Kesusasteraan Rusia: 1914-60

Kesusasteraan Rusia: 1914-60


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.


Kesusasteraan Rusia. Penulis dan penyair terkenal Rusia.

Pembentukan tradisi sastera pertama Rusia bermula pada abad pertama. Penerapan agama Kristian mendorong perkembangan literasi, falsafah dan sastera teologi. Old Church Slavonic adalah bahasa sastera Rusia dan terus digunakan hingga abad ke-17. Sastera gereja termasuk dan catatan sejarah ditulis atau diterjemahkan dari bahasa Yunani ke Old Church Slavonic.

Karya sastera Rusia yang pertama dipercayai adalah "Slovo O Zakone I Blagodati" (1050 "Khutbah tentang Hukum dan Rahmat"), yang ditulis oleh Metropolitan Illarion, ketua Gereja Ortodoks di Rusia pada masa itu. Sastera Rusia lama terdiri daripada beberapa karya yang ditulis dalam bahasa Rusia Lama.

Kronik "Povest 'Vremennykh Let" (1113 "The Kale of Bygone Years," juga dikenal sebagai "The Russian Primary Chronicle"), karya-karya anonim seperti ini termasuk "Kisah Kisah Igor" dan "Doa dari Daniel yang Tidak Terkena" . Apa yang disebut "kehidupan orang-orang kudus" membentuk genre kesusasteraan lama Rusia. (contohnya "Kehidupan Alexander Nevsky"). Monumen sastera Rusia yang lain termasuk Zadonschina, Ahli Fisiologi, Sinopsis dan A Journey Beyond the Three Seas. Bylinas - epik rakyat lisan - menggabungkan tradisi Kristian dan pagan.

Sastera Rusia abad pertengahan mempunyai watak agama. Karya-karya yang paling terkenal pada masa ini termasuk: "Pesan-pesan dari Ivan the Terrible" dan otobiografi Arch Arch Avvakum. Salah satu karya sastera yang paling penting dan terkenal pada abad ke-16 adalah "Domostroi" ("House-Orderer"). Ini menetapkan peraturan untuk tingkah laku moral dan memberi arahan untuk menguruskan rumah tangga.

Pemodenan Rusia, bermula pada abad ke-17 dan biasanya dikaitkan dengan Peter the Great dan Catherine the Great, yang mempengaruhi sastera Rusia juga. Zaman ini dicirikan oleh pembaharuan abjad Rusia dan menggunakan bahasa yang popular untuk tujuan kesusasteraan umum serta pengaruh oleh nilai-nilai Eropah Barat. Sastera moden Rusia mula muncul ketika semakin banyak penulis mula mengembangkan gaya mereka yang tidak konvensional. Menjelang abad ke-18 tulisan Rusia akhirnya digunakan secara meluas, menggantikan Old Church Slavonic.

Sarjana yang diakui pada zaman ini adalah pengarang seperti Antiochus Kantemir, Vasily Trediakovsky, dan Mikhail Lomonosov (tokoh penting kehidupan intelektual Rusia pada abad ke-18) penyair Gavrila Derzhavin, penulis drama Alexander Sumarokov dan Denis Fonvizin, dan penulis prosa Alexander Radishchev (pengarang penulis) karya bukan fiksyen pada masa itu adalah "Puteshestvie iz Peterburga v Moskvu") dan Nikolay Karamzin yang terakhir sering dikreditkan dengan penciptaan bahasa sastera moden Rusia.

Abad ke-19 mungkin merupakan masa paling berbuah dalam sejarah sastera Rusia, yang sering disebut sebagai "Era Emas" sastera Rusia. Tempoh ini memberikan genius seperti Aleksandr Pushkin, Mikhail Lermontov, Nikolay Gogol, Ivan Turgenev, Leo Tolstoy dan Anton Chekhov.

Abad ini bermula dengan munculnya Romantik, yang paling jelas dalam puisi. Zhukovsky mungkin penyair hebat pertama abad kesembilan belas, tetapi anak didiknya Aleksandr Pushkin, yang paling dekat dengan kebangkitan Romantikisme dan puisi Rusia pada umumnya. Kemenangan pertama Pushkin adalah puisi Ruslan dan Lyudmila (1820).

Ini diikuti oleh sejumlah puisi romantis yang dijiwai dengan kesannya ketika tinggal di Selatan Rusia, dan akhirnya Pushkin menciptakan jeniusnya "Eugene Onegin" (selesai pada tahun 1830). Karya yang indah ini adalah "novel dalam ayat" yang unik dan memaparkan kisah tentang kehidupan Rusia kontemporari. Imej watak utama, Eugene dan Tatiana, dan kisah cinta mereka yang hancur telah memberi kesan yang besar pada semua kesusasteraan Rusia terkini.

Di dalamnya ia menggambarkan kehidupan bangsawan Rusia pada masanya dan memperkenalkan Onegin sebagai "lelaki berlebihan". "Manusia berlebihan" ini adalah subjek banyak karya Rusia abad ke-19. Salah satunya, "A Hero of Our Time", adalah novel psikologi Rusia yang pertama. Ia ditulis oleh penyair agung kedua Rusia, Mikhail Lermontov. Dia juga menulis "The Demon" dan "The Novice".

Pushkin mencipta beberapa karya puitis besar, di antaranya puisi yang tidak dapat ditiru "The Bronze Horseman" (1833), pelbagai tulisan prosa dan beberapa ratus ayat yang terkenal kerana kesederhanaan bentuk klasik mereka dan perasaan lirik yang mendalam.

Seluruh generasi penyair baru termasuk Mikhail Lermontov, Evgeny Baratynsky, Konstantin Batyushkov, Nikolay Nekrasov, Aleksey Konstantinovich Tolstoy, Fyodor Tyutchev, dan Afanasy Fet mengikuti langkah Pushkin.

Terutama terkenal adalah penulis dongeng, penyair Ivan Andreyevich Krylov, yang ceritanya cerdas mendapat populariti luas sebagai pelajaran kebijaksanaan dan paragons penguasaan bahasa. Nama Fedor Tyutchev mesti disebut sebagai penyair "moden" sebelum waktunya, penantang sekolah simbolisme Rusia.

Selepas kematian Pushkin pada tahun 1837, Zaman Emas puisi Rusia berakhir. Kepemimpinan dalam surat jatuh secara bertahap kepada penulis prosa, dengan pendekatan kehidupan yang lebih realistik. Nikolai Vasilievich Gogol adalah tokoh yang paling membingungkan dan paling sering disalahtafsirkan antara zaman sastera Rusia yang romantis dan realistik. Prosa ini berkembang dari kisah romantis dan cerita rakyat asal negerinya Ukraine ("Petang di Ladang Dekat Dikanka") ke realisme pencarian, agresif, sarkastik "Dead Souls".

Sebelum abad ke-19, drama mendapat sedikit perhatian daripada penulis Rusia. Ini berterusan sehingga dua tonggak drama Rusia Aleksandr Griboedov ("Gore ot Uma" 1833 "The Woes of Wit") dan Aleksandr Ostrovsky ("Groza" 1860 "The Thunderstorm") melangkah ke sorotan.

Tetapi pada akhir abad ini, beberapa drama abadi ditulis oleh Anton Chekhov, misalnya "Chaika" (1896 The Seagull).

Prosa Zaman Keemasan Rusia mencapai kemuncaknya dalam karya dua wakil terbesar fiksyen Rusia. Mereka adalah Fedor Dostoevski dan Leo Tolstoi. Novel Fedor Dostoyevsky mengupas masalah politik dan sosial serta masalah falsafah dan moral masyarakat Rusia. "Jenayah dan Hukuman" (1866) dianggap sebagai salah satu novel terbaik sepanjang masa.

Leo Tolstoy, seperti Dostoyevsky sezamannya, bukan hanya novelis yang cemerlang tetapi juga pemikir politik dan ahli falsafah. Novelnya "Voina i Mir" (1865-1869 "Perang dan Damai") ​​adalah keluarga dan novel sejarah dalam satu dan dikatakan sebagai salah satu karya sastera terhebat dalam sejarah sastera dunia.

Novel Tolstoi dikira antara yang terhebat di dunia. Novel lain yang terkenal ialah "Anna Karenina", sebuah karya analisis psikologi dan pemerhatian sosial yang luas.

