After the peasant reform of 1861, when unrest began in Russian villages caused by the predatory nature of the reform, the proclamation “To the lordly peasants” became circulated. The authorities decided to attribute its authorship to Chernyshevsky. However, it was not so easy to deal with the famous literary critic, whose articles were passed by the tsarist censorship and widely published in Sovremennik and Otechestvennye Zapiski. Everyone knew about his revolutionary sympathies, about his closeness with Herzen and other major revolutionaries, but this side of Chernyshevsky's activity was carefully concealed. Only his literary activity was visible. With amazing and daring dexterity, Chernyshevsky knew how to speak out in his articles "between the lines." When in the articles about Garibaldi published in Sovremennik and in his commentaries on Italian events he repeated with strange tenacity in almost every phrase: “in Italy”, “I am talking about Italy”, even the most stupid reader eventually began to understand that it was about Russia and current political events. Nevertheless, formally there was nothing to complain about.
On July 7, 1862, the authorities, fearing an open uprising, arrested Chernyshevsky and threw him into the Peter and Paul Fortress. The formal reason was a letter from Herzen, which stated that he, together with Chernyshevsky, was going to publish Kolokol abroad, since the magazine was banned in Russia. However, this was not enough, it was necessary to present a more weighty charge against Chernyshevsky. But in what? And the authorities went to a direct forgery. The retired Lancer cornet V.K. Kostomarov, demoted to the ranks for secretly printing "outrageous publications", a man with mental disabilities and an incompetent graphomaniac poet, in order to avoid punishment, agreed to cooperate with the III Department.
Having forged Chernyshevsky's handwriting, Kostomarov wrote a note, supposedly from Chernyshevsky, asking him to change one word in the proclamation. In addition, Kostomarov fabricated another letter, which allegedly contained irrefutable evidence of Chernyshevsky's direct participation in revolutionary activities. On the basis of these false evidence, at the beginning of 1864, the Senate sentenced Chernyshevsky to fourteen years of hard labor and eternal settlement in Siberia. Alexander II approved the sentence, reducing the term of imprisonment to seven years, but in fact Chernyshevsky spent more than eighteen years in prison.
During Chernyshevsky's arrest, all his notes, including his diary, were confiscated. The most “dangerous” notes were encrypted (in a rather primitive way), but on the whole the diary entries were of a rather chaotic nature, besides, their language and style made a rather chaotic impression. When Chernyshevsky, who resolutely rejected Kostomarov's fake, began to be charged on the basis of diary entries, he came up with a bold and interesting move: he decided to pass off the diary as a draft of a literary work, and all his reasoning as a fiction of a novelist. Moreover, there is an opinion (vehemently contested by official Soviet literary criticism) that Chernyshevsky began to write What Is To Be Done? only to justify the contents of his "seditious" diary, which he thus turned into a draft of the novel. This is hardly the only reason for its writing, but this version sheds light on the mystery of the novel, clearly ill-conceived and written in a hurry. Indeed, the tone of the narration sometimes becomes careless and cheeky, sometimes it acquires far-fetched, fantastic features.
In Soviet literary criticism, it was customary to assert that the tsarist censorship simply “overlooked” the revolutionary nature of the work and therefore allowed it to be published. But there is another point of view: the censors saw perfectly well that everything in this supposedly “love” novel was sewn with white thread, however, taking into account the complete absence of any artistic merit of the manuscript (the author himself declares this on the first pages), they they hoped that the famous publicist and revolutionary would compromise himself in the eyes of the enlightened public with such a mediocre craft. But it turned out the other way around! And the point here is not the author’s literary talents, but the fact that with his book he managed to touch the living of more than one generation of young people who laughed at arguments about the Beautiful and the most impeccable form preferred “useful” content. They despised "useless" art, but bowed before the exact sciences and natural sciences, they recoiled from religion, but with religious fervor defended faith in man, more precisely, in "new people", that is, in themselves. The son of a priest and admirer of Feuerbach, Chernyshevsky, this martyr for faith in the bright future of mankind, opened the way for those who replaced the religion of the God-Man with the religion of the Man-God...
