Postmodernism in Russian literature of the late XX - early XXI centuries. Russian Postmodernism in Literature Postmodernism in Russia

Literary panorama of the second half of the 1990s. determined by the interaction of two aesthetic trends: realistic, rooted in the tradition of previous literary history, and new, postmodern. Russian postmodernism as a literary and artistic movement is often associated with the period of the 1990s, although in fact it has a significant prehistory of at least four decades. Its emergence was completely natural and was determined both by the internal laws of literary development and by a certain stage of social consciousness. Postmodernism is not so much aesthetics as philosophy, type of thinking, a way of feeling and thinking, which found its expression in literature.

The claim to the total universality of postmodernism, both in the philosophical and literary spheres, became obvious by the second half of the 1990s, when this aesthetics and the artists representing it, from literary outcasts, turned into the masters of thoughts of the reading public, which had greatly thinned by that time. It was then that Dmitry Prigov, Lev Rubinshtein, Vladimir Sorokin, Viktor Pelevin, who deliberately shocked the reader, were put forward in place of the key figures of modern literature. The shock impression of their works on a person brought up on realistic literature is associated not only with external paraphernalia, a deliberate violation of literary and general cultural speech etiquette (the use of obscene language, the reproduction of jargon of the lowest social environment), the removal of all ethical taboos (a detailed deliberately underestimated image of multiple sexual acts and anti-aesthetic physiological manifestations), the fundamental rejection of a realistic or at least somehow vitally rational motivation for the character or behavior of a character. The shock from the collision with the works of Sorokin or Pelevin was caused by a fundamentally different understanding of the reality reflected in them; the doubt of the authors in the very existence of reality, private and historical time, cultural and socio-historical reality (the novels "Chapaev and Emptiness", "Generation P" by V. O. Pelevin); deliberate destruction of classical realistic literary models, natural rationally explainable cause-and-effect relationships of events and phenomena, motivations for the actions of characters, development of plot collisions ("Norm" and "Roman" by V. G. Sorokin). Ultimately - a doubt about the possibility of rational explanations of being. All this was often interpreted in the literary-critical periodicals of traditional realistically oriented publications as a mockery of the reader, literature, and man in general. It must be said that the texts of these writers, filled with sexual or faecal motifs, fully gave grounds for such a critical interpretation. However, severe critics unwittingly became victims of writers' provocation, followed the path of the most obvious, simple, and erroneous reading of the postmodernist text.

Responding to numerous reproaches that he does not like people, that he mocks them in his works, V. G. Sorokin argued that literature is “a dead world”, and the people depicted in a novel or story are “not people, They are just letters on paper. The writer's statement contains the key not only to his understanding of literature, but also to postmodern consciousness in general.

The bottom line is that in its aesthetic basis, the literature of postmodernism is not just sharply opposed to realistic literature - it has a fundamentally different artistic nature. Traditional literary trends, which include classicism, sentimentalism, romanticism and, of course, realism, are one way or another focused on reality, which acts as the subject of the image. In this case, the relation of art to reality can be very different. It can be determined by the desire of literature to imitate life (Aristotelian mimesis), to explore reality, to study it from the point of view of socio-historical processes, which is typical of classical realism, to create some ideal models of social relations (classicism or realism of N. G. Chernyshevsky, the author of the novel " What to do?"), directly influence reality, changing a person, "shaping" him, drawing various social masks-types of his era (socialist realism). In any case, the fundamental correlation and correlation of literature and reality is beyond doubt. Exactly

therefore, some scholars propose to characterize such literary movements or creative methods as primary aesthetic systems.

The essence of postmodern literature is completely different. It does not at all set as its task (at least it is declared so) the study of reality; moreover, the very correlation of literature and life, the connection between them is denied in principle (literature is "this is a dead world", heroes are "just letters on paper"). In this case, the subject of literature is not a genuine social or ontological reality, but the previous culture: literary and non-literary texts of different eras, perceived outside the traditional cultural hierarchy, which makes it possible to mix high and low, sacred and profane, high style and semi-literate vernacular, poetry and slang jargon. Mythology, predominantly socialist realism, incompatible discourses, rethought fates of folklore and literary characters, everyday clichés and stereotypes, most often unreflected, existing at the level of the collective unconscious, become the subject of literature.

Thus, the fundamental difference between postmodernism and, say, realistic aesthetics is that it is secondary an artistic system that explores not reality, but past ideas about it, chaotically, bizarrely and unsystematically mixing and rethinking them. Postmodernism as a literary and aesthetic system or a creative method is prone to deep self-reflection. It develops its own metalanguage, a complex of specific concepts and terms, forms around itself a whole corpus of texts that describe its vocabulary and grammar. In this sense, it appears as a normative aesthetics, in which the work of art itself is preceded by the previously formulated theoretical norms of its poetics.

The theoretical foundations of postmodernism were laid in the 1960s. among French scientists, post-structuralist philosophers. The birth of postmodernism is illuminated by the authority of Roland Barthes, Jacques Derrida, Yulia Kristeva, Gilles Deleuze, Jean Francois Lyotard, who created a scientific structural-semiotic school in France in the middle of the last century, which predetermined the birth and expansion of a whole literary movement both in European and Russian literature . Russian postmodernism is a phenomenon quite different from European, but the philosophical basis of postmodernism was created just then, and Russian postmodernism would not have been possible without it, however, like European. That is why, before turning to the history of Russian postmodernity, it is necessary to dwell on its basic terms and concepts developed almost half a century ago.

Among the works that lay the cornerstones of postmodern consciousness, it is necessary to highlight the articles of R. Barth "Death of an Author"(1968) and Y. Kristeva "Bakhtin, word, dialogue and novel"(1967). It was in these works that the basic concepts of postmodernism were introduced and substantiated: the world as a text, the death of the Author And the birth of a reader, scripter, intertext And intertextuality. At the heart of postmodern consciousness lies the idea of ​​the fundamental completeness of history, which is manifested in the exhaustion of the creative potentials of human culture, the completeness of its circle of development. Everything that is now has already been and will be, history and culture move in a circle, in essence, are doomed to repetition and marking time. The same thing happens with literature: everything has already been written, it is impossible to create something new, the modern writer is doomed, willy-nilly, to repeating and even quoting the texts of his distant and near predecessors.