Terdapat tokoh penting lain dalam tempoh ini. Antaranya ialah penyair sivik Nikolai Nekrasov, Nikolai Leskov, seorang novelis dan penulis cerpen.

Selepas zaman prosa yang hebat terdapat kebangkitan puisi. Ini dipanggil Zaman Perak. Ia bermula pada akhir abad ke-19 dengan munculnya sekolah simbolisme di Rusia. Kumpulan penyair Rusia yang baru diilhamkan oleh budaya Eropah Barat, sementara budaya Rusia semakin popular di Eropah.

Valeri Bryusov dan Dmitri Merezhkovski adalah eksponen simbolisme yang paling terkenal dalam prosa. Aleksandr Blok (Karya terhebatnya, "Dvenadtsat" (1918 "The Twelve," 1920), menggambarkan suasana Petrograd pada musim sejuk tahun 1918 setelah Revolusi Bolshevik 1917.), Andrei Bely (Boris Bugaev), Nikolai Gumiliev , Konstantin Balmont, dan Fedor Sologub (Teternikov) adalah ketua penyair sekolah ini.

Beberapa penyair terhebat abad ke-20 yang menentang Revolusi Bolshevik dan pemerintahan Soviet adalah Anna Akhmatova ("Requiem", 1964), Maria Tsvetaeva dan Osip Mandelstam. Yang terakhir ini ditangkap pada tahun 1930-an dan mati di kem buruh.

Di antara mereka yang menyokong Revolusi 1917 adalah novelis dan penulis drama Soviet terkemuka, Maksim Gorky ("Ibu" 1907). Dia juga merupakan pengasas realisme sosialis.

Selepas Revolusi, banyak penulis meninggalkan Rusia untuk Eropah dan Barat. Mungkin salah satu yang paling berbakat di antara mereka adalah novelis Vladimir Nabokov yang berhijrah ke Amerika Syarikat pada tahun 1940 dan mula menulis dalam bahasa Inggeris.

Seorang penulis Rusia yang lain dalam pengasingan yang mendapat pengiktirafan yang cukup besar sebelum Revolusi dan meneruskan kerjanya di luar negara adalah pemenang hadiah Nobel, Ivan Bunin. Dalam novel dan cerpennya yang mahir, Bunin meneruskan tradisi sastera Turgenev, Goncharov, Leo Tolstoi, dan Chekhov.

Tahun-tahun pertama rejim Soviet ditandai dengan karya Nikolay Zabolotsky, Alexander Vvedensky, Konstantin Vaginov dan absurdis Rusia yang paling terkenal, Daniil Kharms. Pengarang terkenal lain pada masa itu ialah novelis Andrei Platonov dan Yuri Olesha dan penulis cerpen Isaac Babel dan Mikhail Zoschenko.

Pada tahun 1930-an realisme Sosialis menjadi gaya yang disetujui secara rasmi, garis panduannya dikuatkuasakan dengan lebih ketat lagi setelah berakhirnya WW2. Oleh itu, tempoh dari 1946 hingga kematian Stalin pada tahun 1953 mungkin merupakan yang paling buruk dalam kesusasteraan Rusia pada abad ke-20. Namun demikian ia menambahkan nama-nama cemerlang dalam sastera Rusia seperti, pemenang Hadiah Nobel Mikhail Sholokhov, dan Aleksey Nikolayevich Tolstoy dan penyair Konstantin Simonov dan Aleksandr Tvardovsky sedang dibaca di Rusia hingga hari ini. Selebriti Soviet yang lain, seperti Alexander Serafimovich, Nikolai Ostrovsky, Alexander Fadeyev, Fyodor Gladkov tidak pernah diterbitkan oleh penerbit arus perdana selepas tahun 1989.

Walau bagaimanapun, beberapa dekad selepas kematian Stalin menyaksikan beberapa pencairan. Sekatan terhadap sastera dikurangkan. Boris Pasternak akhirnya menerbitkan novel legendarisnya "Doctor Zhivago," walaupun berada di luar Kesatuan Soviet. Dia dianugerahkan hadiah sastera yang mulia, namun terpaksa ditolak oleh pihak berkuasa Soviet.

Khrushchev Thaw membawa angin segar ke dalam literatur. Puisi menjadi fenomena budaya besar-besaran: Yevgeny Yevtushenko, Andrey Voznesensky, Robert Rozhdestvensky dan Bella Akhmadulina membaca puisi mereka di stadium dan menarik banyak orang.

Beberapa penulis berani menentang ideologi Soviet, seperti penulis cerpen Varlam Shalamov dan novelis pemenang Hadiah Nobel, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, yang menulis tentang kehidupan di kem gulag, atau Vasily Grossman, dengan perihalannya mengenai peristiwa Perang Dunia II yang bertentangan dengan pensejarahan rasmi Soviet. Mereka dijuluki "pembangkang" dan tidak dapat menerbitkan karya utama mereka hingga tahun 1960-an.

Di antara pengarang anti-Soviet lain yang terkenal ialah penyair Joseph Brodsky, yang meninggalkan Soviet Union pada tahun 1972. Pada tahun 1987 Brodsky juga dianugerahkan Hadiah Nobel. Seperti Solzhenitsyn, dia berpindah ke Amerika Syarikat.

Pada tahun 1970-an muncul Village Prose yang relatif bebas, yang wakilnya yang paling menonjol adalah Viktor Astafiyev dan Valentin Rasputin. Fiksyen detektif dan fiksi perisik juga terkenal, terima kasih kepada pengarang seperti saudara Arkady dan Georgy Vayner dan Julian Semenov.

Kesatuan Soviet menghasilkan sejumlah besar sastera fiksyen Sains, yang diilhamkan oleh perintis ruang negara. Pengarang fiksyen sains awal, seperti Alexander Belayev, Grigory Adamov, Vladimir Obruchev, Aleksey Nikolayevich Tolstoy, Alexander Kazantsev, susunan fiksyen sains sukar, dipengaruhi oleh H. G. Wells dan Jules Verne

Fiksyen sains Soviet dikembangkan dengan cara tersendiri dengan fiksyen sains sosial menjadi subgenre yang paling popular. Buku saudara Arkady dan Boris Strugatsky, dan Kir Bulychov, antara lain, mengingatkan akan masalah sosial dan sering kali merangkumi satira pada masyarakat Soviet kontemporari.

Awal 1990-an menyaksikan kejatuhan Kesatuan Soviet dan dengan itu berakhirnya 70 tahun kawalan negara terhadap sastera. Penapisan rasmi telah berakhir dan pemerintah menyatakan kebebasan akhbar. Kemerdekaan yang dinanti-nantikan ini memberi kesan mendalam kepada sastera Rusia. Karya penulis yang sebelum ini dilarang muncul semula dalam edisi utama.

Penulis yang muncul, menjanjikan dan kontroversial seperti Liudmila Petrushevskaya, Ludmila Ulitskaya, Vladimir Sorokin dan Viktor Erofeev, untuk beberapa nama, muncul di kancah Rusia.

Sastera fiksyen Fantasi dan Sains masih menjadi antara laris dengan pengarang seperti Sergey Lukyanenko, Nick Perumov dan Maria Semenova.

Cerita detektif dan keseronokan telah membuktikan genre sastera Rusia yang sangat berjaya: pada tahun 90-an novel detektif bersiri oleh Alexandra Marinina, Polina Dashkova dan Darya Dontsova diterbitkan dalam berjuta-juta salinan. Pada dekad berikutnya, pengarang yang lebih terkenal, Boris Akunin dengan siri-sirinya mengenai abad ke-19, Erast Fandorin menjadi terkenal.

Terdapat banyak wanita cantik di pelbagai negara, tetapi kecantikan Rusia mempunyai keunikan dan keistimewaannya yang tersendiri. Sejak zaman kuno, banyak seniman dan penyair mengagumi keindahan dan kecerdasan luar biasa seorang gadis Rusia, dan bukan hanya bahawa dia sangat cantik secara semula jadi. Gadis-gadis Rusia dapat merendahkan mata seperti anak-anak nakal, nampaknya mereka hendak menangis, mata mereka hampir tidak menahan air mata pirus yang keluar dari permafrost, berabad-abad kesedihan.

