INAPRESS, 1997. - S. 293-300.
156. Ponomareva G.M. Sources of the image of the "Mother of God Joy of All Who Sorrow" in D. Merezhkovsky's novel "Peter and Alexei" // Uchen. app. Tartu State university, 1990. Issue. 897. S. 72-80.
157. Prikhodko I.S. "Eternal Companions" of Merezhkovsky (On the Problem of the Mythologization of Culture) // Merezhkovsky D.S. Thought and word. M.: Heritage, 1999.-S. 198.
158. Pumpyansky JI.B. About the "Bronze Horseman", about St. Petersburg, about its symbol. // JI.B. Pumpyansky. Classical tradition: Collection of works on the history of Russian literature. M.: Languages of Russian culture, 2000. - S.595-599.
159. Pushkin and Russian culture. Issue. 2. M.: Dialog-MGU, 1999. - 156 p.
160. Ranchin A.M. Poetry of Brodsky and "The Bronze Horseman" // A.M. Ranchin. Joseph Brodsky and Russian poetry of the 18th-20th centuries. M.: Max-Press, 2001. - S. 119.
161. Rozanov V. A. S. Pushkin // New time. 1899, No. 8348. S. 2-3.
162. Rozanov I.N. Folk trail. To the 125th anniversary of A.S. Pushkin // World illustration. 1924. No. 3,4. S. 32.
163. Rozanov V.V. New job about Tolstoy and Dostoevsky (D. Merezhkovsky. JI. Tolstoy and Dostoevsky) // New time. 1900. June 24, No. 8736.
164. Rozanov V.V. Among foreigners // Rozanov V.V. About writing and writers. -M., 1995.-S. 150.
165. Rudich V. Dmitry Merezhkovsky // History of Russian literature: XX century. Silver Age. / Ed. J. Niva. M.: Progress - Litera, 1995. -S. 214225.
166. Rudnev V.P. Dictionary of culture of the XX century. Key Concepts and texts. M.: Agraf, 1999.-S. 113.
167. Russian writers of the XIX century about Pushkin. L., 1938. - S. 12-18.
168. Skatov N.N. Far and near. -M., 1981. S. 27.
169. Sadovsky B. Valery Bryusov. Ways and crossroads. Collection of poems.T.Z. All tunes (1906-1909) // Russian Thought. 1909. No. 6. S. 139.
170. Lena Szilard Poetics of the symbolist novel of the late 19th early 20th century (Bryusov, Sologub, Bely) // Problems of the poetics of Russian realism in the late 19th early 20th century: Sat. articles. L .: Publishing House of Leningrad State University, 1984. - S. 87.
171. Sipovsky V.V. Pushkin. Life and art. SPb., 1907. - S. 49.
172. Skvoznikov V.D. On Lyrics // Theory of Literature: Main Problems in Historical Coverage. Types and genres of literature. M.: Nauka, 1964. - S. 219-224.
173. Sologub F. Sobr. op. vX-tig.T. X. -SPb., 1913.-S. 159-197.
174. Sologub F. About the coming boor of Merezhkovsky // Golden Fleece. 1906, No. 4. S. 103.
175. Spasovich V.D. D.S. Merezhkovsky and his "Eternal Companions" // Bulletin of Europe. 1897, No. 6. S. 558-603.
176. Stepun F.A. The past and the unfulfilled. M.: St. Peter., 1995. -S. 112.
177. Sugay L. ". And the sparkling arabesques draws" // Andrey Bely. Symbolism as a worldview. -M.: Respublika, 1994. S. 11-14.
178. Timenchik R.D. "The Bronze Horseman" in the Literary Consciousness of the Beginning of the 20th Century // Problems of Pushkin Studies: Sat. scientific works. Riga, 1983. - 90 p.
179. Titarenko S.D. Motives and Images of F. Nietzsche in the Poetics of Early Bryusov // Bryusov Readings. Stavropol, 1994. - S. 43.
180. Titarenko S.D. Myth as a Universal Symbolist Culture and the Poetics of Cyclic Forms // Silver Age: Philosophical, Aesthetic and Artistic Searches. Kemerovo, 1996. - S. 6.
181. Tikhancheva E.P. Two lectures by V.Ya. Bryusov about Pushkin // Bryusov readings of 1962. Yerevan, 1963. - S. 366-400.
182. Tolstaya S.M. Evil spirits // Mythological Dictionary. -M., 1991. S. 396. Stlb. 2.
183. Tomashevsky B.V. Pushkin's poetic heritage // Tomashevsky B.V. Pushkin: Works of different years. M.: Book, 1990. - S. 252.
184. Toporov V.N. Myth. Ritual. Symbol. Image: Studies in the field of mythopoetic. -M.: Progress-Culture, 1995. S. 368-400.
185. Tynyanov Yu.N. Pushkin and his contemporaries. -M.: Nauka, 1968. S. 153-154.
186. Fedotov G.P. Singer of Empire and Freedom // Pushkin in Russian Philosophical Criticism. -M.: Book, 1990. S. 362-363.
187. Feinberg I.L. Pushkin's unfinished works. M., 1979. - S. 44.
188. Feinberg I.L. Through the pages of the "History of Peter" // Reading Pushkin's notebooks. -M., 1985.-S. 203-305.
189. Frank S.L. Etudes about Pushkin / Foreword. D.S. Likhachev. M.: Consent, 1999.-178 p.
190. Khaev E.S. The epithet "copper" in the poem "The Bronze Horseman" // Vremennik of the Pushkin Commission. L., 1985. - S. 180-184.
191. Khalizev V.E. Theory of Literature. M., 1999. - S. 352-356.
192. Herdman J. The double in nineteenth century fiction // Basingatoba, L. Macmillan, 1990. P. 5.
193. Khodasevich V.F. About Pushkin // Khodasevich V.F. Sobr. op. in 4 vols. T. 3. M.: Consent, 1996.- S. 395-512.
194. Khodasevich V.F. Petersburg stories of Pushkin // Khodasevich V.F. Sobr. op. in 4 vols. T. 2. M .: Consent, 1996. - S. 60-63.
195. Khodasevich V.F. Oscillating tripod. M.: Sov. writer, 1991.p.180.
196. Tsurkan V.V. Bryusov's concept of Pushkin's creativity. Candidate, dissertation -M.: MGPU, 1995. 181 p.
197. Tsyavlovsky M.A. Bryusov-Pushkinist // Valery Bryusov: collection, dedicated. 50th anniversary of the birth of the poet. -M., 1924, 94 p.
198. Chelyshev E.P. Pushkin studies. Results and prospects // Pushkin and modern culture. -M., 1996. S. 3-30.
199. Chepkasov A.V. Neomythologism in the work of D.S. Merezhkovsky 1890-1910s // Abstract of the thesis. candida dis. Tomsk, 1999. - 20 p.
200. Chukovsky K. Two poets // Change. 1936, no. 9.
201. Shestov JI. The power of ideas (D.S. Merezhkovsky. L. Tolstoy and Dostoevsky) // D.S. Merezhkovsky: pro et contra. St. Petersburg: RKHGI, 2001. - S. 109-135.
202. Eidelman N.Ya. Pushkin: History and Modernity in the Poet's Artistic Consciousness. M.: Sov. writer, 1984. - 368 p.
203. Eikhenbaum B.M. About Pushkin // B.M. Eichenbaum. About poetry. L.: Owls. writer, 1969. - S. 321-324.
204. Eikhenbaum B.M. D.S. Merezhkovsky critic // D.S. Merezhkovsky: pro et contra. - St. Petersburg: RKhGI, 2001. - S. 322-331.
205. Eliot T.S. Tradition and individual talent // foreign aesthetics and theory of literature of the 19th-20th centuries. Treatises, articles, essays. -M., 1987. -S.169-178.
