DOBROLYUBOV Nikolai

Unhappily formed a brief life vysokodarovitogo boys, blindingly brilliant in their literary results, but remarkably dull in his personal existence. Fate played him exactly the "insulting joke", which is so "afraid" his "sick mind" in one of them written before his death poems ( "Let him die, sad little"). With a bitter premonition, he expressed his concerns here: "To a grave dirt did not matter, I love that all he desired so eagerly and so vain I'm alive, do not smile, I am pleased over the grave of my board". But it turned out just so. Glory, . influence, . universal sympathy - all this came to Dobroliubov only after death, in life, he just meekly tried to warm attachment, . knew, . mainly, . alone throes of creation, the triumph of his ideas a little bit it became marked, . and the overall appearance of an evil disease eating away at him, and cares of life was depressing, gloomy,
. - Dob was born January 24, 1836, Mr.. in Nizhny Novgorod, where his father was a priest. His family was of sufficient and many of his comrades Dobrolubova in seminary, children sextons and rural priests did not dare to even come to his house, as much for their important and noble. But the father Dobrolubova had a passion to build homes, thanks to this he was always concerned and, far from being angry, they poured out on the family bitterness of many business failures of their. To his son he has placed himself in such relations that one, since it provides not only outwardly, but deep down most complete deference strongly shunned him, and so shy in front of him that did not open his mouth in his presence. But a good, friendly, intelligent and noble mother, Dobroliubov felt boundless affection. From her he inherited his spiritual character, the desire for moral perfection and wholeness of nature. "From her, - he wrote in his diary shortly after her death - I got their best qualities, with her affinity I first days of my childhood, it flew to my heart, wherever I was, for it was all that Whatever I did ". When she died, gave himself up Dob deepest despair. Diary pages it devoted to this terrible blow for him, belong to the most touching expressions of filial love. In love Dobrolubova to the mother clearly affected the surprising margin of tenderness, which is so striking all become more familiar with the intimate life of the father of Russian "negation". This, . on conviction of his literary opponents, . "heartless scoffer" and "Destroyer" every "illusions", . this imaginary prototype Bazarov was not only an exemplary son, . brother and a relative, . but the whole was full of the romantic quest for a perfect affection,
. In the remaining papers after the death Dobrolubova Chernyshevsky found a long, but out of embarrassment is not sent to the address, the letter 16-year Dobrolubova to his seminary teacher Sladkopevtsevu. Letter breathes such selfless devotion that there are few novels in which a lover with great enthusiasm and passion would say about his beloved. Many other manifestations of a gentle soul touching Dobrolubova found in his papers, and not surprisingly, that Chernyshevsky, examining them, could not keep quiet epic. Remembering neumolkshie and after the death Dobrolubova reproaches in psychic insensitivity, . He broke out in his "Materials for a biography Dobrolubova" ( "Contemporary", . 1862, . ? 1) hot, . indignant tirade against those, . who called Dobrolubova man without heart and soul,
. - Dob and mentally, and spiritually mature very early. For three years he was perfectly recited many fables of Krylov. It is very fortunate in his choice of teachers. When he was 8 years old, to him placed a seminarian philosophical class MA. Kostrova, who later married the sister of his pupil. Campfires led training is not stereotyped by rote, and if possible try to develop a sharper and without the mental capacity of a boy. Mother Dobrolubova always said that out of the classroom only son and heard: "Why," "Why, yes" as ". Outcome studies with Kostrov was brilliant. When 11-year Dobrolubova given to the senior class of the theological school, he hit all the meaningfulness of responses and erudition. A year later he joined the seminary and is also immediately became among the first students, most of them at the 4, 5 were older than him. A timid and shy, he was shunned from the fun and games their friends and literally the whole day reading - read at home, reading and in class during lessons. This gave him a remarkable familiarity with Russian literature, as