Banyak tradisi Rusia biasa menimbulkan kejutan dan ketidakfahaman orang asing. Wanita Rusia suka berpakaian. Sebagai contoh, pakaian yang bagus dan kasut tumit tinggi mereka menganggap pakaian yang sesuai untuk berjalan-jalan sederhana atau bahkan untuk perjalanan biasa ke kedai. Gadis Rusia adalah bunga, bersandar pada lelaki lemah, mereka memaafkan mereka dan memutar-mutar mereka seperti yang mereka mahukan.

Perasaan cinta sejati akan berkembang jika anda menemui pasangan yang tepat. Ia tidak mudah dan memerlukan banyak masa. Perjalanan bersama dapat membantu dengan ini. Hampir semua orang suka melancong, dan gadis-gadis muda yang menarik, mungkin lebih banyak daripada orang lain. Ini mungkin, bukan hanya kerana mereka yang paling menerima segala sesuatu yang baru, cantik dan tidak diketahui, tidak disekat oleh konvensi dan stereotaip, tetapi juga disebabkan oleh fakta bahawa tidak seperti orang lain yang boleh melakukan perjalanan bukan hanya untuk melihat sesuatu tetapi juga dilihat.

PENAFIAN: Maklumat yang terdapat di laman web ini hanya untuk tujuan pendidikan. Penulis tidak memberikan jaminan mengenai kandungan atau ketepatan kandungan yang dilampirkan.

Harap maklum bahawa ini bukan "laman temu janji" atau "laman perjodohan" atau "laman pengantin pesanan mel Rusia" dengan cara apa pun. Ini juga bukan "tarikh bujang" atau "temu janji percuma dalam talian" atau "teman mencari" atau laman web "perkahwinan" atau "perkahwinan" lain. Kami tidak menawarkan perkhidmatan perjodohan. Kami hanya menawarkan maklumat seperti yang kami ketahui dan menunjukkan beberapa gambar kepada anda. Semuanya percuma - tanpa bayaran, tanpa caj.


Tempoh dalam Sejarah Kesusasteraan Rusia Lama

Sastera Rusia Lama memberi kesaksian mengenai kehidupan orang Rusia. Inilah sebabnya mengapa sejarah itu sendiri menentukan tahap kesusasteraan. Perubahan sastera bertepatan terutamanya dengan perubahan sejarah. Zaman apa yang dapat kita bezakan dalam sejarah kesusasteraan Rusia dari abad kesebelas hingga ketujuh belas?

Tempoh pertama dalam sejarah kesusasteraan Rusia Lama adalah kesatuan relatif sastera, ketika sastera berkembang terutama di dua pusat (dihubungkan oleh hubungan budaya): Kiev di selatan dan Novgorod di utara. Ia berlangsung selama satu abad, kesebelas, dan termasuk awal abad kedua belas. Ini adalah masa pembentukan gaya monumental-sejarah dalam kesusasteraan, di mana bentuk-bentuk monumental digabungkan dengan isi penting, ketika dirasakan bahawa setiap peristiwa dan setiap orang dihubungkan dengan sejarah dunia dan dengan seluruh umat manusia. Itu adalah zaman kehidupan Rusia yang pertama, Kehidupan SS Boris dan Gleb dan para bhikkhu di Biara Crypt Monastery, dan kronik Rusia pertama yang terselamat — Kisah Tahun-tahun yang Lama. Itu adalah zaman negara Kievan-Novgorodian Rusia Tua yang bersatu.

Tempoh kedua, dari pertengahan kedua belas hingga pertiga pertama abad ketiga belas, menyaksikan munculnya pusat-pusat sastera baru di Vladimir-Zalessky dan Suzdal, Rostov dan Smolensk, Galich dan Vladimir-Volynsky. Selama periode ini fitur dan tema tempatan muncul, genre menjadi lebih bervariasi, dan aliran topikal dan publisiti yang kuat muncul dalam kesusasteraan. Tempoh ini menandakan permulaan perpecahan feudal.

Sebilangan ciri yang umum untuk kedua-dua tempoh ini memungkinkan kita untuk mengujinya bersama-sama (terutamanya dengan mengingat kesukaran untuk menjalin karya yang diterjemahkan dan yang asli). Kedua-dua tempoh pertama ini dicirikan oleh kelaziman gaya monumental-sejarah.

Kemudian datang jangka masa yang singkat dari pencerobohan Mongol yang mengerikan, diikuti oleh pemerintahan Mongol selama bertahun-tahun. Tempoh singkat ini menyaksikan penciptaan kisah mengenai pencerobohan Rusia oleh orang Mongol, pertempuran di Kalka, penangkapan Vladimir-Zalessky, Lay of the Ruin of the Russian Land dan The Life of Alexander Nevsky. Sastera tertumpu pada satu tema, tetapi tema ini menjelma dengan intensitas yang luar biasa, dan gaya bersejarah-monumental memperoleh kesan tragis dan semangat lirik perasaan patriotik yang mendalam. Tempoh yang singkat tetapi jelas ini harus dikaji secara berasingan. Ia mudah dibezakan.

Tempoh berikutnya, dari akhir abad keempat belas hingga pertengahan abad kelima belas, adalah zaman Pra-Renaissance, yang bertepatan dengan kelahiran semula ekonomi dan budaya tanah Rusia pada periode yang tepat sebelum dan sesudah Pertempuran Kulikovo pada tahun 1380. Ini adalah periode gaya ekspresif, emosi dan patriotisme mendalam dalam sastera, tempoh kelahiran semula penulisan kronik, kisah sejarah dan hagiografi panegyric.

Pada separuh kedua abad kelima belas fenomena baru muncul dalam kesusasteraan Rusia: terjemahan kisah sekular (fiksyen) mula beredar dan karya asli dari jenis yang sama, seperti The Tale of Dracula dan The Tale of Basarga, muncul. Fenomena ini dikaitkan dengan gerakan reformasi dan humanis pada akhir abad kelima belas. Namun, pembangunan kota-kota yang tidak mencukupi (yang merupakan pusat Renaissance di Eropah Barat), tunduknya republik Novgorod dan Pskov, dan penindasan gerakan sesat menghalangi kemajuan menuju Renaissance. Penaklukan Byzantium oleh orang-orang Turki (Konstantinopel jatuh pada tahun 1458), dengan mana Rusia mempunyai hubungan budaya yang erat, menyebabkan Rusia terasing dalam sempadan budaya sendiri. Kesatuan Florence-Ferrara dari gereja-gereja Yunani dan Katolik, yang ditolak secara tegas di Rusia, menimbulkan ketidakpercayaan terhadap Barat dan budayanya. Organisasi sebuah negara berpusat Rusia yang bersatu menyerap sebahagian besar tenaga rohani rakyat. Sastera menjadi semakin bersifat publisiti: dasar dalam negeri dan transformasi masyarakat semakin menarik perhatian penulis dan pembaca.

Dari pertengahan abad keenam belas arus rasmi menjadi semakin jelas dalam kesusasteraan. Tempoh "monumentalisme kedua" tiba, yang menyaksikan penghasilan kronik yang mengagumkan, kronograf panjang, dan penyusunan besar dari semua karya yang dibaca di Rusia, yang dikenal sebagai The Great Menology. Bentuk sastera tradisional mendominasi, menekan elemen peribadi yang mulai muncul pada zaman Pra-Renaissance Rusia. Kejadian pada separuh kedua abad keenam belas yang dihasilkan oleh pemerintahan Ivan the Terotic yang menghina menghalang perkembangan sastera sekular.

Abad ketujuh belas adalah abad peralihan kepada sastera zaman moden. Ini adalah abad pengembangan elemen peribadi dalam segala hal: dalam jenis penulis dan karyanya yang sebenarnya abad pengembangan selera dan gaya peribadi, profesionalisme sastera dan rasa kepengarangan, individu, protes peribadi yang berkaitan dengan peristiwa tragis dalam biografi penulis. Elemen peribadi mendorong kemunculan puisi dan drama suku kata. Sejak abad ketujuh belas, kebanyakan sejarawan Rusia dan Lenin bertarikh permulaan zaman moden dalam sejarah Rusia. 1


Kesusasteraan Rusia

Koleksi Klasik Rusia yang Hebat

Kesusasteraan Kuno

Dengan kedatangan agama Kristian Ortodoks pada tahun 988 Rusia terbuka untuk contoh budaya Byzantine yang terbaik. Mereka meletakkan asas untuk pengembangan aktif sastera agama. Pada awal abad ke-12 (1113) Nestor, biarawan Biara Gua Kiev, menulis Chronicle Utama, yang betul adalah salah satu karya budaya kuno Rusia yang paling cemerlang. & ldquoKisah Kisah Igor & rsquos & rdquo adalah satu lagi monumen kesusasteraan Rusia kuno, yang diciptakan pada akhir abad ke-12.

