scholarly journals S.I. Vavilov — Reader of Soviet Literature

2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 281-287
Author(s):  
Alexander Y. Samarin
Keyword(s):  
19Th Century ◽  
Ussr Academy ◽  
Russian Literature ◽  
Popular Science ◽  
Negative Perception ◽  
Critical Attitude ◽  
Soviet Literature ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
Aesthetic Preferences

The article analyzes the diary records of the outstanding Soviet physicist, Academician and President of the USSR Academy of Sciences Sergei Ivanovich Vavilov (1891—1951), dedicated to his reader’s perception of contemporary Soviet literature. Widely-read S.I. Vavilov collected his private library of 37 thousand volumes; he regularly visited bookstores, mainly antiquarian and second-hand bookshops. Despite the prevailing interest to the old books, S.I. Vavilov knew Soviet literature, used its images in his popular science works (S.A. Yesenin) and diary characteristics (I. Ilf and E. Petrov). The few diary entries with the assessments of the works of Soviet writers (A.N. Tolstoy, A.E. Korneychuk, K.I. Chukovsky, A. Bely, A.K. Vinogradov, V.V. Veresaev, M.A. Bulgakov, etc.) most commonly demonstrate critical attitude to them. It was defined by both his classical aesthetic preferences, formed in his youth on the material of Russian literature of the 19th century, and by his unflattering attitude to the Soviet reality, which Academician did not show publicly, allowing just certain statements in his private diaries. The generally negative perception of Soviet literature indicates that, contrary to the claims of some researchers, S.I. Vavilov was not a Stalinist and was quite sceptical of the socialist reality.

scholarly journals Raphael’s Genius as Reflected in V. A. Zhukovsky’s and A. S. Pushkin’s Works: to the Issue of W. H. Wackenroder’s Influence on Russian Literature

2021 ◽  
pp. 121-129
Author(s):  
К.А. Поташова
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
19Th Century ◽  
Russian Literature ◽  
Work Of Art ◽  
Moral Atmosphere ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Aesthetic Preferences

Новизна исследования связана с раскрытием уникальности синтеза вербального и визуального начал в художественном мышлении В. А. Жуковского и А. С. Пушкина посредством анализа механизмов встраивания живописного произведения в словесный образ. С опорой на анализ стихотворений «Недоконченная картина» А. С. Пушкина, «Преображение» С. П. Шевырёва, очерка В. А. Жуковского «Рафаэлева Мадонна» в сопоставлении с очерком В.-Г. Вакенродера «Видение Рафаэля» рассмотрено влияние эстетической системы Рафаэля на романтическую концепцию творчества художника, природы его вдохновения, заключающейся в ощущении Божественном присутствии. В статье определяется место эстетического очерка Жуковского «Рафаэлева Мадонна» в контексте развития романтического типа экфрасиса, основанного на замене описания визуального образа ассоциативным рядом, возникшим в процессе созерцания картины. Доказывается, что внимание романтиков к личности Рафаэля Санти обусловлено как общей духовно-нравственной атмосферой первой трети XIX века, так и глубоко личностным восприятием живописи В. А. Жуковским и А. С. Пушкиным. The theoretical novelty of the article consists in the investigation of the unique synthesis of verbal and visual aspects of V. A. Zhukovsky’s and A. S. Pushkin’s works. The comparative analysis of A. S. Pushkin’s “Unfinished Painting”, S. P. Shevyrev’s “Transfiguration”, V. A. Zhukovsky’s “The Sistine Madonna” and W. H. Wackenroder’s “Raphael’s Vision” focuses on the impact Raphael’s aesthetics produced on the romantic concept of a painter’s work, and spiritual inspiration. The article investigates Zhukovsky’s aesthetic essay “The Sistine Madonna” through the prism of ekphrastic works, association-based descriptions of a visual work of art. The article maintains that the romantic poets’ infatuation with Raphael Santi can be explained both by the spiritual and moral atmosphere of the first third of the 19th century and by V. A. Zhukovsky’s and A. S. Pushkin’s personal aesthetic preferences.

scholarly journals Suloisen etelän suojatit pohjoisen kuolemanmaisemassa

2016 ◽  
pp. 23-39
Author(s):  
Thekla Musäus
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
19Th Century ◽  
Russian Literature ◽  
Social Situation ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
The Social ◽  
Soviet Literature ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
North And South

