The general concept of the Silver Age

Lecture 1. The general concept of the Silver Age Plan of the lecture: Introduction Hello, we are starting our course on Russian poetry of the early twentieth century. This period is traditionally called the Russian Silver Age. It will consist of 12 parts, each video lecture will be divided into several completed videos and will be accompanied by a presentation and a set of additional materials. In the first section, we will have a look on some general regulations and address the prerequisites that led to the formation of such a unique phenomenon as Russian modernism. The first video will be devoted to the specifics of the Silver Age and the issues associated with the study of this period. The second video examines the origin of the name Silver Age. The third one refers to the prerequisites for the emergence of new poetry. The fourth describes the general context of Russian culture at the turn of the century. At the end of each video, we will draw your attention to two questions on the material studied, which will be included in the test for the section. In conclusion, the test and the answers to it will be analyzed. You can only go to the conclusion if you have passed the test for the section. A large team worked on this course. (there will be an enumeration here) Special thanks to all the authors who wrote about Russian culture and literature. Without your works, articles, encyclopedias, selection of bibliographic lists-nothing would have happened. Video 1 The specifics and complexity of studying the poetry of the Silver Age The Silver Age itself is a very difficult period to study. It is complex, first of all, because of the density of the events taking place. The word century itself, which appears in the traditional designation of this direction in the development of Russian literature, is not accidental, the work on the poetic language is really century-old in its volume, but, chronologically, it has been kept within a quarter of a century, This leads to a special density, compression, events, books. Thus, the incredible concentration of events and personalities takes place. And the concentration is even purely geographical. The Silver Age is primarily a St. Petersburg phenomenon. Imagine, there are several cafes, cabarets, several literary drawing rooms and addresses-and there the whole color of Russian poetry, prose, and literary criticism gathers. They all know each other, literary opposition is superimposed on biographical collisions – friendship, enmity, love, passion, and so on. For example, if you try to understand the background of the creation of the "Poem without a Hero" by Anna Akhmatova at least at the level of secular gossip, then you may even get confused who was whose lover. And all this is superimposed on a huge number of names that are not just of interest to the researcher, but without which the explanation of the phenomenon of the epoch will not be sufficiently complete. As for the poets of the so-called first class, we can name only about a dozen (and we will argue for a long time who will be included in this dozen). But there are also poets of the second row, of the third, and they are all admirable. The third grade, no worse than the first, as Chukovsky said with a certain amount of sarcasm. Finally, I will mention possible cognitive distortions. For example, the hierarchy that we are building today and the hierarchy of that era are different things. Plus the mistakes that arise from the fact that we read memoirs, memories, and they are inevitably subjective. Memories in general are always subjective, but in the case of this time, each participant gives his own version of events, and these versions are often directly opposite. So, take the famous duel between the poets Nikolai Gumilev and Maximilian Voloshin over the poetess Cherubina de Gabriak (this is the pseudonym of Elizabeth Dmitrieva and Maximilian Voloshin). And we have several versions of events. First of all, this is the version of Elizabeth Dmitrieva herself, revealing mainly the events of the duel preceding – the love triangle between Dmitrieva, Voloshin and Gumilev, which developed in the Crimea, in Koktebel at the dacha of Maximilian Voloshin. Further, the version of Marina Tsvetaeva, who was not a direct witness to the events, but knew about them from the words of Voloshin, thus expressing her point of view. Anna Akhmatova considered her incredibly biased in portraying this duel. Further, this is the version of Anna Akhmatova herself, who by the time of the duel was already the wife of Nikolai Gumilev, because of these events she experienced very acutely. There is a clear contradiction between Tsvetaeva's and Akhmatova's versions. The first puts the blame on the incorrect behavior of Nikolai Gumilyov, the second, on the contrary, blames Voloshin, who tried to ruin Gumilyov, for whom the failed affair with Dmitrieva was long in the past. And finally, there is the version of Alexey Nikolaevich Tolstoy, which is written as relatively neutral. Tolstoy disapproves of the duel and partly of the behavior of Nikolai Gumilev, but he also did not absolve Voloshin, whose hoax – the poetess Cherubina de Gabriac, invented by him, and the fear of exposing this hoax led to the duel. Fortunately, the duel was an event more tragicomic than tragic, and no one was