Historical philosophical literary origins of Russian sentimentalism. Russian sentimentalism. Features of formation and development. Main features of the literature of sentimentalism

Sentimentalism as a literary method developed in the literature of Western European countries in the 1760-1770s. The artistic method gets its name from the English word sentiment (feeling).

Sentimentalism as a literary method

The historical prerequisite for the emergence of sentimentalism was the growing social role and political activity of the third estate. At its core, the activity of the third estate expressed a tendency towards democratization of the social structure of society. The socio-political imbalance was evidence of the crisis of the absolute monarchy.

However, the principle of rationalistic worldview significantly changed its parameters by the middle of the 18th century. The accumulation of natural science knowledge has led to a revolution in the field of the methodology of knowledge itself, foreshadowing a revision of the rationalistic picture of the world. The highest manifestation of the rational activity of mankind - the absolute monarchy - more and more demonstrated its practical inconsistency with the real needs of society, and the catastrophic gap between the idea of absolutism and the practice of autocratic rule, since the rationalistic principle of world perception was subject to revision in new philosophical teachings that turned to the category of feelings and sensations .

From the philosophical picture of the world of sensationalism follows a clear and precise concept of statehood as a means of harmonizing a natural chaotic society with the help of civil law.

The result of the crisis of absolutist statehood and the modification of the philosophical picture of the world was the crisis of the literary method of classicism, which was determined by the rationalistic type of worldview and associated with the doctrine of absolute monarchy (classicism).

In sentimentalism, as in classicism, the area of greatest conflict tension remained the relationship between the individual and the collective; sentimentalism gave preference to the natural person. Sentimentalism demanded that society respect individuality.

The universal conflict situation of sentimentalist literature is the mutual love of representatives of different classes, which is broken by social prejudices.

Literature that speaks the language of feelings is addressed to feelings and evokes an emotional resonance: aesthetic pleasure takes on the character of emotion.

The originality of Russian sentimentalism

Russian sentimentalism arose on national soil, but in a larger European context. Traditionally, the chronological boundaries of the birth, formation and development of this phenomenon in Russia are determined by 1760-1810.

Already since the 1760s. works of European sentimentalists penetrate into Russia. The popularity of these books causes many translations into Russian. F. Emin's novel “Letters of Ernest and Doravra” is an obvious imitation of Rousseau’s “New Heloise”.

The era of Russian sentimentalism is “the age of exceptionally diligent reading.”

Karamzin’s lessons from European travel and the experience of the Great French Revolution were in full correspondence with the lessons of Russian travel and Radishchev’s understanding of the experience of Russian slavery. The problem of the hero and the author in these Russian “sentimental journeys” is, first of all, the story of the creation of a new personality, a Russian sympathizer. “Sympathizers” of both Karamzin and Radishchev are contemporaries of turbulent historical events in Europe and Russia, and at the center of their reflection is the reflection of these events in the human soul.

Unlike European Russian sentimentalism had a strong educational basis. The educational ideology of Russian sentimentalism adopted, first of all, the principles of the “educational novel” and the methodological foundations of European pedagogy. Sensitivity and the sensitive hero of Russian sentimentalism were aimed not only at revealing the “inner man,” but also at educating and enlightening society on new philosophical foundations, but taking into account the real historical and social context.

At the same time, in the second half of the 18th century, Russian translations of numerous secondary and even tertiary authors appeared. Some works that left a not very noticeable mark on the history of their domestic literature were sometimes received with great interest in Russia if they touched upon problems that were relevant to the Russian reader and were reinterpreted in accordance with ideas already established on the basis of national traditions. Thus, the period of formation and flourishing of Russian sentimentalism was distinguished by the extraordinary creative activity of the perception of European culture. At the same time, Russian translators began to pay primary attention to modern literature, the literature of today (see about this in detail: Stennik Yu.V., Kochetkova N.D., p. 727 ff.)

Chronological framework:

Sentimental works first appeared in England in the late 1720s and early 1730s (as a reaction to the revolution of 1688-1689, the entry of the third estate into the arena and its transformation into an influential political and social force). These are the works of J. Thomson “The Seasons” (1726-1730), G. Gray “Elegy Written in a Country Cemetery” (1751), S. Richardson “Pamela” (1740), “Clarissa” (1747-1748), “ History of Sir Charles Grandison" (1754).

Sentimentalism took shape as an independent literary movement in the 1760s and 1770s in England, France and Germany. From 1764 to 1774, works were published here that created the aesthetic basis of the method and defined its poetics; they can also be considered unique aesthetic treatises of a sentimental direction (these are the already mentioned novels by J.-J. Rousseau “Julia, or the New Heloise” 1761; L. Stern “Sentimental Journey through France and Italy” 1768; J.-W. Goethe “Sorrows” young Werther" 1774).

Chronological framework of Russian sentimentalism are determined more or less approximately. P.A. Orlov, for example, distinguishes 4 stages:

1760-1775. 1760 is the date of the appearance of the magazine “Useful Amusement”, which rallied around itself a whole group of young poets led by M. Kheraskov. A continuation of “Useful Amusement” were the magazines “Free Hours” (1763) and “Good Intention” (1764), in which the same authors mainly collaborated.

In poetry, primary attention was paid to love, friendship and family issues. Genres have so far been borrowed from previous classic literature (Anacreontic ode, idyll), and ready-made European models have also been used. Prose is represented by the novels “Letters of Ernest and Doravra” by F. Emin and V.A. Levshin "Mainees of a Lover".

Dramaturgy – “tearful plays” by M. Kheraskov.

It should be noted that the history of Russian sentimentalism begins with Kheraskov. It is characterized by a new attitude to the hierarchy of genres: high and low are not only equalized, but, moreover, preference is given to low genres (for example, a song). The term “low genre” itself becomes unacceptable: Kheraskov in this case contrasts “loud” poetry with “quiet”, “pleasant”. A poet and playwright, he focuses his attention on the individual, private person. In this regard, chamber genres begin to attract particular attractiveness to him. For Kheraskov, the singing and dancing shepherdess is “more than a thundering choir.”

Classicism.

Sentimentalism

Romanticism

Satirical poetry of Antioch Dmitrievich Kantemir. Problems of the satire “On those who blaspheme the teaching, To their own minds.” The personality and significance of Kantemir’s creativity in essays and critical articles by N.I. Novikov, N.M. Karamzin, K.N. Batyushkov, V.G. Belinsky.

