Biography of Uspensky Gleb Ivanovich
He came from a poor bureaucratic family, studied at the Tula gymnasium, and then at the Chernihiv gymnasium. The future writer observed the life of the working strata of Tula and peasant villages, from childhood he was familiar with the richness of the folk language and folk art. In the gymnasium, under the influence of the Sovremennik magazine and advanced Russian literature, his literary inclinations were determined.
In 1861, Uspensky entered the law faculty of St. Petersburg University, but soon left it due to student unrest. Education at Moscow University was also not realized due to financial difficulties.
In 1862, Uspensky began his literary activity in the journal Yasnaya Polyana L.N. Tolstoy. Ouspensky draws close to the circle of democratic writers (Levitov, Reshetnikov, etc.), leads a typical for that time lifestyle of a raznochintsy writer. He collaborates in various publications, some of his essays and stories are published in Iskra, Russian Word, Sovremennik. Ouspensky draws closer to Nekrasov, which contributed to his exit as a writer on a wide literary road.
Uspensky's stories and essays in the first half of the 1960s are numerous and varied in content. The main range of his themes is the life and life of officials (“Guest”, “Sketches of official life”, “Winter Evening”, etc.), small labor and petty-bourgeois people of the urban province and both capitals (“Folk festival in Vsesvyatskaya”, “Junk dealer” , "Homeless", "Janitor", etc.), at the same time the first works on rural themes appear ("In the Village", "Beggars", "Rural Scenes", etc.).
Uspensky's first major work, which generalized the writer's early experience and was an important stage in his creative development, was the essays "The Morals of Rasteryaeva Street" (1866), the beginning of which appeared in Sovremennik shortly before the closing of the magazine. They are written on the material of observations of the life of Tula. The writer spoke with deep sympathy about the life of the urban poor - artisans, workers; at the same time, the writer continued to sketch the wretched life of officials (the Preterpeev family, the image of Tolokonnikov, etc.), and the townspeople (the essays “Petty-bourgeois Drykin”, “Balkanikh”, “Medic Khripushin”, etc.). The great achievement of the artist was images petty bourgeois predators, businessmen, tavern-keepers who profited from the people's need, ignorance, drunkenness; the image of Prokhor Porfirych is especially clearly outlined , which is the plot center of the work. The most essential features of Uspensky's talent as an original realist artist - his keen powers of observation, the art of dialogue, the storyteller, juicy humor, the ability to create generalizing pictures and images - were reflected in "Morals ...".
The largest work of Uspensky in the late 60s and early 70s was the cycle of his stories “The Ruin” - “Observations of Mikhail Ivanovich” (1869), “Quieter than water, lower than grass” (1870) and “Observations of one lazy person” (1871). Ouspensky in this work is characterized by an appeal to peasant life, to the problems of the attitude of the progressive raznochintsy intelligentsia to the people. In the subsequent parts of The Ruin, the writer's growing interest in peasant life and in the problems of relations between the advanced raznochintsy intelligentsia and the people is characteristic. All this makes The Ruin a landmark work of the writer on the verge of the 1860s and 1870s.
In the work of Uspensky, in his worldview in the period of the 60-70s, the position of the people, the peasantry of the post-reform village, was reflected.
Acquaintance with populist circles contributed to a sharper and more intense interest of the writer in peasant life. Abroad, the writer meets Turgenev. Their friendly ties do not stop throughout Ouspensky's life.
In the 70s, the writer penetrates deeply into the pictures of peasant life. Captured by the problems of folk, peasant life, Uspensky at the end of the 70s decides to get to know village life better. In 1877, he spends the whole summer in the village of Sopki, Valdai district, Novgorod province, in the spring of the next year he and his wife go to the Samara province and work as a clerk of a savings and loan partnership in the village of Skolkovo. The result of observations and study of various aspects of peasant life was a series of essays called "From a village diary" (1877-1880). Factual in their essence, the essays gave a deep generalizing picture of the life of the post-reform village. The essays caused a great wave of responses both in criticism and in the general readership, primarily because the writer boldly and truthfully revealed the contradictions of rural reality, showed the decomposition of the peasant community, on which the Narodniks placed so many hopes, recreated the picture of the post-reform ruin of the village, lack of land , the growing influence of the kulaks, etc. The essays were also a brilliant work in artistic terms: here the writer's skill was manifested in depicting the way of life of entire social strata, the art of the author's narration, combined with the stories of the characters of the essays themselves. Starting with the essays "From a Village Diary", the peasant theme becomes the main, defining one in Uspensky's work.
Ouspensky later combined the most important essays and stories of the 70s into the cycle “New Times, New Concerns”. By "new times" the writer understands the post-reform era in Russia, new phenomena in the life of various strata of Russian society, the ruin of the countryside, the ever-widening development of capitalism. Pictures of peasant life, penetration into the wilderness of bourgeois entrepreneurship are drawn in the story "The Book of Checks", which opens the cycle. Complex issues of folk life are touched upon in all works of the cycle. In the works of Uspensky of the 70s, the new creative style of the writer was completely determined, which is also characteristic of all subsequent creativity: a combination of an artistic, figurative display of reality with journalistic reasoning, evidence, and comments. Ouspensky considers the framework of the traditional novel, story, short story to be restrictive. . The favorite genre of the writer is the essay, multifaceted cycles of essays and stories.
Uspensky's subsequent main cycles of peasant essays were The Peasant and Peasant Labor (1880) and The Power of the Land (1882); they are closely adjoined by a number of individual essays and stories: “Unbroken Ties”, “Leveling “under the Window”, “Little Guys”, the cycle “Without Certain Activities” and etc. In these works, the writer draws deeper and more versatile the modern countryside, the stratification of the peasantry, gives apt descriptions not only of the predation of the kulaks, but also of the possessive aspirations, the individualism of the working peasant. In the works of this period, and especially in The Power of the Earth, Uspensky seeks to determine the basic laws of peasant life, life, and the peasant worldview. As a result, the writer comes to the conclusion that the determining factors here are the conditions of agricultural labor, the connection with the land - "the power of the earth" in the broad sense of the word. Uspensky's realistic skill in essays on the countryside, on Russian post-reform reality put him on a par with outstanding Russian writers. Turgenev wrote about the essays "The Peasant and Peasant Labour" that Ouspensky had not only knowledge of rural life ... but a penetration into its very depths, an artistic grasp of features and types.
An important work of the period of the 1880s was the essay Living Numbers (1888), which vividly captures the images of village workers who continue either to cling to their beggarly allotment of land, or are forced to leave the village to work in the city, in factories and plants, on railroads. The essays were an outstanding achievement of Uspensky's artistic method - a combination of painstaking research, passionate journalism with vivid imagery, with a wealth of speech characteristics, and subtle humor.
Ouspensky's work: themes, ideas, genres and images.
A special place in democratic prose is occupied by the work of G.I. Uspensky. The ethnographic tendencies in Ouspensky's fiction were still noted by his contemporary criticism and Russian literary criticism. Gorky among the figures of writers who repeat V.I. Dahl in Russian literature, he also called G.I. Uspensky. His work of the 1860s and 1870s is close to those of the sixties in terms of themes, ideological and artistic originality and structure, genres, commonality in the depiction of phenomena and heroes. In the early works of G.I. Uspensky, the influence of Dalev traditions, the natural school, a special attitude to ethnography and folklore is noticeable. Uspensky collects and writes down the genres of oral folk art, carefully studies the economic and social life of various strata of Russian society, traveling around different provinces of Russia, and comes to the conclusion: “To work for this poor people, to serve them both with your heart and (even) with a sword, and if there is no sword, then with the mind - that was the nanny's fairy tale, the lullaby of everything that carried in the chest not a brick, but a heart.
Folklore and ethnographic materials are widely included by him and deeply comprehended in his works, being used in various artistic functions. The study of folklore, along with the socio-economic conditions of life and ethnography, gave the writer an objective idea of the life and way of life of the people. Without a thorough, comprehensive study of the Russian village and traditional peasant creativity, Uspensky would not have come to his main discovery - to explain the worldview of the peasant, his moral strength, aesthetics and moral foundations through the spontaneous "power of the earth", which determines, forms both the whole way of life of the farmer, and its spiritual culture.
Ethnographic elements are included in the early work of the writer: various types of metropolitan poverty, the streets of Moscow, festive booths are described.. However, already here he is characterized not only by ethnographic descriptions, but also by special attention to social phenomena. Ouspensky's essays are distinguished by a well-known factographic style, fixation of events that have fallen into the field of vision, sketches of individual paintings with the inclusion of replicas, snippets of conversations, etc. The genres of the essays, by definition of Uspensky himself, are close to the ethnographic literature of travel: “On the way (travel impressions)”, “Walk”, “At the inn”, “Observations of Mikhail Ivanovich”, etc. In the sixties, Uspensky, in relation to the material he studied and the methods of elucidating it, was close to the Dalev ethnographic school, relied on the experience of the essayists of the sixties, repelled from them and followed them. They were united by the similarity of themes, genre originality, principles of approach to the image, style trends, ways of using folklore and ethnographic materials, knowledge and thorough study of various aspects of folk life, as well as a penetrating personal attitude to the fate of the peasantry. Uspensky wrote: “Reality is alive, unattractive, clumsy, torn, downtrodden, stupid, crying, cursing or beating in the sweat of my face because of a piece of bread, positively tormented me.”