It is this attitude of culture that motivates the idea death of the Author. According to theorists of postmodernism, the modern writer is not the author of his books, because everything he can write was written before him, much earlier. He can only quote, voluntarily or involuntarily, consciously or unconsciously previous texts. In essence, the modern writer is only a compiler of previously created texts. Therefore, in postmodernist criticism, "The author becomes smaller in stature, like a figure in the very depths of the literary scene." Modern literary texts creates scripter(English - scriptor), fearlessly compiling the texts of previous eras:

"His hand<...>makes a purely descriptive (and not expressive) gesture and outlines a certain sign field that has no starting point - in any case, it comes only from language as such, and it tirelessly casts doubt on any idea of ​​a starting point.

Here we meet with the fundamental presentation of postmodern criticism. The death of the Author calls into question the very content of the text, saturated with the author's meaning. It turns out that the text cannot initially have any meaning. It is "a multi-dimensional space where various types of writing combine and argue with each other, none of which is original; the text is woven from quotations referring to thousands of cultural sources", and the writer (i.e. scriptor) "can only imitate forever what has been written before and has not been written for the first time." This thesis of Barthes is the starting point for such a concept of postmodern aesthetics as intertextuality:

"... Any text is built as a mosaic of citations, any text is a product of absorption and transformation of some other text," wrote Y. Kristeva, substantiating the concept of intertextuality.

At the same time, an infinite number of sources “absorbed” by the test lose their original meaning, if they ever had it, enter into new semantic connections with each other, which only reader. A similar ideology characterized the French post-structuralists in general:

"The scriptor who replaced the Author does not carry passions, moods, feelings or impressions, but only such an immense dictionary from which he draws his letter, which knows no stop; life only imitates the book, and the book itself is woven from signs, itself imitates something already forgotten, and so on ad infinitum.

But why, when reading a work, are we convinced that it still has a meaning? Because it is not the author who puts the meaning into the text, but reader. To the best of his talent, he brings together all the beginnings and ends of the text, thus putting his own meaning into it. Therefore, one of the postulates of the postmodern worldview is the idea multiple interpretations of the work, each of which has the right to exist. Thus, the figure of the reader, its significance, increases immensely. The reader who puts meaning into the work, as it were, takes the place of the author. The death of an Author is the payment of literature for the birth of a reader.

In essence, other concepts of postmodernism also rely on these theoretical provisions. So, postmodern sensibility implies a total crisis of faith, the perception of the world by modern man as chaos, where all the original semantic and value orientations are absent. intertextuality, suggesting a chaotic combination in the text of codes, signs, symbols of previous texts, leads to a special postmodern form of parody - pastiche expressing total postmodern irony over the very possibility of the existence of a single, once and for all fixed meaning. Simulacrum becomes a sign that does not mean anything, a sign of a simulation of reality, not correlated with it, but only with other simulacra, which create an unreal postmodern world of simulations and inauthenticities.

The basis of the postmodern attitude to the world of previous culture is its deconstruction. This concept is traditionally associated with the name of J. Derrida. The term itself, which includes two prefixes opposite in meaning ( de- destruction and con - creation) denotes duality in relation to the object under study - text, discourse, mythologeme, any concept of the collective subconscious. The operation of deconstruction implies the destruction of the original meaning and its simultaneous creation.

"The meaning of deconstruction<...>consists in revealing the internal inconsistency of the text, in discovering in it hidden and unnoticed not only by an inexperienced, "naive" reader, but also by the author himself ("sleeping", in the words of Jacques Derrida) residual meanings inherited from speech, otherwise - discursive practices of the past, enshrined in the language in the form of unconscious mental stereotypes, which, in turn, are transformed just as unconsciously and independently of the author of the text under the influence of the language clichés of the era.

Now it becomes clear that the very period of publishing, which simultaneously brought together different epochs, decades, ideological orientations, cultural preferences, the diaspora and the metropolis, writers who are now living and who have died five to seven decades ago, created the ground for postmodernist sensitivity, impregnated magazine pages with obvious intertextuality. It was under these conditions that the expansion of postmodernist literature of the 1990s became possible.

However, by that time, Russian postmodernism had a certain historical and literary tradition dating back to the 1960s. For obvious reasons, until the mid-1980s. it was a marginal, underground, catacomb phenomenon of Russian literature, both literally and figuratively. For example, Abram Tertz's book Walks with Pushkin (1966-1968), which is considered to be one of the first works of Russian postmodernism, was written in prison and sent to freedom under the guise of letters to his wife. A novel by Andrey Bitov "Pushkin House"(1971) stood on a par with the book of Abram Tertz. These works were brought together by a common subject of the image - Russian classical literature and mythologemes, generated by more than a century of tradition of its interpretation. It was they who became the object of postmodern deconstruction. A. G. Bitov wrote, by his own admission, "an anti-textbook of Russian literature."

In 1970, a poem by Venedikt Erofeev was created "Moscow - Petushki", which gives a powerful impetus to the development of Russian postmodernism. Comically mixing many discourses of Russian and Soviet culture, immersing them in the everyday and speech situation of a Soviet alcoholic, Erofeev seemed to be following the path of classical postmodernism. Combining the ancient tradition of Russian foolishness, overt or covert citation of classical texts, fragments of the works of Lenin and Marx memorized at school with the situation experienced by the narrator in a commuter train in a state of severe intoxication, he achieved both the effect of pastiche and the intertextual richness of the work, possessing a truly limitless semantic inexhaustibility, suggesting a plurality of interpretations. However, the poem "Moscow - Petushki" showed that Russian postmodernism is not always correlated with the canon of a similar Western trend. Erofeev fundamentally rejected the concept of the death of the Author. It was the view of the author-narrator that formed in the poem a single point of view on the world, and the state of intoxication, as it were, sanctioned the complete absence of the cultural hierarchy of the semantic layers included in it.

The development of Russian postmodernism in the 1970s–1980s went primarily in line with conceptualism. Genetically, this phenomenon dates back to the "Lianozovo" poetic school of the late 1950s, to the first experiments of V.N. Nekrasov. However, as an independent phenomenon within Russian postmodernism, Moscow poetic conceptualism took shape in the 1970s. One of the founders of this school was Vsevolod Nekrasov, and the most prominent representatives were Dmitry Prigov, Lev Rubinshtein, and a little later, Timur Kibirov.

The essence of conceptualism was conceived as a radical change in the subject of aesthetic activity: an orientation not to the image of reality, but to the knowledge of language in its metamorphoses. At the same time, speech and mental clichés of the Soviet era turned out to be the object of poetic deconstruction. It was an aesthetic reaction to the late, dead and ossified socialist realism with its worn out formulas and ideologemes, slogans, and propaganda texts that made no sense. They were thought of as concepts, the deconstruction of which was carried out by conceptualists. The author's "I" was absent, dissolved in "quotations", "voices", "opinions". In essence, the language of the Soviet era was subjected to total deconstruction.