Antioch Dmitrievich Kantemir was one of the first Russian writers to realize that he was a writer. Although literature was not at all the main thing in his life. The poet, who opens the first page of the history of Russian book poetry, was an extraordinary person, an educated, multi-talented person. He greatly raised the prestige of Russia in the West, where for the last twelve years of his life he served as Russia's diplomatic representative in embassies - first in England and then in France. He had an impeccable command of thought and word: the dispatches he sent were always clearly and skillfully composed. he was a famous person in Russia. His epigrams and love songs were extremely successful. He worked in the genre of scientific translation and had already written five of his nine poetic satires. During the years of service in France, he finally established himself in advanced educational views. He was convinced that only “merit”, and not class and family affiliation, distinguishes one person from another. “The same blood flows in both free and slaves, the same flesh, the same bones!” he wrote, insisting on the “natural equality” of people. Kantemir always remained a citizen of Russia: what he acquired, or, as he put it, “adopted” from the French, was supposed to serve his fatherland. With characteristic modesty he wrote:

What Horace gave, he borrowed from the Frenchman.

Oh, if my muse is poor in appearance.

Yes it is true; Though the limits of the mind are narrow,

What he took in Gallic, he paid in Russian.
And yet, Kantemir is, first of all, a national poet, who has the task of turning to the image of real Russian life. According to Belinsky, he was able to “connect poetry with life”, “write not only in the Russian language, but also with the Russian mind.” By the way, it should be noted here that Princess Praskovya Trubetskaya, who wrote songs in the folk spirit, was in close friendship with the Kantemirov family; Perhaps it was she who was the author of the most popular song in those distant times, “Ah, my bitter light of my youth.” Not only the famous “Poetics” of the French poet and theorist Boileau, not only educational studies, but the living lyrical element of folk song, making its way into the book poetry of the beginning of the century, determined the formation of Cantemir’s artistic style.
Analysis of the satire by Antiochus Cantemir “On those who blaspheme the teachings of their minds.” This is Cantemir's first satire; he wrote it in 1729. The satire was originally written not for the purpose of publication, but for oneself. But through friends she came to the Novgorod Archbishop Theophan, who gave impetus to the continuation of this cycle of satires.
Cantermere himself defines this satire as a mockery of the ignorant and despisers of science. At that time this question was very relevant. As soon as education became accessible to people, colleges and universities were established. This was a qualitative step in the field of science. And any qualitative step is, if not a revolution, then a reform. And no wonder it caused so much controversy. The author turns, as the title suggests, to his own mind, calling it “immature mind,” because The satire was written by him when he was twenty, that is, still quite immature by those standards. Everyone strives for fame, and achieving it through science is the most difficult. The author uses the 9 muses and Apollo as an image of the sciences that make the road to glory difficult. It is possible to achieve fame, even if you are not considered a creator. There are many paths leading to it, easy in our age, on which the brave will not falter; The most unpleasant thing of all is that the barefoot cursed the Nine Sisters. Next, 4 characters appear in turn in the satire: Crito, Silvanus, Luke and Medor. Each of them condemns science and explains its uselessness in their own way. Crito believes that those who are interested in science want to understand the reasons for everything that happens. And this is bad, because... they depart from faith in the Holy Scriptures. And indeed, in his opinion, science is harmful, you just have to blindly believe.
The schisms and heresies of science are children; Those who are given more understanding lie more; Whoever melts over a book comes to godlessness... Silvan is a stingy nobleman. He doesn't understand the monetary benefits of science, so he doesn't need it. For him, only what can bring him specific benefit has value. But science cannot provide him with this. He lived without her, and he will live like that again! It makes sense to divide the land into quarters without Euclid, How many kopecks are in a ruble - we can calculate without algebra Luka is a drunkard. In his opinion, science divides people, because It’s not his job to sit alone over books, which he even calls “dead friends.” He praises wine as a source of good mood and other benefits and says that he will exchange a glass for a book only if time runs back, stars appear on earth, etc. When the reins of plows begin to be driven across the sky, And the stars begin to peep out from the surface of the earth, When in Lent the monk begins to eat the elm, - Then, leaving the glass, I will begin to read the book. Medor is a dandy and a dandy. He is offended that the paper with which hair was curled at that time is spent on books. For him, the famous tailor and shoemaker are much more important than Virgil and Cicero. ...too much paper goes out for writing, for printing books, but it comes to him that there is nothing to wrap his curled curls in; He will not exchange a pound of good powder for Seneca. The author draws attention to the fact that all deeds have two possible motives: benefit and praise. And there is an opinion that if science brings neither one nor the other, then why bother with it? People are not accustomed to the fact that it could be otherwise, that virtue in itself is valuable. ...When there is no benefit, praise encourages labor, but without that the heart becomes depressed. Not everyone loves true beauty, that is, science. But anyone, having barely learned anything, demands a promotion or other status.

For example, a soldier, having barely learned to sign, wants to command a regiment. The author laments that the time when wisdom was valued has passed. The time has not come to us in which wisdom presided over everything and the crowns alone shared, Being the only way to the highest sunrise.

Belinsky said that Cantemir would outlive many literary celebrities, classical and romantic. In an article about Kantemir, Belinsky wrote: “Kantemir not so much begins the history of Russian literature as ends the period of Russian writing. Cantemir wrote in so-called syllabic verses, a meter that is completely unusual for the Russian language; this size existed in Rus' long before Cantemir... Cantemir began the history of secular literature. That’s why everyone, rightly considering Lomonosov the father of Russian literature, at the same time, not entirely without reason, begins its history with Kantemir.”
Karamzin remarked: “His satires were the first experience of Russian wit and style.”

6. The role of Vasily Kirillovich Trediakovsky, M.V. Lomonosov, A.P. Sumarokov in the formation of aesthetic principles, the genre-stylistic system of Russian classicism, in the transformation of versification.