He is considered a democratic writer of the late 70s of the XIX century, who came to the Samara province to study the life of the simple peasantry. This happened not without the influence of the well-known "going to the people" that seized the Russian intelligentsia during these years. “The true truth of life drew me to the source, that is, to the peasant,” wrote Gleb Ivanovich Uspensky. “I needed to know the source of all this ingenious mechanics of folk life, about which I could not find any simple word anywhere” 1 (Fig. 1).
He was born on October 13 (according to the new style on October 25), 1843 in Tula, in the family of a provincial official. At first he studied at the Tula gymnasium, and since 1856 - in Chernigov, where his parents moved. After graduating from the gymnasium, Uspensky entered the law faculty of St. Petersburg University, from where he was expelled due to financial difficulties. He tried to continue his education, and in 1862 he entered the law faculty of Moscow University, but a year later he also left him, and again due to lack of money.
Gleb Ivanovich Uspensky began his literary activity in the summer of 1862 in the pedagogical journal L.N. Tolstoy "Yasnaya Polyana", where he wrote under the pseudonym "G. Bryzgin". Then, in 1864-1865, Uspensky collaborated with the Northern Lights publication, where he wrote texts for lithographs of paintings. And in 1868, Uspensky began a permanent collaboration with the journal Domestic Notes, which at that time came under the editorship of N.A. Nekrasov and M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. It was in this journal that Ouspensky mainly published his works until it was closed in 1884.
His convictions and views were formed in the rebellious 60s of the 19th century, when a movement of the intelligentsia and raznochintsy was rising in Russia. They paid much attention to the urban poor and the urban "bottom". Yielding to these sentiments, Ouspensky devoted his first works to reflecting this problem. The lives of the poorest strata of society were devoted to his debut essays "Morals of Rasteryaeva Street" (1866) and "Ruin" (1869).
In 1871 he went abroad, visited Germany and France. Once again he visited Europe in the first half of 1875, and during this time he managed to live in Paris and London. Here Uspensky became close to the representatives of the "Narodnaya Volya", who literally infected him with the idea that the intelligentsia should "go to the people" in order to educate them and cultivate a high culture in them. In the summer of the same 1875, having returned to Russia, Ouspensky decided to actively implement this idea. He decided to take a closer look at the Russian peasantry, to which until that time he had paid little attention. To do this, he first came to the village of Syabrenitsy, Novgorod province. However, the local life did not work out for him, in the spring of 1878 Uspensky went to the Samara province.
He settled near Samara, in the village of Skolkovo (now the Kinelsky district of the Samara region). Here he got a job as a clerk in a savings and loan partnership, and his wife, Vera Vasilievna 2, was a school teacher.
In the 1970s society and the press did a lot of business with savings and loan partnerships. Zemstvos saw in them almost an all-healing remedy for people's poverty. It is possible that at first Ouspensky shared this belief to some extent, but, having worked in this area for more than a year, he sharply stated in a special article entitled “The Passion-Bearers of Small Credit” that all this was “nonsense”, that these partnerships provide “an opportunity to use loans only to the kulaks and ruin the ordinary peasant.
The savings and loan partnership in the village of Skolkovo was located in the same building as the school. It was here that the Uspenskys rented an apartment. The teacher A. Stepanova lived with the Uspenskys, who subsequently wrote memoirs about this period of the writer's life 3 .
Uspensky's life was difficult, there was not enough money, and in letters to publishers the writer had to ask for reinforcements all the time. At that time, the Uspenskys already had three children, and one daughter was born in Skolkovo. The situation was the most modest, even poor: in one room, instead of furniture, there were boxes, more - as a table, the rest replaced the chairs. The writer himself lived in the association's office, a large room containing a white table with papers and several benches, on one of which he slept. “His costumes,” Stepanova recalled, “Gleb Ivanovich always wore out to the last opportunity, and then, having taken his son with him, he went to Samara to be equipped. There he changed clothes with the child, leaving the old, for complete unsuitability, in the shop.
The office was often visited by the surrounding peasants, who soon felt their man in Uspensky, and therefore often went to him for help, never meeting a refusal. The local sergeant-major, a huge red-haired peasant, often dropped in, from which Uspensky wrote in one of his stories the killer-horse thief. Even a kulak from the village of Bogdanovka came to Uspensky in order to give the writer material for “processing” one of his enemies or offenders, and soon he himself turned out to be “processed” in one of the essays: “it seems like a portrait turned out,” he said , vowing at the same time to take revenge on Ouspensky.
In the office of the partnership, Gleb Ivanovich was assisted by the seminarian Aleksandrov. His writer brought in the essay "Black work" in the image of Andrei Vasilyevich.
The circle of Ouspensky's closest people was made up of local teachers, during the holidays - seminarians. Gleb Ivanovich took a close part in the affairs of the school, helped with advice, and was interested in the course of education. Soon one of the teachers was fired "for unreliability" and a relative of the local bailiff was sent instead. Here is what Ouspensky said about this:
The "unreliable" teacher asked older students to write essays more from peasant life, from what the children see and in which they themselves take part. The new teacher was ordered to keep the students as far away from their life as possible, since a lot of unnecessary talk comes out of this about the “political situation of the peasantry and even the clergy”, to ask them something of a “foreign nature”.
“... Somehow a “new” [teacher] meets me on the street and says: “Excuse me, please, Gleb Ivanovich, since I have heard that you are in some way a famous writer, then let me kindly ask you to help me in one thing, you can say, an emergency. Soon, you see, an inspector of public schools and an indispensable member of our school will come here to take an exam at our school, but it is considered exemplary, and a full course is taken over four winters ... They will ask me to show them the compositions of graduating students, but what will I show them? Last week I read them two extracts from the reader: "Sunset in the Sahara" and "Hurricane on the Ocean" and asked who would like to tell what thing. And what would you think? They took off my head, Gleb Ivanovich, these robbers, positively took it off ... One writes: "The dawn burned a lot, so that it became red everywhere, and the portent of heavy rain means." Do you understand, Gleb Ivanovich, this is heavy rain in the Sahara, in the Sahara?! And the other depicts a hurricane on the ocean like this: “For no reason at all, a terrible storm arose on the sea on the ocean, the wind overtook more than one and a half arshin waves from one coast to the other, take our ferry and turn over, no matter how we dragged it up, and he picked us up under him and as soon as he flopped to the bottom, and hissed a lot after, because it’s like a cast-iron, it goes for a couple, only on water ...
Listen, Matvey Gavrilovich, why don't you send the boys again to describe their way of life? Uspensky advised.
I would be glad, Gleb Ivanovich... according to the order, nothing from the life of the population is allowed to be touched.
Well, make them describe not people, but cattle like that ... Let them write what they see, well, for example, our pets. I am sure of success...
I am most sensitively grateful to you, Gleb Ivanovich, - the teacher was delighted.
It's been a week.
I met the wise guy according to the order, and from a distance he clasped his hands: “Honorable Mr. Uspensky, Gleb Ivanovich, what have you done to me? Allow me to humbly ask you to come to me for a minute ... "
“... Now he dumped a whole pile of essays on the table, and began to read excerpts from them; “Here, for example, is one essay for you: “A pet, a four-legged, a horse.” Now if you please listen: “We had one four-legged horse, but the tyat did not pay taxes, her foreman took her to the station, and picked up the samovar with everything with coals, and uncle’s retinue was new, so we have no animal, neither domestic nor four-legged there is nothing left to describe, everything has already been described…” What a scoundrel, he hit straight into socialism. But this essay, if you please, read it yourself.
I took carefully, with visible love and good handwriting, a quarter of paper written. “This is the first student, Gleb Ivanovich, all hope was on him at the exam.”
I looked first of all at the title: it interested me very much.
“The devil is a domestic animal, four-legged, but not always, but when it sleeps. When he walks, he is on two legs. It lives on our stove, feeds on coals and ash. We often see him with his grandmother when we lie on the floor. He has big fangs and fiery eyes, and his horns are like those of a goat. Grandmother is not afraid of him, and as soon as he climbs onto the stove, she herself reads a prayer, and I must also read: “May God rise again, and scatter him…” He will immediately begin to squander. It will pretend to be so peaceful, but pretend to be sick, and in the end it will completely turn into our black cat, Masha ... incapable of plowing." “Here, Gleb Ivanovich, look at your own, as it is called ... the method of writing,” the teacher, dumbfounded by the results and unsettled, pounced. From a simple life they wanted, from everyday life. So before, let’s say, a student of neither the Sahara nor the ocean could describe, because he didn’t see ... And now, rejoice, Gleb Ivanovich, he described the devil perfectly, because he saw, saw, thanks to your method, sir ... That I now, let me ask you, will I show the inspector and the indispensable member? One misfortune ... An essay about the devil "It is completely unsuitable for agriculture." Otherwise, maybe they would have engaged in devilry ... You, Mr. Writer, directly brought me under the strictest undeserved reprimand, otherwise, maybe I will lose my place ... Well, how can a village uneducated person describe what he actually sees? One ignorance, sir, they have ... The sugar is far away, sir, and the devil is within easy reach, on the stove ... "
This photographic story of Uspensky speaks not only of the teaching methods that were implanted in the school, but also characterizes the era when the peasant “out of domestic four-legged animals had only one devil left, completely incapable of farming.”
Visitors often interfered with Ouspensky, and he had to write in fits and starts. As Stepanova recalls, while working, he drank “the strongest iced tea or beer.”
Sometimes Gleb Ivanovich read aloud his short stories. He read expressively, skillfully emphasizing comic passages. Those present laughed, but he himself remained unperturbed.