206. Ellis (Kobylinsky LL) Russian symbolists. Tomsk: Publishing House "Aquarius", 1998.-288 p.
207. Epstein M. Paradoxes of novelty (O literary development XIX XX centuries).-M., 1988.-S. 174.
208. Jacobson P.O. Statue in the poetic mythology of Pushkin (translated from English by N.V. Pertsova) // Jacobson R. Works on poetics. M., 1987. - S. 147-148.
209. Yarantsev V.N. Intertextual problems of the symbolist text. "The Bronze Horseman" A.S. Pushkin and "Petersburg" by A. Bely // Siberian Pushkin Studies Today: Collection scientific articles. Novosibirsk, 2000. - S. 220-222.
210. Yarantsev V.N. Emblematics of meaning in Andrey Bely's novel Petersburg. Abstract diss. . .cand. philol. Sciences. Novosibirsk, 1997. - 18 p.
BRONZE HORSEMAN
IDEA OF THE STORY
The first thing that strikes in The Bronze Horseman is the discrepancy between the plot of the story and its content.
The story tells about a poor, insignificant Petersburg official, some kind of Eugene, unintelligent, unoriginal, no different from his brothers, who was in love with some Parasha, the daughter of a widow living by the seaside. The flood of 1824 swept away their house; the widow and Parasha died. Eugene could not bear this misfortune and went mad. One night, passing by the monument to Peter I, Eugene, in his madness, whispered to him a few malicious words, seeing in him the culprit of his disasters. It seemed to Yevgeny's frustrated imagination that the bronze horseman was angry with him for this and chased after him on his bronze horse. A few months later, the madman died.
But with this simple story of love and grief of a poor official, details and whole episodes are connected, it would seem that they do not correspond to it at all. First of all, it is preceded by an extensive "Introduction", which recalls the founding of St. Petersburg by Peter the Great and gives, in a number of paintings, the whole appearance of this "creation of Peter". Then, in the story itself, the idol of Peter the Great turns out to be, as it were, the second character. The poet speaks very reluctantly and sparingly about Eugene and Parasha, but a lot and with enthusiasm - about Peter and his feat. The persecution of Eugene by the Bronze Horseman is depicted not so much as the delirium of a madman, but as real fact, and thus an element of the supernatural is introduced into the story. Finally, individual scenes of the story are told in an upbeat and solemn tone, making it clear that we are talking about something extremely important.
All this forced criticism, from its first steps, to look for a second, inner meaning in The Bronze Horseman, to see in the images of Eugene and Peter incarnations, symbols of two principles. Many varied interpretations of the story have been proposed, but all of them, it seems to us, can be reduced to three types.
Some, including Belinsky, saw the meaning of the story in a comparison of the collective will and the will of the individual, the individual and the inevitable course of history. For them, the representative of the collective will was Peter, the embodiment of a personal, individual beginning - Eugene. “In this poem,” Belinsky wrote, “we see the sad fate of a person suffering, as it were, as a result of choosing a place for a new capital, where so many people died ... And with a humble heart we recognize the triumph of the general over the particular, without abandoning our sympathy for suffering of this particular... When we look at the giant, proudly and unwaveringly ascending amid universal death and destruction and, as it were, symbolically realizing the invincibility of his creation, we, although not without a shudder of the heart, admit that this bronze giant could not save the fate of individuals , ensuring the fate of the people and the state, that there is a historical necessity for him and that his view of us is already his justification ... This poem is the apotheosis of Peter the Great, the most daring that could only come to the mind of a poet who is quite worthy to be the singer of the great reformer " . From this point of view, of the two clashing forces, the representative of "historical necessity", Peter, is right.
Others, whose thought was most clearly expressed by D. Merezhkovsky, saw in the two heroes of The Bronze Horseman representatives of two primordial forces fighting in European civilization: paganism and Christianity, renunciation of one's self in God and deification of one's self in heroism. For them, Peter was the spokesman of the personal beginning, heroism, and Eugene was the spokesman of the beginning of the impersonal, collective will. “Here (in The Bronze Horseman), writes Merezhkovsky, is the eternal opposition of two heroes, two principles: Tazit and Galub, the old Gypsy and Aleko, Tatyana and Onegin ... On the one hand, the small happiness of a small, unknown Kolomna official reminiscent of the humble heroes of Dostoevsky and Gogol, on the other hand, a superhuman vision of the hero... What does a giant care about the death of the unknown? if in the weak heart of the most insignificant of the insignificant, the “trembling creature” that came out of the dust, in his simple love, an abyss opens, no less than the one from which the will of the hero was born? The judgment of the small over the great is pronounced: "Good, miraculous builder! .. Already you!" The challenge is thrown, and the calmness of the proud idol is broken... The Bronze Horseman pursues the madman... But the prophetic delirium of the madman, the faint whisper of his indignant conscience will not cease, n will not be drowned out by the thunder-like rumble, the heavy stomp of the Bronze Horseman." From his point of view, Merezhkovsky justifies Yevgeny, justifies the rebellion of the "small", "insignificant", the revolt of Christianity against the ideals of paganism.
Still others, finally, saw in Peter the embodiment of autocracy, and in the "evil" whisper of Eugene - a rebellion against despotism.
A new justification for such an understanding of the "Bronze Horseman" was recently given by prof. I. Tretiak / *Józef Tretiak. Mickiewicz i Puszkin. Warsaw. 1906. We used Mr. S. Brailovsky's exposition. ("Pushkin and his contemporaries", issue VII.) (Note by V. Ya. Bryusov.)*/, which showed the dependence of Pushkin's story on Mickiewicz's satires "Ustçp". Mickiewicz's satires appeared in 1832 and then became known to Pushkin. In Pushkin's papers, there were lists of several poems from these satires made by him personally / * Moscow Rumyantsev Museum. Notebook N2373. (Note by V. Ya. Bryusov).*/. A whole series of verses in The Bronze Horseman turns out to be either a dissemination of Mickiewicz's verses or, as it were, a response to them. Mickiewicz portrayed the northern capital in too gloomy colors; Pushkin responded with an apology for Petersburg. Comparing "The Bronze Horseman" with Mickiewicz's satire "Oleszkiewicz", we see that he has a common theme with it - the flood of 1824, and a common idea: that weak and innocent subjects are punished for the misdeeds of the rulers. If we compare The Bronze Horseman with Mickiewicz's poems "Pomnik Piotra Wielkiego", we will find an even more important similarity: in Mickiewicz "a poet of the Russian people, glorious with songs at midnight" (that is, Pushkin himself), stigmatizes the monument with the name "cascade of tyranny "; in The Bronze Horseman the hero of the story curses the same monument. The notes to The Bronze Horseman twice mention Mickiewicz and his satires, with Oleszkiewicz being named one of his best poems. On the other hand, Mickiewicz in his satires several times definitely alludes to Pushkin, as if provoking him to answer.
Prof. Tretiak believes that in Mickiewicz's satires, Pushkin heard an accusation of betrayal of those "freedom-loving" ideals of youth that he had once shared with the Polish poet. Mickiewicz's reproach in his poems "Do przyjaciól Moskali", addressed to those who "glorify the triumph of the tsar and rejoice in the torments of their friends" with a bribed tongue, Pushkin should have applied to himself as well. Pushkin could not remain silent at such a reproach and did not want to answer the great enemy in the tone of official patriotic poems. In a truly artistic creation, in majestic images, he expressed everything that he thought about the Russian autocracy and its significance. So the "Bronze Horseman" was born.