Kesusasteraan Abad Pertengahan

Abad ke-15 adalah masa hagiografi. Genre ini menggambarkan kehidupan orang kudus, patriarki, dan bhikkhu. Legenda St Peter dan Fevronya of Murom diubah menjadi genre ini pada akhir abad ke-15 atau awal abad ke-16. Ini adalah kisah bergerak tentang cinta antara Duke (knyaz) dan anak perempuan dari lebah lebah liar biasa, yang kemudian berubah menjadi simbol cinta abadi. Tempoh yang sama terkenal dengan minat yang meningkat untuk cerita mengenai perjalanan ke negeri yang jauh. Karya yang paling menarik dan asli dalam genre ini ialah & ldquoA Journey Beyond the Tree Seas & rdquo oleh Athanasius Nikitin, pedagang dari Tver, yang menulis mengenai kesannya terhadap Kaukasus, Parsi, India, Turki dan Crimea dalam bahasa yang sederhana dan menarik. Penemuan percetakan buku merupakan perkembangan penting bagi Rusia. Ivan Fyodorov dan Pyotr Mstislavets mencetak buku bertarikh tepat pertama, & ldquoApostle & rdquo, pada tahun 1564.

Mekarnya Budaya Rusia pada Abad ke-18

Abad ke-18 adalah Zaman Keemasan untuk Kesusasteraan Rusia. Ia membahagikan sastera menjadi tiga cabang. Yang pertama adalah klasikisme & gaya gaya seni dan sastera yang dicirikan oleh subjek sivik tinggi serta integriti tempat, masa dan tindakan. Klasikisme mencapai kemuncaknya dalam karya Mikhail Lomonosov, Gavriil Derzhavin, Sumarokov dan lain-lain. Trend lain dalam sastera Rusia adalah realisme, yang paling terkenal adalah Denis Fonvizin, pengarang komedi abadi & ldquoThe Minor & rdquo. Arah ketiga adalah sentimentalisme, yang dicirikan oleh peningkatan minat terhadap emosi manusia, persepsi emosi terhadap dunia sekitarnya. Dalam sastera Rusia sentimentalisme diwakili oleh N. Karamzin yang bukan sahaja sejarawan hebat tetapi juga penulis popular. Pada awal abad ke-19 Karamzin menjadi konservatif. Pandangan barunya tercermin dalam & laquoSejarah Negara Rusia & raquo.

Kesusasteraan Rusia Abad ke-19.

Sastera Rusia berkembang pada abad ke-19 juga dengan nama-nama terkenal seperti Alexander Griboyedov, Ivan Krylov, Alexander Pushkin, Mikhail Lermontov, Nikolai Gogol dan banyak lagi.


Kandungan

Perkembangan utama dalam dasar luar Rusia adalah menjauh dari Jerman dan menuju ke Perancis. Rusia tidak pernah bersahabat dengan Perancis, dan mengingat perang di Krimea dan pencerobohan Napoleon, ia menjadikan Paris sebagai fon penindasan yang berbahaya dan mengejek pemerintah lemah di sana. Perancis, yang telah ditutup dari seluruh sistem perikatan oleh Bismarck, memutuskan untuk memperbaiki hubungan dengan Rusia. Ia meminjamkan wang kepada Rusia, memperluas perdagangan, dan mulai menjual kapal perang setelah tahun 1890. Sementara itu, setelah Bismarck kehilangan jawatan pada tahun 1890, tidak ada pembaharuan perjanjian Reasuransi antara Rusia dan Jerman. Jurubank Jerman berhenti memberi pinjaman kepada Rusia, yang semakin bergantung pada bank Paris. [2] Pada tahun 1894 sebuah perjanjian rahasia menetapkan bahawa Rusia akan membantu Perancis sekiranya Perancis diserang oleh Jerman. Ketentuan lain adalah bahwa dalam kemungkinan perang melawan Jerman, Perancis akan segera menggerakkan 1.3 juta orang, sementara Rusia akan menggerakkan 700.000 hingga 800.000. Ini menetapkan bahawa jika ada atau lebih dari Triple Alliance (Jerman, Austria, Itali) menggerakkan cadangan mereka sebagai persediaan untuk perang, maka Rusia dan Perancis akan menggerakkan cadangan mereka. "Mobilisasi adalah pengisytiharan perang," kata ketua staf Perancis kepada Tsar Alexander III pada tahun 1892. "Memobilisasi adalah mewajibkan jiran seseorang untuk melakukan hal yang sama." Ini mengatur perjalanan untuk bulan Julai 1914. [3] [4] George F. Kennan berpendapat bahawa Rusia bertanggungjawab terutamanya atas keruntuhan dasar perikatan Bismarck di Eropah, dan memulai kemerosotan ke Perang Dunia Pertama. Kennan menyalahkan diplomasi Rusia yang lemah yang berpusat pada cita-citanya di Balkan. Kennan mengatakan bahawa dasar luar Bismarck dirancang untuk mencegah sebarang perang besar walaupun menghadapi hubungan Franco-Rusia yang bertambah baik. Rusia meninggalkan Liga Tiga Kaisar Bismarck (dengan Jerman dan Austria) dan sebaliknya mengambil cadangan Perancis untuk hubungan yang lebih erat dan pakatan ketenteraan. [5]

Rusia mendapat ruang manuver di Asia kerana persahabatannya dengan Perancis dan persaingan antara Britain dan Jerman yang semakin meningkat. Menjelang tahun 1895 Jerman bersaing dengan Perancis untuk mendapatkan bantuan Rusia, dan negarawan Britain berharap dapat berunding dengan Rusia untuk membatasi pengaruh di Asia. Keadaan ini membolehkan Rusia campur tangan di Asia timur laut setelah kemenangan Jepun ke atas China pada tahun 1895. Dalam rundingan yang diikuti, Jepun terpaksa membuat konsesi di Semenanjung Liaotung dan Port Arthur di Manchuria selatan. Pada tahun berikutnya, Sergei Witte menggunakan modal Perancis untuk menubuhkan Russo-Chinese Bank. Tujuan bank ini adalah untuk membiayai pembinaan landasan kereta api di seberang utara Manchuria dan dengan demikian memendekkan Kereta Api Trans-Siberia. Dalam masa dua tahun, Rusia telah memperoleh pajakan di Semenanjung Liaotung dan Port Arthur dan telah mula membina sebuah barisan batang dari Harbin di Manchuria tengah ke Port Arthur di pesisir. Pada masa yang sama Great Britain menduduki Wei-Hai-Wei, dan Jerman Kiaochao.


Pada tahun 1900, China bertindak balas terhadap pencerobohan asing di wilayahnya dengan pemberontakan popular bersenjata, Pemberontakan Boxer. Kontinjen tentera Rusia bergabung dari Eropah, Jepun, dan Amerika Syarikat untuk memulihkan ketenteraman di utara China. Pasukan 150,000 tentera Rusia menguasai Manchuria untuk mengamankan jalan kereta api. Setelah penindasan pemberontakan, Rusia tidak menarik tenteranya dari Manchuria. Akibatnya, geseran meningkat antara Rusia dan Jepun, dan yang terakhir membuka permusuhan di Port Arthur pada Januari 1904, tanpa pengisytiharan perang rasmi.

