The Thaw in the Literature of the Soviet Era. Thaw (On the history of the creation of the story of the same name by I. Ehrenburg)

Khrushchev's thaw

This is a period in the history of the USSR after the death of I.V. Stalin (late 1950s - early 1960s), characterized by the weakening of totalitarian power, relative freedom of speech, relative democratization of political and public life, more freedom creative activity. The expression “Khrushchev’s thaw” is associated with the title of Ilya Ehrenburg’s story “The Thaw”.

The starting point of the “Khrushchev Thaw” was the death of Stalin in 1953.

With Khrushchev strengthening in power, the “thaw” began to be associated with the condemnation of Stalin’s personality cult. On XX Congress of the CPSU in 1956 Nikita Khrushchev gave a speech in which Stalin's cult of personality and Stalin's repressions. Many political prisoners in the USSR and socialist countries were released and rehabilitated. The majority of peoples deported in the 1930s and 1940s were allowed to return to their homeland.

During the period de-Stalinization Censorship has noticeably weakened, primarily in literature, cinema and other forms of art, where more open coverage of reality has become possible. During the "thaw" there was a noticeable rise in literature and art, which was greatly facilitated by the rehabilitation of some cultural figures repressed under Stalin. For the first time, many learned about the existence of such figures as Mandelstam, Balmont, Tsvetaeva, Modigliani, Savinkov and others. The artificially interrupted connection between the eras - pre-revolutionary and Soviet - was restored. One of the authors Silver Age, in particular, Blok and Yesenin, already began to be mentioned and published in the 1950s. Other authors were still banned.

In the early 1950s, on the pages literary magazines articles and works began to appear that played the role of a pathogen public opinion. The main platform for supporters of the “thaw” was the literary magazine « New world». From 1950 to 1970, the magazine "New World" was headed by A.T. Tvardovsky. As editor-in-chief, he contributed to the appearance of bright and bold publications in the magazine, gathering around himself best writers and publicists. "Novomirskaya prose" brought to the readers serious social and moral problems.

In 1952, a series of essays by Valentin Ovechkin was published in Novy Mir. Regional everyday life. This publication marked the beginning of a whole movement in literature - "village prose". Village prose showed the wisdom of peasants living with nature in the same rhythm and sensitively reacting to any falsehood. One of the brightest subsequently "villageists", Fedor Abramov, began publishing in Novy Mir as a critic. His article was published in 1954 "People of the collective farm village in the after military prose», where he called for writing “only the truth - direct and impartial.”

In 1955-1956, many new magazines appeared - “Youth”, “Moscow”, “Young Guard”, “Friendship of Peoples”, “Ural”, “Volga”, etc.

Knowledge of front-line life and experience of survival in the camps formed the basis of creativity Alexandra Solzhenitsyn, who subjected the Soviet regime to the most consistent criticism. Some works of this period became famous in the West, including the novel by Vladimir Dudintsev “Not by Bread Alone” and the story by Alexander Solzhenitsyn "One day in the life of Ivan Denisovich."

The preconditions for the Thaw were laid in 1945. Many writers were front-line soldiers. Prose about the war by real participants in hostilities, or, as it was called, “officer’s prose,” carried an important understanding of the truth about past war. The first to raise this topic, which became central in military prose of 1950-1960, was Viktor Nekrasov in the story “ In the trenches of Stalingrad", published in 1946. Konstantin Simonov, who served as a front-line journalist, described his impressions in the trilogy “ Living and Dead"(1959-1979). In the stories of front-line writers Grigory Baklanov “ An inch of land"(1959) and "The dead have no shame"(1961), Yuri Bondarev "The battalions are asking for fire"(1957), Konstantin Vorobyov "Killed near Moscow"(1963), against the backdrop of a detailed, unvarnished description of military life, the theme of conscious personal choice in a situation between life and death was heard for the first time.

The thaw period was accompanied by the flowering of poetry. The euphoria from the new possibilities required an emotional outburst. Since 1955, the country began to celebrate Poetry Day. On one September Sunday, poems were read in libraries and theaters all over the country. Since 1956, an almanac with the same name began to be published. Poets spoke from the stands and packed stadiums. Poetry evenings in Polytechnic Museum attracted thousands of enthusiastic listeners. Since the monument to the poet was inaugurated on Mayakovsky Square in 1958, this place has become a place of pilgrimage and meeting for poets and poetry lovers. Here poetry was read, books and magazines were exchanged, and there was a dialogue about what was happening in the country and the world. The greatest popularity was gained by poets with a bright journalistic temperament - Robert Rozhdestvensky and Evgeny Yevtushenko. No less popular Andrey Voznesensky was more focused on the aesthetics of new modernity - airports, neon, new brands of cars. Chamber, intimate motives Bella Akhmadulina, her unique, melodious author's style of performance subtly resembled the poetesses of the Silver Age, attracting many fans to her. "Silent Lyricists" Vladimir Sokolov and Nikolai Rubtsov turned to nature in search of authenticity of being and harmony with the world.

A young poet appeared in a circle at the Leningrad Technological Institute (E. Rein, D. Bobyshev, A. Naiman), whose common hobby was Acmeism Joseph Brodsky.

In the late 1950s and early 1960s, the art song genre became popular. Most a prominent representative and the founder of this direction was Bulat Okudzhava. Together with Rozhdestvensky, Yevtushenko, Voznesensky and Akhmadulina, he performed at noisy poetry evenings at the Polytechnic Museum. His work became the starting point, the impetus for the emergence of a galaxy of popular domestic bards - Vizbor, Gorodnitsky, Galich, Vladimir Vysotsky, etc. Many bards performed songs not only on own words, lines of poets of the Silver Age - Akhmatova, Tsvetaeva, Mandelstam - were often set to music.

"Youth prose" was published mainly in the magazine "Youth". Its editor, Valentin Kataev, relied on young and unknown prose writers and poets. The works of the young people were characterized by a confessional intonation, youth slang, and a sincere upbeat mood.