What does this answer of Pushkin to Mickiewicz say? Prof. Tretiak believes that both in Mickiewicz's poems "Pomnik Piotra Wielkiego" and in Pushkin's "Petersburg story" European individualism comes into conflict with the Asian idea of the state in Russia. Mickiewicz predicts the victory of individualism, while Pushkin predicts its complete defeat. And Pushkin's answer to prof. Tretyak is trying to retell in these words: “True, I was and remain a harbinger of freedom, an enemy of tyranny, but wouldn’t I be crazy, speaking out in an open struggle against the latter? If you want to live in Russia, you must submit to the omnipotent idea of the state, otherwise it will persecute like a mad Eugene." These are the three types of interpretations of The Bronze Horseman. It seems to us that the last of them, who sees in Peter the embodiment of autocracy, should be closest to Pushkin's true intention. Pushkin did not tend to personify in his creations such abstract ideas as "paganism" and "Christianity" or "historical necessity" and "the fate of individuals." But living in recent years
In anxiety motley and barren
Great light and yard,
He could not help thinking about the significance of the autocracy for Russia. His diligent studies of Russian history, and especially the history of Peter the Great, should have led him to the same thoughts. The arguments of Prof. Tretiak on the connection between The Bronze Horseman and Mickiewicz's satires. However, apart from these satires, Pushkin could not help but know that his rapprochement with the court is interpreted by many, and even by some of his friends, as a betrayal of the ideals of his youth. Back in 1828, Pushkin found it necessary to respond to such reproaches with stanzas:
No, I'm not a flatterer when I'm king
I compose free praise...
In addition, the understanding of Peter in The Bronze Horseman as an incarnation, as a symbol of autocracy, to some extent includes other interpretations of the story. Russian autocracy arose out of "historical necessity." The whole course of development of Russian history inevitably led to the autocracy of the Moscow tsars. At the same time, autocracy has always been a deification of the individual. Lomonosov openly compared Peter the Great with God. The contemporaries of Alexander I still called God. The rebellion of the individual against the autocracy involuntarily becomes a rebellion against "historical necessity" and against the "deification of the individual."
But, joining the main views of Prof. Tretiak, we strongly disagree with his conclusions. Seeing together with him in The Bronze Horseman Pushkin's answer to Mickiewicz's reproaches, we understand this answer differently. We believe that Pushkin himself put into his creation a completely different meaning than they want to read in it.
If you take a closer look at the characteristics of the two heroes of The Bronze Horseman, it becomes clear that Pushkin tried by all means to make one of them - Peter - as "great" as possible, and the other - Eugene - as "small", "insignificant" as possible. "Great Peter", according to the poet's plan, was to become the personification of the power of the autocracy in its extreme manifestation; "poor Eugene" - the embodiment of the extreme impotence of an isolated, insignificant personality.
Peter the Great was one of Pushkin's favorite heroes. Pushkin carefully studied Peter, thought a lot about him, devoted enthusiastic stanzas to him, introduced him as a character in entire epics, and at the end of his life began to work on the extensive History of Peter the Great. In all these researches, Peter seemed to Pushkin an exceptional being, as if exceeding human dimensions. "The genius of Peter escaped beyond the limits of his century," Pushkin wrote in his "Historical Notes" of 1822. In The Feast of Peter the Great, Peter is called a "giant miracle worker." In the Stanzas, his soul is given the epithet "comprehensive." On the fields of Poltava, Peter -
Powerful and joyful, like a fight.
...............................
....... . His face is terrible...
He's all like God's thunderstorm.
In My Family Tree, the one who is endowed with almost supernatural power
By whom our earth moved,
Who gave a mighty sovereign run
The stern of the native ship.
However, Pushkin always saw in Peter the extreme manifestation of autocracy, bordering on despotism. "Peter I despised humanity perhaps more so than Napoleon,” Pushkin wrote in Historical Notes. It is immediately added that under Peter the Great in Russia there was “universal slavery and silent obedience.” “Peter the Great was simultaneously Robespierre and Napoleon, the embodiment the revolution", Pushkin wrote in 1831. In Materials for the History of Peter the Great, Pushkin at every step calls Peter's decrees either "cruel", or "barbaric", or "tyrannical". In the same "Materials" we read: "The Senate and the Synod present him with the title of Father of the Fatherland, All-Russian Emperor and Peter the Great. Peter did not stand on ceremony for long and accepted them. In general, in these "Materials" Pushkin, briefly mentioning those institutions of Peter, which are "the fruits of the mind of a vast, full of goodwill and wisdom," diligently writes out those decrees of his, about which he has to talk about "willfulness and barbarism", about "injustice and cruelty", about "the will of the autocrat".
In The Bronze Horseman, the same features of power and autocracy in the image of Peter are brought to the last limits.
The story opens with the image of a ruler who, in a harsh desert, conceives his struggle with the elements and with people. He wants to turn a deserted land into "the beauty and wonder of midnight countries", to erect a magnificent capital from the marshes of the swamps and at the same time for his semi-Asiatic people "to cut a window into Europe." In the first verses there is not even the name of Peter, it is simply said:
On the shore of desert waves
stood He, thoughts of the great poly.
/* In the original version of the "Introduction" we read:
On the banks of the Varangian waves
Standing deep in thought
Great Peter. It is wide before him ... etc.
(Note by V. Ya. Bryusov.)*/
Peter does not utter a word, he only thinks his thoughts, and then, as if by a miracle, a
Midnight countries beauty and wonder,
From the darkness of the forests, from the swamp of blat.
Pushkin reinforces the impression of the miraculous by drawing a number of parallels of what was and what has become:
Where before the Finnish fisherman,
The sad stepson of nature,
Alone by the low shores
Thrown into unknown waters
Your old net, now there,
Along busy shores
The slender masses crowd
Palaces and towers; ships
Crowd from all corners of the earth
They strive for rich marinas.
The Neva is dressed in granite;
Bridges hung over the waters;
Dark green gardens
The islands were covered with it.
In one draft of these verses, after the words about the "Finnish fisherman", Pushkin has an even more characteristic exclamation:
Spirit of Petrov
Nature's resistance!
/*All citations, both this one and the previous and subsequent ones, are based on an independent study of Pushkin's manuscripts by the author of this article. (Note by V. Ya. Bryusov.)*/
With these words, it is necessary to bring together that place in the story "Arap of Peter the Great", where Petersburg is described in the time of Peter. “Ibrahim,” says Pushkin, “looked with curiosity at the newborn capital, which was rising from the swamps. by the mania of autocracy. Exposed dams, canals without embankments, wooden bridges were everywhere victory of the human will over the resistance of the elements." Obviously, in the verses of The Bronze Horseman, Pushkin originally wanted to repeat the idea of victory over the "resistance of the elements" - the human, sovereign will.
"Introduction" after the picture of Pushkin's modern Petersburg, directly named "creation Peter", ends with a solemn call to the elements - to come to terms with your defeat and with his captivity.
Unshakable, like Russia!
May he make peace with you
And defeated element:
enmity and captivity old one
Let Finnish waves forget...
But Pushkin felt that the historical Peter, no matter how exaggerated his charm, would still remain only a man. Sometimes, from under the guise of a demigod, the appearance of simply “a tall man, in a green caftan, with a clay pipe in his mouth, who, leaning on the table, reads the Hamburg newspapers” (“Arap of Peter the Great”), will inevitably appear. And so, in order to make his hero a pure embodiment of autocratic power, in order to distinguish him from all people in outward appearance, Pushkin transfers the action of his story a hundred years ahead (“A hundred years have passed ...”) and replaces Peter himself with his statue, his in an ideal way. The hero of the story is not the Peter who planned to "threaten the Swede" and invite "all the flags" to visit him, but the "Bronze Horseman", the "proud idol" and, above all, the "idol". It is precisely the "idol", that is, something deified, that Pushkin himself most willingly calls the monument to Peter. /* The expression "giant" does not belong to Pushkin; this is Zhukovsky's amendment. (Note by V. Ya. Bryusov.)*/
In all the scenes of the story, where the "Bronze Horseman" appears, he is depicted as a higher being, who knows nothing equal to himself. On his bronze horse he always stands "on high"; he alone remains calm in the hour of general calamity, when all around "everything is empty," "everything is running," everything is "in trembling." When this Bronze Horseman rides, a “heavy clatter” is heard, similar to “roaring thunder”, and the whole pavement is shocked by this galloping, for which the poet has long chosen a suitable definition - “heavy-dimensional”, “far-voiced”, “heavy-voiced”. Speaking of this idol towering over a fenced rock, Pushkin, always so restrained, does not stop at the most daring epithets: he is both “the lord of Fate”, and “the ruler of half the world”, and (in rough sketches) “terrible tsar”, “powerful king", "husband of Fate", "lord of half the world".