Trediakovsky in 1735 published “A New and Brief Method for Composing Russian Poems,” proposing a way to organize syllabic 13- and 11-syllables and giving examples of poems composed in a new way of different genres. The need for such ordering was dictated by the need to more clearly contrast poetry with prose.
Trediakovsky acted as a reformer, not indifferent to the experience of his predecessors. Lomonosov went further. In his “Letter on the Rules of Russian Poetry” (1739), he categorically declared that “our poetry is just beginning,” thereby ignoring the almost century-old tradition of syllabic poetry. He, unlike Trediakovsky, allowed not only two-syllable, but also three-syllable and “mixed” meters (iambo-anapaests and dactylo-trochees), not only female rhymes, but also masculine and dactylic ones, and advised sticking to the iambic as a meter appropriate for tall objects and important (the letter was accompanied by “Ode... for the capture of Khotin, 1739,” written in iambics). The predominance of “trochaic rhythms” in folk songs and book poetry of the 17th century, which Trediakovsky pointed out, thinking that “our ear” was “applied” to them, did not bother Lomonosov, since it was necessary to start from scratch. The pathos of an uncompromising break with tradition corresponded to the spirit of the time, and Lomonosov’s iambics themselves sounded completely new and were as opposed to prose as possible. The problem of stylistic demarcation from church bookishness has been relegated to the background. New literature and syllabic-tonic poetry became almost synonymous concepts.
Trediakovsky eventually accepted Lomonosov’s ideas, in 1752 he published a whole treatise on syllabic-tonic versification (“A method for adding Russian poetry, corrected and multiplied against that published in 1735”) and in practice conscientiously experimented with different meters and sizes. Lomonosov, in practice, wrote almost exclusively in iambics, which, in his opinion, are the only ones suitable for high genres (his classification of high, “mediocre” and low genres and “calms” is set out in the “Preface on the Use of Church Books in the Russian Language,” 1757).
Trediakovsky and Lomonosov, who studied at the Slavic-Greek-Latin Academy, were connected by many threads with pre-Petrine bookishness and church scholarship. Sumarokov, a nobleman, a graduate of the Land Noble Cadet Corps, shunned her. His literary knowledge, sympathies and interests were associated with French classicism. The leading genre in France was tragedy, and in Sumarokov’s work it became the main genre. Here his priority was undeniable. The first Russian classical tragedies belong to him: "Khorev" (1747), "Hamlet" (1747), "Sinav and Truvor" (1750), etc. Sumarokov also owns the first comedies - "Tresotinus", "Monsters" (both 1750) and etc. True, these were “low” comedies, written in prose and being a lampoon on people (in the mentioned comedies Trediakovsky is ridiculed). That. Sumarokov rightfully claimed the titles of “northern Racine” and “Russian Moliere”, and in 1756 it was he who would be appointed the first director of the first permanent theater in Russia, created by F.G. Volkov. But Sumarokov could not be satisfied with the status of a playwright and theater figure. He claimed a leading and leading position in literature (to the considerable irritation of his older fellow writers). His “Two Epistles” (1748) – “On the Russian Language” and “On Poetry” – should have received a status similar to the status of Boileau’s “Poetic Art” in the literature of French classicism (in 1774, their abbreviated version would be published under the title “Instruction to those who want to be writers"). Sumarokov’s ambitions also explain the genre universalism of his work. He tested his strength in almost all classical genres (only the epic did not work for him). As the author of didactic epistles on poetry and poetic satires, he was the “Russian Boileau”; as the author of “parables” (i.e. fables), he was the “Russian Lafontaine”, etc.
However, Sumarokov pursued educational rather than aesthetic goals. He dreamed of being a mentor to the nobility and an adviser to an “enlightened monarch” (like Voltaire under Frederick II). He viewed his literary activity as socially useful. His tragedies were a school of civic virtue for the monarch and his subjects, in comedies, satires and parables, vices were castigated (the rhyme “Sumarokov is the scourge of vices” generally became generally accepted), elegies and eclogues taught “loyalty and tenderness”, spiritual odes (Sumarokov transcribed the entire Psalter) and philosophical poems taught in reasonable concepts about religion, in the “Two Epistles” the rules of poetry were proposed, etc. In addition, Sumarokov became the publisher of the first literary magazine in Russia, “The Hardworking Bee” (1759) (it was also the first private magazine).
In general, the literature of Russian classicism is characterized by the pathos of public service (which makes it similar to the literature of Peter the Great’s time). Instilling “private” virtues in a citizen was her second task, and the first was promoting the achievements of the “regular state” “created” by Peter and denouncing his opponents. That is why this new literature begins with satires and odes. Kantemir ridicules the champions of antiquity, Lomonosov admires the successes of the new Russia. They defend one cause - “the cause of Peter.”
Read publicly on special occasions in huge halls, in the special theatrical setting of the imperial court, the ode should “thunder” and amaze the imagination. It could best glorify the “cause of Peter” and the greatness of the empire, and best suited propaganda goals. Therefore, it was the solemn ode (and not the tragedy, as in France, or the epic poem) that became the main genre in Russian literature of the 18th century. This is one of the distinctive features of “Russian classicism”. Others are rooted in the Old Russian language he demonstratively rejected, i.e. church tradition (which makes “Russian classicism” an organic phenomenon of Russian culture).
Russian classicism developed under the influence of the European Enlightenment, but its ideas were rethought. For example, the most important of them is the idea of “natural”, natural equality of all people. In France, under this slogan there was a struggle for the rights of the third estate. And Sumarokov and other Russian writers of the 18th century, based on the same idea, teach nobles to be worthy of their title and not to stain the “class honor”, since fate has elevated them above people equal to them by nature.

Romantic poem in the works of Ryleev. “Voinarovsky” - composition, principles of character creation, specifics of a romantic conflict, correlation between the destinies of the hero and the author. The dispute between History and Poetry in “Voinarovsky”.

The originality of Decembrist poetry was most fully manifested in the work of Kondraty Fedorovich Ryleev (1795-1826). He created “effective poetry, poetry of the highest intensity, heroic pathos” (39).

Among Ryleev’s lyrical works, the most famous was and, perhaps, still remains the poem “Citizen” (1824), banned at one time, but distributed illegally and well known to readers. This work is a fundamental success for Ryleev the poet, perhaps even the pinnacle of Decembrist lyricism in general. The poem creates the image of a new lyrical hero:

Kondraty Fedorovich Ryleev is one of the founders and classics of Russian revolutionary civil poetry, inspired by the advanced social movement and hostile to autocracy. He more fully expressed the Decembrist worldview in poetry than others and developed the main themes of Decembrism. Ryleev's works reflected the most important moments in the history of the Decembrist movement in its most significant period - between 1820-1825.