graceful as well as scientific, which is already affected in the first article of his. Seminary teachers Dob handed big department works in 30, 40 and even 100-sheet. Especially great were his writings on philosophical topics, the Russian church history and teachings of the Church Fathers. In 14 years Dob has become to communicate with the editorial regarding translations of the poems of Horace, but in 15 years began to lead his diary, which may well be called a literary work. The diary has already seen all the junior Dob, with the only difference being that the direction of the author's diary for the time being has little to do with instilling in him after three or four years. Dob-seminarian - glubokoveruyuschy young man, not formally, but with full penetration follow the instructions of religion. Here he begins to look after themselves after Communion. "I do not know - puts it in your diary - if I'll have to give me strength every day account of his sins, but at least I ask of my God, that He gave me a good start but put". Begins the strictest self-examination, self-flagellation of malformations such as popularity and pride, distraction during prayer, laziness to worship, the condemnation of other. In 1853, Mr.. Dob one of the first course had finished seminary. He dreamed of Kazan University, but it confused with his father could not afford, and Dob went to St. Petersburg to enter the Theological Academy. In St. Petersburg, after strong fluctuations caused by fear of disappoint his father, he enters the main Pedagogical Institute, where teaching was a university, and students were on a government dependent. The Institute has played a very important role in the mental development Dobrolubova. There were several outstanding professors - Lorenz, . Annunciation, . Sreznevsky (latest Dobroliubov especially close), . was a circle of good friends, . had the opportunity to engage in a lot and read, . and adverse conditions have contributed to, . that feeling of protest against banality, . strong in Dobrolubova already in the Lower, . now fully matured,
. Chief among these conditions were dry formalism and bureaucratic attitude director of the institute, Ivan Ivanovich Davydov. Almost all four-year stay at the institute Dobrolubova filled with Davydov struggle - a struggle, of course, is not noticeable from the outside, because otherwise it would prevent a Protestant, but nonetheless extremely intense. Dob grouped around him the most morally-sensitive elements of the institute's students and their environment successfully resisted the rules of morality Davydov. By the end of the stay at the institute Dobrolubova fight was postponed, too, under the cover of the greatest mysteries in print: in the "Contemporary" 1856. (? 8) Dob posted thoroughly imbued with subtle irony analysis of one of the reports of the Institute. At times fighting Dobrolubova with Davydov took violent forms. This bitterness, some was accused Dobroliubov, pointing to the fact that Davydov had the opportunity to provide him with essential services. It was in early 1855, when the anniversary was celebrated Grech. Dob wrote about this very poisonous poetry, quickly dispersed by city. Became known and the author's name and came to the institute's authorities, who immediately searched the papers Dobrolubova. The original poem in them had been found, but found "a lot of other papers, rather daring Content. Davydov, surprisingly, did not attach much importance to the discovery and preferred to hush up the case, which at that time could end up very sad for the young freethinker. Undoubtedly, however, that if Davydov has Dobroliubov this service, it is not for its own sake, and not to incur the displeasure of the institution and its system management. With regard to the related episode of "ingratitude" Dobrolubova, it is in complete harmony with the views Dobrolubova on morality as a phenomenon primarily public. Dob highly valued not only great service, and the slightest attention to him extended, but in relation to the Davydov had even the slightest doubt did not arise, and accusations of "ingratitude" it took very little. Devastate Dobrolubova another episode of his struggle with Davydov. In mid 1857, after graduation, Dob suddenly noticed that his best friends, who always treated him with great respect, almost turned away from him. He was too proud, . to elicit the reasons for this change, . and only after some time found, . that he was the victim of slander: Davydov, . already knew then about the hostile actions against him Dobrolubova, . completely distorted the meaning of conversation, . who had with him Dob after completing the course and talked to him so, . that Dobroliubov asked him a good teacher sites,