However, the thaw period did not last long. Already with the suppression of the Hungarian uprising 1956 years have appeared clear boundaries openness policy. Khrushchev's persecution of Boris Pasternak, who was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1958, outlined boundaries in the field of art and culture. The final completion of the “thaw” is considered to be the removal of Khrushchev and the coming to leadership of Leonid Brezhnev in 1964.

With the end of the “thaw”, criticism of Soviet reality began to spread only through unofficial channels, such as Samizdat.

Tale (1953-1955)

Brief summary of the work "The Thaw"

The club in a large industrial city is sold out. The hall is packed, people are standing in the aisles. An extraordinary event: a novel by a young local writer has been published. Participants in the reading conference praise the debutant: everyday work is reflected accurately and vividly. The heroes of the book are truly heroes of our time.

But about them" personal life"One can argue, says one of the leading engineers of the plant, Dmitry Koroteev. There is not a penny typical here: a serious and honest agronomist could not fall in love with a frivolous and flirtatious woman, with whom he has no common spiritual interests, and in addition - the wife of his comrade! The love described in the novel, it seems, has been mechanically transferred from the pages of bourgeois literature!

Koroteev's speech causes a heated debate. More discouraged than others - although they do not express this out loud - are his closest friends: the young engineer Grisha Savchenko and the teacher Lena Zhuravleva (her husband is the director of the plant, sitting on the presidium of the conference and openly pleased with the harshness of Koroteev's criticism).

The dispute about the book continues at Sonya Pukhova’s birthday party, where Savchenko comes straight from the club. “A SMART man, but he spoke according to a stencil!” Grisha gets excited. “It turns out that the personal has no place in literature. But the book touched a nerve in everyone: too often we say one thing, but in our personal lives we act differently. The reader yearns for such books !" “You’re right,” nods one of the guests, the artist Saburov. “It’s time to remember what art is!” “But in my opinion, Koroteev is right,” Sonya objects. “Soviet people have learned to control nature, but he must learn to control his feelings...”

Lena Zhuravleva has no one to exchange opinions with about what she heard at the conference: she has long lost interest in her husband, it seems, from the day when, at the height of the “doctors’ case,” she heard from him: “You can’t trust them too much, that’s indisputable.” The dismissive and merciless “IM” shocked Lena. And when, after the fire at the factory, where Zhuravlev showed himself to be a fine fellow, Koroteev spoke of him with praise, she wanted to shout: “You know nothing about him. He is a soulless man!”

That’s also why Koroteev’s performance at the club upset her: he seemed so whole to her, extremely honest, both in public, and in a face-to-face conversation, and alone with his own conscience...

The choice between truth and lies, the ability to distinguish one from the other - this is what all the heroes of the story, without exception, call upon during the “thaw”. The thaw is not only in the social climate (Koroteev’s stepfather returns after seventeen years in prison; relations with the West and the possibility of meeting foreigners are openly discussed at the feast; at the meeting there are always daredevils ready to contradict the authorities and the opinion of the majority). This is also the thaw of everything “personal”, which for so long was customary to hide from people, not to let out the door of your home. Koroteev is a front-line soldier, there was a lot of bitterness in his life, but this choice is given to him painfully. At the party bureau, he did not find the courage to stand up for the leading engineer Sokolovsky, for whom Zhuravlev disliked. And although after the ill-fated party bureau Koroteev changed his mind and directly stated this to the head of the department of the city committee of the CPSU, his conscience was not calmed: “I have no right to judge Zhuravlev, I am the same as him. I say one thing, but I live differently. Probably today we need other, new people - romantics, like Savchenko. Where can we get them from? Gorky once said that we need our, Soviet humanism. And Gorky has long been gone, and the word “humanism” has disappeared from circulation - but the task remains And to solve it. Today".

The reason for the conflict between Zhuravlev and Sokolovsky is that the director is disrupting the housing construction plan. Storm, for the first time spring days flying into the city, destroying several dilapidated barracks, causes a retaliatory storm - in Moscow. Zhuravlev is on an urgent call to Moscow for a new assignment (with a demotion, of course). For the collapse of his career, he does not blame the storm, and especially not himself - Lena who left him: his wife leaving is immoral! In the old days, for this... And Sokolovsky is also to blame for what happened (he was almost certainly the one who hastened to report the storm to the capital): “It’s a pity, after all, that I didn’t kill him...”

There was a storm and it blew away. Who will remember her? Who will remember the director Ivan Vasilyevich Zhuravlev? Who remembers last winter, when loud drops were falling from the icicles, and spring was just around the corner?..

It was difficult and long - like the path through snowy winter to the thaw - the path to happiness for Sokolovsky and the “saboteur doctor” Vera Grigorievna, Savchenko and Sonya Pukhova, the drama theater actress Tanechka and Sonya’s brother the artist Volodya. Volodya goes through his temptation of lies and cowardice: during a discussion of an art exhibition, he attacks his childhood friend Saburov - “for formalism.” Repenting of his baseness, asking Saburov for forgiveness, Volodya admits to himself the main thing that he did not realize for too long: he has no talent. In art, as in life, the main thing is talent, and not loud words about ideology and popular demands.

Be people need Now Lena, who has found herself again with Koroteev, is striving. Sonya Pukhova also experiences this feeling - she admits to herself her love for Savchenko. In love, conquering the trials of both time and space: she and Grisha barely had time to get used to the same separation (after college, Sonya was assigned to a plant in Penza) - and then Grisha had a long way to go, to Paris, for an internship, in a group of young specialists.

Spring. Thaw. It is felt everywhere, everyone feels it: both those who did not believe in it, and those who were waiting for it - like Sokolovsky, traveling to Moscow, to meet his daughter Mashenka, Mary, a ballerina from Brussels, completely unknown to him and dearest to him, whom he dreamed of seeing all his life.

Erenburg Ilya

Thaw

PART ONE

Maria Ilyinishna was worried, her glasses were sliding down the tip of her nose, and her gray curls were bouncing.

The floor is given to Comrade Brainin. Comrade Koroteev, prepare.

Dmitry Sergeevich Koroteev slightly raised his narrow dark eyebrows - this always happened when he was surprised; Meanwhile, he knew that he would have to speak at a readers' conference - the librarian Maria Ilyinishna had asked him to do this a long time ago, and he agreed.