The Children of the Sweet South in the Northern Land of Death. On the Opposition of North and South in Russian Literature from Romanticism up to Socialist Realism The starting point of the article is the semiotic theory of culturally coherent “semio-spheres”. The analysis focusses on the changing pictures of the northern parts of the Russian cultural area – Siberia, Karelia, and, in the 19th century, also Finland – in the works of Russian writers from Romanticism into the middle of the 20th century. The traditional juxtaposition of ‘north’ and ‘south’ as cultural, climatic and emotional opposites in Romanticism was inspired in part by admiration for Scandinavian sagas and landscapes. The European idealisation of the South was still valid in the poems of the Russian Romanticism. Embedded into the pictures of a wild and untouched northern nature was the ideal of a simple, rural society and the romantic imagery of the lonesome hero. In the Russian literature of the second half of the 19th century ‘north’ became an emotional centre in opposition to a spoiled, western cultural centre. Nevertheless, the Russian and Ukrainian South continued to be a place of longing for the imprisoned or exiled heroes in the hostile North. In Soviet literature, the communist project to improve the social situation of the toiling masses around the world led to a missionary’s attitude toward the outskirts of the Soviet Union. Russian heroes did not only bring civilisation to the uneducated Northern aborigines but by cultivating the harsh land they also added more civilized Southern nature to the Northern landscape.

“Against the Background of Pushkin”: S.I. Vavilov’s Speech at a Meeting at the Poet’s Monument in June 1949

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 550-559
Author(s):  
Aleksandr Yu. Samarin
Keyword(s):  
Literary Criticism ◽  
Communist Party ◽  
Ussr Academy ◽  
Russian Scientist ◽  
Critical Attitude ◽  
150Th Anniversary ◽  
Soviet State ◽  
The Press ◽  
Academy Of Sciences

The article introduces a previously unpublished speech of the outstanding Russian scientist-physicist, President of the USSR Academy of Sciences, academician Sergey Ivanovich Vavilov, which was delivered by him at the anniversary meeting held on June 5, 1949, at the monument to Alexander Pushkin in Moscow in connection with the celebration of the 150th anniversary of the great Russian poet’s birth. S.I. Vavilov was a great connoisseur of Pushkin’s poetry and literature about him. In the second half of the 1940s, Vavilov actively participated in projects to prepare the anniversary celebrations dedicated to Alexander Pushkin and perpetuate the memory of the poet. Analysis of S.I. Vavilov’s speech, which, unlike his other “Pushkin speeches”, was not intended for the press, shows that in evaluating the great poet’s work, along with the use of cliches, traditional for the epoch, the scientist also took certain liberties. In particular, he did not utter the ritual words praising Stalin, the Communist Party and the Soviet State. The poet Ya.P. Polonsky quoted by Vavilov was not among the classics recognized by Soviet literary criticism, and the selected quote from him could be interpreted as a hint of condemnation of the surrounding Stalinist reality. Numerous fragments of the scientist’s personal diaries indicate his critical attitude towards the latter, in particular.

Funding and Directing Research or Rewarding Scientific Achievements?

Nuncius ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 317-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrice Bret
Keyword(s):  
19Th Century ◽  
Royal Academy ◽  
The State ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Main Question ◽  
Technical Problems ◽  
Académie Des Sciences ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
Scientific Achievements

Abstract This study examines the science and technology prize system of the Académie des Sciences through a first survey of the prizes granted over the period extending from the 1720s to the end of the 19th century. No reward policy was envisaged by the Royal Academy of Sciences in the Réglement (statute) promulgated by King Louis XIV in 1699. Prizes were proposed later, first by private donors and then by the state, and awarded in international contests setting out specific scientific or technical problems for savants, inventors and artists to solve. Using cash prizes, under the Ancien Régime the Academy effectively directed and funded research for specific purposes set by donors. By providing it with significant extra funding, the donor-sponsored prizes progressively gave the Academy relative autonomy from the political power of the state. In the 19th century, with the growing awareness of the importance of scientific research, the main question became whether to use the prizes to reward past achievements or to incentivize future research, and the scale and nature of the prizes changed.