This deification of Peter reaches its highest power in those verses where Pushkin, forgetting for a while his Yevgeny, himself ponders the meaning of the feat accomplished by Peter:
Oh, powerful lord of Fate!
At the height of the iron bridle
Raised Russia on its hind legs?
The image of Peter is exaggerated here to the last limits. This is not only the winner of the elements, it is truly the "lord of Fate." With his "fatal will" he directs the life of an entire nation. With an iron bridle, he holds Russia on the edge of the abyss into which she was ready to fall / * We understand this place as follows: Russia, rapidly rushing forward along the wrong path, was ready to collapse into the abyss. Her "rider", Peter, just in time, over the very abyss, raised her on his hind legs and thus saved her. Thus, in these verses we see the justification of Peter and his works. Another interpretation of these verses, interpreting Pushkin's thought as a reproach to Peter, who raised Russia on its hind legs so much that it only had to "lower its hooves" in the abyss, seems arbitrary to us. By the way, we note that in all original manuscripts are read "raised on their hind legs", and not "hung up on its hind legs" (as it has been printed and is still being printed in all publications). (Note by V. Ya. Bryusov.)*/. And the poet himself, engulfed horror in front of this superhuman power, he does not know how to answer himself who it is in front of him.
He is terrible in the surrounding darkness!
What a thought!
What power is hidden in it!
.......................................
Where are you galloping, proud horse,
And where will you lower your hooves?
Such is the first hero of the "Petersburg story": Peter, the Bronze Horseman, a demigod. - Pushkin made sure that the second hero, "poor, my poor Eugene", was his true opposite.
In the original draft of The Bronze Horseman, a lot of space was dedicated to the characterization of the second hero. As you know, the passage, later singled out as a separate whole under the title "The genealogy of my hero", was at first part of the "Petersburg story", and no one else, like "my Yezersky", later turned into "poor Yevgeny." Precisely, telling how
from guests home
Young Eugene came,
Pushkin continued:
So let's be our hero
We call, then what's my tongue
I'm used to this sound.
Let's start ab ovo: my Eugene
Descended from generations
Whose daring sail across the seas
Was the horror of bygone days.
However, later Pushkin found it inappropriate to talk about the ancestors of that hero, who, according to the plan of the story, should be the most insignificant of the insignificant, and not only singled out all the stanzas dedicated to his genealogy into a separate work, but even deprived him of his "nickname", i.e. surname (in various sketches, the hero of the "Petersburg story" is called either "Ivan Ezersky", then "Young Zorin", then "Young Rulin"). The long pedigree has been replaced by a few words:
We don't need his nickname
Although in the past
It might have shone...
Not content with that, Pushkin tried to completely depersonalize his hero. In the early versions of the story, Eugene is still a rather lively person. Pushkin speaks definitely and in detail about his worldly situation, and about his spiritual life, and about his external appearance. Here are some of those sketches:
He was a poor official
The face is a little pockmarked.He was intricate, not rich,
By myself, blond ...He was a very poor official,
Rootless, round orphan.The poor official
Thoughtful, thin and pale.
He dressed casually
Always buttoned crooked
His green, narrow coat.
Like everyone else, I thought a lot about money,
And Zhukovsky smoked tobacco,
Like everyone else, he wore a uniform coat.
From all this, in the final processing, only the information that "our hero" - "serves somewhere" and that "he was poor" remained.
It is also characteristic that the original hero of the story seemed to Pushkin a person much more significant than the later Eugene. At one time, Pushkin even thought of making him, if not a poet, then a person somehow interested in literature. In the drafts we read:
My official
Was writer and lover
Like everyone else, he did not behave strictly,
Like us, wrote in verse lot.
Instead, in the final version, Pushkin makes Yevgeny dream:
What could God add to him
Mind and money...
Where is the thought of writing for a man who himself admits that he lacks intelligence!
In the same way, the original hero stood much higher on the social ladder than Eugene. Pushkin at first called him his neighbor and even talked about his "luxurious" office.
In my luxurious office
At that time, Rulin is young
Sitting thoughtfully...My neighbor came home
He entered his peaceful office.
/* With regard to the passage given by many editions as a variant of the Bronze Horseman verses:
Then, along the stone platform
Sand-strewn canopy.
Running up the stairs
His wide staircase...etc. -
Then the connection of these verses with the "Petersburg story" seems to us weighty.ma doubtful. (Note 8. Ya. Bryusova.)*/
All these features gradually changed. The "peace" cabinet was replaced by a "modest" cabinet; then instead of the word "my neighbor" a descriptive expression appeared: "in the house where I also stood"; finally, Pushkin began to define the dwelling of his hero as "the canine of the fifth dwelling", "attic", "closet" or with the words: "He lives under the roof." In one draft, a characteristic correction in this respect was preserved: Pushkin crossed out the words "my neighbor" and wrote instead "my eccentric", and the following verse:
He entered his peaceful office. -
Changed like this:
He went in and unlocked his attic.
Pushkin extended his austerity to such an extent that he deprived this very "attic" or "closet" of any individual features. In one of the earlier editions we read:
Sighing, he looked around the closet,
Bed, dusty suitcase.
And a table covered with papers,
And the closet, with all its goodness;
Found everything in order: then,
Fed up with the smoke of his cigar,
I undressed myself and went to bed,
Under a well-deserved overcoat.
From all this information in the final edition, only a deaf mention was preserved:
Lives in Kolomna... -
Yes, two dry verses:
So, I came home, Eugene
He shook off his overcoat, undressed, lay down.
Even in the whitewashed manuscript submitted to the sovereign for censorship, there was still a detailed description of Eugene's dreams, introducing the reader into his inner world and his personal life:
Marry? Well? Why not?
And really? I will arrange
Your own humble corner
And I will calm Parasha in it.
Bed, two chairs, cabbage soup pot.
Yes, he is big ... what more do I need?
Sundays in the summer in the field
I will walk with Parasha:
I will ask for a place; parashe
I will entrust our economy
And raising kids...
And we will live, and so on to the grave
Hand in hand we will both reach,
And our grandchildren will bury us.
After viewing the manuscript by the tsar and forbidding it, Pushkin also threw out this place, inexorably taking away from his Yevgeny all personal characteristics, all individual traits, as he had already taken away his “nickname”.
Such is the second hero of the "Petersburg story" - an insignificant Kolomna official, "poor Eugene", "a citizen of the capital",
What kind of darkness do you meet,
Nothing different from them
Not in the face, not in the mind.
/*In this edition, these verses are included in one of the manuscripts of The Bronze Horseman. (Note by V. Ya. Bryusov.)*/
At the beginning of the "Introduction" Pushkin did not find it necessary to name his first hero, since it is enough to say "He" about him to make it clear who he is talking about. Having put his second hero into action, Pushkin also did not name him, finding that "we do not need his nickname." From everything that is said in the story about Peter the Great, it is impossible to form a definite image: everything blurs into something huge, immeasurable, "terrible." "Poor" Yevgeny, who is lost in the gray, indifferent mass of "capital citizens" like him, has no appearance either. The methods of depicting both - the conqueror of the elements and the Kolomna official - come close to each other, because both of them are the personifications of two extremes: the highest human power and the ultimate human insignificance.