With particular obviousness, the strategy of conceptualism manifested itself in the creative practice Dmitry Alexandrovich Prigov(1940–2007), the creator of many myths (including the myth about himself as a modern Pushkin), parodying Soviet ideas about the world, literature, everyday life, love, the relationship between man and power, etc. In his work, Soviet ideologemes about Great Labor, omnipotent Power (the image of Militsaner) were transformed and postmodernistically profaned. Mask-images in Prigov's poems, "the flickering sensation of the presence - absence of the author in the text" (L. S. Rubinshtein) turned out to be a manifestation of the concept of the Author's death. Parodic citations, the removal of the traditional opposition of the ironic and the serious determined the presence of postmodern pastiche in poetry and, as it were, reproduced the categories of the mentality of the Soviet "little man". In the poems "Here the cranes fly with a strip of scarlet ...", "I found a number on my counter ...", "Here I will fry a chicken ..." they conveyed the psychological complexes of the hero, discovered a shift in the real proportions of the picture of the world. All this was accompanied by the creation of quasi-genres of Prigov's poetry: "philosophers", "pseudo-verses", "pseudo-obituary", "opus", etc.

In creativity Lev Semenovich Rubinstein(b. 1947) a "harder version of conceptualism" was realized (M. N. Epshtein). He wrote his poems on separate cards, while an important element of his work became performance - presentation of poems, their author's performance. Holding and sorting through the cards on which the word was written, only one poetic line, nothing was written, he, as it were, emphasized the new principle of poetics - the poetics of "catalogs", poetic "card files". The card became an elementary unit of text, connecting poetry and prose.

"Each card," the poet said, "is both an object and a universal unit of rhythm, leveling any speech gesture - from a detailed theoretical message to an interjection, from a stage direction to a fragment of a telephone conversation. A pack of cards is an object, a volume, it is NOT a book , this is the brainchild of the “extra-Gutenberg” existence of verbal culture.

A special place among conceptualists is occupied by Timur Yurievich Kibirov(b. 1955). Using the technical methods of conceptualism, he comes to a different interpretation of the Soviet past than that of his senior comrades in the shop. We can talk about a kind critical sentimentalism Kibirov, which manifested itself in such poems as "To the Artist Semyon Faibisovich", "Just Say the Word "Russia"...", "Twenty Sonnets to Sasha Zapoeva". Traditional poetic themes and genres are not at all subjected to total and destructive deconstruction by Kibirov. For example, the theme of poetic creativity is developed by him in poems - friendly messages to "L. S. Rubinstein", "Love, Komsomol and spring. D. A. Prigov", etc. In this case, one cannot speak of the death of the Author: the activity of the author "is manifested in the peculiar lyricism of Kibirov's poems and poems, in their tragicomic coloring. His poetry embodied the worldview of a man at the end of history, who is in a situation of cultural vacuum and suffers from this ("Draft answer to Gugolev").

The central figure of modern Russian postmodernism can be considered Vladimir Georgievich Sorokin(b. 1955). The beginning of his work, which took place in the mid-1980s, firmly links the writer with conceptualism. He did not lose this connection in his subsequent works, although the current stage of his work, of course, is wider than the conceptualist canon. Sorokin is a great stylist; the subject of depiction and reflection in his work is precisely style - both Russian classical and Soviet literature. L. S. Rubinshtein very accurately described Sorokin's creative strategy:

"All his works - diverse thematically and genre - are built, in essence, on the same technique. I would designate this technique as "hysteria of style." Sorokin does not describe so-called life situations - language (mainly literary language), its state and movement in time is the only (genuine) drama that occupies the conceptual literature<...>The language of his works<...>as if he goes crazy and begins to behave inappropriately, which in fact is the adequacy of a different order. It is as lawless as it is lawful."

Indeed, Vladimir Sorokin's strategy consists in a ruthless clash of two discourses, two languages, two incompatible cultural layers. Philosopher and philologist Vadim Rudnev describes this technique as follows:

"Most often, his stories are built according to the same scheme. At the beginning, there is an ordinary, slightly overly juicy parodic Sotsart text: a story about a hunt, a Komsomol meeting, a meeting of the party committee - but suddenly it happens completely unexpectedly and unmotivated<...>a breakthrough into something terrible and terrible, which, according to Sorokin, is real reality. As if Pinocchio pierced a canvas with a painted hearth with his nose, but found there not a door, but something like what is shown in modern horror films.

Texts by V. G. Sorokin began to be published in Russia only in the 1990s, although he began to write actively 10 years earlier. In the mid-1990s, the main works of the writer, created in the 1980s, were published. and already known abroad: the novels "Queue" (1992), "Norma" (1994), "Marina's Thirtieth Love" (1995). In 1994, Sorokin wrote the story "Hearts of Four" and the novel "Roman". His novel "Blue Fat" (1999) gets quite scandalous fame. In 2001, a collection of new short stories "Feast" was published, and in 2002 - the novel "Ice", where the author allegedly breaks with conceptualism. Sorokin's most representative books are Roman and Feast.

Ilyin I.P. Postmodernism: Words, terms. M., 2001. S. 56.

Bitov A. We woke up in an unfamiliar country: Journalism. L., 1991. S. 62.

Rubinshtein L. S. What can τντ say... // Index. M., 1991. S. 344.

Cit. Quoted from: The Art of Cinema. 1990. No. 6.

Rudnev V.P. Dictionary of culture of the XX century: Key concepts and texts. M., 1999. S. 138.

Why is the literature of Russian postmodernism so popular? Everyone can relate to works that relate to this phenomenon in different ways: some may like them, some may not, but they still read such literature, so it is important to understand why it attracts readers so much? Perhaps young people, as the main audience for such works, after leaving school, "overfed" by classical literature (which is undoubtedly beautiful) want to breathe in fresh "postmodernism", albeit somewhere rough, somewhere even awkward, but so new and very emotional.

Russian postmodernism in literature dates back to the second half of the 20th century, when people brought up on realistic literature were shocked and bewildered. After all, the deliberate non-worship of the laws of literary and speech etiquette, the use of obscene language were not inherent in traditional trends.

The theoretical foundations of postmodernism were laid in the 1960s by French scientists and philosophers. Its Russian manifestation is different from the European one, but it would not have been so without its “progenitor”. It is believed that the postmodern beginning in Russia was laid when in 1970. Venedikt Erofeev creates the poem "Moscow-Petushki". This work, which we have carefully analyzed in this article, has a strong influence on the development of Russian postmodernism.