Everyone at the plant treated Koroteev with respect. Director Ivan Vasilyevich Zhuravlev recently admitted to the secretary of the city committee that without Koroteev, the production of high-speed cutting machines would have had to be postponed until the next quarter. Dmitry Sergeevich was valued, however, not only as a good engineer - they were amazed at his comprehensive knowledge, intelligence, and modesty. Chief designer Sokolovsky, man, general opinion, sarcastic, never said a bad word about Koroteev. And Maria Ilyinishna, having once talked with Dmitry Sergeevich about literature, enthusiastically said: “He feels Chekhov exclusively!..” It is clear that the reading conference, for which she had been preparing for more than a month, like a schoolgirl for a difficult exam, could not pass without Koroteev .

Engineer Brainin laid out a pile of papers in front of him; He spoke very quickly, as if he was afraid that he would not have time to say everything, sometimes he stammered painfully, put on his glasses and rummaged through the papers.

Despite the shortcomings that those who spoke before me correctly spoke about, the novel has, so to speak, great educational value. Why did agronomist Zubtsov fail in reforestation? The author correctly, so to speak, posed the problem - Zubtsov misunderstood the meaning of criticism and self-criticism. Of course, the secretary of the party organization Shebalin could have helped him, but the author clearly showed what the neglect of the principle of collegial leadership leads to. The novel will be able to enter the golden fund of our literature if the author, so to speak, takes into account the criticism and reworks some episodes...

The club was full, people were standing in the aisles, near the doors. The novel by a young author, published by a regional publishing house, apparently worried readers. But Brainin tormented everyone with lengthy quotes, “so to speak,” and a boring, official voice. For the sake of decency, they clapped him sparingly. Everyone perked up when Maria Ilyinishna announced:

The floor is given to Comrade Koroteev. Comrade Stolyarova, prepare.

Dmitry Sergeevich spoke lively, and they listened to him. But Maria Ilyinishna frowned: no, he spoke differently about Chekhov. Why did he run into Zubtsov? It is felt that he did not like the novel... Koroteev, however, praised the novel: the images of both the tyrant Shebalin and the young honest communist Fedorova are truthful, and Zubtsov looks alive.

Frankly, I just didn’t like how the author reveals Zubtsov’s personal life. The case he describes is, first of all, implausible. And there is nothing typical here. The reader does not believe that the overly self-confident but honest agronomist fell in love with the wife of his friend, a flirtatious and flighty woman with whom he has no common spiritual interests. It seems to me that the author was chasing cheap entertainment. Really, ours soviet people spiritually purer, more serious, and Zubtsov’s love was somehow mechanically transferred to the pages of a Soviet novel from the works of bourgeois writers...

Koroteev was greeted with applause. Some liked Dmitry Sergeevich’s irony: he told how some writers, arriving on a creative trip with a notebook, quickly question a dozen people and announce that they have “collected material for a novel.” Others were flattered that Koroteev considered them people more noble and mentally more complex than the hero of the novel. Still others applauded because Koroteev is generally smart.

Zhuravlev, who was sitting on the presidium, loudly said to Maria Ilyinishna: “He beat him well, that’s indisputable.” Maria Ilyinishna did not answer anything.

Zhuravlev's wife, Lena, a teacher, seemed to be the only one who did not applaud. She is always original! - Zhuravlev sighed.

Koroteev sat down in his seat and thought vaguely: the flu is starting. It’s stupid to get sick now: I’m wearing Brainin’s project. There was no need to speak: he repeated elementary truths. My head hurts. It's unbearably hot here.

He did not listen to what Katya Stolyarova said, and flinched from the claps that interrupted her words. He knew Katya from work: she was cheerful girl, whitish, eyebrowless, with an expression of some kind of constant admiration for life. He forced himself to listen. Katya objected to him:

I don’t understand Comrade Koroteev. I won't say that this novel is classically written, like, for example, Anna Karenina, but it is captivating. I've heard this from many people. What does “bourgeois writers” have to do with it? In my opinion, a person has a heart, so he suffers. What's wrong with that? I’ll tell you straight, I also had such moments in my life... In a word, it touches your soul, so you can’t brush it aside...

Koroteev thought: well, who could say that funny Katya had already experienced some kind of drama? “A man has a heart”... He suddenly forgot, no longer listened to the speakers, did not see either Maria Ilyinishna, or the prickly brown-gray palm tree, or the boards with books, he looked at Lena - and all the torment of the last months came to life. Lena never looked at him, but he wanted and was afraid of it. This happened now every time they met. But back in the summer, he talked to her casually, joked, and argued. Then he often visited Zhuravlev, although in his heart he did not like him - he considered him too complacent. He visited Zhuravlev most likely because he enjoyed talking with Lena. Interesting woman, I haven’t seen one like this in Moscow. Of course, there is less chatter here, people read more, they have time to think. But Lena is an exception here too; one can feel her deep nature. It’s not even clear how she can live with Zhuravlev? She is a head taller than him. But they seem to live together, their daughter is already five years old...

Until recently, Koroteev calmly admired Lena. A young engineer Savchenko once told him: “In my opinion, she is a real beauty.” Dmitry Sergeevich shook his head. "No. But the face is memorable ... "Lena had golden hair, red in the sun, and green misty eyes, sometimes perky, sometimes very sad, and most often incomprehensible - it seems that in another minute - and she will all disappear, disappear in the slanting ray of the dusty, indoor sun.

It was good then, thought Korolev. He went outside. What a snowstorm! But when I went to the club, it was quiet...

Koroteev walked half-forgotten, did not remember either the reader’s conference or his speech. Before him was Lena - the ruin of his life, the feverish dreams of the last weeks, powerlessness in front of himself, which he had never known before. True, his comrades considered him a success - everything worked out for him, and within two years he gained universal recognition. But he had more than just these two years behind him; He had recently turned thirty-five, and life had not always been kind to him. He knew how to deal with difficulties. His face, long and dry, with a high, convex forehead, with gray eyes, sometimes cold, sometimes affectionately condescending, with a stubborn fold near the mouth, betrayed will.