. Dob In fact, not only did not look for any place, but all his thoughts only to, and were directed to stay out of the teaching service, obligatory for him as a man who studied at the State Dependent. In 1857, Mr.. Dob has already been though a secret, but very active member of The Contemporary, and he was determined to completely surrender to the literary activity and resorted to various acquaintances, just to be enrolled in school department. But precisely because the prosecution was so obviously false, Dob entire 1 1 / 2 years, not a single word to refute it, although it caused him mental suffering burning. And only when loved his comrades - Bordyug, . Szczepanski, . Zlatovratski (AP) and others - themselves, . such as the heart, . realized the absurdity of Dobrolubova cocked accusations and again with him closer, . it in a letter, . which has become the common property only in 1890,
. (with the publication of "Materials for biography Dobrolubova"), explained in detail the case. Alienation of friends due to slander, yet because so painful effect on Dobrolubova that he was at that time already suffered terribly from more and more imminent in its emotional loneliness. One by one, disappeared warmest affection of his. In the first year of stay in the institute's mother died. In the summer of 1854, during a holiday furlough Dobrolubova in Nizhny, died of cholera, his father, leaving the case in the very complicated situation, and seven small children, small less. Then followed a number of other related losses that shook Dobrolubova its continuity and some regularity: for two or three years, died at Dobrolubova brother, sister and two favorite aunts. All of this caught up to him with such terror that he often was afraid to open letters from the Lower, expecting that now know about the new death. When his father died, Dobroliubov was 18 years old. But he never for a moment doubted that he was now head of the family and should take over the device its welfare. And, . himself in need of support, . he not only renounces his share in the inheritance, . but immediately on his return to St. Petersburg vigorously take up the lessons, . proofs, . literary work, . Every extra penny referring to the Bottom, . where, for his young brothers and sisters looked after a few close relatives,
. Each year, this assistance is becoming more serious, . and little by little, have not yet attained the age boy becomes a mainstay of the family, . not only in the immediate needs, . but in the needs of the less insistent, . example, . in the manufacture of a dowry for the sisters,
. In 1858, when the two remaining sisters were in his care into marriage, he finally took to his two little brothers, and with exemplary tenderness cared about them. When a year later illness forced him to go abroad, he ordered in St. Petersburg father's brother, who took over supervision and care for the boys. When complete impracticality Dobrolubova all it cost him big money, and his very significant earnings by 3 / 4 went to the family. But not only in relation to the brothers and sisters Dob was such an ideal relative. One of his cousins was in a quandary and even not directly, but hinted reported the St. Petersburg cousin. Dob in a while was a student of 3rd year and its earnings were still very scarce, but at the time of receipt of the letter he had a 100 rubles, which represented the whole of his "capital" - and he sends them entirely cousin. The same cousin a few years opens bookbinding, and he needs some sort of marble paper, which is very expensive in Nizhny. Immediately writes a letter Dobroliubov, which by then had become a pillar of the best Russian journal - and Dob runs all day on the benches, to gain cousin a few rubles. Such an ideal attitude to a close was Dobrolubova only a matter of serious understanding of their responsibilities because of mental satisfaction of the permanent care of relatives he was not given any. Diametrically opposed to him in the views on life, oppressed by poverty, these people were complete strangers to him in spirit, but messages about health, money and other little things with them there was nothing to correspond. That is why the extended family for a single moment has not diminished sense of oppressive loneliness, overwhelming Dobrolubova since then, as he in 