injured, except for the galoshes that Maximilian Voloshin lost on the way to the place of the duel, for which he received the nickname Wax Galoshin. And such type of information can be given around almost any episode of the Silver Age. The love relationship between Alexander Blok and his wife, Lubov’ Block (born Mendeleeva) and Andrew Belyi. The circumstances of the suicide of Vsevolod Knyazev. The circumstances of the scandal at the Vyacheslav Ivanov tower – each of these events is described from many points of view, which often contradict each other. In this regard, the memoirs of Anna Akhmatova are particularly interesting, a significant part of which is devoted to the criticism of all other memoirs. Especially strong in them goes to Vyacheslav Ivanov, George Ivanov, Irina Odoevtseva, Mikhail Kuzmin and Maximilian Voloshin. At the same time, to trust her memories completely, of course, it is impossible, as well as any other. Behind each such text there are many aesthetic and biographical contradictions. And that's another problem. Aesthetics and biography are very much intertwined at this time. Contradictions in the views on poetry led to real quarrels and, on the contrary, biographical conflicts developed into a literary split. Video 2 Origin of the name Silver Age First of all, let's begin with the question: where the concept of the Silver Age come from? And here again there are some difficulties. The authorship of the concept is usually attributed to Nikolai Berdyaev, but a careful study of his works has shown that this is not the case. Another option is a philologist, poet, Acmeism, a friend of Gumilev – Nikolai Otsup. There are still options – Irina Odoevtseva and Georgy Ivanov. It is used by Akhmatova in "A Poem without a Hero" and it seems as already used widely. Although, taling into consideration general "pushkinism" of Akhmatova, she was could have invented it. On the other hand, "A Poem without a Hero" has long been a "closed" work. Where did this concept come from in general use? This is a problem that has yet to be solved. Perhaps a careful study of the archives and diaries will give us the answer. However, this "random" definition itself can not be accidental at all. It comes from ancient literature, where the Silver Age was called the period from the death of Augustus (the fourteenth year of Our Lord) to the end of the reign of Trajan (the one hundred and seventh year of our Lord). This era was contrasted with the Golden Age (the reign of Octavian Augustus), when Virgil, Horace, and Ovid worked. Russia also had its own Golden Age – the period of Pushkin's Age, the period of his life and work. Even the popular definition of Pushkin as the sun of Russian poetry captures this status. At the same time, the Silver Age itself implicitly contains the idea of something secondary, decadence. This is also no coincidence. The analogy is still good, because the word "decline" is the key word for this era. The decline of the state is obvious. We have failed wars and revolution is ahead of us. In science there is a decline of the prevailing positivist views at that time and a change of paradigm. The theory of relativity appears. If you think that all this is far from poetry, then you should know, for example, that Velimir Khlebnikov specifically invited Sergey Bobrov to visit him, so that he would explain Einstein's discovery to him. Finally, it is the decline of culture and poetry. More precisely, the perception of poetry as the poetry of decline. It should be remembered here that Merezhkovsky's program manifesto was called "On the Causes of Decline and New Trends in Russian Literature". This brings us to the concept of decadence. A separate (and again controversial) question is about the chronological boundaries. The beginning of the Silver Age can be designated as 1893-1895 (the appearance of the first symbolist manifestos – a new trend in Russian poetry), with all the conventions of any exact dating in the matter of literary trends. The finale of the Silver Age is much more difficult to define. The first date is 1914, the beginning of the First World War. In the words of Akhmatova – " the non-calendar, real twentieth century was beginning." However, it was after 1914 that many books appeared that genetically belonged to the Silver Age. The second date – 1917 – the collapse of the state, the Civil War, the beginning of emigration. In many ways, this date is much fairer. In my opinion, the most justified date is 1921. The death of Alexander Blok, the execution of Nikolai Gumilev. Many poets, writers, and philosophers leave the country. Ivan Bunin, Leonid Andreev, Igor Severyanin, Konstantin Balmont, Zinaida Gippius also go to live abroad. A significant part of those who remain are under enormous pressure from the new government. Anna Akhmatova did not publish a single book between 1922 and 1940. Thus, the revolution becomes the beginning of a colossal division. Russian literature is divided into Soviet, emigrant, and forbidden, underground poetry. The example of Akhmatova, just belongs to the third type. Many poets were forced to abandon the idea of being published and go into the field of literary translation and children's poetry. Thus, the aesthete and witty literary critic Korney Chukovsky became a children's poet and the creator of the Soviet school of literary translation. Someone