A few years later, on a hot August, he walked across the steppe with a retreating division. He was gloomy, but did not lose heart. For some reason, it was on him that the general took his anger out, called him a coward and a selfish person in front of everyone, and threatened to put him on trial. Koroteev calmly said to his comrade: “It’s good that he swears. So, we’ll get out...” Soon after this, a shell fragment hit him in the shoulder. He spent six months in the hospital, then returned to the front and fought until the end. He was in love with the signalman Natasha; their battalion was already fighting in Breslau when it turned out that she reciprocated his feelings; she said: “Your appearance is cold, it’s scary to even approach, but your heart is not, I felt it right away...” He dreamed: when the war ends, there will be happiness. Natasha died absurdly - from a mine that exploded on the streets of Dresden on the tenth of May, when no one else was thinking about death. Koroteev endured his grief steadfastly; none of his comrades had any idea how hard it was for him. Only a long time later, when his mother said to him: “Why don’t you get married? After all, you’re over thirty, I’ll die and there’s no one to look after me,” he admitted: “I, Mom, lost my happiness in the war. Now it doesn’t cross my mind...”

But one can argue about their “personal life,” says one of the leading engineers of the plant, Dmitry Koroteev. Not a penny is typical here: a serious and honest agronomist could not fall in love with a frivolous and flirtatious woman, with whom he has no common spiritual interests, and, in addition, the wife of his comrade! The love described in the novel seems to have been mechanically transferred from the pages of bourgeois literature!

The dispute about the book continues at Sonya Pukhova’s birthday party, where Savchenko comes straight from the club. “A smart man, but he performed according to a stencil! - Grisha gets excited. - It turns out that the personal has no place in literature. And the book touched a nerve in everyone: too often we say one thing, but in our personal lives we act differently. Readers are yearning for books like these!” “You’re right,” nods one of the guests, the artist Saburov. “It’s time to remember what art is!” “But in my opinion, Koroteev is right,” Sonya objects. “Soviet man has learned to control nature, but he must learn to control his feelings...”

Lena Zhuravleva has no one with whom to exchange opinions about what she heard at the conference: she has long lost interest in her husband, it seems, from the day when, at the height of the “doctors’ case,” she heard from him: “You can’t trust them too much, that’s indisputable.” The disdainful and merciless “im” shocked Lena. And when, after the fire at the factory, where Zhuravlev showed himself to be a fine fellow, Koroteev spoke of him with praise, she wanted to shout: “You know nothing about him. This is a soulless person!

That’s also why Koroteev’s performance at the club upset her: he seemed so whole to her, extremely honest, both in public, and in a face-to-face conversation, and alone with his own conscience...

The choice between truth and lies, the ability to distinguish one from the other - this is what all the heroes of the story of the “thaw” call for, without exception. The thaw is not only in the social climate (Koroteev’s stepfather returns after seventeen years in prison; relations with the West and the possibility of meeting foreigners are openly discussed at the feast; at the meeting there are always daredevils ready to contradict the authorities and the opinion of the majority). This is also the thaw of everything “personal”, which for so long was customary to hide from people, not to let out the door of your home. Koroteev is a front-line soldier, there was a lot of bitterness in his life, but this choice is given to him painfully. At the party bureau, he did not find the courage to stand up for the leading engineer Sokolovsky, for whom Zhuravlev disliked. And although after the ill-fated party bureau, Koroteev changed his decision and directly stated this to the head of the department of the city committee of the CPSU, his conscience was not calmed: “I have no right to judge Zhuravlev, I am the same as him. I say one thing, but live differently. Probably, today we need other, new people - romantics like Savchenko. Where can I get them from? Gorky once said that our Soviet humanism is needed. And Gorky is long gone, and the word “humanism” has disappeared from circulation - but the task remains. And it will be decided today.”

The reason for the conflict between Zhuravlev and Sokolovsky is that the director is disrupting the housing construction plan. A storm that hit the city in the first spring days, destroying several dilapidated barracks, causes a response storm - in Moscow. Zhuravlev is on an urgent call to Moscow for a new assignment (with a demotion, of course). For the collapse of his career, he does not blame the storm, and especially not himself - Lena who left him: his wife leaving is immoral! In the old days, for this... And Sokolovsky is also to blame for what happened (he was almost certainly the one who hastened to report the storm to the capital): “It’s a pity, after all, that I didn’t kill him...”

Difficult and long was - like the path through the snowy winter to the thaw - the path to happiness of Sokolovsky and the “pest doctor” Vera Grigorievna, Savchenko and Sonya Pukhova, the drama theater actress Tanechka and Sonya’s artist brother Volodya. Volodya goes through his temptation with lies and cowardice: during a discussion of an art exhibition, he attacks his childhood friend Saburov - “for formalism.” Repenting of his baseness, asking Saburov for forgiveness, Volodya admits to himself the main thing that he did not realize for too long: he has no talent. In art, as in life, the main thing is talent, and not loud words about ideology and popular demands.

Now Lena, who has found herself again with Koroteev, strives to be needed by people. Sonya Pukhova also experiences this feeling - she admits to herself her love for Savchenko. In love, conquering the trials of both time and space: she and Grisha barely had time to get used to the same separation (after college, Sonya was assigned to a plant in Penza) - and then Grisha had a long way to go, to Paris, for an internship, in a group of young specialists.

Spring. Thaw. It is felt everywhere, it is felt by everyone: both those who did not believe in it, and those who were waiting for it - like Sokolovsky, traveling to Moscow, to meet his daughter Mashenka, Mary, a ballerina from Brussels, completely unknown to him and dearest to him, whom he dreamed of seeing all his life.

The content of the article

LITERATURE OF THE THAW, conventional name for the period of literature of the Soviet Union of the 1950s–early 1960s. The death of Stalin in 1953, the XX (1956) and XXII (1961) congresses of the CPSU, which condemned the “cult of personality”, the easing of censorship and ideological restrictions - these events determined the changes reflected in the work of writers and poets of the Thaw.