The name of Ryleev in our minds is surrounded by an aura of martyrdom and heroism. The charm of his personality as a fighter and revolutionary who died for his beliefs is so great that for many it seemed to obscure the aesthetic originality of his work. Tradition has preserved the image of Ryleev that was created by his friends and followers, first in the memoirs of N. Bestuzhev, then in the articles of Ogarev and Herzen.

The search for ways to actively influence society led Ryleev to the genre of the poem. Ryleev’s first poem was the poem “Voinarovsky” (1823-1824). The poem has much in common with “Dumas,” but there is also a fundamental novelty: in “Voinarovsky” Ryleev strives for authentic historical coloring and truthfulness of psychological characteristics. Ryleev created a new hero: disappointed, but not in worldly and secular pleasures, not in love or glory, Ryleev’s hero is a victim of fate, which did not allow him to realize his powerful life potential. Resentment towards fate, towards the ideal of a heroic life that did not take place, alienates Ryleev’s hero from those around him, turning him into a tragic figure. The tragedy of the incompleteness of life, its unrealization in real actions and events will become an important discovery not only in Decembrist poetry, but also in Russian literature in general.

“Voinarovsky” is the only completed poem by Ryleev, although besides it he began several more: “Nalivaiko”, “Gaydamak”, “Paley”. “It so happened,” the researchers write, “that Ryleev’s poems were not only propaganda of Decembrism in literature, but also a poetic biography of the Decembrists themselves, including the December defeat and years of hard labor. Reading the poem about Voinarovsky, the Decembrists involuntarily thought about themselves<…>Ryleev's poem was perceived both as a poem of a heroic deed and as a poem of tragic forebodings. The fate of a political exile thrown into distant Siberia, a meeting with his civilian wife - all this is almost a prediction” (43). Ryleev’s readers were especially struck by his prediction in “Nalivaika’s Confession” from the poem “Nalivaiko”:

<…>I know: destruction awaits

The one who rises first

On the oppressors of the people, -

Fate has already doomed me.

But where, tell me, when was it

Freedom redeemed without sacrifice?

I will die for my native land, -

I feel it, I know...

And joyfully, holy father,

I bless my lot!<…> (44)

The fulfilled prophecies of Ryleev’s poetry once again prove the fruitfulness of the romantic principle “life and poetry are one.”

Classicism.

Classicism is based on the ideas of rationalism. A work of art, from the point of view of classicism, should be built on the basis of strict canons, thereby revealing the harmony and logic of the universe itself. Of interest to classicism is only the eternal, the unchangeable - in each phenomenon it strives to recognize only essential, typological features, discarding random individual characteristics. The aesthetics of classicism attaches great importance to the social and educational function of art. Classicism takes many rules and canons from ancient art (Aristotle, Horace).
Classicism establishes a strict hierarchy of genres, which are divided into high (ode, tragedy, epic) and low (comedy, satire, fable). Each genre has strictly defined characteristics, the mixing of which is not allowed.
As a specific movement, classicism was formed in France in the 17th century.
In Russia, classicism originated in the 18th century, after the reforms of Peter I. Lomonosov carried out a reform of Russian verse, developed the theory of “three calms,” which was essentially an adaptation of French classical rules to the Russian language. The images in classicism are devoid of individual features, since they are designed primarily to capture stable generic characteristics that do not pass over time, acting as the embodiment of any social or spiritual forces.

Classicism in Russia developed under the great influence of the Enlightenment - the ideas of equality and justice have always been the focus of attention of Russian classic writers. Therefore, in Russian classicism, genres that require the author’s obligatory assessment of historical reality have received great development: comedy (D. I. Fonvizin), satire (A. D. Kantemir), fable (A. P. Sumarokov, I. I. Khemnitser), ode (Lomonosov, G. R. Derzhavin).

Sentimentalism- state of mind in Western European and Russian culture and the corresponding literary direction. Works written in this genre are based on the reader's feelings. In Europe it existed from the 20s to the 80s of the 18th century, in Russia - from the end of the 18th to the beginning of the 19th century.
Sentimentalism declared feeling, not reason, to be the dominant of “human nature,” which distinguished it from classicism. Without breaking with the Enlightenment, sentimentalism remained faithful to the ideal of a normative personality, however, the condition for its implementation was not the “reasonable” reorganization of the world, but the release and improvement of “natural” feelings. The hero of educational literature in sentimentalism is more individualized, his inner world is enriched by the ability to empathize and sensitively respond to what is happening around him. By origin (or by conviction) the sentimentalist hero is a democrat; the rich spiritual world of the common people is one of the main discoveries and conquests of sentimentalism.
Sentimentalism in Russian literature

Nikolai Karamzin "Poor Liza"

Sentimentalism penetrated into Russia in the 1780s and early 1790s thanks to translations of the novels of Werther by J.W. Goethe, Pamela, Clarissa and Grandison by S. Richardson, Nouvelle Héloïse by J.-J. Rousseau, Paul and Virginie J.-A. Bernardin de Saint-Pierre. The era of Russian sentimentalism was opened by Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin with “Letters of a Russian Traveler” (1791–1792).

His story "Poor Liza" (1792) is a masterpiece of Russian sentimental prose; from Goethe's Werther he inherited a general atmosphere of sensitivity and melancholy and the theme of suicide.
The works of N.M. Karamzin gave rise to a huge number of imitations; at the beginning of the 19th century appeared "Poor Masha" by A.E. Izmailov (1801), "Journey to Midday Russia" (1802), "Henrietta, or the Triumph of Deception over Weakness or Delusion" by I. Svechinsky (1802), numerous stories by G.P. Kamenev ( “The Story of Poor Marya”; “Unhappy Margarita”; “Beautiful Tatiana”), etc.

Ivan Ivanovich Dmitriev belonged to Karamzin’s group, which advocated the creation of a new poetic language and fought against archaic pompous style and outdated genres.

Sentimentalism marked the early work of Vasily Andreevich Zhukovsky. The publication in 1802 of a translation of Elegy, written in a rural cemetery by E. Gray, became a phenomenon in the artistic life of Russia, for he translated the poem “into the language of sentimentalism in general, translated the genre of elegy, and not an individual work of an English poet, which has its own special individual style” (E. G. Etkind). In 1809, Zhukovsky wrote a sentimental story “Maryina Roshcha” in the spirit of N.M. Karamzin.