has completely left literary activity, including translation. However, the changes were also purely stylistic. The poetry of Russian modernism is distinguished by an extraordinary formal variety and poetic innovation. A lot of new forms, purely poetic experiments. The sound organization in Konstantin Balmont's verse reaches an incredibly high level. Alexander Blok brings a accentual verse to Russian literature, which will then be actively used by Akhmatova and Gumilev. Appears and changes the Russian free verse. Valery Bryusov experiments with monoverse. Nikolai Gumilev creates numerous variations, trying to convey the poetry of Africa and the East by means of Russian poetry. Very unusual graphic poetry is created by futurists. Moreover, they also move on to expanding the limits of language. Finally, the poet Andrey Belyi and the poet Sergei Bobrov became the creators of the first theories of Russian verse, laying the foundation for further researchers. Among the interlocutors of Andrei Bely was the Russian Pushkin writer Sergei Mikhailovich Bondi. He was also one of the most active correspondents of Sergey Bobrov, who can be considered one of the teachers of Mikhail Leonovich Gasparov. However, due to political reasons, after the revolution there is a kind of rollback. Soviet poetry is much more conservative. The only version of the literary avant-garde that remains possible is the imitation of Vladimir Mayakovsky. However, in general, with the exception of early Soviet poetry, which is strongly tied to the influence of modernist poets, the purely formal poetry of this period is far inferior to the Silver Age in diversity. In addition, the very materialism of the new society, the presence of censorship restrictions-all this significantly limited the scope of the author's search, differing from the incredible variety of schools and trends of Russian modernism. The experience of the Silver Age was almost unclaimed by Soviet literature. Nikolai Gumilyov's student, the poet Nikolai Tikhonov, actually abandoned his teacher, the Soviet poet Konstantin Simonov was afraid of being accused as imitating Gumilyov and denied it. The lessons and influence of Russian modernism were more pronounced in emigrant literature and underground literature. In particular, in the group of poets that formed around Anna Akhmatova and which included the future Nobel Prize winner, the poet Joseph Brodsky. Video 3 Prerequisites for the emergence of new poetry What are the reasons that led to the appearance of such a phenomenon in art? First of all, we need to focus on the most general ones. First of all, decadence. Decadence means decline. This is a pan-European trend that presupposed hedonism and the enjoyment of decline. Chesterton sarcastically defined decadents as "Young old men for whom Oscar Wilde is a god." The canonical Russian decadent can be called Alexander Dobrolyubov – a St. Petersburg poet, a student of the Faculty of Philology, who lived in a black room where no light penetrated and indulged in smoking opium and writing poetry. In 1898, however, he became disillusioned with the decadence and metropolitan life and decided to seek salvation in the people, leaving as a pilgrim to travel around Russia. But we must understand that the decadence itself is a consequence of frustration and fear. This is the feeling of the end of an era – the end of the XIX century of tension, expectation, fear of change, the coming of barbarians, the coming of Ham, and so on. Hence the artist's desire to build an "ivory tower", to isolate himself from what is happening. Hence, aestheticism arises, when art becomes literally a religion. Hence the craving for the artificial, the unnatural. Like Huysmans in his famous novel The Other Way Around, which was literally the bible of the decadents. Taffy has a wonderful story "The Demonic Woman", which really makes fun of decadent fashion, exaltation, unnatural. However, this story has a more specific addressee-Zinaida Gippius, one of the leaders of the older generation of symbolists. At the same time, Russian symbolism is not at all identical with decadence. Many authors of the first literary manifestos wrote about this. From their point of view, both decadence and symbolism recorded the state of the crisis of modern society, but decadence stopped only at the experience of this crisis, while symbolism offered a spiritual way to overcome this impasse. Decadence largely consisted in getting pleasure in an unusual way. Bernard Lukacs, a writer and literary critic, the creator of Marxist literary criticism, once jokingly formulated this definition of a decadent as "a person who drinks bitter instead of eating sweet." Though this "bon mot" is to be laughed about it also has some truth in it. Decadents looked for enjoyment and satisfaction in the spheres where previous generations had not searched. At the same time, in pursuit of the beauty of decadence and the enjoyment of the process of decomposition, they rather concentrated on the material side of objects. The decadent text directly grows out of French naturalism and owes its physiology to it. Russian symbolism, on the contrary, is incredibly ethereal and musical. In addition to decadence, the development of Russian literature is influenced by two very important trends – French symbolism and Parnassians. We should name