In the early 1950s, articles and works began to appear on the pages of literary magazines that played the role of stimulating public opinion. The story of Ilya Ehrenburg caused heated controversy among readers and critics Thaw. The images of the heroes were given in an unexpected way. The main character, parting with a loved one, the director of the plant, an adherent of Soviet ideology, in his person breaks with the country's past. In addition to the main storyline, describing the fate of two painters, the writer raises the question of the artist’s right to be independent of any attitudes.

In 1956, a novel by Vladimir Dudintsev was published Not by bread alone and stories by Pavel Nilin Cruelty, Sergei Antonov It happened in Penkovo. Dudintsev's novel traces the tragic path of an inventor in a bureaucratic system. The main characters of the stories by Nilin and Antonov attracted people with their lively characters, their sincere attitude to the events around them, and their search for their own truth.

The most striking works of this period were focused on participation in solving pressing socio-political issues for the country, on reconsidering the role of the individual in the state. Society was in the process of mastering the space of newly opened freedom. Most of the participants in the debate did not abandon socialist ideas.

The preconditions for the Thaw were laid in 1945. Many writers were front-line soldiers. Prose about the war by real participants in hostilities, or, as it was called, “officer's prose,” carried an important understanding of the truth about the past war.

The first to raise this topic, which became central in military prose of 1950–1960, was Viktor Nekrasov in the story In the trenches of Stalingrad, published in 1946. Konstantin Simonov, who served as a front-line journalist, described his impressions in a trilogy Living and dead(1959–1979). In the stories of front-line writers Grigory Baklanov inch of land(1959) and The dead have no shame(1961), Yuri Bondarev Battalions ask for fire(1957) and Last salvos(1959), Konstantin Vorobyov Killed near Moscow(1963), against the backdrop of a detailed, unvarnished description of military life, the theme of conscious personal choice in a situation between life and death was heard for the first time. Knowledge of front-line life and experience of survival in the camps formed the basis of the work of Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who subjected the Soviet regime to the most consistent criticism.

Issues of literary almanacs and periodicals—various literary magazines—played a major role in the “warming” process. It was they who reacted most vividly to new trends, contributed to the emergence of new names, and brought the authors of the 1920s–1930s out of oblivion.

From 1950 to 1970, the New World magazine was headed by A.T. Tvardovsky. As editor-in-chief, he contributed to the appearance of bright and bold publications in the magazine, gathering around him the best writers and publicists. “Novomirskaya Prose” brought to the attention of readers serious social and moral problems.

In 1952, a series of essays by Valentin Ovechkin was published in Novy Mir. District everyday life, where the topic of optimal management of agriculture was first discussed. It was debated what was better: strong-willed pressure or providing rural farms with the necessary independence. This publication marked the beginning of a whole movement in literature - “village prose”. Leisurely reflections Village Diary Efim Dorosh about the fate of rural residents was side by side with the nervous, electrified prose of Vladimir Tendryakov - stories Potholes, Mayfly – short lifespan. Village prose showed the wisdom of peasants living with nature in the same rhythm and sensitively reacting to any falsehood. One of the most prominent “villageists” later, Fyodor Abramov, began publishing in Novy Mir as a critic. His article was published in 1954 People of a collective farm village in post-war prose, where he called for writing “only the truth—direct and impartial.”

In 1956, two issues of the almanac “Literary Moscow” were published, edited by Emmanuel Kazakevich. I. Erenburg, K. Chukovsky, P. Antokolsky, V. Tendryakov, A. Yashin and others, as well as poets N. Zabolotsky and A. Akhmatova, published here; for the first time after a 30-year break, the works of M. Tsvetaeva were published. In 1961, the almanac “Tarussa Pages” was published, edited by Nikolai Otten, where M. Tsvetaeva, B. Slutsky, D. Samoilov, M. Kazakov, and the story of the war by Bulat Okudzhava were published Be healthy, student, chapters from golden rose and essays by K. Paustovsky.

Despite the atmosphere of renewal, opposition to new trends was significant. Poets and writers who worked according to the principles of socialist realism consistently defended them in literature. Vsevolod Kochetov, editor-in-chief of the magazine “October,” conducted a polemic with “New World.” Discussions on the pages of magazines and periodicals maintained an atmosphere of dialogue in society.

In 1955–1956, many new magazines appeared - “Youth”, “Moscow”, “Young Guard”, “Friendship of Peoples”, “Ural”, “Volga”, etc.

“Youth prose” was published mainly in the magazine “Yunost”. Its editor, Valentin Kataev, relied on young and unknown prose writers and poets. The works of the young people were characterized by a confessional intonation, youth slang, and a sincere upbeat mood.

In the stories of Anatoly Gladilin published on the pages of Youth Chronicle of the times of Viktor Podgursky(1956) and Anatoly Kuznetsov Continuation of the legend(1957) described the younger generation’s search for their path at the “construction sites of the century” and in their personal lives. The heroes were also attractive because of their sincerity and rejection of falsehood. In the story by Vasily Aksenov Star ticket, published in Youth, was described new type Soviet youth, later called “star boys” by critics. This is a new romantic, thirsting for maximum freedom, believing that in searching for himself he has the right to make mistakes.

During the thaw period Russian literature Many new bright names appeared. For short stories Yuri Kazakov is characterized by attention to shades psychological state ordinary people from the people (stories Manka, 1958, Trali-wali, 1959). A postman girl, a drunken beacon man, singing old songs on the river - they embody their understanding of life, focusing on their own idea of its values. Ironic story Constellation Kozlotur(1961) brought popularity to the young author Fazil Iskander. The story ridicules the emasculated bureaucratic functioning that creates fuss around unnecessary “innovative undertakings.” Subtle irony has become not only characteristic feature Iskander’s author’s style, but also migrated into oral speech.

The genre continues to develop science fiction, the traditions of which were laid in the 1920s–1930s. Significant works were written by Ivan Efremov - Andromeda's nebula (1958), Heart of the Snake(1959). Utopian novel Andromeda's nebula resembles a philosophical treatise on the cosmic communist future to which the development of society will lead.