1857, Mr.. graduated and lost best friends, partly because they are dispersed to different cities, partly because of the above libel. Under the influence of this feeling Dob with feverish anxiety begins to look for intimate attachment. But had the misfortune of shy, very insecure and very little being with youth. The first novel he got into so outside the so-called "society". Dob friends with a simple girl, indicated in the correspondence of his fictitious initials in. D. Z. (in fact T. K. G.). At one time he even planned to marry her, not because to acknowledge it worthy companion of life, but solely because of its infinite delicacy considered himself something before her "guilty". But even in such delicate matters of honor a man as Chernyshevsky, proved to him that under the very prosaic circumstances under which it occurred closer to in. D. Z., funny and talk about whatever was on his side "fault" and that their marriage would be a mutual calamity. Itself in. D. Z. was quite pleased that Dob, suddenly interrupting her all sorts of close relationships and with full freedom, however it has provided significant support to the end of his days. Not rendered nothing but bitterness from his first novel, Dob with even greater anguish began searching for new intimate attachment, but still fails. His letters to his only friend, someone at the institute, I.I. Bordyugovu are a chronicle of the alarming finding, which he described the poet's words: "More love madly heart Requests". Many episodes of his sad pursuit of happiness as, . example, . that, . when a girl, . in which he fell passionately in love at first sight, . he preferred "plyugavenkogo" officer, . Dob says, . rallying her mediocre, but through this frigid laugh easily discern his soul is weeping,
. Is, . however, . literary activities such power and voltage, . as the work of the author of "The Dark Kingdom", . not give him mental satisfaction and enabled him both to appreciate the female love? It is a definite answer to this question is promulgated in "Materials for biography Dobrolubova" letter to his friend's family, . old woman LN,
. Peschurovoy. Written in July 1858, t. e. at the apex of Dobrolubova, it shows the extent to which people are truly high talents, and often have a rough idea of the size of its value. Here are the final words of self-Dobrolubova: "How do you want, . that my writing was for me solace and pride? I see myself, . all, . I write, . weakly, . bad, . old, . useless, . that there is only visible to the mind sterile, . without knowledge, . no data, . without a certain practical attitudes,
. So I do not value his work, do not sign them, and very glad that nobody reads ... ". Three years, . on his deathbed, . Dob somewhat altered view of their activities, up to his ear as if the noise has reached an indefinite future triumph, . and dying poem he foresees, . that "the native land he is known to be true",
. During the life of his share has fallen only a pioneering role, the role of a nameless (because he wrote or even without a signature, or signature - "SVS") vozdelyvatelya that field where sowing ascended only after his death. The triumph of ideas Dobrolubova clearly reflected in the success of his collected works, published in 1862 - the success of a completely unexpected, even to his closest friends. And this success has not turned out to be ephemeral: 7 editions of collected works stood Dobrolubova from 1862 to 1911, . Every once in a number, . what, . in a series of works nebelletristicheskogo nature, . hold, . perhaps, . first place in the prevalence,
. - Dobrolubova literary activity began in the institute. 3 courses a student blew it in the "Contemporary" article on "L'Rossiyskogo Words" which was published in autumn 1856, under the pseudonym Laybova (end of the first and last name: Nicholas Dob). Since then struck up a close friendship with Dobrolubova Tchernyshevskiy, who immediately appreciated Dobrolubova and after the first meeting told his children that he had just been a man of unusual intelligence. And indeed, if we recall that the author of articles on "The parties" was only 20 years old, it affects his fine wit (in the introduction), the maturity of judgments, glitter forms and severity of historical criticism. Written article with great caution (because of the very subject - about Catherine), . with abundant waste of laudatory epithets "great monarch" with sincere sympathy and the general character of its editing the magazine, but still a great deal in the article by that time was so new, . even adjacent to the Fatherland Notes aq,