The "introduction" of the story depicts the might of the autocracy triumphing over the elements, and ends with a hymn to it:
Show off, city of Petrov, and stop
Unshakable, like Russia!
Two parts of the story depict two rebellions against autocracy: the rebellion of the elements and the rebellion of man.
The Neva, once enslaved, "taken prisoner" by Peter, has not forgotten its "old enmity" and with "vain malice" rises up against the enslaver. The "defeated element" is trying to crush its granite fetters and is attacking the "slender masses of palaces and towers" that arose at the behest of the autocratic Peter.
Describing the flood, Pushkin compares it either with military operations or with an attack by robbers:
Siege! attack! evil waves,
Like thieves climbing in windows...So villain
With ferocious gang his,
Bursting into the village, catching, cutting,
Crushes and robs; screams, rattle,
Violence, abuse, anxiety, howl! ..
For a moment it seems that the "defeated element" triumphs, that Fate itself is for it:
Zrit god's wrath and awaits execution.
Alas! everything dies...
Even the "late king", the successor of this subjugator of the elements, is dismayed and ready to admit defeat:
Sad, confused, he left
And he said: "S divine element
Kings cannot be controlled...
However, in the midst of the general confusion, there is One who remains calm and unshakable. This is the Bronze Horseman, the ruler of the semi-world, the miraculous builder of this city. Eugene, riding a marble lion. fixes "desperate gazes" on that distance, where, "like mountains", "from the indignant depths", terrible waves rise. -
And turned his back to him,
In the unshakable height
Over the indignant Neva,
Standing with outstretched hand
Idol on a bronze horse.
In the original sketch of this place, Pushkin had:
And right in front of him from the waters
Appeared with a copper head
Idol on a bronze horse,
Neva rebellious/*Option: "insane". (Note by V. Ya. Bryusov.)*/ in silence
Threatening with a motionless hand...
But Pushkin changed these verses. The Bronze Horseman despises the "vain malice" of the Finnish waves. He does not condescend to threaten the "rebellious Neva" with his outstretched hand.
This is the first encounter between poor Eugene and the Bronze Horseman. Chance made it so that they were left alone, two on a deserted square, above the water, "which conquered everything around" - one on a bronze horse. the other on a stone beast. The Bronze Horseman with contempt "turns his back" to an insignificant little man, to one of his countless subjects, not. sees, does not notice him. Eugene, although his desperate eyes are fixed motionless "at the edge of one", cannot help but see the idol that has arisen from the waters "right in front of him."
The Bronze Horseman turns out to be right in his contempt for the "vain malice" of the elements. It was just a "brazen rampage", a robber attack.
Fed up with destruction
And brazen rampage getting tired
Neva pulled back
Admiring your indignation
And leaving with carelessness
Your prey...
(So) burdened with robbery,
Afraid of the chase, weary,
hurry robbers home,
Dropping prey along the way.
Just a day later, traces of the recent rebellion had already disappeared:
Because of the tired, pale clouds
Flashed over the quiet capital,
And found no trace
The troubles of yesterday...
Everything was in order.
But the rebellion of the elements causes another rebellion: the human soul. Evgeny's confused mind cannot bear the "terrible upheavals" he experienced - the horrors of the flood and the death of his loved ones. He goes crazy, becomes alien to the world, lives without noticing anything around, in the world of his thoughts, where "the rebellious noise of the Neva and the winds" is constantly heard. Although Pushkin now calls Yevgeny "unfortunate," he nevertheless makes it clear that madness somehow elevated and ennobled him. In most editions of the story, Pushkin speaks of the crazy Eugene -
Was wonderful internal anxiety.
/* This is how these verses are read in the white manuscript presented to the sovereign for viewing. (Note by V. Ya. Bryusov.)*/
And in general, in all the verses dedicated to the "mad" Eugene, there is a special sincerity, starting with the exclamation:
But my poor, poor Eugene!
/ * In the same year as The Bronze Horseman, the poems "God forbid I go crazy" were written, where Pushkin admits that he himself "would be glad" to part with his mind. (Note by V. Ya. Bryusov.)*/
A year passes, the same rainy autumn night comes as it was before the flood, the same “rebellious noise of the Neva and winds” is heard all around, which constantly sounds in Yevgeny’s thoughts. Under the influence of this repetition, the madman recalls with special "liveness" everything he experienced and the hour when he remained "on Petrova Square" alone with the formidable idol. This memory brings him to the same square; he sees the stone lion on which he once sat astride, and the same pillars of a large new house and "above the fenced rock"
Idol on a bronze horse.
"Frightening thoughts cleared up in him," says Pushkin. The word "terrible" makes it clear that this "clarification" is not so much a return to sanity as some kind of insight /* "terribly cleared up" - in the final version; in earlier editions: "strange cleared up", which further enhances the meaning we give to this place. (Note by V. Ya. Bryusov.)*/. Eugene in the "idol" suddenly recognizes the culprit of his misfortunes,
Togo, whose fateful will
The city was founded over the sea.
Peter, saving Russia, raising it on its hind legs above the abyss, leading it with its "fatal will" along their chosen path, founded a city "above the sea", set towers and palaces in the marshes. Through this, all happiness, the whole life of Yevgeny, perished, and he drags out his unhappy life as a half-man, half-beast. And the "proud idol" still stands, like an idol, in a dark height. Then a rebellion is born in the soul of the madman against the violence of another will over the fate of his life, "As if possessed by black power," he falls to the bars and, clenching his teeth, angrily whispers his threat to the ruler of the semi-world:
"Good, miraculous builder! Already you!"
Pushkin does not elaborate on Yevgeny's threat. We still don’t know what exactly the madman wants to say with his “You already!”. Does this mean that the "small", "insignificant" ones will be able to "already" avenge their enslavement, humiliation by the "hero"? Or that a voiceless, weak-willed Russia will "already" raise its hand against its rulers, who are hard forcing them to test their fatal will? No answer, / * As you know, "The Bronze Horseman" was printed for the first time not in the form in which it was written by Pushkin. This gave rise to the legend that Pushkin put into the mouth of Yevgeny in front of the "proud idol" some especially sharp monologue, which cannot appear in the Russian press. Book. P. P. Vyazemsky, in his pamphlet "Pushkin Based on the Documents of the Ostafevsky Archive," reported as a fact that when Pushkin himself read the story, he made an amazing impression monologue distraught official in front of the monument to Peter, containing about thirty verses in which "hatred of European civilization sounded too energetically." “I remember,” Prince P. P. Vyazemsky continued, “the impression he made on one of the listeners, A. O. Rossetti, and I seem to remember that he assured me that he would make a copy for the future tense.” Book message. P. P. Vyazemsky must be recognized as completely absurd. In Pushkin's manuscripts, nothing has been preserved anywhere, except for those words that are now read in the text of the story. The sharpest expression that Pushkin put into the mouth of his hero is - "Already for you!" or "Already for you!", according to the spelling of the original. In addition, "hatred of European civilization" does not fit at all with the whole course of the story and with the main idea of the story. (Note by V. Ya. Bryusov.)*/ and by the very vagueness of his expressions, Pushkin, as it were, says that the exact meaning of the reproach is unimportant. The important thing is that small and insignificant, the one who recently humbly confessed that “God could give him more mind”, whose dreams did not go beyond a modest wish: “I will ask for a place”, suddenly felt himself equal to the Bronze Horseman, found strength in himself and the courage to threaten the "ruler of the semi-world".
The expressions that Pushkin describes the state of Yevgeny at this moment are characteristic:
It lay down on the cold grate,
Eyes clouded over,
A fire ran through my heart,
The blood boiled...
