Аннотация: What is a literature? A treatise on a literature.
What is a literature? A treatise on a literature.
1. A foreword.
A reading of a collection on a cultural politics (1917 - 1953) (Power and the artistic intelligentsia. M., 1999. - 872 p.) encourages the construction of a simplified logical scheme.
If we refuse to simplify, then this work will expand to unattainable sizes.
If we agree with the simplification, it turns out not quite accurate and not quite correct scheme.
However, such a scheme also has the right for presentation. In general, any scheme is somewhat incorrect and requires some clarification.
2. The potential of pre-Soviet literature.
What did the writers of the pre-Soviet era write about? About a life, about the movements of the soul, about nature, about childhood ...
3. A tasks posed to Soviet literature.
After the events of 1917, writers of the pre-Soviet era found themselves in a new country. In this new political and economic reality, the new (Soviet) political elite tried to encourage writers to produce works dedicated to enormous economic or political or cultural transformation.
Judging by many materials published in the above-mentioned collection, the writers tried to hide into a journalism, in translations, on long business trips. They felt discomfort, lack of creative plans and motives. A number of documents record simply a lack of understanding by the main mass of writers of a current situation (situation of that time).
All this was justified by political differences, political views.
But the question can be posed in another way: and what could people who previously wrote about the movements of the soul, about nature, about life? What they could to write on new topics - about the colossal processes that took place in society and in the economy write? They were simply not ready for new topics.
4. The concepts of "a writer" and "a literature".
The pre-revolutionary (by origin and creative biography) writers did not like the new, not comfortable socialist society.
Post-revolutionary writers, as a rule, did not have worldview, education, personal culture - to a sufficient degree.
But all of them were the objects of a hopes.
Moreover, there were requirements for cultural continuity, and the rules of cultural solidarity and humanity.
Under the circumstances, Maxim Gorky did the maximum possible.
He combined, united pre-revolutionary and post-revolutionary writers into the Writers' Union.
What the members of the Writers' Union began to do started to be called "a literature." A such literature can be called, conventionally, as "a Writers' literature."
5. "The Writers' literature" and "The real literature."
How many did not demand from the "writers" - members of the Writers' Union - effective work on new topics - little came of this, a little result was achieved.
Why? Once again we can say: they were not ready for these new topics.
And who was ready? Politicians, economic leaders, political leaders, cultural leaders were ready.
But from them (almost) it is pointless to expect stories, novels...
But from them you can expect diaries, memoirs, professional notes (stories).
A certain, a some traditions of the corresponding type of a literary creativity existed. We can to recall the engineer, business man, writer N.G. Garin-Mikhailovsky.
You can recall the famous memoirs of Sergei Witte.
A huge layer of memoirs was left by participants of pre-revolutionary, revolutionary events and the Civil War who went abroad [after 1917].
All these prominent people did not have - during their professional "large" activities - the ability (and desire) to join the Writers' Union, the other the writers' associations, to live by the algorithms according which a "writers" lived. Major politicians had the other habits ...
But if they were not part of the "writers' circles", then they were not fully "a writers" ...
And since they were not fully "writers," their works were not fully "literature."
In this moment, you can catch the difference between "the writer's literature" and "a real literature."
A major, a large problems could be described not only in memoirs and diaries, but also in biographies. Maxim Gorky resumed the series "Life of remarkable people" - that is, he made a contribution also in this direction.
Historical novels can also be called. They are part of the "the writer's literature", as well as part of the "real literature".
The name of Leo Tolstoy unites both "writers" from "writers' circles" and memoirists, authors of diaries, biographers ... authors of historical novels ...
6. The potential of "real literature."
Real literature in this work is understood as the literary creativity covering (also) memoir's, diary's (and biographic) the creativity giving (also) the description of large, large-scale historical, political, economic processes.
None of the most famous members of the Stalinist leadership (except Nikita Khrushchev) left widely known memoirs.
A huge layer of memoirs was created by participants in the Great Patriotic War - the participants of a different levels.
Economic and political figures have not significantly shown themselves in the creation of a diaries and a memoirs.
To some extent, a "major", a "large" problems were reflected in the biographies of various famous personalities.
7. Stalin Prizes, Writers' Union and the development of literature.
The Stalin Prizes themselves could serve as a means of developing diary's, memoir's, professional, and biographical literature.
However, an appropriate creative culture was not created.
This is partly due to the fact that "literature" and "the activities of members of the Writers' Union" were considered as synonymous. And the members of the Union, neither in their outlook nor in their situation, were ready to cover major problems on a large scale.
There were exceptions. Perhaps the exceptions include "The Quiet Don" ("Tikhii Don") and "Virgin Soil Upturned" (Podnyataya Tselina) by Mikhail Sholokhov, "The Front" by Oleksandr Korniychuk, the historical works by Aleksey Nikolayevich Tolstoy ...
The process of awarding Stalin Prizes, although it had considerable potential to support the development of memoir's and diary's literature, did not realize this potential. This is partly due to an excessively large influence, a large role of "writers" from literary circles, from the Writers' Union ...
8. A summation.
Of great public and historical interest are large-scale processes - electrification, industrialization, collectivization, evacuation (during the Great Patriotic War), the creation of atomic weapons, the implementation of a space project and other similar topics. These processes of great importance could be described in memoirs, in diary literature.
In part (fragmentary) they are described in biographies of famous personalities.
A culture of memoir literature exists. Although her development is not a clearly defined cultural goal.
The culture of a diary literature is in a primitive state. Its development is also not a social cultural goal.
Biographical literature - the creation of biographies of prominent personalities - runs into the aforementioned obstacle. The "writer" of the standard caliber is faced with understandable difficulties in describing an outstanding personality and a great tasks ...
The gap, the distinction between "a writer's literature" and "a real literature" remains.
The potential of diary and memoir literature is not sufficiently realized. The culture of creating relevant literary works does not accumulate, does not develop.
Huge arrays of successful social experience, histories of major social successes, do not become the property of public consciousness, are not transmitted from generation to generation.
February 29, 2020 20:32
Translation from Russian into English: March 1, 2020 10:49.
Владимир Владимирович Залесский "Что такое литература? Трактат о литературе".