From under the boulders

From the compilers ^[3] .

• A.I.Solzhenitsyn . On the return of breath and consciousness .
• I.R.Shafarevich . Socialism.
• M.S. Agursky . Modern socio-economic systems and their prospects.
• I.R.Shafarevich. Isolation or rapprochement?
• A.I.Solzhenitsyn. Repentance and self-restraint as a category of national life .
• A. B. ( M.K. Polivanov ). The direction of change.
• F. Korsakov ( F.G. Svetov ). Russian fate.
• E.V. Barabanov . The split of the Church and the world.
• V.M. Borisov . Personality and national identity.
• A.I.Solzhenitsyn. Education .
• I.R.Shafarevich. Does Russia have a future?

A formal reason for the collection to appear was the publication in one of the issues of the quarterly Bulletin of the Russian Christian Student Movement (VRHD), published in New York and Paris, of three anonymous articles by authors living in the USSR.

Solzhenitsyn wrote:

In the Vestnik RSHD several years ago, such a whole direction appeared - the natives of Russia living in Russia accuse it as if they themselves are not boiling in this dirt and are clean, have nothing to do with it ... the antipode of repentance is very common in Soviet public and in the Soviet so-called third emigration. It is to blame Russia and even blame Russia - without a sense of guilt, without recognizing its own share in this guilt. It was extremely characteristic recently that it erupted in the first issue of Continent ^[4] - Sinyavsky literally wrote the following in his article: “Russia is a bitch, you will answer for that too!” In this case, we are talking about Jewish emigration in our time. But this is a private example. And the whole expression - the son tells his mother: “Russia is a bitch, you will answer for it!” And for this, therefore, you will answer for much more! Even in the entire history of Russian self-spitting, I do not remember such an expression ^[5] .

According to the memoirs of I. R. Shafarevich, the idea of ​​the collection belonged to A. I. Solzhenitsyn, and he saw the purpose of the collection as follows:

... with all the acuteness of today's economic, political and social problems, our future is still determined in the first place ... by how we answer the spiritual questions that arise before us ^[6] .

M. S. Agursky, focusing on the fact that he is “a participant in the movement whose goal is the national and spiritual revival of the Jewish people”, noted:

Despite the seemingly complete dissimilarity of our goals, we are united by many universal ideals, as well as a common historical fate in the past more than half a century ^[6] .

The collection “From Under the Boulders” continued a series of historiosophical almanacs “Problems of Idealism” (M., 1902): “Milestones. Collection of articles on the Russian intelligentsia ” (M., 1909) and “ From the depths. A collection of articles on the Russian revolution ” (M., 1918) ^{[7] [8]} The essence of the name was disclosed in Solzhenitsyn's preface:“ For many decades not a single question, not a single major event in our life has been discussed freely and comprehensively, so that we can give a true assessment of what happened and the ways out of it. But everything was suppressed at the beginning, everything was abandoned by meaningless chaotic trash, without concern for the past, and therefore about the future. And there new, new events fell, piled with the same crushing boulders, so that interest and strength in the analysis were lost ... From that darkness and dampness, from under the boulders, we now touch the first weak shoots. Expecting the history of the gift of freedom and other gifts, we run the risk of never having to wait for them. History is ourselves, and we can’t help ourselves dragging ourselves and taking out what was expected so eagerly from the depths ” ^[5] . And when society is renewed, a gap will appear, a “breach of freedom," Solzhenitsyn dreamed, and then he would emerge from the “depths of the sea, like the Thirty Three Athletes,” the helmet-glittering army - and “our great literature (including philosophical and journalistic) will be restored, which we shoved to the seabed during the Great Fracture, and maybe even earlier. ”

In the article " Education " Solzhenitsyn directly addressed the judgments and ideas set forth in the "Milestones" . He wrote:

The fatal features of the Russian pre-revolutionary educated stratum were thoroughly examined in Vekhi, and indignantly rejected by the entire intelligentsia, by all party lines from the Cadets to the Bolsheviks . The prophetic depth “Milestones” did not find (and the authors knew that they would not) the sympathy of reading Russia, did not affect the development of the Russian situation, and did not prevent fatal events. Soon, the title of the book, exploited by another group of authors (“ Change of Milestones ”) of narrow political interests and a low level, began to mix, fade and completely disappear from the memory of new Russian educated generations, especially the book itself from the official Soviet libraries. But even in 60 years her testimonies did not fade: “Milestones” even today seem to us to have been sent from the future. And only that pleases that after 60 years, it seems, the layer in Russia capable of supporting this book is thickening. Today we read it with a dual feeling: we are indicated ulcers as if not only of a past historical time, but in many ways - ours too. And therefore, any conversation about the intelligentsia of today ... it is almost impossible to conduct without comparing the present qualities with the judgments of "Milestones" ^[9] .

The collection caused controversy and sharp criticism both from the side of official Soviet propaganda, and among the representatives of the left (Marxist) wing of the dissident movement:

The compilers of the collection “From Under the Boulders”, and above all Solzhenitsyn and Shafarevich, not only do not accept socialism and socialist ideas, their preaching comes from hatred of socialism, which allows any means in the fight against its opponents ... As for socio-political and economic statements of the authors of the collection, there is generally no basis for scientific debate ... ^[10]

Many of the authors' ideas (criticisms of the Soviet intelligentsia, positive statements about religion, faith in the identity of Russia) of the collection caused a sharp rejection of a significant part of the liberal and democratically minded Soviet intelligentsia ^{[11] [12] [13]} .

The writer A. D. Sinyavsky was one of the first to accuse Solzhenitsyn of Russian nationalism , chauvinism and the desire to build an autocratic state ^[14] .

Answers to such criticism can be found in the articles by I. R. Shafarevich “Rear Guard Fighting of Marxism” ^[15] (1978) and “ Russophobia ” ^[16] (1982), in the article by A. I. Solzhenitsyn “ Our pluralists ” ^[17] (1982) and his autobiographical essay, “A Grain Between the Two Millstones Has Disappeared ” ^[18] , as well as in the works of G. Andreev “Not Twins, but Brothers” and others ^[19] .

• From under the boulders: Sat Art. / A. I. Solzhenitsyn, M. S. Agursky, E. V. Barabanov, V. M. Borisov, A. B., F. Korsakov, I. R. Shafarevich. - Paris: YMCA-Press, 1974.- 980 p.
• Parshin, A. N. “Milestones”, “From the Depth”, “From Under the Rock” as religious manifestos of the Russian intelligentsia. - Collection "Milestones" in the context of Russian culture. - M., 2007 .-- S. 272-277.
• Alexander Solzhenitsyn: From under the boulders: Manuscripts, documents, photographs: To the 95th birthday: [Exhibition at the Pushkin Museum im. A.S. Pushkin, December 9, 2013 - February 9, 2014] / Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation; The Pushkin Museum to them. A.S. Pushkin; Archive of A. I. Solzhenitsyn. - M .: Russian Way, 2013 .-- 372 p. - ISBN 978-5-85887-431-7 . >