It so happened that Chernyshevsky's deathbed delirium was recorded by his secretary. The last words of the writer surprisingly echo the phrase said several decades later by Sigmund Freud about his scientific work: “There is no God in this book.” Chernyshevsky, on his deathbed, mentioned some essay (who knows, perhaps, about his novel?): "It's a strange thing: this book never mentions God."
Tomorrow is a great holiday for the whole Russian land. Tomorrow is celebrated the accession to the throne of the currently reigning Sovereign Emperor, establishing a new era of glory in Russian history; tomorrow, at the same time, is the anniversary of one of the greatest events in Russian history, which marked the present reign. Nine years ago, on February 19, 1861, the Sovereign Emperor signed a memorable manifesto that put an end to serfdom in Russia.
Now, on the ninth anniversary of this event, when it completed its full cycle so successfully and safely, those words of the Supreme Manifesto, which expressed such justified trust in the patriotism and reason of both parties concerned, acquire a special price.
“We rely,” it was said in the manifesto, “on the valiant zeal of the noble class for the common good, to which we cannot but express well-deserved gratitude from Us and from the whole Fatherland for selfless action towards the implementation of Our inscriptions. Russia will not forget that it is voluntary, excited only by respect for the dignity of man and Christian love for one's neighbors, renounced serfdom, which is now abolished, and laid the foundation for a new economic future for the peasants. goodwill and that each owner will complete within the limits of his estate a great civil feat of the entire estate, arranging the life of the peasants and his household people settled on his land on favorable terms for both parties, and thereby give the rural population a good example and encouragement for the accurate and conscientious execution of state decrees " .
Were these hopes brilliantly justified? Who will not do justice to the Russian nobility? Who will not appreciate the "great civil feat" accomplished by him? From among the nobility itself, for the most part at its own direction, came the world mediators of the first series, who on their shoulders endured the entire burden of performing a great deed, personifying the civil self-denial of the whole class. They were reproached, and sometimes not without reason, for their predilection for the benefit of not the nobles, but the peasants. The mode of action of the Russian local estate can best be assessed by comparison with the intrigues that the peasant reform was the subject of in the western region, where landownership renounces the Russian character. There was nothing like systematic opposition to the Regulations of February 19 in the interior provinces; The landowners in the inner provinces did not, as they did in the outlying districts, conspire to circumvent the requirements of the law. On the contrary, the Russian nobility withstood the temptations emanating from a small but influential clique - a "handful of people," as the Moscow nobility expressed it in their last year's meeting - which tried, and is still trying, to stir up selfish passions, itself serving as a blind instrument hostile to the state. parties. The Russian nobility did not fall into deceit and protected our future from disasters; it has saved the basis and conditions for the correct and fruitful progress of our citizenship. Honor and glory to him! His prowess will be even more appreciated later, when history reveals the secret springs of machinations, which are so abundant in our time.
It is not bad to recall the course of peasant affairs in other states. This will best give us a sense of our national dignity. In Prussia, rumors of a ransom have been dragging on for more than twenty years, and yet the final arrangement of the peasants has progressed much less there than in our country over a nine-year period. Compulsory redemption in Prussia, established by the constitution of 1850, was hindered in 1851 and suspended in 1858 pending the issuance of a special provision, which to this day has not yet been issued. It is also known that, thanks to the excessive claims of landowners in Germany and partly in Austria, neither the expansion nor the division of common lands has yet come to an end.
There is no doubt that the Russian nobility will retain its beneficial role in the building of our citizenship. It should see its true interests not in the small, but in the great; such is the meaning of his legends. As regards the further course of peasant affairs, it presents neither dangers nor difficulties.
One can count hundreds of thousands of peasants who have received a quarter of their land as a gift and have long enjoyed complete freedom of movement. In view of this well-known fact, is it possible to think that the resettlement will assume alarming proportions among the temporarily liable peasants, for whom it is associated with the fulfillment of so many diverse conditions?