Brief description of the phenomenon

Postmodernism in literature is a large-scale cultural phenomenon that captured all spheres of art towards the end of the 20th century, replacing the no less well-known phenomenon of “modernism”. There are several basic principles of postmodernism:

• The world as a text;
• Death of the Author;
• Birth of a reader;
• Scriptor;
• Lack of canons: there is no good and bad;
• pastiche;
• Intertext and intertextuality.

Since the main idea in postmodernism is that the author can no longer write anything fundamentally new, the idea of ​​“the death of the Author” is being created. This means, in essence, that the writer is not the author of his books, since everything has already been written before him, and what follows is only quoting previous creators. That is why the author in postmodernism does not play a significant role, reproducing his thoughts on paper, he is just someone who presents what was written earlier in a different way, coupled with his personal style of writing, his original presentation and characters.

"The death of the author" as one of the principles of postmodernism gives rise to another idea that the text initially does not have any meaning invested by the author. Since a writer is only a physical reproducer of something that has already been written before, he cannot put his subtext where there can be nothing fundamentally new. It is from here that another principle is born - “the birth of a reader”, which means that it is the reader, and not the author, who puts his own meaning into what he read. The composition, the lexicon chosen specifically for this style, the character of the characters, main and secondary, the city or place where the action takes place, excites in him his personal feelings from what he read, prompts him to search for the meaning that he initially lays on his own from the first lines he read.

And it is this principle of “the birth of a reader” that carries one of the main messages of postmodernism - any interpretation of the text, any attitude, any sympathy or antipathy for someone or something has the right to exist, there is no division into “good” and “bad” ”, as it happens in traditional literary movements.

In fact, all of the above postmodern principles carry the same meaning - the text can be understood in different ways, can be accepted in different ways, it can sympathize with someone, but not with someone, there is no division into "good" and " evil”, anyone who reads this or that work understands it in his own way and, based on his inner sensations and feelings, cognizes himself, and not what is happening in the text. When reading, a person analyzes himself and his attitude to what he read, and not the author and his attitude to it. He will not look for the meaning or subtext laid down by the writer, because it does not exist and cannot be, he, that is, the reader, will rather try to find what he himself puts into the text. We said the most important thing, you can read the rest, including the main features of postmodernism.

Representatives

There are quite a few representatives of postmodernism, but I would like to talk about two of them: Alexei Ivanov and Pavel Sanaev.

1. Alexei Ivanov is an original and talented writer who has appeared in Russian literature of the 21st century. It has been nominated three times for the National Bestseller Award. Laureate of the literary awards "Eureka!", "Start", as well as D.N. Mamin-Sibiryak and named after P.P. Bazhov.
2. Pavel Sanaev is an equally bright and outstanding writer of the 20th and 21st centuries. Laureate of the magazine "October" and "Triumph" for the novel "Bury me behind the plinth."

Examples

The geographer drank away the globe

Aleksey Ivanov is the author of such well-known works as The Geographer Drank His Globe Away, Dormitory on the Blood, Heart of Parma, The Gold of Riot, and many others. The first novel is heard mainly in films with Konstantin Khabensky in the title role, but the novel on paper is no less interesting and exciting than on the screen.

The Geographer Drank His Globe Away is a novel about a school in Perm, about teachers, about obnoxious children, and about an equally obnoxious geographer, who by profession is not a geographer at all. The book contains a lot of irony, sadness, kindness and humor. This creates a feeling of complete presence at the events taking place. Of course, as it suits the genre, there is a lot of veiled obscene and very original vocabulary here, and also the presence of jargon of the lowest social environment is the main feature.

The whole story seems to keep the reader in suspense, and now, when it seems that something should work out for the hero, this elusive ray of the sun is about to peek out from behind the gray gathering clouds, as the reader goes on a rampage again, because the luck and well-being of the heroes are limited only by the reader's hope for their existence somewhere at the end of the book.

This is what characterizes the story of Alexei Ivanov. His books make you think, get nervous, empathize with the characters or get angry at them somewhere, be perplexed or laugh at their witticisms.

Bury Me Behind the Baseboard

As for Pavel Sanaev and his emotional work Bury Me Behind the Plinth, it is a biographical story written by the author in 1994 based on his childhood, when he lived in his grandfather's family for nine years. The protagonist is the boy Sasha, a second-grader whose mother, not caring much about her son, puts him in the care of his grandmother. And, as we all know, it is contraindicated for children to stay with their grandparents for more than a certain period, otherwise there is either a colossal conflict based on misunderstanding, or, like the protagonist of this novel, everything goes much further, up to mental problems and a spoiled childhood.

This novel makes a stronger impression than, for example, The Geographer Drank His Globe Away or anything else from this genre, since the main character is a child, a boy who has not yet matured. He cannot change his life on his own, somehow help himself, as the characters of the aforementioned work or Dorm-on-Blood could do. Therefore, there is much more sympathy for him than for the others, and there is nothing to be angry with him for, he is a child, a real victim of real circumstances.

In the process of reading, again, there are jargon of the lowest social level, obscene language, numerous and very catchy insults towards the boy. The reader is constantly indignant at what is happening, he wants to quickly read the next paragraph, the next line or page to make sure that this horror is over, and the hero has escaped from this captivity of passions and nightmares. But no, the genre does not allow anyone to be happy, so this very tension drags on for all 200 book pages. The ambiguous actions of the grandmother and mother, the independent “digestion” of everything that happens on behalf of a little boy, and the presentation of the text itself are worth reading this novel.

Hostel-on-the-blood

Dormitory-on-the-Blood is a book by Alexei Ivanov, already known to us, the story of one student hostel, exclusively within the walls of which, by the way, most of the story takes place. The novel is saturated with emotions, because we are talking about students whose blood boils in their veins and youthful maximalism seethes. However, despite this some recklessness and recklessness, they are great lovers of philosophical conversations, talk about the universe and God, judge each other and blame, repent of their actions and make excuses for them. And at the same time, they have absolutely no desire to even slightly improve and make their existence easier.

The work is literally replete with an abundance of obscene language, which at first may repel someone from reading the novel, but even so, it is worth reading.

Unlike previous works, where the hope for something good faded already in the middle of reading, here it regularly lights up and goes out throughout the book, so the ending hits the emotions so hard and excites the reader so much.

How does postmodernism manifest itself in these examples?

What a hostel, what the city of Perm, what the house of Sasha Savelyev’s grandmother are strongholds of everything bad that lives in people, everything that we are afraid of and what we always try to avoid: poverty, humiliation, grief, insensitivity, self-interest, vulgarity and other things. Heroes are helpless, regardless of their age and social status, they are victims of circumstances, laziness, alcohol. Postmodernism in these books is manifested literally in everything: in the ambiguity of the characters, and in the reader's uncertainty about his attitude towards them, and in the vocabulary of the dialogues, and in the hopelessness of the existence of the characters, in their pity and despair.