Russian sentimentalism had exhausted itself by 1820.

It was one of the stages of pan-European literary development, which completed the Age of Enlightenment and opened the way to romanticism.

Main features of the literature of sentimentalism

So, taking into account all of the above, we can identify several main features of Russian literature of sentimentalism: a departure from the straightforwardness of classicism, an emphasized subjectivity of the approach to the world, a cult of feelings, a cult of nature, a cult of innate moral purity, innocence, the rich spiritual world of representatives of the lower classes is affirmed. Attention is paid to the spiritual world of a person, and feelings come first, not great ideas.
Romanticism- a phenomenon of European culture in the 18th-19th centuries, representing a reaction to the Enlightenment and the scientific and technological progress stimulated by it; ideological and artistic direction in European and American culture of the late 18th century - the first half of the 19th century. It is characterized by an affirmation of the intrinsic value of the spiritual and creative life of the individual, the depiction of strong (often rebellious) passions and characters, spiritualized and healing nature. It has spread to various spheres of human activity. In the 18th century, everything strange, fantastic, picturesque and existing in books and not in reality was called romantic. At the beginning of the 19th century, romanticism became the designation of a new direction, opposite to classicism and the Enlightenment.
Romanticism in Russian literature

It is usually believed that in Russia romanticism appears in the poetry of V. A. Zhukovsky (although some Russian poetic works of the 1790-1800s are often attributed to the pre-romantic movement that developed from sentimentalism). In Russian romanticism, freedom from classical conventions appears, a ballad and romantic drama are created. A new idea is being established about the essence and meaning of poetry, which is recognized as an independent sphere of life, an expression of the highest, ideal aspirations of man; the old view, according to which poetry seemed to be empty fun, something completely serviceable, turns out to be no longer possible.

The early poetry of A. S. Pushkin also developed within the framework of romanticism. The poetry of M. Yu. Lermontov, the “Russian Byron,” can be considered the pinnacle of Russian romanticism. The philosophical lyrics of F. I. Tyutchev are both the completion and overcoming of romanticism in Russia.

Sentimentalism is not only a trend in culture and literature, it is, first of all, the mentality of human society at a certain stage of development, which in Europe began somewhat earlier and lasted from the 20s to the 80s of the 18th century, in Russia it occurred at the end of the 18th century - beginning of the 19th century. The main features of sentimentalism are as follows: in human nature, the primacy of feelings, not reason, is recognized.

From mind to feelings

Sentimentalism closes, which covered the entire 18th century and gave rise to a series of classicism and rococo, sentimentalism and pre-romanticism. Some experts consider romanticism to be the next direction described, and sentimentalism is identified with pre-romanticism. Each of these directions has its own characteristic distinctive features, each has its own normative personality, the one whose features better than others express the trend that is optimal for a given culture. We can name some signs of sentimentalism. This is a concentration of attention on the individual, on the strength and power of feelings, the prerogative of nature over civilization.

Towards nature

What distinguishes this direction in literature from previous and subsequent movements is primarily the cult of the human heart. Preference is given to simplicity and naturalness; the hero of the works becomes a more democratic person, often a representative of the common people. Great attention is paid to the inner world of man and the nature of which he is a part. These are the signs of sentimentalism. Feelings are always freer than reason, which classicism worshiped or even deified. Therefore, sentimentalist writers had greater freedom of imagination and its reflection in the work, which was also no longer squeezed into the strict logical framework of classicism.

New literary forms

The main ones are travel and novels, but not just, but instructive or in letters. Letters, diaries, memoirs are the most frequently used genres, as they make it possible to more widely reveal a person’s inner world. Poetry gives preference to elegy and message. That is, in themselves, also signs of sentimentalism. Pastoral cannot belong to any other direction than the one described.

In Russia, sentimentalism was reactionary and liberal. The representative of the first was Pyotr Ivanovich Shalikov (1768-1852). His works represented an idyllic utopia - infinitely kind kings sent by God to earth solely for the sake of peasant happiness. No social contradictions - good-naturedness and general goodness. Probably, thanks to such sweet and sour works, a certain tearfulness and far-fetchedness have become attached to this literary movement, which are sometimes perceived as signs of sentimentalism.

Founder of Russian sentimentalism

Prominent representatives of the liberal trend are Karamzin Nikolai Mikhailovich (1766-1826) and the early Zhukovsky Vasily Andreevich (1783-1852), these are among the famous. You can also name several progressive liberal-minded writers - A. M. Kutuzov, to whom Radishchev dedicated “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow”, M. N. Muravyov, sage and poet, poet, fabulist and translator, V. V. Kapnist and N. A. Lvov. The earliest and most striking work of this direction was Karamzin’s story “Poor Liza.” It should be noted that the characteristics of Russia have distinctive features from Europe. The main thing is the instructive, moral and educational nature of the works. Karamzin said that you need to write the way you speak. Thus, another feature of Russian sentimentalism is the improvement of the literary language of the work. I would like to note that a positive achievement or even discovery of this literary movement is that it was the first to turn to the spiritual world of people of the lower classes, revealing its wealth and generosity of soul. Before the sentimentalists, poor people, as a rule, were shown to be rude, callous, and incapable of any spirituality.

“Poor Liza” - the pinnacle of Russian sentimentalism

What are the signs of sentimentalism in “Poor Liza”? The plot of the story is simple. That's not the beauty of it. The very idea of the work conveys to the reader the fact that the natural naturalness and rich world of Liza, a simple peasant woman, is incomparably higher than the world of the well-educated, secular, well-trained Erast, in general, and a good person, but squeezed by the framework of conventions that did not allow him to marry beloved girl. But he did not even think about getting married, because, having achieved reciprocity, Erast, full of prejudices, lost interest in Lisa, she ceased to be for him the personification of purity and purity. A poor peasant girl, even full of merit, having trusted a rich young man who has condescended to a commoner (which should speak of the breadth of her soul and democratic views), is initially doomed to the final run to the pond. But the dignity of the story is in a completely different approach and perspective of the rather banal events covered. It was precisely the signs of sentimentalism in “Poor Liza” (the beauty of the soul of a common man and nature, the cult of love) that made the story incredibly popular among contemporaries. And the pond in which Lisa drowned began to be called after her (the place in the story is indicated quite accurately). The fact that the story became an event is also evidenced by the fact that even among current graduates of Soviet schools, almost everyone knows that “Poor Liza” was written by Karamzin, like “Eugene Onegin” by Pushkin, and “Mtsyri” by Lermontov.