Sebagai lawan strategi Jepun untuk memperoleh kemenangan yang cepat untuk menguasai Manchuria, strategi Rusia memfokuskan pada memerangi tindakan menunda untuk mendapatkan masa agar bala bantuan tiba melalui kereta api Trans-Siberia yang panjang. Pada Januari 1905, setelah beberapa serangan yang tidak berjaya yang mengorbankan 60,000 tentera yang terkorban dan cedera serta pengepungan selama lapan bulan, Jepun menangkap Port Arthur. Pada bulan Mac, Jepun memaksa orang Rusia menarik diri ke utara Mukden, tetapi tidak dapat mengejar orang Rusia kerana tentera Jepun mengalami korban yang besar. Kerana penguasaan kota secara strategis tidak banyak berarti, kemenangan terakhir bergantung pada angkatan laut. Pada bulan Mei, di Selat Tsushima, Jepun memusnahkan harapan terakhir Rusia dalam perang, sebuah armada yang berkumpul dari pasukan tentera laut Baltik dan Mediterranean. Secara teorinya, bala bantuan tentera Rusia dapat mengusir Jepun dari daratan Asia, tetapi revolusi di rumah dan tekanan diplomatik memaksa tsar untuk mencari perdamaian. Rusia menerima pengantaraan oleh presiden Amerika Syarikat, Theodore Roosevelt, menyerahkan Pulau Sakhalin selatan ke Jepun, dan mengakui kenaikan Jepun di Korea dan Manchuria selatan.

Sistem pengeluaran pertanian Rusia mempengaruhi sikap petani dan kumpulan sosial lain untuk melakukan pembaharuan terhadap pemerintah dan mendorong perubahan sosial. "Pada awal abad kedua puluh, pertanian merupakan sektor terbesar ekonomi Rusia, menghasilkan sekitar setengah daripada pendapatan negara dan menggunakan dua pertiga penduduk Rusia". [6] Ini menggambarkan peranan luar biasa yang dimainkan oleh petani secara ekonomi sehingga menjadikannya merugikan ideologi revolusi demokrat populis dan sosial. Pada akhir abad ke-19, pertanian Rusia secara keseluruhan adalah yang terburuk di Eropah. Sistem pertanian Rusia tidak mempunyai pelaburan modal dan kemajuan teknologi. Produktiviti ternakan sangat mundur dan kekurangan tanah ragut seperti padang rumput memaksa ternakan merumput di tanah yang tidak diusahakan. Kedua sistem tanaman dan ternakan gagal untuk menahan musim sejuk Rusia. Semasa pemerintahan Tsar, ekonomi pertanian berubah dari pengeluaran sara hidup ke pengeluaran langsung untuk pasar. Seiring dengan kegagalan pertanian, Rusia mengalami pertumbuhan penduduk yang pesat, jalan kereta api meluas di seluruh ladang, dan inflasi menyerang harga komoditi. Sekatan diberikan pada pengedaran makanan dan akhirnya menyebabkan kebuluran. Kesukaran pertanian di Rusia membataskan ekonomi, mempengaruhi pembaharuan sosial dan membantu kebangkitan parti Bolshevik.

Perang Russo-Jepun mempercepat kebangkitan gerakan politik di antara semua kelas dan kebangsaan utama, termasuk orang-orang Rusia. Pada awal tahun 1904, aktivis liberal Rusia dari zemstva dan dari profesion telah membentuk sebuah organisasi yang disebut Union of Liberation. Pada tahun yang sama, mereka bergabung dengan orang Finland, Poland, Georgia, Armenia, dan anggota Parti Sosialis-Revolusi Rusia untuk membentuk pakatan antiautokratik.

Revolusi 1905, pergolakan sosial dan politik di seluruh kerajaan yang belum pernah terjadi sebelumnya, digerakkan oleh penindasan ganas pada 9 Januari (Ahad Berdarah) di St Petersburg sebuah prosesi massa pekerja, yang dipimpin oleh imam radikal Georgiy Gapon, dengan petisyen untuk tsar. Hari Ahad berdarah diikuti, di seluruh negara, oleh pemogokan pekerja dan pelajar, demonstrasi jalanan, serangan vandalisme dan keganasan berkala lain, pembunuhan pegawai pemerintah, pemberontakan tentera laut, gerakan nasionalis di perbatasan imperialis, dan pogrom anti-Yahudi dan protes reaksi lain dan keganasan. Di sejumlah kota, pekerja membentuk Soviet, atau dewan. Pada akhir tahun, pemberontakan bersenjata berlaku di Moscow, Ural, Latvia, dan beberapa bahagian di Poland. Aktivis dari zemstva dan Persatuan Kesatuan profesional yang luas membentuk Parti Demokrat Konstitusional, yang inisialnya meminjamkan parti itu dengan nama tidak rasmi, Kadets. Beberapa aktivis kelas atasan dan berharta meminta kompromi dengan kumpulan pembangkang untuk mengelakkan gangguan selanjutnya.

Hasil revolusi bertentangan. Pada akhir tahun 1905, Nicholas bersetuju, dengan agak enggan, untuk mengeluarkan Manifesto Oktober yang dijanjikan, yang menjanjikan kepada Rusia sebuah tatanan politik yang direformasi dan kebebasan sivil dasar bagi kebanyakan rakyat. New fundamental laws in 1906 established the legislative State Duma, or parliament, but also restricted its authority in many ways — not least of which was the complete lack of parliamentary control over the appointment or dismissal of cabinet ministers. Trade unions and strikes were legalised, but police retained extensive authority to monitor union activities and to close unions for engaging in illegal political activities. Press freedom was guaranteed.

Those who accepted the new arrangements formed a center-right political party, the Octobrists. Meanwhile, the Kadets held out for a truly responsible ministerial government and equal, universal suffrage. Because of their political principles and continued armed uprisings, Russia's leftist parties were undecided whether to participate in the Duma elections, which had been called for early 1906. At the same time, rightist factions actively opposed the reforms. Several new monarchist and protofascist groups also arose to subvert the new order. Nevertheless, the regime continued to function through the chaotic year of 1905, eventually restoring order in the cities, the countryside, and the army. In the process, terrorists murdered hundreds of officials, and the government executed much greater number of terrorists. Because the government had been able to restore order and to secure a loan from France before the first Duma met, Nicholas was in a strong position that enabled him to replace Witte with the much more conservative Petr Stolypin.

The First Duma was elected in March 1906. The Kadets and their allies dominated it, with the mainly nonparty radical leftists slightly weaker than the Octobrists and the nonparty center-rightists combined. The socialists had boycotted the election, but several socialist delegates were elected. Relations between the Duma and the Stolypin government were hostile from the beginning. A deadlock of the Kadets and the government over the adoption of a constitution and peasant reform led to the dissolution of the Duma and the scheduling of new elections. In spite of an upsurge of leftist terror, radical leftist parties participated in the election, and, together with the nonparty left, they gained a plurality of seats, followed by a loose coalition of Kadets with Poles and other nationalities in the political center. The impasse continued, however, when the Second Duma met in 1907.

In June 1907, The Tsar dissolved the Second Duma and promulgated a new electoral law, which vastly reduced the electoral weight of lower-class and non-Russian voters and increased the weight of the nobility. This political coup (Coup of June 1907) had the desired short-term result of restoring order. New elections in the autumn returned a more conservative Third Duma, which Octobrists dominated. Even this Duma quarreled with the government over a variety of issues, however, including the composition of the naval staff, the autonomous status of Finland, the introduction of zemstva in the western provinces, the reform of the peasant court system, and the establishment of workers' insurance organizations under police supervision. In these disputes, the Duma, with its appointed aristocratic-bureaucratic upper house, was sometimes more conservative than the government, and at other times it was more constitutionally minded. The Fourth Duma, elected in 1912, was similar in composition to the third, but a progressive faction of Octobrists split from the right and joined the political center.

Stolypin's boldest measure was his peasant reform program. It allowed, and sometimes forced, the breakup of communes as well as the establishment of full private property. Stolypin hoped that the reform program would create a class of conservative landowning farmers loyal to the Tsar. Most peasants did not want to lose the safety of the commune or to permit outsiders to buy village land, however. By 1914 only about 10 percent of all peasant communes had been dissolved. Nevertheless, the economy recovered and grew impressively from 1907 to 1914, both quantitatively and through the formation of rural cooperatives and banks and the generation of domestic capital. By 1914 Russian steel production equaled that of France and Austria-Hungary, and Russia's economic growth rate was one of the highest in the world. Although external debt was very high, it was declining as a percentage of the gross national product, and the empire's overall trade balance was favorable.