. Galahov article appeared insufficiently deferential. The comments provoked a response Galakhova Dobrolubova, filled with subtle irony. Striking article on "interlocutor" and the remarkable historical and literary erudition. Dob though ridiculed his enthusiasm bibliography, but he was a great bibliographer, was even a pointer to the "review of spiritual literature" Archbishop Filaret and studied the smallest literary facts, with extraordinary care. The past of our literature has always been a favorite subject of the founder of "journalistic" criticism, . and even in 1859, . in the midst of his enthusiasm journalistic themes, . he had a special love and with the same brilliance special erudition wrote a great article on the satirical journals of Catherine time,
. Both of these articles have the indisputable scientific dignity that respects cited by historians of literature's most diverse areas. But for some reason has not yet drawn the attention of the special criticism for three long articles Dobrolubova on "Stories of Peter the Great" Ustryalov. They are highly remarkable for a bright selection of facts, . prove, . that Peter's reforms were not such a sudden and violent phenomenon, . as many thought, . that they were just spectacular conclusion slow, . but rather a sustained process of "evropeizirovaniya" Russia, . which began in the XVI century,
. Currently, when a long series of investigations of foreign influence on the pre-Petrine Russia completely, we can say, has undermined the Petrine legend article Dobrolubova nothing special is not present, but in 1859, Mr.. it was necessary to have a great insight to a pile of almost raw material collected Ustryalov, deduce, far differed from prevailing glance. Of great importance was in its time and paper Dobrolubova of Robert Owen. In 1857, Mr.. Dob, graduated from the institute and not getting a gold medal only because of the hostile attitude towards him Davydova, finally joins the Contemporary, a rare book magazine published without his articles and reviews. The first of the big papers 1857. - "The importance of authority in education" - opens up a whole series of socio-pedagogical articles Dobrolubova that almost all are caused by the activities of Pirogov. Dob first refers to the "Questions of Life" with the greatest respect, the success of the book Pirogov saw "a deep sense of sacred" and in my first article only logically developed some of the thoughts of the famous scientist. And the second article on the Pirogov, appeared much later (1859), Dob still highly sympathetic towards him. But it is in the very praise that Dob showered Pirogov, and the wings are the source of later attacks on him. Was deeply feel the pain Dob, . when they celebrated the enemy "wobble" and concessions "konvenansam" suddenly made a routine assignment pedagogy and published them in "Rules of misconduct and punishment of pupils grammar schools Kiev district" - the truth, . with different qualifications - legalized section,
. Passionately devoted to the cause, rather than individuals, implacable rigorist, Dob single minute was sure what to do with yesterday's my idol. He wrote an article against the thunderous Pirogov, entitled: "All-Russia illusions, destructible rods and no hesitation calls Kiev section of" atrocities. - By 1857, when the whole Dobroliubov given magazine work is the first major article on his purely literary theme - the "Provincial Essays" Shchedrin. This is a typical dobrolyubovskaya article "about" where the author are examining the work is almost on the sidelines, and the whole task of criticism is that on the basis of the material of this work, discuss the terms of our public life. Opponents Dobrolubova see in this method of complete destruction of the aesthetics and the abolition of art. They look at Dobrolubova as one of the founders of the very utilitarian view of art, to which came later, 60-ies in the face of Pisarev. In this, a very common understanding dobrolyubovskogo method lies utter misunderstanding. There is no denying, of course, the genetic connection between the two leaders of the new generation, but one of boundless respect Dobrolubova Pushkin shows that there is no way to link them any closer. In complete contrast Pisarev, who dreamed of conducting journalistic ideals of his lovely art, Dob his articles laid the basis solely of journalistic criticism. Do not artists, but only criticism he had turned to a publicist. In art, he explicitly