These works are very difficult for receptive and over-emotional people, but you will not be able to regret what you read, because each of these books contains nutritious and useful food for thought.

Interesting? Save it on your wall!

Representatives of POSTMODERNISM in the literature of the 20th century of the country ... works?

1. In the works of theorists and practitioners of postmodernism (R. Venturi, M. Culot, L. Krie, A. Rossi, A. Gryumbako), the following postulates are formulated:
   "imitation" of historical monuments and "models";
   "references" to a well-known architectural monument in the general composition or its details;
   work in "styles" (historical and architectural);
   "reverse archeology" - bringing a new object in accordance with the old construction technique;
   "everyday life of realism and antiquity", carried out by a certain "belittlement" or simplification of the applied classical forms.
   Postmodernism as a movement in literature, art, philosophy emerges in the West in the late 60s. This term combines a wide range of diverse cultural processes: the absence of a single value center, a critical attitude towards global ideologies and utopias, attention to marginal social groups (bottom people), the search for a synthesis between art and mass culture. Russian postmodernism is characterized by inflation of basic values ​​(communist utopias), the effect of the disappearance of reality - the world is perceived as a huge multi-level and multi-valued text, consisting of a chaotic interweaving of various cultural languages, quotations, paraphrases. The postmodernist writer enters into a kind of dialogue with chaos, collecting fragments of various languages ​​of cultures, looking for compromises between the base and the sublime, mockery and pathos, integrity and fragmentation; life and death (A. Bitov, V. Erofeev, Sokolov), fantasy and reality (Tolstaya, Pelevin), memory and oblivion (Sharov), law and absurdity (V. Erofeev, Pietsukh), personal and impersonal (Prigov, Kibirov) . The main principle of the poetics of postmodernism is oxymoron.
   Russian postmodernism began with A. Bitov's novel Pushkin House. The aesthetic searches of S. Sokolov are going on in a peculiar way. He defiantly violates the most important postulate, bringing to the arena of the text the actual figure of the author of the novel, leading a conversation with the hero-student (School for Fools).
   http://bank.orenipk.ru/Text/t37_20.htm
   Russian post-modernists, to one degree or another, are the writers Vladimir Nabokov, Viktor Pelevin, Vladimir Sorokin, Sasha Sokolov, Venedikt Erofeev. All of them, except for Vladimir Sorokin in the early period of his work and Viktor Pelevin in the later period, are quite moderate and skillfully construct their own unique artistic world without an aggressive attack on the old culture.
2. Postmodernism in American literature is associated primarily with the names of the founders of the school of black humor, which include John Bart, Thomas Pynchon, James Patrick Dunleavy and Donald Bartelmy. As influential postmodernists, such writers as Don DeLillo, Julian Barnes, William Gibson, Vladimir Nabokov, John Fowles and others are singled out.

   Russian post-modernists, to one degree or another, are the writers Vladimir Nabokov, Viktor Pelevin, Vladimir Sorokin, Sasha Sokolov, Venedikt Erofeev. All of them, except for Vladimir Sorokin in the early period of his work and Viktor Pelevin in the later period, are quite moderate and skillfully construct their own unique artistic world without an aggressive attack on the old culture.

1. New!

   (Option 1) One of the problems that have worried and, obviously, will worry humanity throughout all the centuries of its existence, is the problem of the relationship between man and nature. The subtlest lyric poet and a wonderful connoisseur of nature Afanasy Afanasyevich ...

2. New!

   The turn of the XIX-XX centuries. - the beginning of modern times, which became the era of transition from regional cultures to global culture, the era of the flourishing of civilization, but also the time of world wars and revolutions. Periodization. Modern times include three periods: ...

3. New!

   The Roman Empire fell, and with its fall a great era ended, crowned with laurels of wisdom, knowledge, beauty, majesty, brilliance. With its fall, the advanced civilization came to an end, the light of which will be revived only after ten centuries - ...

4. New!

   After all, its founder himself, “the singer of the sufferings of the people,” Nikolai Nekrasov, proclaimed that one may not be a poet, but one must certainly be a citizen. XIX Art. ended the same way it began - under the volleys of cannons and shots of guns: in 1871 in France ...

5. New!

   "Children's literature" we mean books written specifically for children, and books that were written for adults, but are considered children's. Fairy tales by G.-Kh. Andersen, Alice in Wonderland by L. Carroll, Prisoner of the Caucasus...

6. New!

   At first I wanted to start this chapter with a story about the literary and creative circle of the Balashov Pedagogical Institute, but then I realized that this was the topic of a separate book. The work of the circle members was especially intensive and fruitful in the 60s - the first half of the 70s, when about ...

The study of the problem "Realism and postmodernism in Russian literature of the late 20th century" returns - page No. 1/1

I.A. Kostyleva

(Vladimir,

Vladimir State Pedagogical University)
REALISM AND POSTMODERNISM

IN RUSSIAN LITERATURE OF THE END OF THE 20TH CENTURY

IN UNIVERSITY STUDIES.

The study of the problem “Realism and postmodernism in Russian literature of the late 20th century” brings us back to the end of the last century, especially since, as a rule, “history repeats itself”. A century ago, in 1893, D.S. Merezhkovsky, in his program article “On the Causes of the Decline and New Trends in Modern Russian Literature”, speaking about the emergence of modernism (symbolism) in Russian literature, emphasized: “Our time should be defined by two opposite features - this is the time of the most extreme materialism and at the same time passionate ideal impulses of the spirit. We are present at a great, meaningful struggle between two views on life, two diametrically opposed worldviews…”. 1 Characteristic features of the ideal, i.e. anti-realist poetry, in his words, is “the pursuit of elusive shades, of the dark and unconscious in our sensibility.” 2 K. Balmont, criticizing realism, clarified: “Realists are always mere observers… Realists are caught, like a surf, by concrete life, beyond which they see nothing…”. 3

Realistic art at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries was really in crisis, and modernism powerfully announced itself with the emergence of symbolism, acmeism, futurism, expressionism, impressionism, etc. Reflecting on the reasons for the “decline and new trends”, S.N. Trubetskoy in the article “Superfluous people and heroes of our time” (1901) refers to the work of M. Gorky as a phenomenon of a new order in the literature of realism and emphasizes the reasons for the emergence of new heroes (tramps - Nietzscheans), new moods and problems - the main of these reasons is a crisis of faith. “Both superfluous people and our super-humans are born by the same disintegration of the “old framework”, the decomposition of the traditional foundations of life and customs in the complete absence of new viable and life-giving beliefs.” 4 In place of old beliefs, “surrogates” appeared, and for those “to whom they are disgusted, there remains a great spiritual emptiness.” 5