During his stay in Skolkovo, Uspensky traveled to Samara several times, where he lived for a week or more, once he went to St. Petersburg to “refresh himself”. In Samara, he stayed with a local old-timer, judicial investigator Yakov Lvovich Teitel, 4 that "merry righteous man," as Gorky called him.
One of Ouspensky's trips to Samara almost ended in arrest. Arriving somehow in the city with his assistant, the seminarian Alexandrov, Uspensky stayed at one of the cheap hotels. Familiar seminarians came to Aleksandrov. Gleb Ivanovich also took part in the general conversation, telling several comical episodes from the life of the clergy. The seminarians laughed loudly and a lot. Ouspensky's stories were heard in the next room by a kulak from the village of Bogdanovka, who had long been spying on the writer. And this time he purposely came to Samara after Ouspensky. The kulak immediately ran after the gendarmes, who came and heard through the thin plank partition a few free words of Ouspensky addressed to the clergy. A case arose about Ouspensky spreading "criminal ideas among seminarians." During interrogation by the head of the gendarme department Smolkov, Gleb Ivanovich said that he took stories about the clergy from the Diary of Prince Meshchersky. Ouspensky was released.
Ouspensky's position was not easy. The presence of a revolutionary-minded writer in the midst of the peasant population, his connections with him, published stories - all this has long made the local authorities alert and take measures to get rid of the dangerous person as soon as possible. Intensified denunciations, surveillance, complaints rained down on the wife of Gleb Ivanovich, as a teacher.
Ouspensky decided to leave. This, apparently, was facilitated by disappointment in the service, in the entire system of small credit, which he called "national nonsense."
“We will all leave Skolkovo at once,” Uspensky wrote in one of his letters. - Will be. We have suffered enough, and the boredom is diabolical” 5 .
When leaving, Ouspensky was very worried about his servant Osip, and worked hard to arrange him as best as possible.
In the autumn of 1879, the Uspenskys left the Samara places and settled in St. Petersburg. According to his contemporaries, Ouspensky was nevertheless satisfied with his stay in the Middle Volga region, which gave him great and interesting material for literary work.
In the summer of 1887, making a trip along the Volga, G. I. Uspensky again visited Samara, but, for lack of time, did not stop by Skolkovo.
The end of the 70s and the beginning of the 80s were the time of the full flowering of Uspensky's remarkable talent. He moved on to a deep depiction of the peasantry and created his own literary genre, his own style. During these years, Uspensky wrote his best works - "From a Village Diary" (1877-1879), "Peasant and Peasant Labor" (1880) and "The Power of the Land" (1882), which have a pronounced revolutionary democratic character.
Already in his first works, Gleb Uspensky acted as a spokesman for the thoughts, moods and hopes of the enslaved mass of the peasantry. Raised on the ideas of revolutionary democracy in the 60s, Gleb Uspensky understood that Russia needed to be transformed. But who is capable of rising up to fight against tsarism, against the survivals of serfdom and emerging capitalism? Ouspensky intensely searched for such heroes, but could not find them.
In search of positive heroes, Gleb Uspensky at the end of the 70s closely turned to the peasantry. The essays "From a village diary" were the first approach to the development of the peasant theme. They vividly depict the decay of the foundations of the old village, give a deeply realistic depiction of peasant life.
“From a village diary” is the first major work of Uspensky, created on the basis of peasant life. The appearance of these essays, written in Skolkovo and published in Otechestvennye Zapiski, was a major event in the literary and social life of that time. A lot was written and argued about the work, and Ouspensky himself from that moment became the subject of a sharp literary struggle between various groups of the then intelligentsia.
The problem of the countryside, the peasant question, continued to be at the center of public attention in the late 1970s. Although the "going to the people", which ended in the defeat of the populists, changed the idea of the Russian peasant, of the countryside, populist doctrines, rosy-romantic utopias, nevertheless continued to live in broad sections of the Russian intelligentsia; the landed peasant community was portrayed "as the germ and foundation of socialism", as a bulwark against impending capitalism.
In his essays “From a Village Diary”, Ouspensky deeply realistically showed peasant life in all its breadth and complexity with its screaming contradictions, truthfully and sincerely told about what he saw, and what overturned his own “fantasies” and “read” ideas about the village . A truthful and honest democrat artist, Gleb Uspensky could not but see that the actual course of life refutes the populist utopias.
The essays “From a village diary” consist of nine chapters: the first three are devoted to the Novgorod village, the rest to the Samara, “the steppe zone of the Samara Territory”, “blessed places”, but “with the same turmoil” as in the Novgorod village. Uspensky conscientiously studied Skolkovo and the surrounding area, collecting diverse material, which included not only personal impressions, observations, records of meetings, conversations, events, sketches of numerous people, but also documents, information from the history of the settlement of the described places. Plekhanov had this side of Uspensky's essays in mind when he remarked that "the works of our populists-fiction writers must be studied as carefully as statistical studies on the Russian national economy are studied" 5 .
Depicting the Samara village of the late 70s of the XIX century, Uspensky displays a string of rural people: watchmen, clerks, volost foremen, scribes, local intellectuals, merchants, kulaks, various social groups of peasants. In Chapter VII, Uspensky describes the surrounding three villages (Gvardeytsy, Skolkovo, and Zaglyadino) and deduces their true inhabitants. In the countryside, the writer saw that "the mutual strife among the members of the village society has reached almost dangerous proportions" 6 , that there are "two rather clearly defined village groups: "wealthy and weak", that "the mass of the people constantly singles out such a mass of predators, kulaks, world-eaters who elevate the plundering of their brother-peasant to the level of industry, a trading enterprise - like, for example, the wool trade" 7 that there is "an almost complete lack of moral connection between members of the village community" 8 . “Fictitiously united,” Uspensky says about the peasants, “into society by mutual responsibility in the performance of numerous public duties ... they, not as community members and government workers, but simply as people, are left each to himself, each answer for himself, each for himself. suffer yourself, cope - if you can, if you can't - disappear! 9 .
The countryside is torn apart by contradictions, a class struggle is going on in it, koshtans and world-eating fists enslave the working peasants, the power of the landowner has been replaced by the power of money, under which the “erosion of the middle peasantry”, “depeasantization” went much faster (Fig. 2-8).
“Koshtany and myrrh eaters,” Uspensky writes, “rule over the modern village. Koshtan is a person who lives on a worldly "kosht": the world "koshte" him, feeds him ... The world-eater eats the world with what he strives to morally intimidate, crush. It is not enough for him to have people work for him for a debt, it is not enough to confuse a person because of need and profit from labor: he still wants to hold the conscience of a village person in his hands.
In living images and vivid scenes, Uspensky showed the life and customs of the then village - ignorance, superstition, savagery, lynching, poverty, hunger, drunkenness. “The peasant had pants in tatters and holes, revealing a naked body, his feet were barefoot. The girl who was in his arms was so thin and yellow that it seemed to me sick; the white hair on her head was tousled, grew in uneven strands and bore traces of very noticeable dirt.
Ouspensky writes with sincere sympathy for the working village, with excruciating pain for its miserable life, when he notes peasant problems, peasant deprivation. “There are so many children in the village who grow up illiterate, can neither count, nor read or write letters ... in a word, they know absolutely nothing. How many beggars, wretched, crippled, orphans, homeless, accidentally unfortunate and left to fend for themselves in the village? 13 And this is all the more insulting because there is “a peasant mind, talent, thought, in general, all the power of his natural talent ... but all this, as if to evil, is driven away and operates in such a vicious circle, is practiced on such phenomena of village life that have either absolutely no significance for the vital interests of the countryside, or have a very remote significance. Nevertheless, in these cases, the peasant mind works, works hard and a lot, observes all sorts of little things, knows and sees a person through and through, does not spare his back, hands, strength, strives not to offend, not dishonor a person.
The ninth chapter of the essays is interesting. Analyzing the folk handwritten medical manual, the writer correctly saw in it "an immense mass of unsatisfied, oppressive people's lives of sorrows and worries", and subtly, witty showed the social significance of this document, which goes beyond medicine.
The truth about the village, about the peasant, about his life, shown by Uspensky in his works, was a great event for the readers of the 70s. Although the writer drew many wrong conclusions and did not understand the full significance of the economic processes of village life “discovered” by him, his bold, truthful, authoritative word about folk life, which he studied in the Samara village, had significant consequences. IN AND. Lenin in his work "What are the "friends of the people" and how do they fight against the Social Democrats?" gives the following description of the writer: “Gleb Uspensky stood alone with his skepticism, responding with an ironic smile to the general illusion. With his excellent knowledge of the peasantry and with his enormous artistic talent, penetrating to the very essence of phenomena, he could not fail to see that individualism had become the basis of economic relations not only between usurer and debtor, but between peasants in general. On the essays "From the Village Diary" by V.I. Lenin refers in his work "The Development of Capitalism in Russia".
Subsequently, the underground Leninist Iskra, in an obituary about the writer, defined the meaning of Uspensky as follows: “G.I. Ouspensky immeasurably more than all the legal writers of the 70s and 80s influenced the course of our revolutionary movement ... His rural essays of the 70s, coinciding with the personal impressions of the revolutionaries who went to the people, contributed to the collapse of the original anarchist rebellious populism ... The Social Democrats have always will love and read G. Uspensky as one
one of those deeply sincere observers and thinkers who, by virtue of their great truthfulness, help to more and more elucidate the only path that goes through the social revolution of the proletariat ... "
G.I. Ouspensky believed in the mighty strength of his people and in their bright future. “Whatever you say,” he wrote, “life goes on! continuously goes and goes!.. I would like to dispose of it so that life goes ... forward. To make Tuesday better than Monday, so that today there is less evil than yesterday, so that tomorrow people will be smarter, kinder to each other than today ... That's how it should be in my opinion.