“We also rely on the common sense of our people,” the Manifesto says on February 19, 1861. “Getting for themselves a more solid foundation of property and greater freedom to dispose of their economy, they (serfs) become obligated to society and to themselves for the beneficence of the new law to supplement with faithful, well-intentioned and diligent use of the rights granted to them. The most beneficent law cannot make people prosperous if they do not take the trouble to arrange their own well-being under the protection of the law.
Never has "the common sense of the people" expressed itself so brilliantly as in the peasant reform that took place in Russia. At first, after liberation, immediately after the sharp turning point that took place in the Russian countryside, when serfdom had already fallen, but neither the mediators of the peace, nor the rural authorities had yet been put into action, when the peasants had not yet had time to get acquainted with their new rights - and then there was no serious confusion among the people, in spite of all the efforts of the malicious parties. The special measures taken just in case turned out to be completely unnecessary. The Russian people, with their common sense, surprised not only their enemies, but also their friends, who still did not expect the masses to be able to show such complete self-control at the first stages of freedom.
It is known that malicious people tried to arouse exaggerated expectations in the peasantry. Rumors spread about a free allotment, about a new will, about liberation from all duties. But among the people a sound instinct for truth was always preserved. It is a remarkable fact that quite a few landlords in the northern provinces did not demand the obligatory redemption of the peasant allotment; Doesn't this testify in the most convincing way that the payment of dues was carried out regularly and that the "gold letters" did not have any effect on the peasants?
Malicious attempts to alarm society with the imaginary dangers of the nine-year anniversary of the liberation of the peasants continued throughout the past year. The machinations were mainly aimed at our student youth. Think what you will of these malicious attempts, but it would be a pitiful mistake to see anything sincere at the basis of them. Let us hope that little by little our affairs will be freed from misunderstandings and obscurities, and thus the ground will be taken away from deceit, along with the hope of success. With the prudence of the nobility and the common sense of the people, God willing, malicious intrigues will again be put to shame, no matter what twists and turns they resort to and no matter what masks they hide behind.
Mikhail Nikiforovich Katkov (1818-1887) - Russian publicist, philosopher, literary critic, publisher of the Russky Vestnik magazine, editor-publisher of the Moskovskiye Vedomosti newspaper.
I wanted to give the material a different name. In any social group there are individuals who act contrary to the general laws, not of the state, but of the crowd. The general attitude towards the beats is polar, from the initial condemnation at the very beginning, to a certain idealization at the end.
There are plenty of examples in history. Who would have thought that the son of an eternally drunk shoemaker would become a Generalissimo, alive, for hundreds of millions of people, the embodiment of a deity? And the crowd, initially condemning the handicapped child, suddenly carried him to the shining peaks.
Of course, the current citizen of Russia, who acted contrary to the laws of the mob, will never become a Generalissimo. Yes, and I think he has other tasks now. A certain impossibility to remain silent when others either sing "hosanna" or drunkenly herd on the days allocated for such cases.
Any urban agglomeration has certain political poles. In Saratov, they are more or less clearly marked. By the way, these reference points are located not so far from each other. Such geography gives even greater dynamism to the political life of the region. This is already affecting the entire country. Perhaps this influence will increase even more. But this is about the future.
In the meantime, I'll fantasize a little. I did not find information that the deputy of the State Duma N.V. Poklonskaya was in the capital of the Volga region. Yes, and there are no places here connected with the intimate life of the last monarchical ruler of Russia.
But everything, I think, is possible. And which historical and political pole will he prefer? There is a high probability that he will bow and lay a modest bouquet at the foot of the monument to P.A. Stolypin. Undoubtedly, the personality of Peter Arkadyevich is a tough monarchist mix, even stronger than the formal highest bearer of power itself.
Within walking distance from the "monarchical" pole of Saratov there is an object no less important for the development of society. A certain, albeit conditional for the current majority of Russia, a touchstone of morality. We are talking about a monument to the main Saratov democrat. To the one who immortalized for future generations of Russians a simple question: "What to do?"
On August 2 of this year, Airborne Forces officer Kuralesin committed, as I see it, a civil act. At a time when his brothers-in-arms were joining the friendly ranks, he came to the monument to Chernyshevsky. Held a solo picket here. On the chest of the officer, in addition to well-deserved awards, there was a simple poster.