Originally from France

Sentimentalism itself is a more significant phenomenon in fiction than classicism with its rationalism and dryness, with its heroes, who, as a rule, were crowned heads or generals. “Julia, or the New Heloise” by Jean-Jacques Rousseau burst into fiction and laid the foundations for a new direction. Already in the works of the founder of the movement, general signs of sentimentalism appeared in literature, forming a new artistic system that glorified the common man, capable of empathizing with others without any self-interest, endlessly loving loved ones, and sincerely rejoicing in the happiness of others.

Similarities and differences

And sentimentalism largely coincides, because both of these movements belong to the Age of Enlightenment, but they also have differences. Classicism glorifies and deifies reason, and sentimentalism - feeling. The main slogans of these directions also differ: in classicism it is “a person subject to the dictates of reason”; in sentimentalism it is “a feeling person”. The forms of writing also differ - the logic and rigor of the classicists, and the works of authors of a later literary movement, rich in digressions, descriptions, memories and letters. Based on the above, we can answer the question of what are the main features of sentimentalism. The main theme of the works is love. Specific genres - pastoral (elegy), sentimental story, letters and travel. In the works there is a cult of feelings and nature, a departure from straightforwardness.

Sentimentalism— mentality in Western European and Russian culture and the corresponding literary direction. Works written within this artistic movement focus on the reader's perception, that is, on the sensuality that arises when reading them. In Europe it existed from the 20s to the 80s of the 18th century, in Russia - from the end of the 18th to the beginning of the 19th century.

Sentimentalism declared feeling, not reason, to be the dominant of “human nature,” which distinguished it from classicism. Without breaking with the Enlightenment, sentimentalism remained faithful to the ideal of a normative personality, however, the condition for its implementation was not the “reasonable” reorganization of the world, but the release and improvement of “natural” feelings. The hero of educational literature in sentimentalism is more individualized, his inner world is enriched by the ability to empathize and sensitively respond to what is happening around him. By origin (or by conviction) the sentimentalist hero is a democrat; the rich spiritual world of the common people is one of the main discoveries and conquests of sentimentalism.

Sentimentalism as a literary method developed in the literature of Western European countries in the 1760-1770s. Over the course of 15 years - from 1761 to 1774 - three novels were published in France, England and Germany, which created the aesthetic basis of the method and defined its poetics. “Julia, or the New Heloise” by J.-J. Rousseau (1761), “Sentimental Journey through France and Italy” by L. Stern (1768), “The Sorrows of Young Werther” by I.-V. Goethe (1774). And the artistic method itself got its name from the English word sentiment (feeling) by analogy with the title of the novel by L. Stern.

Sentimentalism as a literary movement

The historical prerequisite for the emergence of sentimentalism, especially in continental Europe, was the growing social role and political activity of the third estate, which by the middle of the 18th century. had enormous economic potential, but was significantly disadvantaged in its socio-political rights compared to the aristocracy and clergy. At its core, the political, ideological and cultural activity of the third estate expressed a tendency towards democratization of the social structure of society. It is no coincidence that it was in the third-class environment that the slogan of the era was born - “Liberty, equality and fraternity”, which became the motto of the Great French Revolution. This socio-political imbalance was evidence of the crisis of the absolute monarchy, which, as a form of government, ceased to correspond to the real structure of society. And it is far from accidental that this crisis has acquired a predominantly ideological character: the rationalistic worldview is based on the postulate of the primacy of ideas; Therefore, it is clear that the crisis of the real power of absolutism was complemented by the discrediting of the idea of monarchism in general and the idea of an enlightened monarch in particular.

However, the very principle of rationalistic worldview changed its parameters significantly by the middle of the 18th century. The accumulation of empirical natural science knowledge and the increase in the sum of individual facts have led to a revolution in the field of the methodology of knowledge itself, foreshadowing a revision of the rationalistic picture of the world. As we remember, it already included, along with the concept of reason as the highest spiritual ability of man, the concept of passion, denoting the emotional level of spiritual activity. And since the highest manifestation of the rational activity of mankind - the absolute monarchy - more and more demonstrated its practical inconsistency with the real needs of society, and the catastrophic gap between the idea of absolutism and the practice of autocratic rule, the rationalistic principle of worldview was subject to revision in new philosophical teachings that turned to the category of feelings and sensations as alternative means of world perception and world modeling to reason.

The philosophical doctrine of sensations as the only source and basis of knowledge - sensualism - arose at a time of full viability and even flowering of rationalist philosophical teachings. The founder of sensationalism is the English philosopher John Locke (1632-1704), a contemporary of the English bourgeois-democratic revolution. His main philosophical work, An Essay on Human Reason (1690), proposes a fundamentally anti-rationalist model of knowledge. According to Descartes, general ideas were innate. Locke declared experience to be the source of general ideas. The external world is given to man in his physiological sensations - vision, hearing, taste, smell, touch; general ideas arise on the basis of the emotional experience of these sensations and the analytical activity of the mind, which compares, combines and abstracts the properties of things known in a sensitive way.

Thus, Locke's sensationalism offers a new model of the process of cognition: sensation - emotion - thought. The picture of the world produced in this way also differs significantly from the dual rationalistic model of the world as a chaos of material objects and a cosmos of higher ideas. A strong cause-and-effect relationship is established between material reality and ideal reality, since ideal reality, a product of the activity of the mind, begins to be perceived as a reflection of material reality, cognizable through the senses. In other words, the world of ideas cannot be harmonious and natural if chaos and randomness reign in the world of things, and vice versa.

From the philosophical picture of the world of sensationalism follows a clear and precise concept of statehood as a means of harmonizing a natural chaotic society with the help of civil law, which guarantees each member of society the observance of his natural rights, while in a natural society only one right prevails - the law of force. It is easy to see that such a concept was a direct ideological consequence of the English bourgeois-democratic revolution. In the philosophy of the French followers of Locke - D. Diderot, J.-J. Rousseau and K.-A. Helvetius, this concept became the ideology of the coming Great French Revolution.