The solemnity of the tone, the abundance of Slavic words ("brow", "cold", "flame") show that the "black power" with which Evgeny is possessed makes one treat him differently than before. This is no longer "our hero" who "lives in Kolomna, serves somewhere"; this is the rival of the "terrible king", about whom one should speak in the same language as about Peter.
And the “idol”, who remained standing motionless above the indignant Neva, “in an unshakable height”, cannot treat the threats of the “poor madman” with the same contempt. The face of the formidable king is kindled with anger; he leaves his granite foot and "with a heavy stomp" chases poor Yevgeny. The Bronze Horseman pursues the madman, so that by the horror of his chase, his "heavy-voiced galloping" to make him reconcile, to forget everything that flashed through his mind at the hour when "terrible thoughts cleared up in him."
And all night long, poor madman
Wherever you turn your feet
Behind him everywhere is the Bronze Horseman
Jumped with a heavy thud.
The Bronze Horseman achieves his goal: Eugene resigns himself. The second rebellion is defeated, like the first. As after the riot of the Neva, "everything went back to the old order." Eugene again became the most insignificant of the insignificant, and in the spring his corpse, like the corpse of a tramp, was buried by fishermen on a deserted island, "for God's sake."
In his early youth, Pushkin joined the liberal political movement of his era. He was in friendly relations with many Decembrists. "Outrageous" (according to the then terminology) poems were one of the main reasons for his exile to the south. In essence, Pushkin's political ideals were always moderate. In his boldest poems, he invariably repeated:
Masters, you crown and throne
Gives the law, not nature!
In such poems as "Liberty", "Dagger", "Andrei Chenier", Pushkin distributes the most unflattering epithets of "inglorious blows", "criminal ax", "fiend of rebellion" (Marat), "Frenzy Areopagus" (revolutionary tribunal of 1794 .). But still, in that era, under the influence of general ferment, he was still ready to sing "the last judge of shame and resentment, the punishing dagger" and believe that over the "rebellious square" could rise
The day is great, inevitable
Freedom is a bright day ...
However, in the mid-1920s, even before the events of December 14, a certain revolution took place in Pushkin's political views. He became disillusioned with his revolutionary ideals. He began to look at the question of "freedom" not so much from a political as from a philosophical point of view. He gradually came to the conclusion that "freedom" could not be achieved by a violent change in the political system, but would be the result of the spiritual education of mankind. /* The evolution of Pushkin's political views, schematically outlined by us, is traced in more detail in the article by Alexander Slonimsky - "Pushkin and the December Movement" (vol. II, p. 503). (Note by V. Ya. Bryusov.)*/ These views form the basis of The Bronze Horseman. Pushkin chose as his hero the most powerful of all autocrats that had ever risen on earth. This is a giant miracle worker, a demigod who commands the elements. The spontaneous revolution does not frighten him, he despises it. But when the free spirit of a single person rises up against him, the "ruler of the semi-world" is thrown into confusion. He leaves his "enclosed rock" and all night long pursues the madman, only to drown out the revolt of the soul in him with his heavy stomp.
"The Bronze Horseman" is indeed Pushkin's answer to Mickiewicz's reproaches of betraying the "freedom-loving" ideals of youth. “Yes,” Pushkin seems to say, “I no longer believe in the fight against despotism by the forces of spontaneous rebellion; I see all its futility. But I have not betrayed the lofty ideals of freedom. "No matter how terrible he is in the surrounding darkness, no matter how exalted he is "in an unshakable height." Freedom will arise in the depths of the human spirit, and the "enclosed rock" will have to empty.
ORIGIN AND COMPOSITION OF THE STORY
Annenkov suggests that "The Bronze Horseman" was the second half of a large poem, conceived by Pushkin before 1833 and not finished by him. An excerpt from the first half of this poem Annenkov sees in "My Hero's Pedigree". However, we have no reason to accept such an assumption.
Neither in Pushkin's papers, nor in his letters before 1833, are there any indications of a great poem conceived by him, in which The Bronze Horseman would be included as a part. Sufficiently weighty arguments allow us to think that Pushkin was pushed to work on The Bronze Horseman by Mickiewicz's satires, with whom he could not get acquainted until the end of 1832. /*Cm. previous article. (Note by V. Ya. Bryusov).* / If Pushkin had an idea for a poem that had something in common with The Bronze Horseman before 1833, then only in the most general terms. So, in one of the drafts of the "Introduction" Pushkin says that the idea to describe the St. Petersburg flood of 1824 came to him under the impression of the first stories about him. Pushkin even hints that he saw this as his duty, the poet's duty to the "sad hearts" of his contemporaries:
It was a terrible time!
I'll start talking about her.
Long time ago when I first time
Heard a sad story
Sad hearts for you
Then I made a promise
Poems to believe your story.
As for the Genealogy of My Hero, the evidence of the manuscripts leaves no doubt about its origin. This is - part"The Bronze Horseman", isolated from its composition and processed as a separate whole. In the initial drafts, "The genealogy of my hero" was precisely the genealogy of the later "poor Eugene", but Pushkin soon became convinced that these stanzas violated the harmony of the story, and excluded them. Later he made an independent work out of them, giving a genealogy some a hero, not a hero of this or that story, but a "hero" in general. In addition, The Bronze Horseman is such a complete creation, its idea is so fully expressed, that one cannot in any way consider the "Petersburg Tale" a part of some larger whole.
The Bronze Horseman was written in Boldino, where Pushkin spent about a month and a half after his trip to the Urals, from October 1, 1833 to mid-November. Under one of the first drafts of the story there is a note: "October 6"; under the first list of the whole story: "October 30". Thus, the entire creation of the story took less than a month.
One can, however, not without probability assume that the idea to write The Bronze Horseman arose in Pushkin before his arrival in Boldino. Probably, some sketches have already been made in St. Petersburg - for example, those that are not written in notebooks, but on separate sheets(such is the excerpt from "Over Darkened Petersburg..."). We have evidence that on the way to the Urals, Pushkin thought about the flood of 1824. Regarding the strong western wind that caught him on the road, he wrote to his wife (August 21): "What happened to you, Petersburg residents? Didn't you have new floods? what if and this is me skipped? it would be annoying."
From Boldin, Pushkin wrote to almost no one except his wife. With his wife, he spoke of his poems only as a profitable article, and, moreover, without fail in the tone of a joke. Therefore, from Pushkin's Boldino letters, we learn nothing about the course of his work on the "Petersburg story". On October 2, he reported: "I am writing, I am in trouble." October 21: "I work lazily, knocking down a stack through a stump. I started a lot, but there is no desire for anything; God knows what is happening to me. I have become old and have a bad mind." October 30: "Recently signed and already painted the abyss." November 6: "I will bring you a lot of rhymes, but do not disclose this, otherwise the almanacs will eat me." The very title of "The Bronze Horseman" is not named here, and the general tone of the joke does not allow one to trust Pushkin's admission that while working on the story he "had no desire for anything."
Turning to the manuscripts, we see that the story cost Pushkin an enormous amount of work. Each of its fragments, each of its verses, before taking on its final form, appeared in several - sometimes up to ten - modifications. From the initial rough sketches, where many connecting parts are still missing, Pushkin, in a special notebook, made the first set of the whole story. This vault, marked "October 30", is the second edition of the story, since much has been changed in it compared to the first drafts. This list is covered by new amendments. giving the third edition. It also came down to us in Pushkin's own handwritten list, made to present the story to the sovereign. Finally, already in this white list (and, moreover, after prohibition of the story by the "highest censorship") Pushkin also made a number of changes, entire passages were thrown out, many expressions and entire verses were replaced by others, etc. Thus, the text now being printed must be considered the fourth edition of the story.