In the 1950s, brothers Arkady and Boris Strugatsky came to literature - From outside (1959), Country of Crimson Clouds (1959), The path to Amalthea (1960), Noon, 21st century (1962), Distant Rainbow (1962), It's hard to be a god(1964). Unlike other science fiction writers who dealt with the themes of cosmic messianism in an abstract and heroic manner, the problems of cosmic “progressors” were revealed by the Strugatskys at the level of philosophical understanding of the mutual influences of civilizations different levels. In the story It's hard to be a god the question is asked what is better: the slow, painful, but natural development of society or the artificial introduction and expansion of the values of a more civilized society into a less developed one in order to direct its movement in a more progressive direction. In subsequent books by the authors, reflection on this issue becomes deeper. There comes an awareness of moral responsibility for considerable sacrifices - the so-called payment. "primitive" societies for the progress imposed on them.

It was in the 1960–1980s that Yuri Trifonov, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Venedikt Erofeev, and Joseph Brodsky came to realize themselves as writers and poets.

So, in 1950 Trifonov’s story was published Students. Solzhenitsyn during the years of exile and teaching in Ryazan region worked on a novel Cancer building , research Gulag Archipelago; in 1959 he wrote the story One day of Ivan Denisovich, published in 1962. In the 1950s, Venedikt Erofeev led the life of a student, wandering around different universities. He tried his pen in a lyrical diary Notes from a Psychopath(1956–1957), where a special Erofeev style was already felt.

The thaw period was accompanied by the flowering of poetry. The euphoria from the new possibilities required an emotional outburst. Since 1955, the country began to celebrate Poetry Day. On one September Sunday, poems were read in libraries and theaters all over the country. Since 1956, an almanac with the same name began to be published. Poets spoke from the stands and packed stadiums. Poetry evenings at the Polytechnic Museum attracted thousands of enthusiastic listeners. Since the monument to the poet was inaugurated on Mayakovsky Square in 1958, this place has become a place of pilgrimage and meeting for poets and poetry lovers. Here poetry was read, books and magazines were exchanged, and there was a dialogue about what was happening in the country and the world.

The greatest popularity during the period of the poetic boom was gained by poets with a bright journalistic temperament - Robert Rozhdestvensky and Evgeny Yevtushenko. Their civic lyrics were imbued with the pathos of understanding the place of their country in the scale of world achievements. Hence a different approach to understanding civic duty and social romance. The images of leaders were revised - the image of Lenin was romanticized, Stalin was criticized. Many songs were written based on Rozhdestvensky’s poems, which formed the basis of the “big style” in the genre of Soviet pop song. In addition to civil themes, Yevgeny Yevtushenko was known for his deep and fairly frank love lyrics and cycles written based on his impressions of trips around the world.

The no less popular Andrei Voznesensky was more focused on the aesthetics of the new modernity - airports, neon, new brands of cars, etc. However, he also paid tribute to attempts to comprehend the images of Soviet leaders in a new way. Over time, the theme of searching for the true values of existence began to emerge in Voznesensky’s work. Bella Akhmadulina's chamber, intimate motifs and her unique, melodious author's style of performance were subtly reminiscent of the poetesses of the Silver Age, attracting many fans to her.

In the late 1950s and early 1960s, the art song genre became popular. The most prominent representative and founder of this trend was Bulat Okudzhava. Together with Rozhdestvensky, Yevtushenko, Voznesensky and Akhmadulina, he performed at noisy poetry evenings at the Polytechnic Museum. His work became the starting point, the impetus for the emergence of a galaxy of popular domestic bards - Vizbor, Gorodnitsky, Galich, Vladimir Vysotsky and others. Many bards performed songs not only with their own words, often lines of poets of the Silver Age - Akhmatova, Tsvetaeva, Mandelstam were set to music.

The entire palette of the poetic process of the Thaw period was not limited to the bright young voices that were widely heard by the general reader. The collections of poets of the older generation - Nikolai Aseev - are imbued with a premonition of change Thoughts(1955), Leonid Martynov Poetry(1957). Understanding the lessons of war - main topic front-line poets Semyon Gudzenko, Alexander Mezhirov, Olga Berggolts, Yulia Drunina. The motives of courageous asceticism, which helped to survive in the camps, were heard in the works of Yaroslav Smelyakov. “Quiet lyricists” Vladimir Sokolov and Nikolai Rubtsov turned to nature in search of authenticity of being and harmony with the world. David Samoilov and Boris Slutsky based their work on broad cultural and historical reflection.

In addition to the generally recognized published authors, there were a significant number of poets and writers who were not published. They united in groups - poetry circles of like-minded people, which existed either as private associations or as literary associations at universities. In Leningrad, the association of poets at the university (V. Uflyand, M. Eremin, L. Vinogradov, etc.) was inspired by the poetry of the Oberiuts. In a circle at the Leningrad Technological Institute (E. Rein, D. Bobyshev, A. Naiman), whose common hobby was Acmeism, a young poet Joseph Brodsky appeared. He attracted attention for his lack of conformity - his reluctance to play by the accepted rules, for which in 1964 he was brought to court for “parasitism.”

Most creative heritage The Moscow “Lianozov group”, which included G. Sapgir, I. Kholin, Vs. Nekrasov, was published only 30–40 years after it was written. The Lianozovites experimented with colloquial, everyday speech, achieving paradoxical connections and consonances through dissonance. In Moscow at the end of the 1950s there was also a circle of students of the institute foreign languages, which included the poet Stanislav Krasovitsky. In 1964, on the initiative of the poet Leonid Gubanov, the student association of poets and artists SMOG was born (V. Aleinikov, V. Delone, A. Basilova, S. Morozov, V. Batshev, A. Sokolov, Yu. Kublanovsky, etc.), which, in addition to literary experiments carried out radical actions, which accelerated its collapse.

The reaction of the authorities to the publications of some authors abroad was painful and acute. This was given the status of almost high treason, which was accompanied by forced expulsion, scandals, trials, etc. The state still considered itself to have the right to determine the norms and boundaries of thinking and creativity for its citizens. That is why in 1958 a scandal broke out over the award Nobel Prize Boris Pasternak for a novel published abroad Doctor Zhivago. The writer had to refuse the prize. In 1965, a scandal followed with the writers Andrei Sinyavsky (stories The trial is underway, Lyubimov, treatise What is socialist realism) and Julius Daniel (stories Moscow speaks, Redemption), who published their works in the West since the late 1950s. They were sentenced “for anti-Soviet agitation and propaganda” to five and seven years in the camps. Vladimir Voinovich after the publication of the novel in the West The life and extraordinary adventures of soldier Ivan Chonkin had to leave the USSR because He could no longer hope to publish his books in his homeland.