pursued rational bias, for example, he refused to dismantle "A thousand souls" Pisemsky, because he felt that it fits well to the known content of the idea. Dob demanded of a literary work only one thing: the truth of life, which would give an opportunity to look at him with full confidence. Art, therefore, for Dobrolubova something quite self-sufficient, interesting only insofar as it alone. Full unfounded accusations Dobrolubova in the destruction of art will become even more obvious if we turn to the actual review of what is in the field of Russian art, he has destroyed. Yes, sham reputation Countess Rostopchina, Rosenheim, Benediktova, Sollogub Dobroliubov really ruined his witty derision. But not with the name of a Dobrolubova closely linked glory of the two largest representatives of the "aesthetic" generation of 40-ies? Who more Dobrolubova contributed glory Goncharov famous article: "What is Oblomovism? Only through Dobroliubov was discovered that a deep sense, . who hid in the novel, . so fully reflect the life of feudal Russia,
. Interpretation, . this Dobroluboff in "darkness" works Ostrovsky, . contested by some, but no one has yet occurred to dispute the fact, . that it is "whistler" Dob created Ostrovsky this country-wide fame, . were powerless to deliver him to his closest literary friends to slavyanofilstvovavshemu Moskvityanin ",
. In the "darkness" and "What is Oblomoffdom talent Dobrolubova reached its climax. Particularly remarkable for the strength of talent "Dark Kingdom", which stands quite apart not only in Russian, but also in European critical literature. This is not the official review, but a completely independent, purely creative synthesis of disparate features created a striking harmony of its logical construction. Sam Apollon Grigoriev, ten years who went about the bush Ostrowski, getting a mystical abstraction and narrowly sectarian interpretations, was blinded by the light thrown on the creativity of his idol, the man opposite Ostrovsky "party". But the fact of the matter is that the high animation and fiery indignation, penetrating "Dark Kingdom" Dob drew no commitment to one or another literary circle, but in a deep humane sentiments, which penetrated his whole being. It something to him and gave the vision of the heart, . with which he managed to paint a moving picture of tyranny, . humble powerlessness, . spiritual darkness and the complete absence of the concept of human dignity, . taken together, form the world, . Dobroluboff branded name of "dark kingdom",
. There are a number of other writers who have also nothing but the warmest welcome, not met by Dobrolubova. He reacted very favorably to Zhadovskoy, . by Polonsky, . Pleshcheyev, . Marco Vovchka and he gave permeated by a truly sympathetic comments on Turgenev's "Yesterday" ( "When will this day") and "humiliated and insulted" Dostoevsky ( "downtrodden people"),
. Going over all this long series of literary reputations, . who found powerful support in the authoritative word Dobrolubova, . puzzled ask yourself: Why not Dob "negative"? Surely only because, . that the overall meaning of his work - a protest against injustice and denial of the dark forces of our lives, . did not give come "present day"? In the usual reply is an indication of the "whistle" - satire annex to the "Contemporary", . institution in 1858,
. Dobroluboff along with Nekrasov. Dob was the most active contributor to "whistle" and under the pseudonym Lilienshvagera Conrad, Jacob Ham, and others wrote many poems and satirical stateek occupying an entire half of Volume IV of his collected works. Even people in general are friendly to Dobroliubov, put him in the guilt of "Whistle", which laid if the beginning of "devil's sabbath", t. e. crude mockery of authorities and the unbridled tone, dwell in the 1860's in our journalism. This accusation - the result of mixing Dobrolubova with later events in the Russian literary life. As soon as any close look at the written Dobroluboff in "Whistle", . ensure, . what, . except very few and very mild ridicule over Pogodin and Vernadsky, . dobrolyubovskaya "pandemonium" almost all not only directed against the 'authorities', . and, . contrary, . ridicules people about "their",