The result of the crisis of absolutist statehood and the modification of the philosophical picture of the world was the crisis of the literary method of classicism, which was aesthetically determined by the rationalistic type of worldview, and ideologically associated with the doctrine of absolute monarchy. And above all, the crisis of classicism was expressed in the revision of the concept of personality - the central factor determining the aesthetic parameters of any artistic method.

The concept of personality that has developed in the literature of sentimentalism is diametrically opposed to the classicist one. If classicism professed the ideal of a rational and social person, then for sentimentalism the idea of the fullness of personal existence was realized in the concept of a sensitive and private person. The highest spiritual ability of a person, which organically includes him in the life of nature and determines the level of social connections, began to be recognized as a high emotional culture, the life of the heart. The subtlety and mobility of emotional reactions to the life around us is most manifested in the sphere of a person’s private life, which is least susceptible to rationalistic averaging that dominates in the sphere of social contacts - and sentimentalism began to value the individual over the generalized and typical. The area where a person’s individual private life can be revealed with particular clarity is the intimate life of the soul, love and family life. And the shift in ethical criteria for the dignity of the human person naturally inverted the scale of the hierarchy of classicist values. Passions have ceased to be differentiated into reasonable and unreasonable, and a person’s ability for true and devoted love, humanistic experience and sympathy has transformed from the weakness and guilt of the tragic hero of classicism into the highest criterion of the moral dignity of an individual.

As an aesthetic consequence, this reorientation from reason to feeling entailed a complication of the aesthetic interpretation of the problem of character: the era of unambiguous classicist moral assessments is forever a thing of the past under the influence of sentimentalist ideas about the complex and ambiguous nature of emotion, mobile, fluid and changeable, often even capricious and subjective , combining different incentives and opposing emotional affects. “Sweet torment”, “bright sadness”, “sorrowful consolation”, “tender melancholy” - all these verbal definitions of complex feelings are generated precisely by the sentimentalist cult of sensitivity, the aestheticization of emotion and the desire to understand its complex nature.

The ideological consequence of the sentimentalist revision of the scale of classicist values was the idea of the independent significance of the human personality, the criterion of which was no longer recognized as belonging to a high class. The starting point here was individuality, emotional culture, humanism - in a word, moral virtues, and not social virtues. And it was precisely this desire to evaluate a person regardless of his class affiliation that gave rise to the typological conflict of sentimentalism, which is relevant for all European literature.

Moreover. that in sentimentalism, as in classicism, the sphere of greatest conflict tension remained the relationship between the individual and the collective, the individual with society and the state, obviously the diametrically opposite emphasis of the sentimentalist conflict in relation to the classicist one. If in the classicist conflict the social man triumphed over the natural man, then sentimentalism gave preference to the natural man. The conflict of classicism required the humility of individual aspirations in the name of the good of society; sentimentalism demanded that society respect individuality. Classicism was inclined to blame the egoistic personality for the conflict; sentimentalism addressed this accusation to an inhuman society.

In the literature of sentimentalism, stable outlines of a typological conflict have developed, in which the same spheres of personal and public life collide that determined the structure of the classic conflict, which was psychological in nature, but in forms of expression had an ideological character. The universal conflict situation of sentimentalist literature is the mutual love of representatives of different classes, breaking up against social prejudices (the commoner Saint-Preux and the aristocrat Julia in Rousseau's "New Heloise", the bourgeois Werther and the noblewoman Charlotte in Goethe's "The Sorrows of Young Werther", the peasant woman Lisa and the nobleman Erast in “Poor Liza” by Karamzin), rebuilt the structure of the classic conflict in the opposite direction. The typological conflict of sentimentalism, in its external forms of expression, has the character of a psychological and moral conflict; in its deepest essence, however, it is ideological, since an indispensable condition for its emergence and implementation is class inequality, enshrined in the legislative order in the structure of absolutist statehood.

And in relation to the poetics of verbal creativity, sentimentalism is also the complete antipode of classicism. If at one time we had the opportunity to compare classicist literature with the regular style of landscape gardening art, then the analogue of sentimentalism will be the so-called landscape park, carefully planned, but reproducing natural landscapes in its composition: irregularly shaped meadows, covered with picturesque groups of trees, whimsical shapes ponds and lakes dotted with islands, streams murmuring under the arches of trees.

The desire for natural feeling dictated the search for similar literary forms of its expression. And the lofty “language of the gods” - poetry - is replaced in sentimentalism by prose. The advent of the new method was marked by the rapid flourishing of prose narrative genres, primarily the story and novel - psychological, family, educational. The desire to speak in the language of “feeling and heartfelt imagination”, to understand the secrets of the life of the heart and soul, forced writers to transfer the function of narration to heroes, and sentimentalism was marked by the discovery and aesthetic development of numerous forms of first-person narration. Epistolary, diary, confession, travel notes - these are typical genre forms of sentimentalist prose.

But, perhaps, the main thing that the art of sentimentalism brought with it was a new type of aesthetic perception. Literature, speaking to the reader in a rational language, addresses the reader’s mind, and his aesthetic pleasure is of an intellectual nature. Literature that speaks the language of feelings is addressed to feelings and evokes an emotional resonance: aesthetic pleasure takes on the character of emotion. This revision of ideas about the nature of creativity and aesthetic pleasure is one of the most promising achievements of aesthetics and the poetics of sentimentalism. This is a unique act of self-awareness of art as such, separating itself from all other types of spiritual human activity and defining the scope of its competence and functionality in the spiritual life of society.

The originality of Russian sentimentalism

The chronological framework of Russian sentimentalism, like any other movement, is determined more or less approximately. If its heyday can be confidently attributed to the 1790s. (the period of creation of the most striking and characteristic works of Russian sentimentalism), then the dating of the initial and final stages ranges from the 1760-1770s to the 1810s.