The place at the monument is crowded on any day. Yes, and Saratov residents get used to such a combination. Even now the crowd reacted sluggishly to the single picket. There were also those who shook hands with the officer. The main "culprits" of the celebration also approached. They asked what the picket was about. And let's move on. And he remained at the foot of the monument to one of the main Russian democrats. Alone, in spite of the celebrating crowd.
What was on the poster? Can an officer of the Airborne Forces write something bad, especially on such a day? He's not a colossus.
So I hope that, if Mrs. Poklonskaya were to visit Saratov, she would come up not only to the Stolypin monument? On foot, within walking distance...
Reviews
Here, Vladimir, in Russia not even participating in a common feast during the plague is considered suspicious.
I remember that my father (the kingdom of heaven to Viktor Mikhailovich) did not like industrial joint "drinking". There was such a tradition in the USSR, after pay, to take shape on a "bubble". Now it is called "corporate".
Not out of greed, just didn't like to drink. But after sidelong glances, he began to "invest", relatively not too expensive, for the ruble.
The daily audience of the Proza.ru portal is about 100 thousand visitors, who in total view more than half a million pages according to the traffic counter, which is located to the right of this text. Each column contains two numbers: the number of views and the number of visitors.
After the peasant reform of 1861, when unrest began in Russian villages caused by the predatory nature of the reform, the proclamation “To the lordly peasants” became circulated. The authorities decided to attribute its authorship to Chernyshevsky. However, it was not so easy to deal with the famous literary critic, whose articles were passed by the tsarist censorship and widely published in Sovremennik and Otechestvennye Zapiski. Everyone knew about his revolutionary sympathies, about his closeness with Herzen and other major revolutionaries, but this side of Chernyshevsky's activity was carefully concealed. Only his literary activity was visible. With amazing and daring dexterity, Chernyshevsky knew how to speak out in his articles "between the lines." When in the articles about Garibaldi published in Sovremennik and in his commentaries on Italian events he repeated with strange tenacity in almost every phrase: “in Italy”, “I am talking about Italy”, even the most stupid reader eventually began to understand that it was about Russia and current political events. Nevertheless, formally there was nothing to complain about.
On July 7, 1862, the authorities, fearing an open uprising, arrested Chernyshevsky and threw him into the Peter and Paul Fortress. The formal reason was a letter from Herzen, which stated that he, together with Chernyshevsky, was going to publish Kolokol abroad, since the magazine was banned in Russia. However, this was not enough, it was necessary to present a more weighty charge against Chernyshevsky. But in what? And the authorities went to a direct forgery. The retired Lancer cornet V.K. Kostomarov, demoted to the ranks for secretly printing "outrageous publications", a man with mental disabilities and an incompetent graphomaniac poet, in order to avoid punishment, agreed to cooperate with the III Department.
Having forged Chernyshevsky's handwriting, Kostomarov wrote a note, supposedly from Chernyshevsky, asking him to change one word in the proclamation. In addition, Kostomarov fabricated another letter, which allegedly contained irrefutable evidence of Chernyshevsky's direct participation in revolutionary activities. On the basis of these false evidence, at the beginning of 1864, the Senate sentenced Chernyshevsky to fourteen years of hard labor and eternal settlement in Siberia. Alexander II approved the sentence, reducing the term of imprisonment to seven years, but in fact Chernyshevsky spent more than eighteen years in prison.
During Chernyshevsky's arrest, all his notes, including his diary, were confiscated. The most “dangerous” notes were encrypted (in a rather primitive way), but on the whole the diary entries were of a rather chaotic nature, besides, their language and style made a rather chaotic impression. When Chernyshevsky, who resolutely rejected Kostomarov's fake, began to be charged on the basis of diary entries, he came up with a bold and interesting move: he decided to pass off the diary as a draft of a literary work, and all his reasoning as a fiction of a novelist. Moreover, there is an opinion (vehemently contested by official Soviet literary criticism) that Chernyshevsky began to write What Is To Be Done? only to justify the contents of his "seditious" diary, which he thus turned into a draft of the novel. This is hardly the only reason for its writing, but this version sheds light on the mystery of the novel, clearly ill-conceived and written in a hurry. Indeed, the tone of the narration sometimes becomes careless and cheeky, sometimes it acquires far-fetched, fantastic features.
