Apollon Grigoryev

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Apollon Grigoryev, a Russian poet

Apollon Aleksandrovich Grigoryev[1] (Russian: Аполло́н Алекса́ндрович Григо́рьев, IPA: [ɐpɐˈlon ɐlʲɪˈksandrəvʲɪt͡ɕ ɡrʲɪˈɡorʲjɪf] ( ); 20 July 1822 - 7 October 1864) was a Russian poet, literary and theatrical critic, translator, memoirist, as well as the author of a number of popular songs and romances.


Apollon Grigoryev was born in Moscow, where his father was the secretary of the City magistrate. He received a good education at home and studied in the Moscow University.

Literary career[edit]

In about 1845 several of his poems were published by Otechestvennye Zapiski. Then, a number of short, unremarkable articles of different genres appeared in Repertuar and Pantheon: verses, critical articles, theatrical reviews, and translations. In 1846 Grigoryev published a separate book of his poems, which was met by rather harsh criticism. Subsequently Grigoryev wrote little original poetry, but focused on translation: from Shakespeare (A Midsummer Night's Dream, The Merchant of Venice, Romeo and Juliet), from Byron ("To parizinu", fragments from Child Harold, etc.), Molière, Delavigne. Grigoryev's years in Saint Petersburg were the stormiest; he became more and more extensively a victim of the Russian "weakness",[2] to which he was first introduced through student revelry. In 1847 he returned to Moscow, where he became the teacher of jurisprudence in the 1st Moscow secondary school, as well as actively collaborating in Moscow. City. Leaf. In 1847, he married Lydia Fedorovna Korsh, the sister of the well-known writers Evgenii and Valentin Korsh, but for some period remained dissipated and lived a less than fully productive lifestyle.


In 1850 he became editor of Moskvityanin and leader of the remarkable circle known as the "young editorial staff of Moskvityanin". Without any efforts from the representatives of the "old editorial staff", Mikhail Pogodin, Stepan Shevyrev, and Alexander Veltman, somehow around their periodical was assembled, in Grigoryev's words, "the young, daring, drunk, but honest and shining by gifts" friendly circle, into composition of which entered Alexander Ostrovsky, Aleksey Pisemsky, Almazov, A. Potekhin, Pecherskiy-Melnikov, Edel'son, Lev Mey, Berg, Gorbunov, etc. None of them were Slavophiles in the orthodox sense, but Moskvityanin attracted them all because here they could freely base their social and political ideology on the foundation of Russian reality. Grigoryev was the chief theorist of the circle and its standard-bearer. In the 60's he reached his apogee.

Later years[edit]

Grigoryev wrote for Moskvityanin until it folded in 1856. After that he worked for the Russian Conversation, the Library for Reading, the initial Russian Word, where he was for a while one of three editors, for the Russian Peace, Svetoch, the Syn Otechestva of Starchevskiy, the Russian Herald of Katkov. Nothing settled came up.

In 1861 arose the "Epoch" of the Dostoyevsky brothers, and he again entered onto the literary stage. As in "Moskvityanin", here was grouped the entire circle of the writers of "pochvennikov" – it was insurance, the Averkis, Dostoyevskys, etc., connect with both the generality of sympathies and antipathies and with personal friendship. To g. they all related with the sincere respect. Soon, however, to it sensed also in this medium what the cold relation to its mystical broadcastings, in it in the same year left into the Orenburg by teacher it was Russian. language and literature in the military school. Not without the enthusiasm it undertook by g. the matter, but it very rapidly cooled, and in yr it returned to Petersburg and again began a disorderly life of literary Bohemia, to the seat in the debt prison inclusively. In 1863. "Time" was forbidden. G. moved to the weekly "anchor". It edited newspaper and it wrote the theatrical reviews, which unexpectedly enjoyed great success, because of the unusual animation, which g. introduced into the reporterskuyu routine and the dryness of theatrical marks. It investigated the game of actors with the same carefulness and with the same passionate enthusiasm, with which it related to the phenomena of remaining skills. In this case it, besides thin taste, manifested numerous acquaintance with the German and French theorists of stage skill. In 1864 G. "Time" is resurrected in the form of "epoch". Grigoryev again undertakes the line of business of the "first critic", but already temporarily. The hard drinking, which passed directly into the physical, agonising ailment, cracked powerful organism Grigoryev died in Petersburg. He is buried on the Mitrofaniyevskom cemetery, next to the same victim of wine – a poet Lev Mey.

Grigoryev's articles, which had been scattered along the different periodicals, were in 1876 assembled into one volume by Nikolay Strakhov.