Unfortunately, in the fall of 1889, Ouspensky began to have a nervous breakdown, which then turned into insanity (progressive paralysis). In the fall of 1892, Uspensky was placed in the Kolmovsky hospital for the mentally ill in Novgorod, where he spent the last years of his life.
In Kolmovo, Uspensky was visited by populist N.S. Tyutchev, which is described in literary form in one of the episodes of Y. Davydov's story "Evenings in Kolmov".
Gleb Ivanovich Uspensky died of heart failure on March 24 (April 6, according to the new style), 1902 in the Kolmovsky hospital, and was buried in St. Petersburg at the Volkovo cemetery (Fig. 9, 10).
1 G.I. Uspensky, Soch., 1908, vol. I, p. 11.
2 Sister of the famous revolutionary Vera Zasulich.
3 "Samarskaya Gazeta", 1902, No. 83.
4 Ya.L. Teitel appears in Gorky's memoirs and in Garin-Mikhailovsky's book In the Bustle of Provincial Life. Many writers visited his apartment.
5 G. I. Uspensky in life. According to memoirs, correspondence and documents. Ed. Academy, 1935, p. 573.
6 G. Plekhanov, Soch., 1924, vol. X, pp. 15-16.
7 G. Uspensky, Soch., 1908, vol. IV, p. 124.
8 Ibid., p. 163.
9 Ibid., p. 114.
10 G. Uspensky, Soch., 1908, vol. IV, p. 112.
11 Ibid., p. 216.
12 Ibid., pp. 106-107.
13 Ibid., p. 110.
14 G. Uspensky, Soch., 1908, vol. IV, p. 195.
15 V.I. Lenin, Soch., ed. 4th, vol. I, p. 238.
In preparing this publication, materials from the book were used: K.A. Selivanov. Russian writers in Samara and the Samara province. Kuibyshev book publishing house, 1953.
Uspensky, Gleb Ivanovich
See Art. N. K. Mikhailovsky at Pavlenkovsky ed. works by U. and in the "Works" of Mikhailovsky (vol. VI); Skabichevsky, "Populist Fiction Writers" and "History of New Russian Literature"; Protopopov, in Russian Thought (1890, Nos. 8 to 9); Or. Miller, "G. I. Uspensky. Experience of explanatory presentation of his writings" (St. Petersburg, 1889); A. N. Pypin, "History of Russian Ethnography" (vol. II, ch. XII).
P. Morozov.
(Brockhaus)
Uspensky, Gleb Ivanovich
(1843-1902] - an outstanding Russian writer. Born in the family of a provincial official. He studied at the gymnasium, first in Tula, then in Chernigov. Recalling his childhood and youth, U. always painted this time with gloomy colors. "The whole atmosphere of my personal life until the age of 20,” he wrote, “doomed me to a complete eclipse of the mind, complete death, the deepest savagery of concepts, underdevelopment, and generally separated me from the life of the white world at an immeasurable distance.” After graduating from the gymnasium in 1861, U. left for St. Faculty of History and Philology of the University It was a time of student unrest, and there were almost no classes at the University. some very indefinite, but broad public work.In 1862 U. moved to Moscow, but here, too, nothing came of teaching at the university.
W. began his literary activity in the summer of 1862 as a teacher. journal L. N. Tolstoy "Yasnaya Polyana" (pseudonym - G. Bryzgin). Then he worked in a small Moscow magazine "Spectator". In 1863, Uspensky again left for St. Petersburg and began to publish here already in thick magazines: in the Library for Reading (the essay "Junk Man"), in the Russian Word (the essay "Night", etc.). At the invitation of Nekrasov in 1865, he became a member of Sovremennik (Village Meeting, Morals of Rasteryaeva Street). But, despite his immediately revealed major literary talent, he did not have a solid job in any major magazine. At this time, he spent his talent on writing small essays in various small magazines ("Spectator", "Northern Lights", "Spark", "Alarm Clock", "Women's Messenger", "New Russian Bazaar", Nevsky collection "Literate", "Week", "Fashion Store"). In 1864-1865, he collaborated a lot even in the publication "Northern Lights", where he wrote texts for lithographs of paintings. Need forced W. at that time to write a lot and hastily. According to him, during this time he wrote about 60 small essays, begun and unfinished, due to extreme need, sketched somehow, for 3-5 rubles.
The closure of Sovremennik and Russkoe Slovo by the government in 1866 placed W., like many other writers, in an even more difficult position.
Having received after long ordeals the opportunity to be published in the "Women's Journal", W. was in great difficulty with the heroes of his works begun, with his drunkards, shoemakers and other characters. He was forced to rename the characters of "The Morals of Rasteryaeva Street", which had begun printing in Sovremennik, to shred and spoil his works.
This hard life of literary bohemia ended in 1868, when U. began a permanent collaboration in the journal Otechestvennye Zapiski, which at that time came under the editorship of Nekrasov and Shchedrin. Almost exclusively in this magazine U. and placed his works before closing it in 1884.
In 1871 (or in 1872) U. went abroad, visited Germany, and Ch. arr. in France (in Paris). This time he did not live abroad for long. In January 1875 he went abroad for the second time, staying there until the end of the summer of 1875 (Paris, London). While living abroad, U. became close to many Russian revolutionary emigrants (German Lopatin, Klements, Ivanchin-Pisarev, P. L. Lavrov, and others).
Upon his return from abroad, U. entered the service in the management of the Syzran-Vyazemskaya railway. etc., but was completely unable to endure the atmosphere of this institution and the society of intellectuals, who, under the cover of hypocritical people-loving phrases, became at the service of capital, the society of "God-Mamonics", as he put it. At the end of 1875, U. went as a correspondent to Serbia, which at that time entered the war with Turkey. The populists saw in this war a manifestation of a spontaneous popular movement on the part of the Serbs, and U. wanted to see this movement on the spot. But even here U. quickly understood the essence of the matter. "There is no Slavic case, but there is only a chest," he wrote.
Returning to Russia, U. in search of living popular forces that could become the creators of a new life, he decided to take a closer look at the Russian peasantry, to which until that time he had paid little attention. To this end, he settled in a village in the Novgorod province. ; the result of these observations W. was a series of brilliant essays "From the village diary". From here, in 1878, U. moved to the province of Samara in order to study the life and mood of a steppe peasant there. Here, in the village of Skolkovo - for greater convenience of observation - he entered the service of a clerk of a savings and loan association, which at that time was fond of many populists. The result of these observations was a long essay "Passion-bearers of small credit." "National nonsense" - so briefly U. defined the essence of the work of these associations.
In the autumn of 1879, U. settled in St. Petersburg, leaving there quite often for Novgorod Gubernia, where he built himself a small house near Chudovo station. These trips to the village gave U. the opportunity to stock up on rich observational material for a number of brilliant essays on the topics of village life (series: "People and Mores", "Little Guys", "In the Native Field", "Without Certain Occupations", "The Power of the Earth" , Willy-nilly, etc.). From time to time he made trips to Russia (to the Caucasus, to Siberia), which also provided a lot of material for W.'s observant eye. arr. in the journals "Russian Thought" and "Severny Vestnik", as well as in the newspaper "Russian Vedomosti". In the autumn of 1889, U. began a nervous breakdown, which, more and more intensifying, turns into insanity (progressive paralysis). In the autumn of 1892 W. was placed in a hospital for the mentally ill, where he spent the last years of his life. W. died of heart failure in 1902. He was buried in St. Petersburg at the Volkov cemetery.
Most of the old critics and literary scholars considered U. as a populist, although he retreated in depicting the life of the peasantry, thanks to his sharp observation, from the dogma of populism and from the idealization of the peasantry. This opinion was shared by G. V. Plekhanov. This opinion cannot be considered correct. The starting point in understanding U.'s work should be taken from the point of view of V. I. Lenin, who noted U.'s independence in relation to the populists. Lenin's assessment of Uspensky can be established on the basis of the numerous use of U.'s images and a sympathetic quote from the work of the early Russian Marxist Gurvich: "Gleb Uspensky stood alone with his skepticism, answering with an ironic smile to the general illusion [of the populists. - Ya. M.]. With his excellent knowledge of the peasantry and with his enormous artistic talent, penetrating to the very essence of phenomena, he could not but see that individualism had become the basis of economic relations not only between the usurer and the debtor, but between the peasants in general "(quoted by Lenin in the book "What is "friends of the people"?", Works, vol. 1,158).
Uspensky's youth fell on the 60s; at this time his main aspirations were formed. Ideas of the 60s had a strong influence on him. Chernyshevsky Ouspensky put unusually high. "There was one personality in St. Petersburg," he wrote, "and, moreover, such a personality that positively there is only one in all of Russia. To my misfortune, I managed to witness how this personality suddenly faded away." The government's defeat of the revolutionary movement of the 1960s, the closure of Sovremennik and Russkoye Slovo, the two leading journals of this movement, were painfully received by W. "I was ready to lay hands on myself," he wrote, recalling this time.
It is difficult to present a positive system of worldview U. Remembering the 60s. and the environment of young talented writers, to which he belonged at that time, W. wrote in his autobiography: "Even the slightest definite views on society, on the people, on the goals of the Russian intelligentsia, no one had decisively." There was an indefinite but strong striving to create a social order in which all exploitation, all oppression, and all "pushing" would be ruled out. The lack of a solid scientific education and ignorance of foreign languages (Uspensky knew only French) and, consequently, the impossibility of getting acquainted with the movement of Western European thought, given the then poverty of Russian literature, further contributed to this uncertainty of a positive world outlook.