To give an idea of the work expended by Pushkin on The Bronze Horseman, it is enough to say that the beginning of the first part is known to us in six, completely processed, editions. Already one of the first seems to be such a finished creation that it almost makes one regret the severity of the "exacting" artist, who omitted many features from it:
Over darkened Petersburg
The autumn wind drove the clouds.
Neva, in the course of the perturbed,
Noise, rushed. gloomy shaft,
As if the petitioner is restless,
Splashed in the granite fence slender
Wide Neva banks.
Among the moving clouds
The moon was not visible at all.
Lights shone in the houses,
Ashes billowed in the street
And the violent whirlwind howled sadly,
Puffing the hem of the night sirens
And drowning out sentries.
The plot of The Bronze Horseman belongs to Pushkin, but individual episodes and pictures of the story were not created without extraneous influence.
The idea of the first verses of the "Introduction" is borrowed from Batyushkov's article "A Walk to the Academy of Arts" (1814). “My imagination,” writes Batyushkov, “introduced to me Peter, who for the first time surveyed the banks of the wild Neva, now so beautiful ... A great thought was born in the mind of a great man. Here there will be a city,” he said, a miracle of the world. "arts, all arts. Here arts, arts, civil institutions and laws will conquer nature itself. He said - and Petersburg arose from a wild swamp." The verses of the "Introduction" repeat some of the expressions of this passage almost literally.
Before starting the description of Petersburg, Pushkin himself makes a note: "See the poems of Prince Vyazemsky to Countess Z - oy." In this poem, Vyazemsky ("Conversation on April 7, 1832"), indeed, we find several stanzas reminiscent of Pushkin's description:
I love Petersburg with its slender beauty,
With a brilliant belt of luxurious islands,
With a transparent night - a rival of the heatless day,
And with the fresh greenery of his young gardens...etc.
In addition, the influence of two satires by Mickiewicz, "Przedmiescia stolicy" and "Petersburg", affected Pushkin's description. Prof. Tretiak / *See. previous article. Here, too, we use Mr. S. Brailovsky's exposition. (Note by V. Ya. Bryusov.)*/ proved that Pushkin almost step by step follows the paintings of the Polish poet, responding to his reproaches with an apology for the northern capital. So, for example, Mickiewicz laughs at that. that Petersburg houses stand behind iron bars; Pushkin objected:
Your fences have a cast-iron pattern.
Mickiewicz denounces the severity of Petersburg's climate: Pushkin replies:
I love your cruel winters
Still air and frost.
Mickiewicz speaks contemptuously of Northern women, white as snow, ruddy as crayfish; Pushkin praises -
Maiden linden brighter than roses
There is an analogy between the depiction of the "idol" in The Bronze Horseman and the description of the same statue in Mickiewicz's satire "Pomnik Piotra Wieikiego".
The image of an animated statue could have been inspired by Pushkin by M. Yu. Vielgorsky's story about some wonderful dream. In 1812, the sovereign, fearing an enemy invasion, planned to take away the monument to Peter from St. Petersburg, but he was stopped by Prince. A. I. Golitsyn, reporting that recently a major had a wonderful dream: as if the Bronze Horseman gallops through the streets of St. Petersburg, drives up to the palace and says to the sovereign: “Young man! nothing to fear." However, the same image could also be suggested by the episode with the statue of the commander in Don Juan.
The description of the flood of 1824 was compiled by Pushkin according to the testimony of eyewitnesses, since he himself did not see it. He was then in exile, in Mikhailovsky. / * Having received the first news of the disaster, Pushkin at first treated him half-jokingly and in a letter to his brother admitted even about the flood a witticism of a rather dubious dignity. However, having learned closer the circumstances of the case, he completely changed his mind and, in another letter to his brother, wrote: “This flood doesn’t go crazy for me: it’s not at all as funny as it seems at first glance. If you decide to help some unfortunate, help from Onegin's money, but I ask without any fuss." (Note by V. Ya. Bryusov.)*/ Belinsky wrote: “Pushkin’s picture of the flood was painted with paints that a poet of the last century, obsessed with the idea of writing the epic poem The Flood, would have been ready to buy at the cost of his life ... Here you don’t know what to marvel more at, whether the enormous grandiosity of the description or its almost prosaic simplicity, which, taken together, amount to the greatest poetry." However, Pushkin himself stated in the preface that "the details of the flood were borrowed from the magazines of that time," and added: "the curious can deal with the news compiled by V. N. Berkh."
Coping with Berch's book ("Detailed historical news about all the floods that were in St. Petersburg"), one has to admit that Pushkin's description, for all its brightness, is really "borrowed". Here, for example, is what Berch says: "Rain and penetrating cold wind from early in the morning they filled the air with dampness... With the dawn... crowds of curious rushed to the banks of the Neva, which is high rose foamy waves and with a terrible noise and spray smashed them against the granite shores... The boundless expanse of waters seemed boiling abyss... White foam swirled over the masses of water, which, constantly increasing, finally rushed furiously to the shore ... People were saved as best they could." And further: "Neva, encountering an obstacle in its course, rose in its banks, filled the canals and gushed through the underground pipes as fountains to the streets. In an instant the water poured out across the edges of the embankments.
All the main features of this description are repeated by Pushkin, partly in the final version of the story, partly in rough sketches.
...rain dull
knocked on the window and wind out.
In the morning over her shores
Crowded crowds of people
admiring spray, mountains
And foam furious waters.Neva wandered, ferocious,
Rise and boil
Boiler bubbling and swirling.Neva all night
Rushed to the sea against the storm
And she couldn't argue!
And from them / * It is not entirely clear what the word "their" refers to, both here and in the corresponding place in the final edition:Rushed to the sea against the storm,
Not having overcome them powerful dope.Probably, Pushkin meant "sea" and "storm", or "winds", about which it is said further: But by force winds from the Bay of the Barred Neva ...
By the way, all editions still printed "winds" instead of "winds" (as it is read in all manuscripts). (Note by V. Ya. Bryusov.)*/ ferocious dope
Went bubbling and swirling.
And suddenly, like a tiger freaking out,
Through the iron fence
Waves rushed over the hail.Everything ran, everything around
Suddenly empty... Water suddenly
Flowed into underground cellars;
Channels flooded to the gratings.The people fled. Towards her
Channels flooded; from pipes
Fountains splashed.
In the original versions of the description, Pushkin also reproduced in verse an anecdote about c. V. V. Tolstoy, later told by the book. P. A. Vyazemsky / * See. in Text history. (Note by V. Ya. Bryusov.)*/.
In any case, Pushkin was quite right to say in one of his notes, comparing his description of the flood with the description of Mickiewicz (who depicts the evening before the flood): "our description rather"...
In terms of the number of verses, The Bronze Horseman is one of Pushkin's shortest poems. It contains only 464 verses in the final version, while in "Gypsies" - 537, in "Poltava" - about 1500, and even in "The Fountain of Bakhchisarai" - about 600. Meanwhile, the concept of "The Bronze Horseman" is extremely broad, hardly ns wider than in all other Pushkin's poems. In less than 500 verses, Pushkin managed to fit Peter's thoughts "on the shore of the Varangian waves", and a picture of St. Petersburg at the beginning of the 19th century, and a description of the flood of 1824, and the love story and madness of poor Yevgeny, and his thoughts on Peter's case. Pushkin found it possible even to allow himself, as a luxury, a few jokes, for example, the mention of Count Khvostov.
The language of the story is extremely varied. In those parts where the life and thoughts of an official are depicted, he is simple, almost prosaic, willingly allows colloquial expressions ("life is much easier", "I will entrust the economy", "I myself am big", etc.). On the contrary, where the fate of Russia is spoken of, the language completely changes, prefers Slavic forms of words, avoids everyday expressions, such as:
A hundred years have passed - and young deg.
midnight countries beauty and wonder.
From the darkness of the forests, from the swamp blat
ascended pompous, proud.