In 1911 Stolypin was assassinated by Dmitry Bogrov whilst watching an opera. Finance Minister Vladimir Kokovtsov replaced him. The cautious Kokovtsov was very able and a supporter of the tsar, but he could not compete with the powerful court factions that dominated the government.

Historians have debated whether Russia had the potential to develop a constitutional government between 1905 and 1914. The failure to do so was partly because the tsar was not willing to give up autocratic rule or share power. By manipulating the franchise, the government obtained progressively more conservative, but less representative, Dumas. Moreover, the regime sometimes bypassed the conservative Dumas and ruled by decree.

Russia's earlier Far Eastern policy required holding Balkan issues in abeyance, a strategy Austria-Hungary also followed between 1897 and 1906. Japan's victory in 1905 had forced Russia to make deals with the British and the Japanese. In 1907 Russia's new foreign minister, Aleksandr Izvol'skiy, concluded agreements with both nations. To maintain its sphere of influence in northern Manchuria and northern Persia, Russia agreed to Japanese ascendancy in southern Manchuria and Korea, and to British ascendancy in southern Persia, Afghanistan, and Tibet. The logic of this policy demanded that Russia and Japan unite to prevent the United States from establishing a base in China by organizing a consortium to develop Chinese railroads. After China's republican revolution of 1911, Russia and Japan recognized each other's spheres of influence in Inner Mongolia. In an extension of this reasoning, Russia traded recognition of German economic interests in the Ottoman Empire and Persia for German recognition of various Russian security interests in the region. Russia also protected its strategic and financial position by entering the informal Triple Entente with Britain and France, without antagonizing Germany.

In spite of these careful measures, after the Russo-Japanese War Russia and Austria-Hungary resumed their Balkan rivalry, focusing on the Kingdom of Serbia and the provinces of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which Austria-Hungary had occupied since 1878. In 1881 Russia secretly had agreed in principle to Austria's future annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. But in 1908, Izvol'skiy consented to support formal annexation in return for Austria's support for revision of the agreement on the neutrality of the Bosporus and Dardanelles—a change that would give Russia special navigational rights of passage. Britain stymied the Russian gambit by blocking the revision, but Austria proceeded with the annexation. Then, backed by German threats of war, Austria-Hungary exposed Russia's weakness by forcing Russia to disavow support for Serbia.

After Austria-Hungary's annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Russia became a major part of the increased tension and conflict in the Balkans. In 1912 Bulgaria, Serbia, Greece, and Montenegro defeated the Ottoman Empire in the First Balkan War, but the putative allies continued to quarrel among themselves. Then in 1913, the alliance split, and the Serbs, Greeks, and Romanians defeated Bulgaria in the Second Balkan War. Austria-Hungary became the patron of Bulgaria, which now was Serbia's territorial rival in the region, and Germany remained the Ottoman Empire's protector. Russia tied itself more closely to Serbia than it had previously. The complex system of alliances and Great Power support was extremely unstable among the Balkan parties harboring resentments over past defeats, the Serbs maintained particular animosity toward the Austro-Hungarian annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

In June 1914, a Serbian terrorist assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the throne of Austria-Hungary, which then held the Serbian government responsible. Austria-Hungary delivered an ultimatum to Serbia. Serbia submitted to the first 2 of 3 cases of the ultimatum the last one, which was rejected, demanded Serbia allow 100,000 Austrio-Hungarian troops to occupy their country. After Serbian rejection of the third clause of the ultimatum, Austria-Hungary responded forcefully. Russia supported Serbia. Once the Serbian response was rejected, the system of alliances began to operate automatically, with Germany supporting Austria-Hungary and France backing Russia. When Germany invaded France through Belgium as dictated by the Schliffen Plan, the conflict escalated into a world war and they were not prepared.

At the outbreak of the war, Tsar Nicholas yielded to pressure and appointed Grand Duke Nicholas as commander in chief of the Russian armies. The Grand Duke, a cousin of the tsar, was competent but had no part in formulating the strategy or appointing commanders.

In the initial phase of the war, Russia's offensives into East Prussia drew enough German troops from the western front to allow the French, Belgians, and British to stop the German advance. One of Russia's two invading armies was almost totally destroyed, however, at the disastrous Battle of Tannenberg—the same site at which Lithuanian, Polish, and Moldovan troops had defeated the German Teutonic Knights in 1410. Meanwhile, the Russians turned back an Austrian offensive and pushed into eastern Galicia, the northeastern region of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The Russians halted a combined German-Austrian winter counteroffensive into Russian Poland, and in early 1915 they pushed more deeply into Galicia. Then in the spring and summer of that year, a German-Austrian offensive drove the Russians out of Galicia and Poland and destroyed several Russian army corps. In 1916 the Germans planned to drive France out of the war with a large-scale attack in the Verdun area, but a new Russian offensive against Austria-Hungary once again drew German troops from the west. These actions left both major fronts stable and both Russia and Germany despairing of victory—Russia because of exhaustion, Germany because of its opponents' superior resources. Toward the end of 1916, Russia came to the rescue of Romania, which had just entered the war, and extended the eastern front south to the Black Sea.

Wartime agreements among the Allies reflected the Triple Entente's imperialist aims and the Russian Empire's relative weakness outside Eastern Europe. Russia nonetheless expected impressive gains from a victory: territorial acquisitions in eastern Galicia from Austria, in East Prussia from Germany, and northeastern Anatolia from the Ottoman Empire, which joined the war on the German side control of Constantinople and the Bosporus and Dardanelles straits and territorial and political alteration of Austria-Hungary in the interests of Romania and the Slavic peoples of the region. Britain was to acquire the middle zone of Persia and share much of the Arab Middle East with France Italy—not Russia's ally Serbia—was to acquire Dalmatia along the Adriatic coast Japan, another ally of the Entente, was to control more territory in China and France was to regain Alsace-Lorraine, which it had lost to Germany in the Franco-Prussian War, and to have increased influence in western Germany.

The onset of World War I exposed the weakness of Nicholas II's government. A show of national unity had accompanied Russia's entrance into the war, with defense of the Slavic Serbs the main battle cry. In the summer of 1914, the Duma and the zemstva expressed full support for the government's war effort. The initial conscription was well organized and peaceful, and the early phase of Russia's military buildup showed that the empire had learned lessons from the Russo-Japanese War. But military reversals and the government's incompetence soon soured much of the population. German control of the Baltic Sea and German-Ottoman control of the Black Sea severed Russia from most of its foreign supplies and potential markets. In addition, inept Russian preparations for war and ineffective economic policies hurt the country financially, logistically, and militarily. Inflation became a serious problem. Because of inadequate material support for military operations, the War Industry Committees were formed to ensure that necessary supplies reached the front. But army officers quarreled with civilian leaders, seized administrative control of front areas, and refused to cooperate with the committee. The central government distrusted the independent war support activities that were organized by zemstva and cities. The Duma quarreled with the war bureaucracy of the government, and center and center-left deputies eventually formed the Progressive Bloc to create a genuinely constitutional government.

After Russian military reversals in 1915, Nicholas II went to the front to assume nominal leadership of the army, leaving behind his German-born wife, Alexandra, government and Duma.

While the central government was hampered by court intrigue, the strain of the war began to cause popular unrest. Since 1915 high food prices and fuel shortages caused strikes in some cities. [7] Workers, who had won the right to representation in sections of the War Industries Committee, used those sections as organs of political opposition. The countryside also was becoming restive. Soldiers were increasingly insubordinate, particularly the newly recruited peasants who faced the prospect of being used as cannon fodder in the inept conduct of the war.

The situation continued to deteriorate. Increasing conflict between the tsar and the Duma weakened both parts of the government and increased the impression of incompetence. In early 1917, deteriorating rail transport caused acute food and fuel shortages, which resulted in riots and strikes. Authorities summoned troops to quell the disorders in Petrograd (as St. Petersburg had been called since September 1914, to Russianize the Germanic name). In 1905 troops had fired on demonstrators and saved the monarchy, but in 1917 the troops turned their guns over to the angry crowds. Public support for the tsarist regime simply evaporated in 1917, ending three centuries of Romanov rule.