In Soviet literary criticism, it was customary to assert that the tsarist censorship simply “overlooked” the revolutionary nature of the work and therefore allowed it to be published. But there is another point of view: the censors saw perfectly well that everything in this supposedly “love” novel was sewn with white thread, however, taking into account the complete absence of any artistic merit of the manuscript (the author himself declares this on the first pages), they they hoped that the famous publicist and revolutionary would compromise himself in the eyes of the enlightened public with such a mediocre craft. But it turned out the other way around! And the point here is not the author’s literary talents, but the fact that with his book he managed to touch the living of more than one generation of young people who laughed at arguments about the Beautiful and the most impeccable form preferred “useful” content. They despised "useless" art, but bowed before the exact sciences and natural sciences, they recoiled from religion, but with religious fervor defended faith in man, more precisely, in "new people", that is, in themselves. The son of a priest and admirer of Feuerbach, Chernyshevsky, this martyr for faith in the bright future of mankind, opened the way for those who replaced the religion of the God-Man with the religion of the Man-God...
It so happened that Chernyshevsky's deathbed delirium was recorded by his secretary. The last words of the writer surprisingly echo the phrase said several decades later by Sigmund Freud about his scientific work: “There is no God in this book.” Chernyshevsky, on his deathbed, mentioned some essay (who knows, perhaps, about his novel?): "It's a strange thing: this book never mentions God."
THE CIVIL FEAT OF N. G. CHERNYSHEVSKY After the peasant reform of 1861, when unrest began in the Russian villages caused by the predatory nature of the reform, a proclamation to the lordly peasants began to circulate. The authorities decided to ascribe its authorship to Chernyshevsky. However, it was not so easy to crack down on the famous literary critic, whose articles were passed by tsarist censorship and were widely published in Sovremennik and Otechestvennye zapiski. Everyone knew about his revolutionary sympathies, about his closeness with Herzen and other major revolutionaries However, this side of Chernyshevsky's activity was carefully legalized.
Only his literary activity was in sight. With amazing and daring dexterity, Chernyshevsky knew how to express himself between the lines in his articles. When in articles published in Sovremennik about Garibaldi and in comments on Italian events, he repeated with strange persistence in almost every phrase in Italy, I'm talking about Italy, even the most stupid reader eventually began to understand that it was about Russia and current political events. .
Nevertheless, formally there was nothing to complain about. On July 7, 1862, the authorities, fearing an open uprising, arrested Chernyshevsky and threw him into the Peter and Paul Fortress. The formal reason was Herzen's letter, which said that he, together with Chernyshevsky, was going to print the Kolokol abroad, since the magazine was banned in Russia. But this was not enough, Chernyshevsky had to be charged with more weight.
But why? And the authorities went to a direct forgery. The retired lancer cornet V.K. Kostomarov, demoted to the ranks for secretly publishing outrageous publications, a man with mental disabilities and an incompetent graphomaniac poet, agreed to cooperate with the III Department in order to avoid punishment. Having forged Chernyshevsky's handwriting, Kostomarov wrote a note, allegedly from Chernyshevsky, asking him to change one word in the proclamation. In addition, Kostomarov fabricated another letter, which allegedly contained irrefutable evidence of Chernyshevsky's direct participation in revolutionary activity. On the basis of these false evidence, at the beginning of 1864, the Senate sentenced Chernyshevsky to 14 years of hard labor and eternal settlement in Siberia.
Alexander II approved the verdict, reducing the term of hard labor by 7 years, but in fact Chernyshevsky spent more than 18 years in prison. When Chernyshevsky was arrested, all his notes, including his diary, were confiscated. The most dangerous notes were encrypted in a rather primitive way, but on the whole, the diary entries were rather chaotic, and their language and style made a rather chaotic impression.