Unfolded in the 60s. W. perceived the movement of revolutionary democracy as the beginning of a broad social movement, as the beginning of a radical change in all life, all social relations, as the beginning of a "world flood," as he put it.
U. had an unusually strong, observant critical mind. Naturally, the question arose before him: what social forces could become the backbone of the new movement? The movement of the 1960s, although based on the coming peasant revolution, which was still brewing at that time, at first paid much attention to the urban poor, to the oppressed and exploited sections of the urban population; it was here that W.'s attention was drawn at first. It was to the image of these layers that his first works were devoted, and in particular a series of essays "The Morals of Rasteryaeva Street" and "Ruin". The results of W.'s observations turned out to be the saddest.
In "The Morals of Rasteryaeva Street" and in "The Ruin" U. describes the life and life of the city through which the railway under construction must pass, in which there is a factory (this city, obviously, Tula). And here he sees the same sad pictures of dying and ruin. W. also gave a number of essays on the life, life and moods of the metropolitan poor, but even here the writer did not find anything encouraging. Everywhere he saw incredible spiritual squalor, a fierce struggle for a piece of bread, petty squabbles and quarrels, and the worst thing from his point of view was that he did not find in these crushed people attempts to protest, fight. "Rasteryaeva Street" dutifully bears its burden - need. "Quieter than water, lower than grass" - this is how W. titles one of the series of his essays. "Prolonged sufferings have vanished fruitlessly," he writes, "leaving not a single drop of hostility towards their causes." “Is it really possible,” I thought, “even such sufferings leave nothing but silence, disappear into the ground without a trace, only frighten and bend their heads even lower?” And about the orphan Marfa (the story "On the back stairs"), he says that "only in tears and sobs was she free."
U. explains this lack of protest, on the one hand, by the fact that need has crushed these unfortunate people too much, and on the other hand, by a sense of his powerlessness, which gives rise to a feeling of fear. "A Russian person is shy, like a poisoned hare, and is afraid in general, for no apparent reason, without any real danger."
But in the rich and extensive gallery depicted by U. crushed and crushed people, whom life has made "quieter than water, lower than grass," there is one exception. This is one of the heroes of the essays "Ruin" - the worker Mikhail Ivanovich.
Mikhail Ivanovich has endured a lot in his life. He "at night tossed and turned at the factory in fire and flame." The result of the "squeezing", according to Mikhail Ivanych, was "stupefaction and impoverishment of the common man, which could be seen in our worker, in our muzhik." Mikhail Ivanovich himself escaped this stupefaction, for fate brought him into conflict with the revolutionary-minded seminarian Maxim Petrovich. Maxim Petrovich and his comrades taught Mikhail Ivanovich to read and write. From them, he also learned the essence of all "robber mechanics." "It's a passion how many robbers I saw," says Mikhail Ivanovich. "I began to understand why this is our brother in holes, bast shoes, for example." The thoughts sown by Maxim Petrovich do not leave Mikhail Ivanovich's head. Everywhere he begins to show disobedience and tries to prevent the surrounding robbery. While working at the plant, he once threw a stone at him for some kind of "squeezing" of the tenant of the plant, and although there was no direct evidence against Mikhail Ivanovich, he still spent six months in prison on suspicion and was expelled from the plant "for riots" . This further strengthened Mikhail Ivanovich in his indignant protest, but all the protests of Mikhail Ivanovich do not meet with any sympathy in the provincial town. He remains alone and powerless. He only sees that the new way of life, which is personified for him in the image of the railway, "cast iron", undermines the roots of the old prizhyka. Here, as in a number of subsequent essays ("Book of Checks" and "Evil News", etc.), the appearance of a cast-iron means for U. the beginning of the establishment of new, capitalist relations. But Mikhail Ivanovich does not see elements around him on which his protest could rely. The thought of Mikhail Ivanovich turns to Maxim Petrovich, who has left for St. Petersburg. Chugunka, the development of capitalism should help him find Maxim Petrovich, help the worker to connect with the revolutionary. He looks forward to the day when the first train of the cast-iron will go. He rides on it to Petersburg, but there, despite all his efforts, he cannot find Maxim Petrovich, who has disappeared somewhere without a trace. Instead, he finds there, too, only weak-willed, flabby, perishing people "quieter than water, lower than grass."
In the face of the rebel worker Mikhail Ivanovich, we see a man who "is not afraid of anything"; he is ready for protest, he yearns for it, but he is alone and does not know the ways of struggle. He wants to strengthen his forces by linking up with the revolutionary Maxim Petrovich, but this bond fails. And if the worker Mikhail Ivanovich turns out to be weak, cut off from the revolutionaries, then the revolutionary-minded urban intellectuals, who have no support among the broad masses of the people, are also weak. According to U., this is "an insignificant group with a collective student Ivanov at the head."
Having been abroad - in Germany, France, Belgium, England - W. saw there a completely different picture of social relations. He saw there, first of all, the absence of "universal fear": "In France," he wrote, "the people are their own masters." He saw there further - especially in England - a vivid picture of class stratification, social contrasts, and the simplicity and clarity of the class struggle, which the people-loving intellectuals tried so hard to obscure. In the face of the fighters of the Paris Commune being shot, he saw people who, with an unfurled banner, boldly fight for the ultimate ideals of communism, while in Russia, with rare exceptions, he observed among the intelligentsia only "communards with the ability to be content with the philosophy of a penny in silver."
In Western Europe, the emergence of the proletariat and the development of its class struggle were a consequence of the development of capitalism. It was natural that, in regard to Russia, Ouspensky drew attention above all to the results to which the development of capitalism that had begun in our country was leading. Even in The Ruin, he noted that this development deals a blow to the old, pre-revolutionary methods of "squeezing".
In 1875 W. placed in the Notes of the Fatherland an interesting essay, Evil News. In it, he describes the changes that the beginning of the development of capitalism brings with it to a remote province in the form of steamships and railways. Under their influence, the collapse of the old patriarchal life begins, and besides, a thought came to the peacefully sleeping outback, a need to think.
But Russia of that time was going through a period of primitive accumulation, that is, a stage at which the influence of the development of capitalism as a force generating the proletariat was still weakly affected. On the other hand, at this stage the destructive power of capital came into play very sharply, ruining the masses of the peasantry and artisans and cruelly exploiting them. Probably under the influence of these last impressions, W. did not finish his Evil News series. In 1876, he began the series "New Times, New Concerns" in "Notes of the Fatherland"; in one of the essays in this series - "The Book of Checks" - he gave a picture of the predatory and predatory action of capital on the village, into which it penetrates. So, the hope that the development of capitalism would create a support for the "global flood" was relegated far into the future. U. at first paid very little attention to the peasantry. The revealed lack of support among the urban strata of the population, on the one hand, and the development of the populist movement with its "going to the people" - on the other, directed U.'s attention towards the village. But his observations turn out to be very far from the rosy hopes of the Narodniks regarding the stability of the old "foundations" of village life - the land community, the artel, the "peace", etc. - and the possibility of developing these institutions in the direction of socialism. U. clearly saw that capital had already penetrated deeply into the economic life of the countryside and quickly decomposed the old patriarchal relations there, and in their place established new relations characterized by the power of money.
Whoever is not gray, whose need has not eaten away his mind, whom chance or something else made him think about his position, who barely understood the tragicomic aspects of peasant life, he cannot help but see his deliverance exclusively in a thick wad of money, only in a pack, and will think of nothing to get it." "The harmony of agricultural agricultural ideals is mercilessly destroyed by civilization." “The kulak mind and kulak knowledge are always so strong and thorough that, if not to convince, then to silence a small group of village people trying to reason. And behind this group stands a solid mass of people who meekly, accurately, like a machine, bear a heavy burden both old and new orders. "There is no public life, no community here (in the village), and there is nothing to practice it on." If things continue to go the same way, then "in ten years - many, many - to Ivan Yermolaich [a middle peasant. - H.M.] and it will be impossible for him like him to live in the world. "These were the conclusions that U. led to his first observations in the village. U. emphasized that the whole life of the peasant of that time was entirely determined by the power of nature. Nature" instills in the consciousness of the peasant the idea of the need for unconditional obedience, "obedience to God, the tsar, the priest, the camp. And from this followed the consequence that for the revolutionary intellectual fighting against these authorities, there is no soil, no support in the countryside. "To preserve the Russian agricultural type, Russian agricultural practices and harmony , based on the conditions of agricultural labor, all national and private social relations must be counteracted in every possible way to the influences that destroy this harmony; to do this, it is necessary to destroy everything that bears a sign more or less alien to the agricultural order: kerosene lamps, chintz factories, railways, telegraphs, taverns, cabbies and taverners, even books, tobacco, cigars, cigarettes, jackets, etc. etc. ... But if such a demand were actually made, then at present there would hardly be at least one person who would define it otherwise than as extreme frivolity.
“And therefore,” U. concludes, “the task is truly insoluble: civilization is advancing, and you, an observer of Russian life, not only cannot stop this procession, but also, as Ivan Yermolaich himself assures you and proves, you must not, you have neither the right nor reason to meddle... So, you cannot stop the processions, but you must not meddle."