G. Fedotov in his work “The Struggle for Art” (1935) also raises the question of the crisis, the decomposition of traditional realism and the reasons for the rapid growth of modernist trends in the literature of the 20th century. G. Fedotov writes: “We are far from the idea, familiar to the 19th century (Plato!) that art is a reflection of reality. But for us, the position of modern Formalists, for whom art is a form of play completely unrelated to reality (plot), is completely unacceptable. The relationship between art and life is very complex.” 6 Art, from the point of view of the researcher, is creative, creating a new form of activity. “The Christian character of the ethics of realists is indisputable ... The main originality of realism and its creative merit lies in the conquest of the sensual world, as well as the social world, in which an old person educated in Christian ethics is placed,” the philosopher asserts. 7

However, in the 20th century, according to the thinker, the final decomposition of realism takes place as the loss of the integrity of the world outlook; the artist sees and depicts only fragments of a disintegrated world, in which human destiny becomes a mystery, in art "the first involuntary" estrangement "of the world" takes place. The withering away of ethics (a reaction against moralism), the triumph of aesthetics (sensations), the loss of the human “I” are the characteristic features of modernism in its most diverse varieties (impressionism, futurism, constructivism, etc.) - a culture of formal perfection that marked the collapse of old forms. “Man, the core of the world, has broken into a stream of experiences, lost the center of his unity, dissolved in processes.” 8

According to G. Fedotov, such art does not carry a life-giving, healing power, it is hostile to man and acts destructively. Salvation of art is possible only in one way - in the return to the religious fundamental principle of life. Otherwise, we are dealing with an “inflation of values” (F. Stepun) where a penny is hidden behind terrible names.

In Russian literature of the late 20th century, the question of the death of realism, the decline of literature, its crisis, the emergence of postmodern literature on the ruins of realism is again raised. The range of opinions is very wide: from a nihilistic attitude towards realism or postmodernism, respectively, to the absolutization of one or another direction.

The problem of realism as a literary movement. considered repeatedly in our literary criticism (see the works of V.M. Zhirmunsky, V.V. Vinogradov, L.Ya. Ginzburg, G.A. Gukovsky, M.M. Bakhtin, etc.). V.M. Zhirmunsky, defining the classical realism of the 19th century as a truthful, critical depiction of modern social life in socially typical persons and circumstances (“Literary movements as an international phenomenon”), makes a fair conclusion that any literary movement is not a closed system, but an open one. , which is in the process of development ... Therefore, between individual literary trends and styles, there are always phenomena of a transitional nature.

V.M. Markovich (“Pushkin and realism. Some results and perspectives of studying the problem”) believes that in the literature of realism a “close” distance between verbal art and reality is created, which allowed art to get as close as possible to reality, to enter into it and that’s it. -the same “stay out”, i.e. appear as a semblance of life and at the same time its continuation. 9 In "high" realism, "next to the empirical plane" inevitably appears a mystical plane, which makes it possible to correlate everyday everyday life with "the last mysteries of being." 10 V. M. Markovich implies the mythopoeticization of novel plots, the introduction of legends, utopias and prophecies into them, a metatypical (or archetypal) interpretation of characters, etc.

Realism in Russian literature of the late 20th century is widely represented: both in the classical version (V. Rasputin, V. Astafiev, A. Solzhenitsyn, V. Belov, B. Ekimov, S. Zalygin, G. Vladimov), and in transitional ones, “ synthetic” forms, for which E. Zamyatin so ardently advocated in his time in his theoretical and critical articles and, of course, in his own work (“On Synthetism”, “On Literature, Revolution, Entropy and Others”, “We”) , arguing that true art is always a synthesis, where “realism is the thesis, symbolism is the antithesis, and now there is a new, third, synthesis, where there will be both a microscope of realism and telescopic glass of symbolism leading to infinity” (“New Russian prose). The assimilation of modernist trends by realism (see the work of E. Zamyatin) does not imply a departure from reality, but a deeper comprehension of it.

Realistic prose of the late 20th century, as already noted, is represented by various names. A. Solzhenitsyn again turned to the genre of the story. “You can put a lot in a small form, and it is a great pleasure for an artist to work on a small form. Because in a small form you can hone the edges with great pleasure for yourself, ”the writer believes. The new stories by A. Solzhenitsyn “On the Breaks”, “Ego”, “On the Edges”, “Young People”, “Apricot Jam” noticeably differ from the classic “Matryona Dvor” by a large proportion of publicism, historicism in its most concrete sense. The publicity of the style, the sharpness of the conflict, the uncompromising position, the tragedy of the narration are also emphasized in terms of plot and composition: the stories are called two-part stories. Expression of style, oversaturation, concentration of content involuntarily return us to the work of E. Zamyatin, about whom A. Solzhenitsyn wrote a vivid critical article, admiring his “provocatively brief brightness in portraits and his energetic condensed syntax.” 11 A. Solzhenitsyn defined the style of E. Zamyatin as “excellent male speech”. It seems that this is the self-determination of the author, A. Solzhenitsyn himself, who in his stories also teaches lessons in energetic presentation, jerky, catchy manner. Two-part stories are always a duel of ideas, images, styles. So, in the story “Young”, two cultures, two ideologies, two destinies, two images collide: an engineer, associate professor Vozdvizhensky and a student - a worker's faculty member Konoplev, a Russian intellectual and an investigator of the GPU. There are no detailed descriptions, detailed psychological characteristics in the story. As Chekhov wrote, the main thing in the story: the absence of “long eruptions”, solid objectivity, truthfulness in the description of characters and objects, extreme brevity, courage and originality, cordiality, lack of common places. 12 Behind the dynamism of the narrative in A. Solzhenitsyn's story is the intensity of the struggle, the drama of the era, the fate of the people and the fate of man, and the author is silent about the main thing, taking the drama into subtext. A. Solzhenitsyn's small genre, like all his work, explores not only and not so much the class, but the universal, existential, existential: behind the fate of the heroes, inexorably “last” questions arise. The story "Nastenka" is an acutely dramatic story about the fate of women in the revolution; moreover, A. Solzhenitsyn avoids compromise - either betrayal, self-destruction, moral death, or overcoming, purification, resistance in spite of everything. “Apricot Jam” is also a story - a dialogue and at the same time a duel of two voices: a dispossessed peasant, appealing for mercy, and a famous Writer, admiring the primordial language of tragic writing and indifferent to the fate of its author.

