Small pictures (on the road)

The essay was written in connection with the proposal to Dostoevsky to take part in the creation by St. Petersburg writers of the collective charity collection Skladchina, the proceeds of which were earmarked for the victims of hunger in the Samara province in 1873. An initiative group of writers gathered on December 15 at the apartment of the leader of the Literary Fund V.P. Gayevsky and proposed the idea of ​​writing assistance to the starving Samara peasants. Three organizational meetings took place, and as a result, the organizing committee was approved, whose functions included the publication and editing of the collection, called "Folding". It included N. A. Nekrasov , A. A. Kraevsky , A. V. Nikitenko , V. P. Meshchersky (treasurer), I. A. Goncharov ^[2] .

The latter was engaged in the selection and reading of manuscripts, correspondence with the participants in the collection. He kept detailed letters to the organizing committee of Skladchina with reviews of the materials sent, showing Goncharov’s significant editorial and organizational contribution, his attitude to his publishing, including censorship duties. His role in the publication of Little Pictures is paramount, because, due to his intervention, Dostoevsky has moved away from the original outline of the essay. On January 11, 1874, in a letter to A. A. Kraevsky, chairman of the Skladchina Publishing Committee, Dostoevsky responded to the request of the editorial committee and intended to transmit the essay no earlier than February 1. But in early February, he gave Goncharov only the first half of the essay. In connection with the publication of “Small Pictures”, intensive correspondence was established between Dostoevsky and Goncharov, however, the February letters of Dostoevsky did not survive, only two March letters reached us ^[1] .

From these letters a different aesthetic approach and creative principles of two writers appear. In a letter dated February 11, 1874, Goncharov spoke about the first half of the essay: “Of course, without my criticism you know very well how peculiar, smart and true characteristic notes about our travelers are, which serve as an introduction to your“ Small Pictures “. They alone could constitute in themselves a capital offering to Sluchin ” . Goncharov emphasized the “subtle and apt" character of the "engraver of large houses." However, referring to his “boring censor duty”, the editor of Skladchina expressed his doubts about the desirability of describing the character of the “priest-boyar”, who, according to Goncharov, was presented “so sharply and evil that it seems to fall into the cartoon, it seems implausible " . From the next letter to Goncharov, it is clear to Dostoevsky that Dostoevsky stood up for the image of a modern priest, motivating him with the fact that "this type is arising" ^[2] .

In turn, Goncharov challenged the typicality of such an image.

“... if it is emerging, then this is not the type. You know better than me that a type is made up of long and many repetitions or stratifications of phenomena and persons - where the similarities of both become more frequent over time and, finally, are established, solidify and become familiar to the observer. Creativity (I mean the creativity of an objective artist, like you, for example) can appear only then, in my opinion, when life is established, it does not get along with a new, nascent life: it needs a different kind of talent, for example, Shchedrin. You no longer depicted a priest as a sine ira <without anger (lat.)> ... here the artist gave way to a publicist ”

- I. A. Goncharov, Collected Works, vols. I — VIII. Goslitizdat, M., 1952-1955. T. VIII, pp. 457–458.

Goncharov expressed his censorship fears to Dostoevsky, but suggested that he decide on his own how to publish “Small Pictures” - “with or without priest”. In the next letter of February 14, the dispute between two writers about the typical in literature continued. Agreeing with the opponent that the priest portrayed by Dostoevsky could have a real prototype, Goncharov insisted on the cartoon character of this character: “... he can be mistaken for a cartoon because he is the only one who wears all the scars that overlap with nihilism, on one side ( he smokes exorbitantly, and calls the devils, and praises a civil marriage), but he, on the other hand, is a dandy, all dressed in key chains, chains, sprinkled with perfume and resembles the French fashionable abbot of Bourbon times . ” Dostoevsky’s argument that the image of the priest is not a cartoon or fiction, but only a photograph, did not convince Goncharov: “this is precisely the reason that it did not come out of <...> type” ^[2] .

While there was a correspondence between the writers, I. A. Goncharov recommended to the Committee “Skladchiny” the first half of the essay “Small Pictures”: “This is a series of small essays, smart, original, talented. There is only one half. The author promises to send the other half in two or three days, on Saturday. ” Two weeks later, Goncharov sent the second half of the essay to the Collection Committee. It did not contain a fragment about the priest (this fragment has partially survived to the present time as a fragment of a white autograph) - apparently, the writers managed to agree on a reduction of the text. In the surviving fragment (less than half of the text about the priest) there is an image of a teacher (which caused Goncharov’s praise), who condemns the constantly cursing nihilist priest: (“... if you can’t go without a damn, why did you go to priests?”) At the same time, the teacher defended the right priest smoking “out of protest”, despite the fact that the smoking of persons vested with priesthood was not welcomed, supported the priest in his approval of a civil marriage ( “as for this, he was absolutely right because he spoke the truth <...> and that even he about the first and holy duty in his position ”) ^[2] .

In March, Dostoyevsky wrote to Goncharov twice in writing about the essay “Small Pictures”: in a letter dated March 7, he asked him to send proofs of the collection, and on March 20 noticed Goncharov that his name was missing in the newspaper announcement about Skladchina’s release . The collection itself was printed at the end of March 1874. It included the works of 48 writers of various directions, united by the idea of "on a neutral basis <...> to join their common efforts in one selfless desire to help those in need . " Among the authors of the collection were the names of M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin , I. S. Turgenev , A. K. Tolstoy , N. A. Nekrasov , A. A. Potekhin , A. N. Ostrovsky , A. N. Pleshcheev , P I. Weinberg , P. D. Boborykin , A. N. Apukhtin , I. A. Gorbunov and many others ^[1] .