Author Information

Andrew Kahn, St Edmund Hall, Oxford, Mark Lipovetsky, University of Colorado-Boulder, Irina Reyfman, Columbia University, and Stephanie Sandler, Harvard University

Andrew Kahn is Professor of Russian Literature at the University of Oxford. He has published widely on Russian Enlightenment literature and on Russian poetry, including Pushkin's Lyric Intelligence (OUP, 2008, pbk. 2012). His studies often focus on the interplay between the history of ideas and how writers think with literature.

Mark Lipovetsky is Professor of Russian Studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder (USA). He is the author of seven books on Russian literature and culture including Russian Postmodernist Fiction: Dialogue with Chaos (1999), Paralogies: Transformations of the (Post)Modernist Discourse in Russian Culture of the 1920s-2000s (2008), dan Performing Violence: Literary and Theatrical Experiments of New Russian Drama (with Birgit Beumers). He has co-edited the volume of Dictionary of Literary Biography: Russian Writers Since 1980 (Gale Group in 2003), an anthology of Russian and Soviet wondertales, Politicizing Magic (2005), Veselye chelovechki: Cult Heroes of Soviet Childhood (2008) , and A Non-Canonical Classic: D. A. Prigov (2010), Charms of Cynical Reason: the Trickster's Transformations in Soviet and post-Soviet Culture (2011), and edited (with Evgeny Dobrenko) Russian Literature since 1991 (CUP, 2015).

Irina Reyfman is professor of Russian Language and Literature at Columbia University. In her studies, Reyfman focuses on the interaction of literature and culture, examining both how literature reacts to cultural phenomena and how it contributes to the formation of cultural biases and forms of behavior. Reyfman is the author of How Russia Learned to Write: Literature and the Imperial Table of Rannks (Madison, Wisconsin, 2016), Vasilii Trediakovsky: The Fool of the `New' Russian Sastera (Stanford, 1990), and Ritualized Violence Russian Style: The Duel in Russian Culture and Literature (Stanford, 1999) the latter book also appeared in Russian (Moscow: Novoe Literaturnoe obozrenie, 2002). She is also a co-editor (with Catherine T. Nepomnyashchy and Hilde Hoogenboom) of Mapping the Feminine: Russian Women and Cultural Difference (Bloomington, IN: Slavica, 2008).

Stephanie Sandler is the Ernest E. Monrad Professor of Slavic Languages and Literatures at Harvard University. She has written on Pushkin and later myths about him, including Distant Pleasures: Alexander Pushkin and the Writing of Exile (1989) and Commemorating Pushkin: Russia's Myth of a National Poet (2004). Other interests include ideas of selfhood and identity in Russian literature and film, which led to a co-edited volume, Self and Story in Russian History (2000, with Laura Engelstein) and questions of sex and gender, subject of another edited volume, Sexuality and the Body in Russian Culture (1993, 1998, with Jane Costlow and Judith Vowles). She has co-edited a pioneering collection of essays on the contemporary poet Olga Sedakova, published in Russia in 2017 and due out in English with University of Wisconsin Press.


Speak, memory

The myriad references to other thinkers serve a purpose: to weave Russia back into the wider Western cultural fabric. As Ms Stepanova sees it, in the 19th and early 20th centuries Russian culture was part of a shared dialogue and exchange of ideas. Her search for traces of her great-grandmother leads her to Paris, where Sarra studied medicine in the 1910s—as Franz Kafka and Amedeo Modigliani were roaming the same city’s streets.

But from the late 1930s an “invisible curtain” divided Russian culture from the West, Ms Stepanova says, and the country became an “exporter of a kind of borderline experience”. Its literature, from Alexander Solzhenitsyn to Varlam Shalamov, came to be seen primarily as “confessional or reportorial material”. By linking writers from across that curtain, she aims to refute the idea that the Russian experience is separate and unique. A passage in which she visits a museum in New York evokes this sense of connection. Coming upon an image of autumn woods, “I begin to cry, very quietly, under my breath, because it’s the very same Moscow wood where I used to walk with my parents once, many thousands of miles ago, and we are now looking at each other again.” As Mr Saprykin puts it, the book “returns us to the sensation of Russia being a part of world culture”.

Struggles over memory, Ms Stepanova notes, are not exclusive to Russia. In essays elsewhere, she reflected on the appeals to past greatness that, in 2014, fuelled Russia’s war with Ukraine her observations could just as well apply to the rhetoric of Trump-era America and Brexit Britain. “The virus has somehow spread around the world,” she laments. (Her output is formid able. She is editor-in-chief of Colta.ru, an online cultural journal a collection of her essays and verse has been published this year as “The Voice Over” another book of poetry is out in English as “War of the Beasts and the Animals”.)

When the past is prosecuted in this way, suggests Ms Stepanova, it becomes an opportunity “for settling scores, for a kind of conversation about the present that for some reason cannot happen in real time”. This seepage across time is the underlying theme of “In Memory of Memory”, says Stanislav Lvovsky, a Russian poet and critic: “It’s not a story about history, but about how the past lives on in the present.”

These disparate battles over memory may be part of the same war, but in Russia they tend to rage at a higher pitch. Her country, Ms Stepanova says, has long had competing channels for memory: an official, state-endorsed narrative, and family stories, which “like lace, have more holes than threads”. Vladimir Putin has made a glorious version of the past, in particular victory in the second world war, a pillar of his statist ideology. Last week, in a meeting with senior officials, Mr Putin declared that “all kinds of Russophobic individuals and unscrupulous politicians are trying to attack Russian history”. He promised “to ensure the continuity of historical memory in Russian society, so that decades and centuries from now, future generations will cherish the truth about the war”.

Ms Stepanova makes the dissonance between these ways of thinking clear in a poignant chapter about the siege of Leningrad. A distant relative of hers perished in battle there, writing quaint letters home until his death. She quotes Lydia Ginzburg, a critic who noted from behind the Nazi blockade how the Soviet system “dehumanised the individual to such an extent that he had learnt to sacrifice himself without even realising it”.

By contrast, Ms Stepanova imbues individual lives with meaning independent of the collective fate. For her, writing “is always a rescue operation”. Her family’s relics are safely preserved in their sekretik. ■

This article appeared in the Books & arts section of the print edition under the headline "Secrets and lies"


Keadaan: Bagus. Ships from the UK. Former Library book. Shows some signs of wear, and may have some markings on the inside.

Published by Progress Publishers, 1980

Terpakai - Hardcover
Condition: Fair

Condition: Fair. This is an ex-library book and may have the usual library/used-book markings inside.This book has hardback covers. In fair condition, suitable as a study copy. Please note the Image in this listing is a stock photo and may not match the covers of the actual item,550grams, ISBN:


Keadaan: Bagus. Ships from the UK. Former Library book. Shows some signs of wear, and may have some markings on the inside.

Published by Progress Publishers, 1980

Terpakai - Hardcover
Condition: Fair

Condition: Fair. This is an ex-library book and may have the usual library/used-book markings inside.This book has hardback covers. In fair condition, suitable as a study copy. Please note the Image in this listing is a stock photo and may not match the covers of the actual item,550grams, ISBN:


A History of Russian Literature

Abstrak

The History of Russian Literature provides a comprehensive account of Russian writing from its earliest origins in the monastic works of Kiev up to the present day, still rife with the creative experiments of post-Soviet literary life. Five chronological parts by design unfold in diachronic histories they can be read individually but are presented as inseparable across the span of a national literature. Throughout its course, this History follows literary processes as they worked in respective periods and places, whether in monasteries, at court, in publishing houses, in the literary marketpl . Lebih banyak lagi

The History of Russian Literature provides a comprehensive account of Russian writing from its earliest origins in the monastic works of Kiev up to the present day, still rife with the creative experiments of post-Soviet literary life. Five chronological parts by design unfold in diachronic histories they can be read individually but are presented as inseparable across the span of a national literature. Throughout its course, this History follows literary processes as they worked in respective periods and places, whether in monasteries, at court, in publishing houses, in the literary marketplace, or the Writers’ Union. Evolving institutional practices used to organize literature are themselves a part of the story of literature told in poetry, drama, and prose including diaries and essays. Equally prominent is the idea of writers’ agency in responding to tradition and reacting to larger forces such as church and state that shape the literary field. Coverage strikes a balance between extensive overview and in-depth thematic discussion, addressing trans-historical questions through case studies detailing the importance of texts, figures, and notions. The book does not follow the decline model often used in accounts of the nineteenth century as a change-over between ages of prose and poetry. We trace in the evolution of literature two interrelated processes: changes in subjectivities and the construction of national narratives. It is through categories of nationhood, literary politics, and literary life, forms of selfhood, and forms of expression that the intense influence of literature on a culture as a whole occurs.