A. Solzhenitsyn continues the Russian novelistic realistic tradition: a minimum of poetic means with a maximum of content, while the word has a huge semantic load. The story of “Ego” about the participants in the Tambov uprising, about the betrayal of one of its leaders - Ektov, who chose the pseudonym Ego (symbolic!), is distinguished by a special drama. The tension of this story brings us back to the works of E. Zamyatin: to depict only the main thing, not a single secondary feature, “only the essence, extract, synthesis ... when all feelings are collected in focus, compressed, sharpened ...”. 13 The author seems to be in a hurry to express everything that he has accumulated over a long life, so the stories of A. Solzhenitsyn are an organic addition to the writer's epic.

V. Rasputin stubbornly continues his theme in Russian realistic prose, he is still faithful both to the precepts of the classics of the 19th century, and to the principles and aesthetics of “village prose”. The phenomenon of "village prose" includes "philosophical, historical-social, psychological, ethical and aesthetic aspects". 14 According to modern researchers (Z.A. Nedzvetsky “Predecessors and origins of “village” prose”), this direction has a strong foundation - Russian classical literature of the 19th century. As F.M. Dostoevsky wrote, “morality, stability in society, calmness and maturity of the land and order in the state (industry and any economic well-being, too) depend on the degree and success of land ownership. If land ownership and economy are weak, sprawling, disorderly, then there is no state, no citizenship, no morality, no love in God. 15

V. Rasputin at the end of the century, like A. Solzhenitsyn, turned to the genre of the story, without changing the “structure” of his work, its ethical and aesthetic coordinates. Perhaps, these stories became more topical, publicistic, declarative (as in “Fire”). To the question “Where to get strength?” to continue the tradition, fidelity to the ideal, V. Rasputin answers: “From Pushkin and Dostoevsky, from Tyutchev and Shmelev, Glinka and Sviridov, from the field of Kulikov and Borodino, from December 41st near Moscow and November 42nd near Stalingrad, from the resurrected Temple Christ the Savior, from the pure eyes of some village boy, in which stands Eternal Russia…”. 16 In the new stories “To the same land”, “Suddenly, unexpectedly”, “The hut”, modernity is connected with the content of life, journalism with ontological problems. The ideal of V. Rasputin is the same, the nostalgic image of the Russian village as a symbol of the small and large motherland remains the same, the image of “the wise old woman, the keeper of centuries-old morality and tribal purity” has been and remains an invariable part of it. 17 At the center of his stories ("The Hut") is the personality of "a people's peasant warehouse, whose consciousness and behavior is determined primarily by a sense of duty, formed by the whole way of life of a farmer." 18 This is a duty to the land, to nature, with which the farmer is organically connected, a duty to his peasant ancestors, a duty to his family.

The hut becomes the central symbol, the center of the peasant cosmos, about which S. Yesenin wrote in “The Keys of Mary”: likening things to their gentle hearths. 19

The story “The Hut” belongs to the level of realistic art that F.M. Dostoevsky called realism in the “highest sense”, where an objective picture of the world, “in socially typical persons and circumstances” (V.M. Zhirmunsky) is combined with myth, with mystery.

The hut is at the center of the story about the difficult peasant fate, just as the plot-compositional, semantic, symbolic center of “Farewell to Matera” is not the image of Daria, but the image of Matera herself, mother - earth, mother - nature, the entire peasant cosmos. The image of the hut opens and ends the story; all the vicissitudes of the plot, all concrete social, everyday and ontological issues are connected with this mythology. The social and at the same time existential plans of the narrative continue the tragic theme of “Farewell to Mother”, “Fire” - the theme of life after “death”, that is, after flooding. Moreover, both in the former and in the new life of the main character of Agafya’s story, there was and is no harmony, harmony, peace: the death of her husband in the war, early widowhood, loneliness with a living daughter, inescapable peasant need (“once and for all she dried her tears”) . Time seems to have stopped for all the heroes of this “non-existent” life and earth, the space has narrowed, lost its former scope and scope. The very image of Agafya is traditional for V. Rasputin and for rural prose in general: inner beauty and spiritual strength with external everydayness and even anti-poetry (the image of an old woman), the same desire to understand oneself, to realize the meaning of one's own existence. Agafya's existential anguish is expressed in her own words: “I am like a drowned mermaid, wandering here and calling someone ... I call and call. And who do I call? Old life? I don't know... Calling someone I want to call. If I knew for sure: if I didn’t get enough, life would have become disgusting long ago. ” 20 The moral imperative that the heroine is guided by does not allow her to give up. G. Fedotov rightly wrote (“The Struggle for Art”) that in classical realism “Christianity still remains an invisible, illuminating and warming force, like the sun that has just disappeared behind the horizon ... Never before in the two millennia of the Christian era has a culture of compassion, for example, and the culture of conscience has not reached such refinement.” 21

The theme of life, struggle (restoration of the hut) and death of Agafia, as already noted, is revealed in parallel in everyday and existential aspects. It is no coincidence that prophetic, prophetic dreams of Agafya appear in the story. The first one seems to be burying Agafya in her own hut, which does not fit in a huge pit, the second one is also dying, where she is surrounded by her closest people. The symbolism of the first dream points to the idea of ​​the story - the blood connection of the heroine with the peasant hut, the peasant world.

The hut is the central mythopoetic image of the story with its “biography”, “portrait characteristic”, independent inner life. She is likened to a heroine, after flooding the hut is transferred to a new place and restored in parts, reborn to a new life. After the death of Agafya, the hut continues to keep her warmth, her dignity, external and internal becoming; no one lives in this hut, but here “only souls speak inaudibly and in harmony.” Numb, careless, cold, mournful, lifeless, dead without a grave, bringing heavy anguish to the living, this hut comes back to life by the will of the author. The hut becomes a criterion of the value of the world, a standard of spirituality. “There was something to think about, from here it might seem that the whole world is wearing out, he looked so tired, even his joy was so worn out.” But! “In the remnants of this life, in its final squalor, they are clearly dormant and, it seems, will respond, if you call out, such perseverance, such endurance, built in here from the very beginning, that there is no measure for them.” 22