Russian sentimentalism was part of the pan-European literary movement and at the same time a natural continuation of the national traditions that developed during the era of classicism. Works of major European writers associated with the sentimental movement (“The New Heloise” by Rousseau, “The Sorrows of Young Werther” by Goethe, “Sentimental Journey” and “The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy” by Sterne, “Nights” by Jung, etc.), very soon after their appearance in their homeland they become well known in Russia: they are read, translated, quoted; the names of the main characters gain popularity and become a kind of identification marks: Russian intellectual of the late 18th century. could not help but know who Werther and Charlotte, Saint-Preux and Julia, Yorick and Tristram Shandy were. At the same time, in the second half of the century, Russian translations of numerous secondary and even tertiary modern European authors appeared. Some works that left a not very noticeable mark in the history of their domestic literature were sometimes perceived with greater interest in Russia if they touched upon problems that were relevant to the Russian reader and were reinterpreted in accordance with ideas already established on the basis of national traditions. Thus, the period of formation and flourishing of Russian sentimentalism is distinguished by the extraordinary creative activity of the perception of European culture. At the same time, Russian translators began to pay primary attention to modern literature, the literature of today.

Already since the 1760s. works of European sentimentalists penetrate into Russia. The popularity of these books causes many translations into Russian. According to G. A. Gukovsky, “already in the 1760s, Rousseau was being translated; from the 1770s, there were abundant translations of Gessner, dramas by Lessing, Diderot, Mercier, then Richardson’s novels, then Goethe’s Werther, and much, much more was translated , sells out and is successful.” The lessons of European sentimentalism, of course, did not pass without a trace. F. Emin’s novel “Letters of Ernest and Doravra” (1766) is an obvious imitation of Rousseau’s “New Heloise”. In Lukin's plays and Fonvizin's "Brigadier" one can feel the influence of European sentimental drama. Echoes of the style of Stern’s “Sentimental Journey” can be found in the work of N. M. Karamzin.

The era of Russian sentimentalism is “the age of exceptionally diligent reading.” “A book becomes a favorite companion on a lonely walk”, “reading in the lap of nature, in a picturesque place acquires a special charm in the eyes of a “sensitive person”, “the very process of reading in the lap of nature gives aesthetic pleasure to a “sensitive” person” - behind all this a new the aesthetics of perceiving literature not only and not so much with the mind, but with the soul and heart.

But, despite the genetic connection of Russian sentimentalism with European sentimentalism, it grew and developed on Russian soil, in a different socio-historical atmosphere. The peasant revolt, which developed into a civil war, made its own adjustments both to the concept of “sensitivity” and to the image of a “sympathizer.” They acquired, and could not help but acquire, a pronounced social connotation. Radishchevsky: “the peasant in law is dead” and Karamzinsky: “even peasant women know how to love” are not as different from each other as it might seem at first glance. The problem of the natural equality of people given their social inequality has a “peasant registration” for both writers. And this indicated that the idea of moral freedom of the individual lay at the heart of Russian sentimentalism, but its ethical and philosophical content did not oppose the complex of liberal social concepts.

Of course, Russian sentimentalism was not homogeneous. Radishchev's political radicalism and the underlying sharpness of the confrontation between the individual and society, which lies at the root of Karamzin's psychologism, brought their own original flavor to it. But, it seems, the concept of “two sentimentalisms” has completely exhausted itself today. The discoveries of Radishchev and Karamzin are not only and not so much in the plane of their socio-political views, but in the area of their aesthetic achievements, educational position, and expansion of the anthropological field of Russian literature. It was this position, associated with a new understanding of man, his moral freedom in the face of social lack of freedom and injustice, that contributed to the creation of a new language of literature, a language of feeling, which became the object of writerly reflection. The complex of liberal-enlightenment social ideas was translated into the personal language of feeling, thus moving from the plane of social citizenship to the plane of individual human self-awareness. And in this direction, the efforts and searches of Radishchev and Karamzin were equally significant: the simultaneous appearance in the early 1790s. “Travels from St. Petersburg to Moscow” by Radishchev and “Letters of a Russian Traveler” by Karamzin only documented this connection.

Karamzin’s lessons from European travel and the experience of the Great French Revolution were in full correspondence with the lessons of Russian travel and Radishchev’s understanding of the experience of Russian slavery. The problem of the hero and the author in these Russian “sentimental journeys” is, first of all, the story of the creation of a new personality, a Russian sympathizer. The hero-author of both journeys is not so much a real person as a personal model of a sentimental worldview. One can probably talk about a certain difference between these models, but as directions within one method. “Sympathizers” of both Karamzin and Radishchev are contemporaries of turbulent historical events in Europe and Russia, and at the center of their reflection is the reflection of these events in the human soul.

Russian sentimentalism did not leave a complete aesthetic theory, which, however, most likely was not possible. A sensitive author formalizes his worldview no longer in the rational categories of normativity and predetermination, but presents it through a spontaneous emotional reaction to manifestations of the surrounding reality. That is why sentimentalist aesthetics is not artificially isolated from the artistic whole and does not form a specific system: it reveals its principles and even formulates them directly in the text of the work. In this sense, it is more organic and vital compared to the rigid and dogmatic rationalized system of classicism aesthetics.

Unlike European sentimentalism, Russian sentimentalism had a solid educational basis. The crisis of enlightenment in Europe did not affect Russia to the same extent. The educational ideology of Russian sentimentalism adopted, first of all, the principles of the “educational novel” and the methodological foundations of European pedagogy. Sensitivity and the sensitive hero of Russian sentimentalism were aimed not only at revealing the “inner man,” but also at educating and enlightening society on new philosophical foundations, but taking into account the real historical and social context. Didactics and teaching in this regard were inevitable: “The teaching, educational function, traditionally inherent in Russian literature, was also recognized by sentimentalists as the most important.”

The consistent interest of Russian sentimentalism in the problems of historicism also seems indicative: the very fact of the emergence from the depths of sentimentalism of the grandiose edifice of “History of the Russian State” by N. M. Karamzin reveals the result of the process of understanding the category of historical process. In the depths of sentimentalism, Russian historicism acquired a new style associated with ideas about the feeling of love for the motherland and the indissolubility of the concepts of love for history, for the Fatherland and the human soul. In the preface to “The History of the Russian State,” Karamzin formulates it this way: “The feeling, we, ours, enlivens the narrative, and just as gross passion, the consequence of a weak mind or a weak soul, is unbearable in a historian, so love for the fatherland gives his brush heat and strength , lovely. Where there is no love, there is no soul.” Humanity and animation of historical feeling - this is, perhaps, what sentimentalist aesthetics has enriched Russian literature of modern times, which tends to understand history through its personal embodiment: epochal character.