K. I. Chukovsky`s Nekrasov Questionnaire and D.S. Merezhkovsky

IF 0.1 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
E. A. Andrushchenko
{"title":"K. I. Chukovsky`s Nekrasov Questionnaire and D.S. Merezhkovsky","authors":"E. A. Andrushchenko","doi":"10.37816/2073-9567-2023-67-174-185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper examines D.S. Merezhkovsky’s responses to the famous Nekrasov questionnaire by K.I. Chukovsky, who presented it to his contemporaries by publishing some of the responses in “Chronicle of the Writers` club” (1921). In the preface he pointed out the modernists’ decisive role in reviving the poet’s legacy during the 20th century. In the second (1926) and third (1930) editions Chukovsky changed the list of surveyed poets, which suggests that as a publisher he intended to reflect the new literary hierarchy. In his three publications of the Nekrasov questionnaire he justified his decisions by the views he assumed while working with the material and by the current sociocultural situation. The paper focuses on the handwritten draft of D.S. Merezhkovsky’s responses (1919), which appeared partly in the first edition and were only fully published in 1988. Merezhkovsky was more outspoken than before in his judgement of Nekrasov’s poems about the people, suspecting poet`s speculation on this subject. He also exposed his true attitude to the “feminine” and “masculine” streams of the Russian culture. His responses to Chukovsky deconstructed the artificial concept that he had established in his works “Two mysteries of Russian poetry” and “The poet of eternal femininity”. His intuitively delicate and convincing definition of the currents of Russian culture ran into a contradiction with Nekrasov that emerged in his response. In truth he regarded Nekrasov as a figure of the “masculine” stream of culture, which is a driving, active, rather than a contemplative and passive creative element.","PeriodicalId":41255,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Slavianskikh Kultur-Bulletin of Slavic Cultures-Scientific and Informational Journal","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vestnik Slavianskikh Kultur-Bulletin of Slavic Cultures-Scientific and Informational Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37816/2073-9567-2023-67-174-185","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The paper examines D.S. Merezhkovsky’s responses to the famous Nekrasov questionnaire by K.I. Chukovsky, who presented it to his contemporaries by publishing some of the responses in “Chronicle of the Writers` club” (1921). In the preface he pointed out the modernists’ decisive role in reviving the poet’s legacy during the 20th century. In the second (1926) and third (1930) editions Chukovsky changed the list of surveyed poets, which suggests that as a publisher he intended to reflect the new literary hierarchy. In his three publications of the Nekrasov questionnaire he justified his decisions by the views he assumed while working with the material and by the current sociocultural situation. The paper focuses on the handwritten draft of D.S. Merezhkovsky’s responses (1919), which appeared partly in the first edition and were only fully published in 1988. Merezhkovsky was more outspoken than before in his judgement of Nekrasov’s poems about the people, suspecting poet`s speculation on this subject. He also exposed his true attitude to the “feminine” and “masculine” streams of the Russian culture. His responses to Chukovsky deconstructed the artificial concept that he had established in his works “Two mysteries of Russian poetry” and “The poet of eternal femininity”. His intuitively delicate and convincing definition of the currents of Russian culture ran into a contradiction with Nekrasov that emerged in his response. In truth he regarded Nekrasov as a figure of the “masculine” stream of culture, which is a driving, active, rather than a contemplative and passive creative element.
《涅克拉索夫问卷》与梅列日科夫斯基
本文考察了D.S.梅列日科夫斯基对著名的涅克拉索夫问卷的回答,该问卷由K.I.楚科夫斯基提出,楚科夫斯基在《作家俱乐部编年史》(1921)中发表了一些回答,并将其呈现给同时代的人。在序言中,他指出了现代主义者在20世纪复兴诗人遗产方面的决定性作用。在第二版(1926年)和第三版(1930年)中,丘科夫斯基改变了被调查诗人的名单,这表明作为出版商,他打算反映新的文学等级。在他出版的三份涅克拉索夫调查问卷中,他根据他在处理材料时所假设的观点和当前的社会文化状况来证明他的决定是正确的。论文的重点是D.S.梅列日科夫斯基的回应(1919)的手写草稿,它部分出现在第一版中,直到1988年才完全出版。梅列日科夫斯基在评价涅克拉索夫关于人民的诗歌时,比以前更加直言不讳,怀疑诗人在这个问题上的猜测。他还暴露了自己对俄罗斯文化中“女性化”和“男性化”的真实态度。他对丘科夫斯基的回应解构了他在《俄罗斯诗歌的两个奥秘》和《永恒女性气质的诗人》中建立的人为概念。他对俄罗斯文化潮流的定义直觉细腻,令人信服,但在他的回答中,他与涅克拉索夫产生了矛盾。事实上,他认为涅克拉索夫是“男性”文化流的一个人物,这是一种驱动的、积极的,而不是沉思的、被动的创造元素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
48
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信