U. - one of the very few representatives of revolutionary democracy, who, thanks to a strong mind and deep insight, managed to preserve the revolutionary ideas of the 60s. and in the conditions of the 70s. However, the influence of populism nevertheless had a rather strong effect on U. in the 80s. due to the fact that he had to live and work surrounded by populism, and in particular due to the strong influence of N.K. Mikhailovsky on him. When publishing collections of his works, Ouspensky sometimes did not include in them such works that sharply contradicted populism (for example, "Evil News"). He altered his other essays for collected works in a populist way and made cuts in them. Thus, in his essays of the late 70-80s. a rather strong duality is noticeable: on the one hand, especially where he falls into journalism, one can see the idealization of the peasantry, and on the other hand, where he acts as an artist and observer, we see the most sober, harsh truth about the village and about the peasantry . This bitter truth often aroused great dissatisfaction with W. among the sentimental Narodniks. So for example. V. Figner wrote in her memoirs: “He paints only one of the negative sides of the peasant, and it is sickening to look at this miserable human herd, crammed with material interests ... Is there really no light in the village life and in the peasant’s soul? .. Why draw a peasant like that paints that no one wants to climb into the village and everyone will try to stay away from it? In response to these reproaches, U. answered with an ironic smile that they were demanding a "chocolate man" from him. We see the same dissatisfaction with the lack of idealization of the countryside and the harsh truth about it in Plekhanov's article "What is the dispute about?", written by him at the time when he was a populist.
The talent of a subtle artist-observer prevented W. from any consistent subordination to populism. His essays do not show such characteristic features of populism as the desire to "merge" the intellectual with the peasantry ("it's creepy and scary to live in this ocean of people," he wrote, referring to the peasant masses), as the idealization of the community, "peace" , artels, etc. "foundations", the conviction that there is no proletariat in Russia and that it faces a special path of development to socialism, not similar to Western Europe. Here is what W. wrote about this last idea: “The exhausted society came up with the idea to stop the flywheel of the European order, which was drawing us onto the hateful path of all kinds of untruth, us who do not want it, who want “honor”, “in conscience” and all that ... And so various obstacles began to be thrust into the spokes of this wheel, which, however, turned out to be very unreliable: the wheel continued to swing, throwing out those, mostly paper, obstacles with which they wanted to stop it; the Slavic race, the Slavic idea, Orthodoxy, the absence of a proletariat and etc. - all this, proved on a huge number of sheets of paper, was broken and disheveled by the wheel that did not stop swinging, which, as it were, said to the Russian person: all this is nonsense; you have a proletariat and will be in large numbers ... Pharisee "Deceiver! He who robs himself and complains about some kind of Europe, a deceiver! A liar, a coward, a lazybones!"
So, U. saw no independent path of development for Russia to socialism, bypassing capitalism. He considered the development of capitalism and its inevitable death undoubted: "Of course, the coupon will be destroyed, but not so that very soon. On the contrary, his biography will still have unprecedentedly brilliant pages," W. wrote in the late 80s. The development of capitalism in Russia, as it became a fact, interested U. more and more, and in the late 80s. he seriously intended to write a series of essays "On the Coming of Coupon," which he wanted to title "The Power of Capital" or "Mr. Coupon's Misdemeanors."
In 1887, the 25th anniversary of W.'s literary activity was celebrated. Among the mass of letters welcoming him, he received a letter from the Urals, written by a group of workers who welcomed him as their favorite writer. W. was delighted with this letter, which showed him that those single workers whom he painted in The Ruin in the person of Mikhail Ivanovich were growing into a major social force, over the common man. The growth of this new social force U. noted in his response to the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature, which elected him an honorary member, joyfully pointing to these masses of a new, upcoming reader, a new, fresh "lover of literature."
Significant independence from the reactionary-utopian ideas of populism provided W.'s literary work with a number of advantages in comparison with populist fiction: W. is alien to her naturalism, ethnography, and formlessness. The typical presentation of life, the great power of critical realism, the brightness of the scenes are distinguished by U.'s essays. U.'s early works ("Morals of Rasteryaeva Street" for example) are also characterized by elements of everyday life. The heroes here are household masks (Kalachev and others). But already in "The Ruin" U. gives an idea of the development of character (Cheremukhin). True, numerous images of this time are very reminiscent of each other (Cherepkov, Cheremukhin, P. Khlebnikov, Pevtsov, and others). Since the transition to rural themes (1877), the circle of Uspensky's images has expanded significantly (all sorts of bares and various positions and conditions of peasants), and the author is not so much interested in the fate of each of them individually, but in the public interests they represent. Hence the breadth and versatility of the social characteristics of these images (Ivan Afanasyevich, Ivan Ermolaich, and many others). In later reworkings of old works and new works (70s-80s), U. also avoids lexical naturalism, replacing provincialisms and dialectisms with commonly used words. Like all our revolutionary educators, we also observe in Ouspensky a craving not only for artistic, but also for journalistic propaganda of his ideas. The journalistic elements of his essays are significant. And in the very structure of his works of art, this feature is sharply reflected, first of all, in plot construction: the action is usually led by the author himself, by no means hiding behind the actions of the characters, openly proving his ideas by them. Ouspensky mainly wrote in the genre of essays. W.'s inquisitive, intense thought, striving primarily to discover new aspects of Russian life, did not have time to generalize its phenomena in the complex forms of stories and novels.
Bibliography: I. Works, 8 vols., ed. F. Pavlenkova, St. Petersburg, 1883-1886; the same, 3 vols., with intro. article by N. Mikhailovsky, published, the same, St. Petersburg, 1889-1891 (reprinted several times during the life of the author without changes); Complete Works, 12 vols., ed. B. K. Fuks, Kyiv, 1903-1904 (the most complete edition, carried out with the participation of the son of the writer A. G. Uspensky; in volume XII, 22 stories were printed that were not previously included in the collection of works by U., and a bibliographer. index to the works of W.); the same with the biographer. essay, comp. N. Rubakin, 6 vols., ed. A. F. Marx, St. Petersburg, 1908 (repetition of the previous edition); the same, 6 vols.. ed. Lit.-ed. department of the People's Commissariat. education, P., 1918 (reprint of the previous ed.); Selected works. Ed. I. P. Kubikov a, Guise, M., 1926; Works and letters in one volume, ed. B. G. Uspensky and others, Giz, M. - L., 1929; Selected Stories, Mrs. ed. artistic Literature, L., 1934; Selected Works, Ed., commentary and bio-graphic. essay by A. S. Glinka-Volzhsky, Goslitizdat, Moscow, 1935; Uncollected Works, Ed., Preface. and note. R. P. Materina, vol. I, Goslitizdat, M., 1936 (30 works by U. relating to the 60-70s were published).
II. V. I. Lenin's statements about U. see according to the "Reference book" to the II and III editions of the works of V. I. Lenin, M., 1935; Nikitin P. [Tkachev P. N.], Literary studies. Unthinking thoughts. (Sochin. G. Uspensky), "Case", 1872, 1; His own, Empiricist Fictionists and Metaphysical Fictionists, "Case", 1875, III, V, VII; His own, Muzhik in the salons of modern fiction, "Case", 1879, III, VI - IX; All three articles rev. in "Selected Works" by P. N. Tkachev, ed. B. P. Kozmina, vols. 2, 3 and 4, M., 1932-1934; Plekhanov G. V., Our Narodnik Fiction Writers. Art. 1. G. I. Uspensky, Social Democrat. Lit.-political. Sat., book. 1, Geneva, 1888 (and in "Sochin.", vol. X, M. - L., 1924); Protopopov M., Literary and critical characteristics, St. Petersburg, 1896; Gornfeld A., Aesthetics Ch. Uspensky, on Sat. "At a glorious post", St. Petersburg, 1901; Korolenko V., About Gleb Ivanych Uspensky, "Russian Wealth", 1902, V; Lunacharsky A.V., Journal notes, "Education", 1904, IV; Borovsky V. V., "Superfluous people", "Pravda", 1905, VII (and in "Sochin.", Vol. II, M., 1931); Ovsyaniko-Kulikovskiy D.N., Sobr. cit., vol. VIII, History of the Russian intelligentsia, part II, St. Petersburg, 1911; Aptekman O. V., Gleb Ivanovich Uspensky, M., 1922; Ivanchin-Pisarev A., From the life of Ch. Iv. Uspensky (According to memoirs), "Red Nov", 1925, VII - VIII; Voitolovsky L., The tragedy of Gleb Uspensky, "Star", 1927, No. 9; Cheshihin-Vetrinsky V., G. I. Uspensky. Biographer, essay. Ed. and introductory article by P. N. Sakulin, ed. "Federation", M., 1929 (here and bibliography); Letkova E., About Gleb Ivanovich, Memoirs, "Links", Sat. 5, Moscow, 1935; Glagolev N., Artistic essay by Gleb Uspensky, "Fiction", 1935, No. 9; Glinka-Volzhsky A. S., Gleb Uspensky in life. According to memoirs, correspondence and documents. Intro. Art. N. Meshcheryakova, ed. "Academia", M. - L., 1935.
Great Soviet Encyclopedia - (1843 1902), Russian. writer. In the 70s and 80s. created a kind of social philosophy. and morals. concept of nature and agriculture. labor, to Rui illustrated in the essays "Peasant and Peasant Labor" (1880) compare. analysis of the poetry of A. V. Koltsov and ... ... Lermontov Encyclopedia
Gleb Ivanovich Uspensky (13 (25) X. 1843, Tula - 24. III (5. IV) 1902, St. Petersburg) - prose writer, publicist. His life and creative path are closely connected with the social life, ideas and moods of that time. Being a typical representative of the raznochintsy class, he was a kind of "hero of the time." Even a brief biography of Gleb Ivanovich Uspensky is a life story of an ascetic, socially significant, tragic and instructive.