However, Pushkin clearly avoids truncated adjectives, and there are only three of them in the whole story: "spring days", "past times", "sleepy eyes".
A peculiar feature of the verse in The Bronze Horseman is the abundance of caesuras. In none of his poems, written in iambic tetrameter, did Pushkin allow himself as often as in The Bronze Horseman to pause in meaning within a verse. Apparently, in The Bronze Horseman he consciously tried to ensure that the logical divisions did not coincide with the metric divisions, thus creating the impression of extreme ease of speech. There are especially many such examples in verses telling about Eugene, for example:
Sitting motionless, terribly pale
Evgeny. He feared the poor
Not for myself.Eugene for his good
Ns came. He will soon light
Became a stranger. Walked all day,
And slept on the pier.At the Neva pier. Summer days
Leaning towards autumn. breathed
Bad wind.
It is remarkable that almost all new sections of the story (as if its individual chapters) begin with a half-verse. In general, in about a third of the verses of The Bronze Horseman there is a period in the middle of the verse, and in more than half there is a logical stop of speech within the verse.
In the use of rhymes in The Bronze Horseman, Pushkin remained true to his rule, expressed by him in The House in Kolomna:
I need rhymes, I'm ready to save everything.
In "The Bronze Horseman" there are many rhymes of the most ordinary (nights - eyes, horse - fire, etc.), even more verbal ones (sat down - looked, got angry - rushed about, found out - played, etc.), but there are also several "rare" (the sun - Chukhonets, cuts - gnashing) and a number of "rich" (live - sentry, penis - steps, howling - washing away, head - fatal, etc.). As in other poems, Pushkin pronunciation freely rhymes adjectives into th with adverbs on about (carefree - willingly).
The verse of "The Bronze Horseman" knows few rivals in terms of sound representation. It seems that in none of his creations did Pushkin use as often as in the "Petersburg story", all means of alliteration, playing with vowels and consonants, etc. An example of them is the quatrain:
And shine, and noise, and ball talk,
And at the hour of the feast idle
Shi singing pen pure glasses
And P unsha P blue lamp.
But the verse of "The Bronze Horseman" in the scene of the persecution of poor Yevgeny reaches the top of the figurativeness. By repeating the same rhymes, repeating the initial letter several times in adjacent words, and stubbornly repeating sounds k, g and X- Pushkin gives a vivid impression of "heavy-voiced galloping", the echo of which resounds in an empty square like the rumble of thunder.
And he P about P horses P mouth oh
Runs and hears oh
To a to as if G Roma G rumble,
heavy-ringing to oe s to a to anye
According to p shaken bridges oh.
And illuminated by the moon pale,
Stretch out your hand above
Behind n them n esetsya AT gardener Copper
On ringing to o s to aching to one;
And all night a madman poor
Wherever you turn your feet
Follow him by sun justice Sun adnik Copper
With t pitiful t wholesale sk a to al.
However, traces of some haste in processing the form are also noticeable in the story. Three verses remained completely without rhyme, namely:
Rushed to the city. Before her...
And found no trace...
And slept on the pier. Ate...
In the original redactions, the first and last of these verses have their own rhyme:
With all my heavy strength
Went to attack. in front of her
The people fled and disappeared suddenly.And slept on the pier. ate
From the windows of a thrown piece;
Almost never undressed
And the dress is shabby on him
It tore and smoldered...
As you know, in 1826 the sovereign expressed a desire to personally be Pushkin's censor. All his new works, before they were printed, Pushkin had to submit, through Benckendorff, to this "highest censorship."
On December 6, 1833, shortly after his return from Boldin, Pushkin sent a letter to Benckendorff, asking for permission to present to his Excellency a "poem" that he would like to print. It must be assumed that it was the "Bronze Horseman". On December 12, the manuscript of The Bronze Horseman was already returned to Pushkin. "Highest censorship" found a number of reprehensible passages in the story.
We do not know how Pushkin himself reacted to the ban on the story. He spent the last years of his life in strict spiritual solitude and, apparently, did not initiate anyone into his inner life. In his letters he became extremely restrained and no longer allowed himself that fascinating chatter about everything that interests him, which is the main charm of his letters from Mikhailovsky. Even in the entries in his diary, which he kept last years life, Pushkin was very careful and did not allow a single superfluous word.
In this diary, under December 14, it is written: “On the 11th, I received an invitation from Benckendorff to come to him the next day in the morning. I arrived. Bronze Horseman with the remarks of the sovereign. The word idol is not missed by the highest censorship; poems:
And in front of the younger capital
Faded old Moscow
As before a new queen
Porphyritic widow -
Marked out. In many places put -? - . All this makes a big difference to me. I was forced to change the terms with Smirdin.
We learn nothing more from Pushkin's letters either. In December 1833, he wrote to Nashchokin: “Here I had financial troubles: I conspired with Smirdin and was forced to destroy the contract, because the Bronze Horseman was not allowed by the censors. This is a loss for me.” Pushkin repeated to him in another, later letter: "The Bronze Horseman is not missed - losses and troubles." Pogodin, in response to his question, Pushkin said briefly: "You are asking about the Bronze Horseman, Pugachev and Peter. The first will not be published."
From these dry reports, one can only conclude that Pushkin wanted to publish the "Petersburg story" (which means that he considered it finished, processed) and that he introduced his friends to it.
Pushkin himself believed that his manuscripts were examined directly by the sovereign. He believed that the manuscript of The Bronze Horseman had also been returned to him "with the sovereign's remarks." But at the present time it is sufficiently clear that Pushkin's manuscripts were examined in Benckendorff's office and that the sovereign only repeated, sometimes retaining all the polemical attacks, the critical remarks of this office. The inner meaning of The Bronze Horseman, of course, was not understood by this censorship, but a number of individual expressions seemed unacceptable to her.
Apparently, the same manuscript that was submitted to the sovereign for consideration has come down to us (Pushkin writes: "I returned The Bronze Horseman...") In this manuscript, the verses about the "faded Moscow" about which Pushkin speaks in his diary are crossed out in pencil and marked NB on the side. A question mark is placed against those verses where the Bronze Horseman first appears.
Over the perturbed Neva
Standing with outstretched hand
Idol on a bronze horse.
In the second part, a question mark is placed against the repetition of these verses:
Idol with outstretched hand
He sat on a bronze horse.
Who stood still
In the darkness with a copper head,
Togo, whose fateful will
The city was founded over the sea.
O mighty lord of Fate,
Are you not so above the abyss,
At a height, an iron bridle,
Raised Russia on its hind legs?
Finally, the expressions "proud idol" and "miraculous builder" are underlined, and all the verses are crossed out, starting with the words of the madman addressed to the "idol", to the end of the page.
In another manuscript, a list made by a clerk's hand, there are traces of Pushkin's corrections, apparently begun with the aim of softening the expressions indicated to him. Pushkin replaced the word "idol" with the word "rider" and in the quatrain about "faded Moscow" restored the original version of the second verse ("Moscow bowed its head"). However, Pushkin did not complete his amendments and preferred to refuse to publish the story. "Pushkin's poem about the flood is excellent, but it is crossed out (i.e. crossed out by censorship), and therefore it is not printed," wrote Prince. P. Vyazemsky to A.I. Turgenev.
During Pushkin's lifetime, only an excerpt from the "Introduction" under the title "Petersburg" was published from The Bronze Horseman. After Pushkin's death, the story was published with corrections by Zhukovsky, who softened all the controversial passages in his own way. For a long time, Russia knew one of Pushkin's most significant creations only in a distorted form. Correction of the text according to the original manuscripts of Pushkin, begun by Annenkov, continued until recently. The original reading of the poems about the "idol" was restored only in the 1904 edition of P. Morozov. However, some poems appear only in this edition for the first time in the form in which they were written by Pushkin.