In addition to “tamizdat,” “samizdat” became a characteristic phenomenon of the society of that time. Many works passed from hand to hand, reprinted on typewriters or simple duplicating equipment. The very fact of prohibition fueled interest in these publications and contributed to their popularity.

After Brezhnev came to power, it is believed that the “thaw” ended. Criticism was allowed within limits that did not undermine the existing system. There was a rethinking of the role of Lenin - Stalin in history - it was proposed different interpretations. Criticism of Stalin waned.

Essential for understanding the boundaries of freedom was the attitude towards literary heritage beginning of the century. The event was last piece Ilya Ehrenburg - memories People, years, life(1961–1966). For the first time, many learned about the existence of such historical figures as Mandelstam, Balmont, Tsvetaeva, Falk, Modigliani, Savinkov and others. Names suppressed by Soviet ideology, described in detail and vividly, became the reality of national history, the artificially interrupted connection between the eras - pre-revolutionary and Soviet - was restored. Some of the authors of the Silver Age, in particular Blok and Yesenin, already began to be mentioned and published in the 1950s. Other authors were still banned.

Self-censorship developed. The internal censor told the author which topics could be raised and which should not be discussed. Certain elements of ideology were perceived as a formality, a convention that must be taken into account.

Olga Loshchilina

DRAMATURGY OF “THAW”

The “Thaw” not only debunked the myth of the holiness of the “father of all nations.” For the first time, it made it possible to raise the ideological scenery above the Soviet stage and drama. Of course, not all, but a very significant part of them. Before talking about the happiness of all mankind, it would be nice to think about the happiness and unhappiness of an individual person.

The process of “humanization” declared itself in playwrights both in its literary basis and in its production.

Search artistic means, capable of conveying the leading trends of the time within the framework of everyday, chamber drama, led to the creation of such a significant work as the play by Alexei Arbuzov Irkutsk history(1959–1960). Image of everyday life human drama it rose to the heights of poetic reflections on the moral principles of a contemporary, and the features of the new historical era were vividly imprinted in the appearance of the heroes themselves.

At the beginning, the heroine of the play, a young girl Valya, experiences a state of deep mental loneliness. Having lost faith in the existence of true love, she lost faith in people, in the possibility of happiness for herself. She tries to compensate for the painful spiritual emptiness, boredom and prose of everyday work with a frequent change of love affairs, the illusory romance of a thoughtless life. Loving Victor, suffering humiliation from him, she decides to “revenge” him - she marries Sergei.

Another life begins, Sergei helps the heroine find herself again. He has a strong-willed, strong, persistent and at the same time humanly charming character, full of warmth. It is this character that makes him, without hesitation, rush to the aid of a drowning boy. The boy is saved, but Sergei dies. The tragic shock experienced by the heroine completes the turning point in her soul. Victor also changes; the death of a friend forces him to reconsider many things in his life. own life. Now, after real tests, it becomes possible real love heroes.

It is significant that Arbuzov widely used stage convention techniques in the play. A sharp mixture of real and conventional plans, a retrospective way of organizing action, transferring events from the recent past to the present day - all this was necessary for the author in order to activate the reader, viewer, make his contact with the characters more lively and direct, as if bringing problems to the surface. space for broad, open discussion.

The Chorus occupies a prominent place in the artistic structure of the play. He introduces into this drama journalistic elements that were extremely popular in the society of that time.

“Even the day before death is not too late to start life over again” - this is the main thesis of Arbuzov’s play My poor Marat(1064), the approval of which the heroes come to in the finale after many years of spiritual quest. Both plot-wise and from the point of view of the dramatic techniques used here My poor Marat constructed as a chronicle. At the same time, the play is subtitled “dialogues in three parts.” Each such part has its own precise, up to month, designation of time. With these constant dates, the author seeks to emphasize the connection of the heroes with the world around them, evaluating them throughout the entire historical period.

The main characters are tested for mental strength. Despite the happy ending, the author seems to be saying: everyday life, simple human relationships require great spiritual strength if you want your dreams of success and happiness not to collapse.

In the most famous dramatic works those years, the problems of everyday life, family, love are not separated from issues of moral and civic duty. At the same time, of course, the severity and relevance of social and moral issues in themselves were not a guarantor creative success– it was achieved only when the authors found new dramatic ways of considering life’s contradictions and sought to enrich and develop the aesthetic system.

The work of Alexander Vampilov is very interesting. His main achievement is a complex polyphony of living human characters, in many ways dialectically continuing each other and at the same time endowed with pronounced individual traits.

Already in the first lyrical comedy Farewell in June(1965) The signs of a hero were clearly identified, who then passed through Vampilov’s other plays in different guises.

Busygin takes complex psychological paths to achieve spiritual integrity, main character plays by Vampilov Eldest son(1967). The plot of the play is constructed in a very unusual way. Busygin and his random travel companion Sevostyanov, nicknamed Silva, find themselves in the Sarafanov family, unknown to them, who are going through difficult times. Busygin unwittingly becomes responsible for what is happening to his “relatives.” As he ceases to be a stranger in the Sarafanovs’ house, the previous connection with Silva, who turns out to be an ordinary vulgar, gradually disappears. But Busygin himself is increasingly burdened by the game he has started, by his frivolous but cruel act. He discovers a spiritual kinship with Sarafanov, for whom, by the way, it doesn’t matter at all whether the main character is a blood relative or not. Therefore, the long-awaited revelation leads to a happy ending to the entire play. Busygin takes a difficult and therefore conscious, purposeful step forward in his spiritual development.

The problem of moral choice is solved in an even more complex and dramatic way in the play. Duck hunting(1967). The comic element, so natural in Vampilov’s previous plays, is here reduced to a minimum. The author examines in detail the character of a person drowned in the vanity of life, and shows how, by making immorality the norm of behavior, without thinking about the good for others, a person kills the humanity in himself.