The controversy about postmodernism in Russian literature of the late 20th century is in many respects similar to the situation at the end of the last century, with the only difference being that contemporary art strives for other values, and the problems of the unknown and the unknowable are of little concern to it. Modern postmodernism has its roots in the avant-garde art of the beginning of the century, in the poetics and aesthetics of expressionism, the literature of the absurd, the world of V. Rozanov, Zoshchenko's tale, the work of V. Nabokov. The picture of postmodernist prose is very colorful, many-sided, there are also a lot of transitional phenomena. Stable stereotypes of postmodern works have developed, a certain set of artistic techniques that have become a kind of cliche, designed to express the crisis state of the world at the end of the century and the millennium: “the world as chaos”, “the world as a text”, “crisis of authorities”, pastiche, narrative essayism, eclecticism, game, total irony, “exposing the device”, “the power of writing”, its outrageous and grotesque character, etc. Postmodernism is an attempt to overcome once again the traditional and immortal realism with its absolute values, it is a global revision of classical fiction. The irony of postmodernism lies primarily in the impossibility of its existence both without modernism and without realism, which give this phenomenon a certain depth and significance. A. Solzhenitsyn in his "Reply to the Literary Award of the American National Arts Club" (1993) very critically assesses postmodern art, which does not contain any values, locks itself into itself, and testifies to the moral illness of the entire modern society. He is deeply convinced, and one cannot but agree with the writer on this, that on the neglect of higher meanings, on the relativism of concepts and culture itself, nothing worthy can be created.

Domestic postmodern literature went through a certain process of “crystallization” before taking shape in accordance with the new canons. At first it was “different”, “new”, “hard”, “alternative” Wen's prose. Erofeev, A. Bitov, L. Petrushevskaya, S. Kaledin, V. Pelevin, V. Makanin, V. Pietsukha, and others. its dystopian, nihilistic, lumpen consciousness and hero (see tramps - the heroes of M. Gorky), harsh, negative, anti-aesthetic style, comprehensive irony, citation, excessive associativity, intertextuality. Gradually, it was postmodern literature with its proper postmodern sensibility and absolutization of the Game that stood out from the general stream of alternative prose. However, nothing fundamentally new in this direction could not be created, because. installation on the “game mode of existence” is far from new and in Russian literature of the late 20th century was a passed stage (Oberiuts) with the only difference that D. Kharms, N. Zabolotsky, A. Vvedensky were the first and original masters, artists of this kind.

In the literature of the end of the century, there are many works of a “synthetic”, polysemantic, polystylistic, polyvalent plan. Just as at the end of the past, the beginning of this century it was difficult for a realist to avoid modernist influence, so in the modern literary situation there are many similar examples, for example, the work of V. Makanin, balancing on the verge of realism (“Prisoner of the Caucasus”) and postmodernism (“Laz ”, “Underground or Hero of our time”). The short story "Laz", noticed by critics, brought us back to E. Zamyatin, his novel "We", which had a strong influence on the state of literature of the 20th century. Much more successful is the novel "Underground or Hero of Our Time", which, of course, continues the tradition of "Laz" but on a different material. The novel, at first glance, corresponds to many signs of postmodernism: it is a continuous intertext, an encyclopedia of various kinds of quotations (at the level of a theme, hero, image, style), ironically interpreted. The conscious attitude towards secondary nature, literary centrism, the perception of the world as a large text is already stated in the very title and table of contents: “Nov”, “Malevich's Square”, “Little Man Tetelin”, “Dulychov and Others”, “I Met You”, “Dog's Scherzo ”, “Ward number one”, “Double”, “One day of Venedikt Petrovich”. On the pages of the novel-essay, the image of Platonov with an “underground broom” appears as the forerunner of postmodernism, the binary opposition Moscow-Petersburg, the image and motives of the Gorky bottom, the theme of a man from the underground of F. Dostoevsky, images and reminiscences from the works of I.S. Turgenev ( democracy of the first call), N. Gogol (the theme of the “little man”), M. Bulgakov (“Heart of a Dog”), etc. a name that combines two strongest traditions: M.Yu. Lermontov and F.M. Dostoevsky, where from the novel by M.Yu. Of course, V. Nabokov, who loves to make riddles to his readers, is also remembered as a forerunner of postmodernist creativity, including this work.

V. Makanin (jokingly or seriously? The text is ambivalent) sneers at the “great virus” of Russian literature that has infected Russian society, but he himself seems to be seriously ill with this disease. The protagonist, the underground writer, Petrovich repeats the path of Raskolnikov, his painful thoughts, and pays the highest price for his crimes, but in the end, he retains his “I”, his human honor, his literary dignity.

NOTES.

1. 
   Merezhkovsky D.S. On the Causes of the Decline and New Trends in Modern Russian Literature // Poetic Trends in Russian Literature in the Late 19th – Early 20th Century. M., 1988. P.48.
2. 
   There. P.50.
3. 
   Balmont K.D. Elementary words about symbolic poetry // Poetic trends in Russian literature of the late 19th - early 20th centuries. M., 1988. P.54.
4. 
   Trubetskoy S.N. Superfluous people and heroes of our time // Questions of Literature. 1990. September. P.143.
5. 
   There. P.143.
6. 
   Fedotov G. Struggle for art // Questions of literature. 1990. February. S. 214.
7. 
   There. P.216.
8. 
   There. P.220.
9. 
   Markovich V.M. Pushkin and realism. Some results and prospects for studying the problem // Markovich V.M. Pushkin and Lermontov in the history of Russian literature. SPb., 1997. S. 121.
10. 
    There. S. 127.
11. 
    Solzhenitsyn A. From Evgeny Zamyatin // New World. 1997. No. 10. S. 186.
12. 
    Grechnev V.Ya. Russian story of the late 19th - 20th century. L., 1979. S. 37.
13. 
    Zamyatin E. On Synthetism // Zamyatin Evgeniy. Selected works. M., 1990. S. 416.
14. 
    Bolshakova A.Yu. The phenomenon of village prose // Russian literature. 1999. No. 3. S. 15.
15. 
    Dostoevsky F.M. Full coll. cit.: V 30 t. L., 1972 - 1990. V. 21. S. 270.
16. 
    “Do the best, take the best.” Valentin Rasputin. Conversation with a writer // Roman - newspaper of the XXI century. 1999. No. 1. S. 6.
17. 
    Bolshakova A.Yu. The phenomenon of village prose // Russian literature. 1999. No. 3. S. 16.
18. 
    Nedzvetsky Z.A. “Family Thought” in the prose of Vasily Belov // Russian Literature. 2000. No. 1. S. 19.
19. 
    Yesenin Sergei. Full coll. op. M., 1998. S. 631.
20. 
    Rasputin Valentin. Izba // Roman - newspaper of the XXI century. 1999. No. 1. S. 28.
21. 
    Fedotov G. Struggle for art // Questions of literature. 1990 February. S. 215.
22. 
    Rasputin Valentin. Izba // Roman - newspaper of the XXI century. 1999. No. 1. S. 30.