Gleb Ivanovich Uspensky was born into the family of an official (Secretary of the Chamber of State Property), the son of a rural deacon. In childhood, he was surrounded by a calm, kind-hearted atmosphere. Grandmother told the boy fairy tales and stories from pictures. L. N. Tolstoy himself came to consult with his grandfather, who knew perfectly well. Maternal relatives highly valued art and literature. My father had a small library, the books from which Ouspensky read very early. This is where the love for Pushkin's work originates, which began with the fairy tales of the great creator. Gleb Ivanovich Uspensky also liked Lermontov's poems very much. From early childhood, Ouspensky demonstrated amazing acting skills when reciting poetic works. He grew up as an affectionate, kind and meek boy, who was adored in the family circle.
Since 1853, Uspensky has been studying at the Tula Gymnasium, and has impressive achievements in teaching. This was the case until 4th grade. And then his father receives a transfer to Chernihiv and the family moves. Uspensky was given a very difficult change of scenery: academic success remains in the past, the boy often gets sick, becomes whiny.
In 1861, Gleb Ivanovich graduated from the gymnasium and entered the Faculty of Law at St. Petersburg University. But a year later he was transferred to Moscow University, from which he was expelled a year later due to the fact that he could not pay for his studies.
Gleb Ivanovich is forced to go to work, he manages to get a job at the printing house of Moskovskie Vedomosti as a proofreader. But this stage of the biography of Gleb Ivanovich Uspensky did not last long either, since after the death of his father in 1864 he was forced to take care of his three brothers and four sisters. It was an extremely difficult time, Ouspensky had to learn from his own experience what hunger and wandering are.
The first attempts at writing date back to the time of graduation from the gymnasium. Unfortunately, none of the texts written at that time has survived, so the beginning of Uspensky's literary activity is usually counted from 1862, when his first stories are published in the magazines Spectator and Yasnaya Polyana.
The early works of Gleb Ivanovich Uspensky tell about the life of slum dwellers, impoverished artisans and petty officials. At this time, Uspensky was guided by the artistic principle formulated by Chernyshevsky: "the truth without any embellishment."
The creative manner of the first essays was greatly influenced by the cousin of Gleb Ivanovich, who was also a writer.
In 1865, Gleb Ivanovich met Nekrasov, who was already the editor of the Sovremennik magazine. This event marked important changes in the fate of the young writer. The democratic nature of Ouspensky's work fully corresponded to the direction of the magazine. It was in Sovremennik that the essays were published, which would later form the cycle "The Morals of Rasteryaeva Street", which brought public recognition to the author.
The essays very realistically present the first post-reform years, which became a monstrous disappointment for the whole nation. Widespread need, despair and drunkenness - such are "Rasteryaev's mores." Ouspensky was the first to introduce a new type of hero into literature - this is an acquirer who profits from people and their weaknesses.
After the Sovremennik was closed in 1866, the writer was left without a job and a livelihood. And again a difficult time comes: for two long years, Uspensky is forced to live in an atmosphere of that very “Rasteryaevism”, which was transferred with merciless realism to the pages of his essays and stories.
Nekrasov again comes to the aid of Uspensky, who in 1868 becomes co-editor of Otechestvennye Zapiski. Gleb Ivanovich gets a permanent job in the magazine.
In his works of this period, Ouspensky not only denounces morals, like many of his contemporaries writers, he penetrates the very essence of events and phenomena. He is distinguished by the depth of understanding of the social movements of the post-reform society, a sober, devoid of all illusions view of human nature. Ruthless truthfulness, vivid realism, sometimes turning into rough frankness, will become a hallmark of Ouspensky's entire creative path. The ability to see clearly, clearly understand and deeply experience everything that happens around, the desire to understand and comprehend the essence of phenomena and their causes shaped the writer's worldview and his approach to writing.
Gleb Ivanovich Uspensky married in 1870. His chosen one was the teacher Alexandra Vasilievna Baraeva. Ouspensky's biographers testify that the marriage was quite happy, despite the fact that the financial situation left much to be desired. The couple had five children.
In the first half of the 70s. Gleb Ivanovich has twice been abroad: in Paris and London. One of the most striking impressions of this period was a trip to the Louvre, where the writer saw the Venus de Milo. Much later, in 1885, in the essay Straightened Out, Gleb Ivanovich Uspensky will talk about its amazing impact on the audience.
Acquaintance with many revolutionaries and ideologists of populism, as well as the beginning of friendship with I. S. Turgenev, belongs to the same period.
Until the end of the seventies, Ouspensky would put into his works everything that he saw and comprehended during his travels. The leitmotif of many stories will be the power of money, which devalues human life, turns people into "fifty dollars".
Since the late 70s, the creative biography of Gleb Ivanovich Uspensky has taken a new turn. The writer intensely reflects on the reasons that led the people to such a deplorable state, about how and why the unlimited power of money spread, why drunkenness flourishes. In search of the “true truth of life,” Uspensky moved to the Novgorod province, where he devoted much time to studying peasant life. The result of this work is the understanding that the common people retain their "mighty and meek type" as long as they are under the "power of the earth."
He creates a number of works, where with harsh truthfulness and accuracy he depicts peasant psychology and folk life. True to himself, Ouspensky does not allow any idealization of the peasantry, which the populist fiction of that time sinned.
The first fame came to Uspensky after the publication of "The Morals of Rasteryaeva Street". And after the publication in the mid-80s of an eight-volume collected works, he became widely known in all corners of Russia. His works were especially popular among young people.
At the same time, he was repeatedly attacked not only by the liberal press, but also among the populists. Often his stories were subjected to rather harsh criticism. Even in the editorial office of Otechestvennye Zapiski, headed by M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin after Nekrasov's death, Uspensky's ideas were not always approved.
The works of Gleb Ivanovich Uspensky of the 1980s are devoted to depicting the process of Russia's capitalization. He considered this phenomenon incomprehensible, unnecessary and even shameful. The “power of the earth” is being replaced by the “power of capital”.
At this time, the writer makes a number of trips around the country. Gleb Ivanovich Uspensky also visited the Kuban, in the city of Tikhoretsk, about which he would later write a story included in Letters from the Road.
The collection of short stories "Living Numbers" (1888) tells about the difficult, sometimes nightmarish everyday life, hidden behind dry, and sometimes mockingly ridiculous statistics (for example, "a quarter of a horse for 1 revision soul").
Uspensky saw the spread and strengthening of capitalism as a hopeless tragedy leading to the destruction of the very essence of Russia. The inconsistency of social life tormented the writer, he acutely felt vulgarity, could not tolerate falsehood. Very impressionable and sensitive, he was exhausted by suffering not only personal, but also general. The situation was complicated by the need to wage a constant exhausting struggle with censorship, with its endless nit-picking. Gleb Ivanovich begins to constantly complain about the "cold in the soul."
From the end of 1889, the writer began to have a nervous breakdown. Gleb Ivanovich Uspensky was officially recognized as a madman in 1892; in the autumn of this year he was placed in a clinic for the mentally ill.
He suffered from periodic auditory and visual hallucinations. There is a disintegration of the personality: into Gleb, embodying all the good, and Ivanovich, who is the focus of all the bad. These two principles were constantly fighting, alternately gaining the upper hand.
Ouspensky spent the rest of his life in the hospital. He died in 1902, the cause of death was heart failure. Thousands of people came to the writer's funeral, but the cemetery was cordoned off by a police detachment, no one was allowed to give a farewell speech.
The grave of the writer is located in St. Petersburg on the Literary bridges, which is at the Volkov cemetery.
The language of Uspensky's prose is accurate and accurate, close to the folk language. Vitally interested in the fate of the people, he was keenly worried about everything that was happening in the country. This was reflected in the presence of the author in all works as a researcher and actor, which brings his works closer to journalism.
The result of artistic research and intense reflection has become capacious formulations and concepts that can characterize the entire modern era of the Dormition. Sometimes, behind playful intonations and humor in Gleb Ivanovich's essays, there is a true drama, a terrible and gloomy reality.
The writer's creative research was aimed not only at researching and describing the present, but also at anticipating the future. He was convinced that only true art and following high ideas can "straighten" a person. Some of his works are a kind of instructions, a guide to action.
The leading genre of the writer's work is an essay, which provides an opportunity to bring artistry and publicism as close as possible. The essays were combined by the author into cycles.
Ouspensky considered his work to be his true biography, he wanted to give up the memory of the factual side of his life, argued that he was all, all the most important and only significant in him - in his works.
Gleb Ivanovich Uspensky in his work paid attention to many aspects of human nature and life. Quotes from his works have become aphorisms that have not lost their relevance to this day.
On poverty:
All kinds of poverty and all kinds of ignorance inseparable from poverty - sometimes downtrodden, timid, helpless, sometimes self-satisfied and therefore even more disgusting than other varieties<…>terrible.
About the Russian people:
Until then, the enormous mass of the Russian people has been patient and mighty in misfortunes, until then young in soul, courageously strong and childishly meek - in a word, a people that holds everyone and everything on its shoulders - a people that we love, to which we go for the healing of spiritual anguish, - until then it retains its mighty and meek type, as long as the power of the earth reigns over it, as long as the impossibility of disobeying its commands lies at the very root of its existence, as long as they rule over its mind, conscience, as long as they fill its existence .