According to commentators of Dostoevsky, the collection “Skladchina” received positive reviews in the press. The newspaper “Voice” in the anonymous feuilleton “Literature and Life” regarded its appearance as “a major literary event”. The newspaper was praised by many works of the collection, including the essay by Dostoevsky ^[1] :

Mr. Dostoevsky gave “Small Pictures (On the Road)”, so to speak, an intimate conversation of a talented author with a reader about traveling by rail and on ships, as well as about passengers. In these conversations there are very witty remarks and accurate observation <...>, with few exceptions, the collection is well-composed, and readers will find in it a diverse reading. In general, the connection of literature with life, discovered by Skladchina and caused by hunger in the Samara province, proved, it seems to me, compulsory that our literary forces are still great and the state of modern literature could be brilliant.

- “The Voice ”, “Literature and Life”, 1874, March 28, No. 87

.

Another Petersburg liberal newspaper, St. Petersburg Vedomosti , also responded with an anonymous article, New Books. In her opinion, the idea of ​​the collection: "clearly indicates that despite all the discord among various figures of various literary parties, solidarity is found between them in one point - in sympathy with the needs of the people . " Focusing on the analysis of Dostoevsky’s essay, the reviewer noted:

Mr. Dostoevsky’s essay “Small Pictures” can serve as a brilliant example of how a great talent, even from the most battered and ordinary plot, can do an interesting and bright thing. In “Small Pictures”, the author sketches sketches of road impressions, scenes, conversations, depicts the physiognomy of the public meeting on the railway, on the ship. Which, it seems, can be older and more innocent of such a plot: it is visited by all feuilletonists of almost all countries, centuries and peoples. Meanwhile, what an interesting essay Mr. Dostoevsky published, what characteristic “pictures” he managed to draw, what typical images of Russian road satellites he sketched, in relief and brightly, with several seemingly carelessly drawn figures, a few carelessly thrown strokes he expressed the special Russian falsity and pettiness of the subjects of the so-called “good society” that you encounter on the road. Right, so it seems that it was with such satellites that you happened to travel more than once, it was precisely this kind of “picture” that you saw which are depicted by Mr. Dostoevsky. ”

- " St. Petersburg Gazette ", "New Books", 1874, April 3, No. 90.

The reviewer’s attention was drawn to the conversation between “my lord” and the general: “Is it not true that this workshop“ picture ”is drawn with truly Dickensian humor and beats in the eyes with its liveliness; it seems involuntarily, once, somewhere, I saw this “master of the region”, and my lord, and the little man “from the second step”, I once heard their conversation. And in this way, the whole essay of Mr. Dostoevsky is full of vivid, typical pictures . ” The conservative newspaper Russkiy Mir published two lengthy articles on the collection Skladchina. The author of the articles “Essays on Russian Literature” V. G. Avseyenko , hiding behind the letters of A. O. , wrote: “The success of“ Skladchina ”is well deserved by her, in addition to even a charitable purpose, just as a literary publication <...> in“ Skladchina “names appear Ms. Turgenev, Goncharov, Maykov, Ms. Kokhanovskaya ; already these names alone are completely enough to arouse the public interest in the most legitimate way ” ^[1] .

The first article by Vasily Avseyenko is devoted to the poetry of “Skladchiny”, and the second to prose works. The critic singled out the work of the editor of Skladchina, I. A. Goncharov, “From Memoirs and Tales of Sea Navigation,” as well as “ Living Relics ” by I. S. Turgenev. On the contrary, Dostoevsky’s essay was criticized by the reviewer:

Dostoevsky’s “small pictures” would have come out, perhaps, not bad, if the author had treated them more simply. Unfortunately, Mr. Dostoevsky for some reason considered it necessary to douse them with some kind of bile acid, which makes it all the more unpleasant that there are no real sarcasm, healthy humor in the “pictures”, but there is only a convulsive irritation, for which self let loose. This annoyance makes the author sometimes say perfect fables, for example, to assure that, wherever Russian educated people come together, their first thought is: and they would not have fought somehow! <...> We did not know this at all, and now we remain convinced that there are such educated people who do not even think of the idea of ​​a fight. It is another matter if Mr. Dostoevsky understands those educated Russian people with whom he fills his novels; they really slap each other at each step, say instead of “hello” and “goodbye” - “scoundrel” and “bastard”, break into private apartments with drunken gangs, bite the governors by the ears, grab another friend’s nose in the club, etc. under. But you can’t transfer your fantasies to the whole educated Russian society and assure in print that in Russia people are not going without a thought about a fight.

- A.O. <B. G. Avseenko>, "Essays on Current Literature", "Russian World", 1874, April 12, No. 97.

The reviewer of the Novosti newspaper of the New Critic (the writer I. A. Kushchevsky was hiding under this pseudonym) was generally not impressed with the idea of ​​the Skladchina collection. In his opinion, "no parties in Skladchina met, <...> the desire to help the people did not reconcile anyone at all, as many had expected . " In his words, there was an insult to the writer-democrat on the literary hierarchy: "literary generals and staff officers took a mite out of their works according to a proverb: God, it’s for us that we are worthless . " His sympathy was awarded only to Turgenev’s story “Living relics” and Nekrasov’s poetry, while “Small Pictures” were simply mentioned when enumerating other works of the reviewed collection ^[1] .

• “Small Pictures (On the Road)” on the site “Fedor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky. Anthology of life and creativity "
• The crease. A literary collection compiled from the works of Russian writers in favor of those who suffered from hunger in the Samra province. SPb .: Type. A.M. Kotomina, 1874.S. 454-478 .
• “Small pictures (on the road)”

• Small pictures