The critique[edit]

To give any precise formulation of the critical views of Grigoryev is not easy for many reasons. Clarity never entered into the composition of Grigoryev's critical talent; extreme confusion and the darkness of account they did not for free frighten away public from its articles. The specific idea about the basic features of world view G. prevents the complete indiscipline of thought in its articles. With the same disorder, with which it burnt physical forces, it spent its mental wealth, without allowing oneself the labour to compile the precise plan of article and without having a force to restrain from the temptation to have a talk immediately about the questions, which are simultaneously encountered. Because the most significant part of its articles is placed in "Moskvityanin", "Time" and to "Epoch", where in the chapter of the matter stood either it itself or its friends, these articles simply strike with their carelessness. He himself excellently realised the lyric disorder of his writings, their time himself described as the "articles careless, pisannye to the ploughing", but this he pleased itself as the guarantee of their complete "sincerity". For entire his literary life he never definitely explain his world view. It was so unclear even to the nearest its friends and admirers, what his last article – the "paradoxes of organic criticism" (1864) – as usual, not finished and treating about thousands of things, besides main object, is answer to Dostoyevsky's invitation to present finally critical profession de foi its. G. itself entire more frequent and more willingly called its criticism "organic", in the difference both from the camp of "theorists" – Chernishevsky, Nikolai Dobrolyubov, Dmitri Pisarev and from the criticism of "aesthetical", that protects the principle of "skill for the skill", and from the criticism of "historical", by which it implied Belinskiy. Belinskiy g. was placed unusually highly. He called him the "immortal champion of ideas", "with the great and powerful spirit", with the "nature on the truth of brilliant". But Belinskiy saw in the skill only reflection of life and concept itself about the life in it was too direct and "goal is logical". On G. "life is something mysterious and not exhausted, the abyss, which absorbs any final reason, the immense expanse, in which frequently it disappears, as wave in the ocean, the logical conclusion any clever head – something even ironic and at the same time complete of love, which generates from itself peaces after the peaces". In conformity with this "organic view recognizes for its starting point creative, direct, natural, vital forces. In other words: not one mind, with its logical requirements and generated by them theories, but mind is plus life and its organic manifestations ". However, "snake position; what there is – that reasonably "G. decisively condemned. The mystical admiration of the slavophiles before the Russian people spirit it recognised "narrow" and only Khomyakov placed very highly, and that because it "one of the slavophiles the thirst of ideal combined astonishingly with the faith in infinity of life and therefore it were not calmed on ideal'chikakh" of Konstantin Aksakov. In the book of Victor Hugo about Shakespeare G. saw one of the quite one-piece formulations of the "organic" theory, followers of which he considered also Renan[disambiguation needed], Emerson and Carlyle. But the "initial, huge ore" of organic theory, according to Grigoryev, "SOCh. Schelling in all phases of his development ". G. with the pride called itself the student of this "great teacher". The persuasion g. emerges from the admiration before the organic force of life in its diverse manifestations that the abstract, naked truth, in its pure form, is inaccessible to us, that we can master only the truth coloured, expression of which can be only national skill. Pushkin is great by no means with one size of his artistic talent: he is great because let us realise in himself a whole series of foreign influences into something the completely independent. In Pushkin the first time were isolated and clearly was designated "our Russian physiognomy, true measure of all our public, moral and artistic sympathies, complete description of the type of Russian soul". With the special love was stopped, therefore, g. on the personality of belkina, entirely almost not commented by Belinskiy, on "Captain's daughter" and "Dubrovskiy". With the same love stopped it on Maxim Maksimovich from the "Hero of our time", also, with the special hatred – on Pechorin as one of the "predatory" types, which are completely alien to Russian spirit. Skill, in the essence herself to its, not only nation – it even is local. Any talented writer exists unavoidably the "voice of known soil, locality, which has right to his citizenship, to his opinion and voice in the public life as type, as color, as ebb, nuance". Reducing thus the skill to the almost unconscious creation, g. did not love even to use the word: influence, as something excessively abstract and little spontaneous, and introduced new term "movement". Together with Tyutchev, G. said that nature "not mold, not heartless face, that directly and directly in it there is a soul, in it there is freedom, in it there is love, in it there is language. Talents true are covered by these organic "movements" and consonant echo by them in their works. But once truly talented writer is a spontaneous repercussion of organic forces, he must without fail reflect any unknown another aspect of the nation organic life of this people, he must say "new word". Each writer, therefore, G. examined, first of all, with respect to that, he did say "new word". The most powerful "new word" in the newest Russian literature said Ostrovsky; he opened the new, unknown peace, to which he related by no means negatively, but with the deep love. Full value G. – in the beauty of his own spiritual personality, in the deeply sincere tendency toward the limitless bright ideal. Stronger than all confused and misty reasonings G. acts the charm of his moral essence, which is truly "organic" penetration by the best beginnings of high and elevated. Sr. on it "epoch" (1864 № 8 and 1865 № 2).

Нет, не рожден я биться лбом,
Ни терпеливо ждать в передней,
Ни есть за княжеским столом,
Ни с умиленьем слушать бредни.
Нет, не рожден я быть рабом,
Мне даже в церкви за обедней
Бывает скверно, каюсь в том,
Прослушать августейший дом.
И то, что чувствовал Марат,
Порой способен понимать я,
И будь сам бог аристократ,
Ему б я гордо пел проклятья...
Но на кресте распятый бог
Был сын толпы и демагог.


  1. ^ Also transliterated Grigor'ev and Grigoriev
  2. ^ alcohol

External links[edit]