When Chernyshevsky, who resolutely rejected Kostomarov's forgery, began to be charged on the basis of diary entries, he came up with a bold and interesting move: he decided to pass off the diary as a draft of a literary work, and all his reasoning for the fiction of a fiction writer.
Moreover, there is an opinion, vehemently disputed by the official Soviet literary criticism, that Chernyshevsky began to write What is to be done? only to justify the contents of his seditious diary, which he thus turned into a draft of a novel. This is hardly the only reason for its writing, but this version sheds light on the mystery of the novel, clearly poorly thought out and written in a hurry. the censorship simply overlooked the revolutionary character of the work and therefore allowed it to be published.
But there is another point of view, the censors saw perfectly well that everything in this supposedly love novel was sewn with white thread, however, taking into account the complete absence of any artistic merit of the manuscript, the author himself declares this on the first pages, they hoped that the famous publicist and revolutionary ner compromises himself in the eyes of the enlightened public with such a mediocre craft.
But it turned out the other way around! And the point here is not the literary talents of the author, but the fact that with his book he managed to touch more than one generation of young people who laughed at the arguments about the Beautiful and the most impeccable form, preferring useful content. They despised useless art, but bowed before the exact sciences and natural sciences, they recoiled from religion, but with religious fervor defended faith in man, more precisely, in new people, that is, in themselves.
The son of a priest and admirer of Feuerbach, Chernyshevsky, this martyr for faith in the bright future of mankind, opened the way for those who replaced the religion of the God-man with the religion of the man-god. It so happened that Chernyshevsky's dying delirium was recorded by the secretary. His last words miraculously resonate with a phrase said several decades later by Sigmund Freud about his scientific work There is no God in this book. It is strange that God is never mentioned in this book.
What will we do with the received material:
If this material turned out to be useful to you, you can save it to your page on social networks:
| tweet |
More essays, term papers, theses on this topic:
Civil, hereditary and property rights according to the Sudebniks of 1497 and 1550. The differences between these judges in other branches of law, except for civil, inheritance and property law
The composition of the Sudebnik includes 4 parts 1. Resolution on the central court. 2. Decree on the local provincial, governor's court. 3. Art. 54 The article proceeds from the provisions of the PSG Art. Art. 40 and 41 about contractual .. In the conditions of the development of commodity production, cities, when the top of feudal society has a growing need for skilled ..
Financing of the civil service, salaries of civil servants
Basic and additional state guarantees for civil servants.. encouragement and awards in the public service.. professional training, retraining and advanced training of civil servants..
The concept of civil society is one of the key concepts of modern political science. The relevance of the theoretical and practical aspects of this concept is due to .. The successes of public organizations and movements of people of good will in the field of international detente are widely known..
Property rights as objects of civil rights. The concept and types of objects of civil rights
The concept and types of objects of civil rights.
Concept, subject and method of civil law. Civil law as a science and academic discipline
And sciences of Ukraine.. Donetsk national.. university..
Civil Law and Civil Procedure
Ministry of Education and Science of the Samara Region.. Ministry of Property Relations of the Samara Region.. GOU VPO Samara State Regional Academy Nayanova..
"The main provisions of the Federal Law "On Civil Defense" and "Civil Defense"
Mobilization. Civil defense. Territorial defense15 Article 18. State of war15 Article 19. Martial law15 Article 20. Mobilization15 Article..
Civil society. Formation of the theory of civil society
The concept of "civil society" is one of the key concepts of modern political science. The relevance of the theoretical and practical aspects of this concept is due to .. The successes of public organizations and movements of people of good will in the field of international detente are widely known..
Civil law as a branch of law: concept, subject, method concept of civil law
The concept of civil law .. the subject of civil .. and the system of civil law as a branch of law ..
Spurs on civil law
The seller has the right to execute such an agreement before or after the expiration of the period specified in it only with the consent of the buyer. 458. Moment.. The goods are not recognized as ready for transfer if they are not identified for the purposes of.. The condition of the contract that the risk of accidental loss or accidental damage to the goods passes to the buyer from the moment..