scholarly journals The Literary Portrait from Pushkin to Dostoevsky

2020 ◽  
pp. 86-104
Author(s):  
Elena V. Stepanian-Rumyantseva
Keyword(s):  
19Th Century ◽  
Russian Literature ◽  
Dynamic Nature ◽  
Human Personality ◽  
Literary Portraits ◽  
Existential Choice ◽  
Literary Portrait ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
Physical Resemblance ◽  
As If

The article explores the peculiarities of literary portraits and studies the interconnections and contrasts between painted and written portraits. The recognizability of a portrait in pictorial art is attained not only through physical resemblance but also through “artistic deformations” that the author introduces to the appearance of the portrayed. In a literary portrait, identification is achieved both by verbal and plastic detailing and by addressing the reader’s inner experience and imagination. Traditionally, the literary portrait in the Russian literature of the 19th century is based mostly on plastic characteristics, comparisons, and color accents, and because of this, it is often defined as “pictorial”. However, portraits by Pushkin and Dostoevsky stand out as exceptionally original, as if created from a different material. Pushkin avoids detailing, instead, he presents a “suggestive” portrait, i.e., a dynamic outline of the personality. The reader’s imagination is influenced not by details, but rather by the dynamic nature of Pushkin’s characters. Dostoevsky does not inherit Pushkin’s methods, though he also turns to a dynamic principle in describing the heroes of his novels. When they first appear, he presents them as if from different angles of vision, and their features may often be in discord, which makes the reader sense a contradictory impact of their personalities, as well as of their portraits. This kind of portrait is a dynamic message, where the reader follows the hero along unexpected and contrasting paths that the author previously mapped for him. From the beginning to the very end of their works, these two classics of Russian literature present the human personality as a being in a state of life-long development, always changing and always free in its existential choice.

Chuvash Nikita Bichurin (Iakinf) and Buryat Dorzhi Banzarov — famous researchers of ethnic culture of Mongols in the 19th century

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (12-3) ◽  
pp. 143-152
Author(s):  
Tikhon Sergeyev ◽  
Vitaly Orlov ◽  
Valery Andreev
Keyword(s):  
19Th Century ◽  
Ethnic Culture ◽  
Outstanding Scientist ◽  
Russian Academy Of Sciences ◽  
The People ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
The 19Th Century

The article shows the contribution of two representatives of multinational Russia of the 19th century to the study of the ethnic culture of the Mongols: the first corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences from the Chuvash, the founder of Sinology, an outstanding scientist-monk N. Ya. Bichurin (Fr. Iakinfa) (1777-1853) and the first Buryat scientist, the Buryat “Lomonosov”, Dorzhi Banzarov (1822-1855). Coming from the lower classes of the people, they became prominent representatives of the Russian democratic intelligentsia of the 19th century.

Russian Meteorological Investigations in China in the 19th Century

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatiana Feklova
Keyword(s):  
19Th Century ◽  
18Th Century ◽  
Far East ◽  
Scientific Network ◽  
Historical Archive ◽  
Russian State ◽  
Meteorological Observatory ◽  
History Of ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
The 19Th Century

The history of the Russian Magneto-Meteorological Observatory (RMMO) in Beijing has not been extensively researched. Sources for this information are Russian (the Russian State Historical Archive, Saint Petersburg Branch of the Archive of the Academy of Sciences, Russian National Library) and Chinese (the First Historical Archive of Beijing, the Library of the Shanghai Zikavey Observatory) archives. These archival materials can be scientifically and methodologically analyzed. At the beginning of the 18th century, the Russian Orthodox Mission (ROM) was founded in the territory of Beijing. Existing until 1955, the ROM performed an important role in the development of Russian–Chinese relations. Russian scientists could only work in Beijing through the ROM due to China’s policy of fierce self-isolation. The ROM became the center of Chinese academic studies and the first training school for Russian sinologists. From its very beginning, it was considered not only a church or diplomatic mission but a research center in close cooperation with the Russian Academy of Sciences. In this context, the RMMO made important weather investigations in China and the Far East in the 19th century. The RMMO, as well as its branch stations in China and Mongolia, part of a scientific network, represented an important link between Europe and Asia and was probably the largest geographical scientific network in the world at that time.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document