here such poets as Charles Baudelaire, Théophile Gautier, Stéphane Mallarmé. The influence of Maurice Maeterlinck is enormous. However, each of the existing groups was influenced by these poets in different ways. And the very nature of the influence is not easy to consider. Thus, Russian symbolism did not always admit the French influence, and the Acmeists were reproached for imitating the Parnassians. The Futurists were initially split from the inside, and from this split grew an ambiguous attitude towards Filippo Marinetti, who was considered the founder of futurism. The “Budetlyan” group, which included Mayakovsky and Khlebnikov, was rather indifferent to it (surprisingly, for them, the poetry of Arthur Rimbaud was almost more important). And this indifference, ostentatious or true, was the reason for reproaches from the Moscow "Centrifuge" group, which included Nikolai Aseev and Boris Pasternak, who also started as a futurist. However, these authors later reconciled. If we assume that theirs was real, and was not part of the typical avant-garde aesthetics of scandal and provocation. Finally, Russian culture should also be considered in the general context of European modernism. We will discuss this in a separate lecture. Moreover it will no longer be a conversation about influence, but about juxtaposition and consonance. Russian modernism is an incredibly interesting version of European modernism, and the search for similarities and differences allows you not only to learn about Russian culture, but also to understand European culture much more deeply. Video 4 Russian culture at the turn of the century But at the same time, the phenomenon of the Silver Age itself, for all its apparent Europeanness, is a phenomenon that is closely connected with the Russian literary tradition. First of all, the shadow of Leo Tolstoy and Anton Pavlovich Chekhov falls on literature in general. Young writers have an attraction-repulsion relationship with them – on the one hand, they tend to write differently from Tolstoy, on the other hand, it is incredibly important to them. How the older generation perceives their work. Andreyev, Merezhkovsky, or experienced a lack of understanding of Tolstoy and Chekhov incredibly painful. However, we are talking primarily about poetry. And here the two key names of pre – symbolist literature are Apukhtin and Nadson. They were incredibly popular during their lifetime and are almost forgotten now. The new poetry again contrasted itself on the one hand; on the other, it is not true to say that the new poetry borrowed nothing from them. First of all, the melody, musicality. Apukhtin, for instance, was the author of a large number of popular romances. And Nadson acted as a kind of intermediary between Nekrasov and the new poets. However, it is necessary to identify those factors (in addition to the European influence that we noted above) that influenced the formation of a new direction. First of all, these are the ideas of Vladimir Solovyov, who offered his own interpretation of aestheticism. The very credo of aestheticism, which puts beauty above all else, was formulated by John Keats: When will the old age of this generation pass, You will remain among other troubles. Than ours, the friend of the person you're talking to: "Beauty is truth, truth is beauty,"that's all You know everything on earth that you need to know." In Solovyov, however, beauty turns out to be part of the well-known good-truth-beauty triad. The beauty is unthinkable without being kind. Moreover, he declares the following-beauty should really change the world. This is a continuation of Dostoevsky's ideas that "beauty will save the world", but it is also a very important attitude that will form the basis of all symbolism. Very close to these ideas is the setting for the creation of a certain all-art. That is a work that would combine music, plastic art, literature, and theater. Both the productions of Sergei Diaghilev, Blok's "Balaganchik", and the novel "Petersburg" by Andrey Bely – all this is to some extent an experience in the synthesis of the arts. Or you can remember that many of the "budetlyans" were also artists, and Malevich is listed among the co-authors of futuristic manifestos. However, from the combination of these two ideas – the triad of Vladimir Solovyov and the idea of synthesis of arts, the idea of Life Creation, which is significant for the Silver Age, is born. This is partly a return of the ideas of romanticism, because in general symbolism is strongly influenced by this trend. In part, this is the realization of a certain Path, as Solovyov and Lee understood it, as Blok and Gumilev understood it differently. First of all, it is the idea that there is no boundary between life and creativity. There is no boundary between an artist and a person. And if art is to transform life, then the artist must transform the person in you. This gives rise to the attitude to create a personal myth, which so greatly complicates the perception of this time. And from here comes an incredibly consistent implementation of aesthetic principles in life. Both Blok and Gumilev lived in accordance with the life he had written. The poets were different, and life was incredibly different. Only here they died in one year-due to the absolute incompatibility with the new era that replaced the Silver Age.