What Makes the Russian Literature of the 19th Century So Distinctive?

Each week in Bookends, two writers take on questions about the world of books. This week, Francine Prose and Benjamin Moser discuss the great Russian writers and their approach to the human heart and soul.

By Francine Prose

I could cite the wild imaginings of Gogol, who can make the most unlikely event seem not only plausible but convincing.

Trying to answer this difficult question in 650 words or less, I could say that part of what makes the 19th-century Russian writers so distinctive — why we still read them with such pleasure and fascination — is the force, the directness, the honesty and accuracy with which they depicted the most essential aspects of human experience. Not the computer-dating experience, obviously, or the airplane-seat-rage experience, or the “Where is the takeout I ordered an hour ago?” pengalaman. But plenty of other crucial events and emotions appear, unforgettably, in their work: childbirth, childhood, death, first love, marriage, happiness, loneliness, betrayal, poverty, wealth, war and peace.

I could mention the breadth and depth of their range, their success at making the individual seem universal, the fact that — though they inhabited the same country and century — each of “the Russians” is different from the others. I could applaud their ability to persuade us that there is such a thing as human nature, that something about the human heart and soul transcends the surface distinctions of nationality, social class and time. I could cite the wild imaginings of Gogol, who can make the most unlikely event — a man wakes up to discover that his nose has gone missing — seem not only plausible but convincing the way in which Dostoyevsky’s people seem real to us, vivid and fully present, even as we suspect that no one ever really behaved as they do, flinging themselves at each other’s feet, telling their life stories at extraordinary length and in excruciating detail to a stranger in a bar the mournful delicacy of Chekhov, his uncanny skill at revealing the deepest emotions of the men, women and children who populate his plays and short stories the ambition and insight that suffuses Tolstoy’s small moments (jam-making and mushroom-picking) and epic set pieces (a disastrous horse race, the Battle of Borodino) the subtlety with which Turgenev portrays the natural landscape and his meticulously rendered but ultimately mysterious characters.

Alternately, I could suggest that anyone seeking a more complete answer to this question read Nabokov’s “Lectures on Russian Literature.” Certain aspects of the book can be irritating: Nabokov’s aristocratic prejudices, his contempt for Dostoyevsky’s “neurotics and lunatics,” his dismissal of almost all Soviet-era literature. (What about Akhmatova, Platonov and Babel?) On the other hand, no one has written more perceptively about two of Chekhov’s most affecting stories, “The Lady With the Little Dog” and “In the Gully,” nor presented such a persuasive argument for the brilliance of “Anna Karenina.” And however we may bristle at his suggestion that if we can’t read Gogol in Russian, we probably shouldn’t read him at all, our admiration for Gogol is heightened by Nabokov’s explanation of how he replaced the conventions “inherited from the ancients. The sky was blue, the dawn red, the foliage green” — with fresh and precise descriptive language. “It was Gogol . . . who first saw yellow and violet at all.”

Better even than reading Nabokov on the Russians is to read the Russians. Or reread them, since their books so often strike us as more beautiful and meaningful each time we return to them they seem to age and change along with us, to surprise us much as we are surprised to meet a dear friend, grown older. If I were to tell someone where to start, I’d advise beginning with Gogol’s “The Overcoat” or Turgenev’s “First Love” or Chekhov’s “The Black Monk” or “Ward No. 6,” “The Bishop” or “The Duel” or that greatest of all page-turners, Dostoyevsky’s “The Brothers Karamazov.” I’d say read Tolstoy’s “Anna Karenina,” which is perhaps my favorite novel, or his “The Three Hermits,” which is to my mind the best story ever written about the limits of pedagogy. I’d say read them all, discover your own favorites, and when you reach the last sentence of the last book on your shelf, start over and read them again.

Francine Proseis the author of 20 works of fiction and nonfiction, among them the novel “Blue Angel,” a National Book Award nominee, and the guide “Reading Like a Writer,” a New York Times best seller. Her new novel is “Lovers at the Chameleon Club, Paris 1932.” Currently a distinguished visiting writer at Bard College, she is the recipient of numerous grants and awards a contributing editor at Harper’s, Saveur and Bomb a former president of the PEN American Center and a member of the American Academy of Arts and Letters and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

By Benjamin Moser

Dostoyevsky depicted humans as beings whose lunacy and lust and terror were held in check by only the gauziest of veils.

An odd characteristic of Russian literature is that the first novel to appear in the vernacular was not an original work but a translation from the French — and not until the 18th century. This was at least 200 years after the rest of Europe had shelved their churchy tongues: Dante praised the “eloquence of the vernacular” at the beginning of the 14th century Du Bellay offered a “Defense and Illustration of the French Language” in the 16th and languages with far fewer speakers — Dutch, Portuguese, Polish — had broad and distinguished literatures when all the Russians had were a scattering of medieval epics and devotional works written in the ecclesiastical language, Church Slavonic.

Even at the end of the 19th century, Russian, as readers of Tolstoy know, still reeked of bog and tundra. Classy people spoke French, and the relation of French to Russian in the 19th-century Russian novel offers an uncomfortable metaphor for the society as a whole: an elegant foreign language stretched like a glistening membrane atop the “real” language of the people. As the classical colonnades of St. Petersburg never quite hid the destitute swamp upon which they were built, the language of Descartes never supplanted the hallucinated utopias that populated the dreams of the Slavonic saints.

French was civilization Russian, its discontents. A generation before Freud, Dostoyevsky — a favorite of Freud’s — depicted humans as beings whose lunacy and lust and terror were held in check by only the gauziest of veils. The village idiot admonishes the magnificent czar the pretty princess, back from Baden-Baden, brushes gigglingly past the soothsaying hag. In a land that knew no Renaissance, the superstitious medieval village, with its thunderclaps and forebodings, inevitably swamps the Gallic palace. The Russia of Dostoyevsky and Pushkin lurks in the alleyway behind the mansion, a materialization of the id.

The experiences of the Russian writers echoed their particular national history, but there is nothing particularly national about the volcanic passions that threaten to burst through the carefully maintained surfaces of every human life. That they explored the depths did not mean that the great Russians neglected their brilliant surfaces, whose Fabergé luster makes them irresistibly romantic, and makes us feel the pathos of their destruction.

When that destruction came, the surface — the heritage of Cartesian formalism — would keep the demons at bay. If, a century before, French seemed like a froufrou frill, the vision of humane culture of which it was a symbol now offered consolation, however meager. Amid the Stalinist terror, nothing is more self-consciously classical than the poems of Akhmatova, who wrote sonnets in besieged Leningrad of Tsvetayeva, who looked longingly, insistently, to Greece or of Mandelstam, who, in an instance unique in literary history, committed suicide by ode. If Dostoyevsky insisted on the enduring reality of the irrational, the 20th-century poets described — but refused to reflect — the chaos swallowing them, and clung to form as to a vital lie.

Joseph Brodsky wrote that Russia combined “the complexes of a superior nation” with “the great inferiority complex of a small country.” In a nation so tardily arrived at the banquet of European civilization, its mentality makes the world’s biggest country strangely provincial. But its smallness and its bigness offer an obvious metaphor for the extremes of the human psyche. “I can be led only by contrast,” Tsvetayeva wrote. In the eight time zones sprawling between the galleries of the Hermitage and the frozen pits of Magadan, there is contrast enough. Awareness of this unbridgeable distance makes Russian books, at their greatest, reflections of all human life — and suggests that the old cliché, the “Russian soul,” could lose the adjective.

Benjamin Moser is the author of “Why This World: A Biography of Clarice Lispector,” a finalist for the National Book Critics’ Circle Award, and the general editor of the new translations of Clarice Lispector at New Directions. A former New Books columnist at Harper’s Magazine, he is currently writing the authorized biography of Susan Sontag. He lives in the Netherlands.


Tonton videonya: 1950 Пять этапов русской литературы XX века