The duck hunt, which the hero of the drama Viktor Zilov is going on throughout the entire action, is not at all an expression of his spiritual essence. He is a bad shot because he admits that he feels bad about killing ducks. As it turns out, he feels sorry for himself, too, although once he reaches a dead end in his senseless whirling among seemingly beloved women and men who seem to be friends with him, he tries to stop everything with one shot. Of course, there was not enough strength for this.

On the one hand, comic, obviously invented, and on the other, small everyday situations in which Vampilov places his heroes, with a more serious acquaintance with them, each time turn out to be serious tests for a contemporary trying to answer the question: “Who are you, man?”

Ethical problems were clearly revealed in the drama of Viktor Rozov On your wedding day(1964). Here, quite young people are tested for moral maturity. On the wedding day, the bride suddenly declares that the wedding will not happen and that she is parting with the groom forever, although she loves him endlessly. Despite all the unexpectedness of such a decisive act, the behavior of the heroine - Nyura Salova, the daughter of a night watchman in a small Volga town - has its own inexorable internal logic, leading her close to the need to renounce happiness. As the story progresses, Nyura becomes convinced of a bitter but immutable truth: the man she is marrying has long loved another woman.

Originality conflict situation that arises in the play is that the struggle does not flare up between the heroes within a closed and fairly traditional love “triangle”. Rozov, having retrospectively outlined the real origins of the acute conflict that has arisen, follows, first of all, the intense confrontation that takes place in the soul of the heroine, because ultimately she herself must make a conscious choice, utter the decisive word.

Rozov opposed the dogmatic concept of the “ideal hero”, who certainly manifests himself against a historical and social background. The action of his plays always takes place in a narrow circle of characters. If this is not a family, then a group of graduates and classmates gathered at school for their evening after for long years separation. Sergei Usov, the main character of the play Traditional collection(1967), directly speaks about the value of the individual, independent of professional achievements, positions, social roles– the fundamental principles of human spirituality are important to him. Therefore, he becomes a kind of arbiter in the dispute between matured graduates trying to separate the wheat from the chaff in assessing the viability of this or that fate. The gathering of graduates becomes a review of their moral achievements.

In the same way, Alexander Volodin separates and disconnects his characters from numerous public connections - Elder sister(1961),Purpose(1963); Edward Radzinsky - 104 pages about love(1964),Filming (1965).

This is especially typical for female images, to whom the author's undivided sympathy is given. The heroines are touchingly romantic and, despite the very difficult relationship with those around them, as if pushing them to give up any dreams, they always remain true to their ideals. They are quiet, not very noticeable, but, warming the souls of loved ones, they find strength for themselves to live with faith and love. Girl stewardess ( 104 pages about love), chance meeting which did not foreshadow for the hero, the young and talented physicist Electron, seemingly any changes in his rationally correct life, in fact showed that a person without love, without affection, without a feeling of his daily need for another person is not a person at all. In the finale, the hero receives unexpected news about the death of his girlfriend and realizes that he will never again be able to feel life the way he once did - that is, just three and a half months ago...

Interestingly, much changed in the 1960s even for so-called revolutionary drama. On the one hand, she began to resort to the possibilities of documentary filmmaking, which is largely explained by the desire of the authors to be reliable down to the smallest detail. On the other hand, the images of historical figures acquired the features of completely “living” people, that is, contradictory, doubting people going through an internal spiritual struggle.

In the play by Mikhail Shatrov sixth of july(1964), called in the subtitle “an experience in documentary drama,” the history of the revolution itself was directly recreated in a dramatic combination of circumstances and characters. The author set himself the task of discovering this drama and introducing it into the framework theatrical action. However, Shatrov did not take the path of simply reproducing the chronicle of events; he tried to reveal their internal logic, revealing the socio-psychological motives for the behavior of their participants.

The historical facts underlying the play - the Left Socialist Revolutionary rebellion in Moscow on July 6, 1918 - gave the author ample opportunity to search for exciting stage situations and free flight of creative imagination. However, following the principle he had chosen, Shatrov sought to discover the power of drama in the real story itself. The intensity of the dramatic action intensifies as the political and moral combat between the two politicians– Lenin and the leader of the Left Socialist Revolutionaries Maria Spiridonova.

But in another play, Bolsheviks(1967), Shatrov is already in many ways, according to own confession, departs from the document, from the exact chronology “for the sake of creating a more integral artistic image era." The action takes place over just a few hours on the evening of August 30, 1918 (with the stage time more or less exactly corresponding to the real one). Uritsky was killed in Petrograd, and an attempt was made on Lenin's life in Moscow. If in Sixth of July the mainspring of the stage action was the rapid, condensed movement of events, the development historical fact, then in Bolsheviks the emphasis is shifted to the artistic understanding of the fact, to penetration into its deep philosophical essence. Not the tragic events themselves (they happen behind the scenes), but their refraction in the spiritual life of people, the moral problems they put forward form the basis of the ideological and artistic concept of the play.

Collision different views on the moral responsibilities of the individual in society, internal processes, spiritual development the hero, the formation of his ethical principles, which takes place in intense and acute mental struggles, in difficult searches, in conflicts with others - these contradictions constitute the driving principle of most plays of the 1960s. By turning the content of their works primarily to issues of morality and personal behavior, playwrights significantly expanded the range of artistic solutions and genres. The basis of such searches and experiments was the desire to strengthen the intellectual element of the drama, and most importantly, to find new opportunities for identifying spiritual and moral potential in a person’s character.

Elena Sirotkina

Literature:

Goldstein A. Farewell to Narcissus. M., UFO, 1997
Matusevich V. Notes of a Soviet editor. M., UFO, 2000
Weil P., Genis A. 1960s: the world of Soviet man. M., UFO, 2001
Voinovich V. Anti-Soviet Soviet Union . M., Mainland, 2002
Kara-Murza S. "Scoop" remembers. M., Eksmo, 2002
Savitsky S. underground. M., UFO, 2002
Soviet wealth. St. Petersburg, Academic project, 2002