About creativity:
An artist who sets as his task profit, monetary benefit, ceases to stand on ceremony with his conscience, paints everything that is required, descends to drawing signboards for portrait and vegetable shops ...
About agricultural work:
Creativity in agricultural work, its poetry, its versatility constitute a vital interest for the vast majority of our peasantry, the source of the work of thought, the source of almost all of its relations, private and public.
Agricultural labor, with all its ramifications, adaptations, accidents, absorbs thought, concentrates in itself almost all mental and even moral activity, and even, as it were, satisfies morally.
Oh kids, kids! What grief you will endure with them!
About villains:
According to the general "conscientious" opinion, there are no other means for intimidating the villains, except for torture. The question is: from what sources do people who are able to engage in such villainous deeds come from?
On human dignity:
The most important misfortune of a simple working person is ignorance, darkness, lack of moral support, which makes it possible to feel human dignity in oneself.
Here it is, human life! Ashes, ashes!
In Tula, on the square named after Gleb Ivanovich Uspensky, there is a monument to the writer by Z. Tsereteli.
In 1952 and 1963, postage stamps with a portrait of Gleb Ivanovich were issued in the USSR, timed to coincide with the 50th anniversary of the writer's death and the 120th anniversary of the writer's birth.
Streets in St. Petersburg, Sevastopol, Irkutsk, Nizhny Novgorod, Perm, Tula, Bugulma, Nizhny Tagil, Murmansk, Rybinsk are named after Gleb Uspensky. There is Gleb Uspensky Street in several cities of Ukraine: Borispol, Luhansk, Vinnitsa and Torez.
Memorial house-museum of G.I. Uspensky is located in the Novgorod region, in the village of Syabrenitsy. Previously, the village was called Uspenskoe, since it was here that Gleb Ivanovich once bought a house. During the Second World War, the museum was looted, but in the 1980s it was restored and opened to visitors.
Uspensky Gleb Ivanovich (10/13/1843-3/24/1902), writer. Born in Tula in the family of an official. He studied at St. Petersburg (1861) and Moscow (1862–63) universities, which he did not graduate due to lack of funds. He began to publish in 1862 (in L. N. Tolstoy's journal Yasnaya Polyana and the journal Spectator). In 1864-65 he collaborated in the journal "Russian Word", in 1865-66 - in Nekrasov's Sovremennik. The main themes of Ouspensky at this time are the life and life of petty officials and the urban poor. In the essays “The Morals of Rasteryaeva Street” (1866), pictures of the life of Tula artisans and workers, the life of officials, philistines, and bourgeois businessmen are depicted in many ways. In 1868, Uspensky became one of the main contributors to Otechestvennye Zapiski, a literary collaborator with N. A. Nekrasov and M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. In the cycle of stories "The Ruin" (1869-71), images of Russian people are presented with deep penetration into psychology.
Since the 70s, the post-reform village has become the central theme of Ouspensky’s work: cycles of essays and stories “From a village diary” (1877-80), “Peasant and peasant labor” (1880), “Power of the earth” (1882), “Koi about what” (1886-87) and others, in which he writes about the ruin of the working peasants, the disintegration of the peasant community. In the 80s, Uspensky created cycles of essays and stories about the spiritual quest of the Russian intelligentsia: “Without a definite occupation” (1881), “Will it or not” (1884), etc. The writer’s views on the moral purpose of art were vividly reflected in the essay Straightened (1885). Works about folk life in the last period of creativity - "Living Figures" (1888), "Journeys to Settlers" (1888-89), etc. dialogue, subtle humour.
Used materials from the site Great Encyclopedia of the Russian people - http://www.rusinst.ru
Uspensky Gleb Ivanovich (1843 - 1902), prose writer. Born on October 13 (25 n.s.) in Tula in the family of an official. Childhood years passed in a calm, kind-hearted atmosphere, among loving relatives. Already at an early age, he read fairy tales and poems by Pushkin, Lermontov, and Karamzin.
In 1853 he began to study at the Tula gymnasium, but, in connection with the transfer of his father to the Chernigov chamber, he completed the gymnasium course at the Chernigov gymnasium in 1861. The first literary experiments date back to the years of study at the gymnasium.
He entered the Faculty of Law at St. Petersburg University, but after student unrest and due to financial difficulties, he was expelled the same year. In 1862 he entered Moscow University, but he studied for only a year, as he could not pay the tuition fee, and was forced to leave. Worked as a proofreader in a printing house. In 1864, after the death of his father, he had to take care of four sisters and three brothers.
In 1862 Uspensky's first stories "Idyll" and "Mikhalych" were published. The writer finds support in the magazines "Russian Word" and "Contemporary". Of decisive importance for the literary fate of Uspensky was his acquaintance with Nekrasov, who appreciated his talent, his knowledge of life and his powers of observation. He published in Sovremennik Uspensky's first major work, Morals of Rasteryaeva Street (1866). Later, when instead of the Sovremennik closed by the government, Nekrasov took over the publication of the journal Domestic Notes, Uspensky again became his permanent employee. Essays and stories "The First Apartment", "Necessity Sings a Song", "Up the Back Stairs" and others were published here.
In 1869 - 71 was written the second major work - "Ruin". Uspensky was close to the figures of the populist movement - N. Mikhailovsky, P. Lavrov, V. Figner and others. His trips abroad in 1872 and 1875 - 76 played a big role in the development of the writer's relations with the populist revolutionaries. He lived in Paris for about a year, where everything still reminded of the Commune of 1871 and the massacre of the revolutionaries. The places of execution he saw shocked the writer. In Paris, Uspensky met I. Turgenev, their friendly relations then did not stop. Foreign impressions were reflected in a number of essays and stories ("A sick conscience", "From a memorable book", "Foreign diary of a provincial", etc.).
In the 1870s, Uspensky, studying the life of the post-reform village, lived in the villages for a long time. The result of these trips was a cycle of essays "From a village diary" (1877 - 80). According to the author, the peasantry "until then it will retain its mighty and meek type, as long as the power of the earth reigns over it ...".
In 1884 the government closed Otechestvennye Zapiski. For Uspensky, the time of wandering begins: the Caucasus, Siberia, the Volga region, Ukraine, the Novgorod forests and the Samara steppes. But in these new impressions he sees nothing gratifying, everything seems hopeless to him. Illness comes. Literary activity ceased to bring him joy, although in 1885 the famous story "Straightened Up" was published, and in 1888 the no less famous "Live Figures" was published. Since 1892 the writer was in the St. Petersburg psychiatric hospital. There he died on March 24 (April 6 n.s.), 1902.
Used materials of the book: Russian writers and poets. Brief biographical dictionary. Moscow, 2000.
USPENSKY Gleb Ivanovich (10/13/1843-03/24/1902), Russian prose writer, publicist. The son of an official, the grandson of a village deacon. Unable to complete his studies at the university, he began to print early (since 1862 in the magazines Spectator and Yasnaya Polyana) with essay stories about the life of slum people, impoverished artisans and officials.
In "Contemporary" N. A. Nekrasova a cycle of essays “The Morals of Rasteryaeva Street” (1866) about the life of post-reform Russia was published.
After the prohibition of Sovremennik and with the transition to Nekrasov (with co-editing M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin) Notes of the Fatherland (1868) Ouspensky gets a permanent job, a new stage of his creative life begins, marked by in-depth reflections on Russia in the 1860s and 70s (the Ruin cycle, 1869-71). Sober, merciless realism, the depth and accuracy of social observations sharply distinguished the writer from his fellow writers, who limited themselves to accusatory writing of everyday life.
In n. 1870s Ouspensky travels abroad twice; impressions from these trips formed the basis of a number of his works of subsequent years: “A sick conscience”, “Foreign diary of a provincial”, “Letters from Serbia”. In the essay cycle "New Times, New Cares" (1873-78), the writer traces the corrupting and depersonalizing influence on the Russian people of capitalist entrepreneurship.
In the late 1870s, Uspensky's work and fate took a turn. He tries to reveal the source of the “cunning mechanics of the people’s life” and the underlying causes of the dominance in Russian life of “prig”, i.e., the ripping off of the working person by new, post-serf oppressors, and alcohol. Uspensky “goes to the people”, settling in the Novgorod province. Life in the village, the study of the life and consciousness of the peasants lead him to the conclusion about the great “power of the earth” (“From the village diary”, 1877-80, “Peasant and peasant labor”, 1880, “Power of the earth”, 1882).
Uspensky's publications in Otechestvennye Zapiski, which after Nekrasov's death until 1884 was headed by Saltykov-Shchedrin, evoked sharp critical responses both in the literary press and in the populist milieu. The writer, unlike his opponents, is not inclined to consider the strengthening of the capitalization of the country as something fleeting and accidental; he predicts that the "terrible" power of capital "will be understood by readers when the statistical fractions come to us in the form of people mutilated and maimed." On Sat. "Living Figures" (1888) behind the statistical reports appear bitter pictures of poverty and orphanhood, exhausting labor and complete defenselessness before the "power of capital".
In the works of the late Ouspensky, even more clearly than before, there is the personality of the author himself: impressionable and ironic, sincere and delicate, gullible and intolerant of facts. He was constantly tormented by the “Russian disorder”, “the inconsistency of the common life”. Since 1892, due to severe mental illness, Ouspensky finally withdrew from literary work.
Op. T. 1-3. SPb., 1889-91;
Full coll. op. T. 1-14. M.; L., 1940-54;
Sobr. op. T. 1-9. M., 1955-57.