. Dobrolubova resented herd suddenly our people "progress"; genuine nature of his sickened paradirovanie progressiveness. "Whistle" laughs Benediktov, Rosenheim, Kokorev, Lvov, Semevsky, Sollogub, which "trumpeted our ears, crying for truth, transparency, bribes and free trade, harm leases, foul oppression" and pr. As for the alleged brutality dobrolyubovskoy "pandemonium", then it is just nothing to do with reality. With rare wit and remarkable poetic talent, Dob ironically remarkably thin. And if, as someone put it, the polemicists of the 1860's went to battle, armed with dirty mops, then Dob spoke to a duel always with the thinnest Toledo sword in his hand. - A mere glance at the weather distribution of articles Dobrolubova enough to make sure that such work is beyond the power and the very talented man. During 1857, 1858 and half of 1859, Mr.. Dob wrote to 4 printed pages per month. This - a huge amount even for a compilation of work, and yet Dob gave himself entirely to his intensive critical work, he wrote, and burned. Is it any wonder that he, in the end, strained. After the death Dobrolubova wrote that he was healing from childhood and painful and this is completely wrong. He broke down only strain of the mind and heart. Rightfully he said in his last poem that he was dying from what was "honest", t. e. too close to take to heart the good of the homeland and the duty to contribute to the entire volume of their mental and physical strength. To avoid starting consumption, the editorial board of Contemporary sent Dobrolubova spring of 1860, overseas. He spent more than a year in Germany, southern France, Italy, but without substantial relief. In August 1861,. via Greece and Constantinople, he returned to St. Petersburg. Slowly extinguished, he died on Nov. 17, 1861, Mr.. and buried in the Volkov Cemetery. The main source for the biography Dobrolubova are the "Materials" compiled NG. Tchernyshevskiy. Getting appeared in "Contemporary" in 1862,? 1, and continued - only 27 years later, in Russian Thought "1889. Death Chernyshevskogo interrupted the printing of the material "in the magazine, but then they were published in book form (Moscow, 1890). - See. Averkiev in "Russian Invalid", 1861,? 267; "Contemporary", 1861,? 11; Pyatkovsky in the "Book Gazette, 1861,? 22; Library for Reading, 1862,? 3, P. Bibikov on literary activity N.A. Dobrolubova ", (St. Petersburg, 1862); Zaitsev Belinsky and Dob"; Skabichevsky "Works", Volume I; Eugene Markov in the "Russian Speech", 1880; Gorshkov (MA. Protopopov) in Russian hero, 1880, VA. Goltsev in Russian Thought, 1885,? 12, and in his book "The Art"; VI. Modestov in Novi, 1886,? 6; "Anniversary Collection" Literary Fund (St. Petersburg, 1910), E. Anichkov in the modern world ", 1911,? 8 and 11; C. Streich in Russian hero ", 1911, 10; Ovsyaniko-Kulikovskii in the Journal of Europe", 1912,? 1; Antonovich in the Journal for All ", 1902,? 1; Pypin in the Journal of Europe ", 1905,? 3; In. Dob "False P.N. Engelhardt and Rozanov on Dobrolubova "(St. Petersburg, 1902); In. Zasulich "Works", Volume II; Bogucharsky "From the past of Russian society" (St. Petersburg); Protopopov, "Russian Thought", 1896,? 12; N.A. Kotlyarevsky in the Journal of Europe ", 1911,? 11; Ivanov "History of Russian criticism"; Volinskiy "Russian criticism"; Vengerov Sources Dictionary of Russian Writers "; Vladislavlev" Russian Writers ". Elapsed in 1911. fiftieth anniversary of the death Dobrolubova significantly pushed the study of his life and work. Appeared a long series of collected works Dobrolubova. In the series of meetings of selected works issued edited by N.A. Kotlyarevskogo (published on. Popova) and VP. Kranihfelda (edition of "Enlightenment"). Of particular significance are the publication under the editorship of mK. Lemke (in 4 volumes) and EV. Anichkov (7 volumes so far come). They embody a lot of unknown and forgotten and are equipped with abundant and valuable commentary. Shortly before the anniversary were donated to the Literary Fund paper Dobrolubova, and the development of this material has many new features relating to the identity Dobrolubova, which until then drew in some ethereal outlines. Smart impressed by the excerpts from the diary Dobrolubova, printed in the commemorative collection of the Literary Fund (St. Petersburg, 1910, edited by Vengerov). Usually people in the diaries of his plume; Dob, on the contrary, for the most punishing himself, and only here and there, and betrays a consciousness of their strength and advantages. Along with record high sentiment is true, Dob some other experiences its outlines often with such frankness that not everyone can even be printed. At first sight, this realistic candor belittles image inflexible rigorista, which was created first biographer Dobrolubova - Tchernyshevskiy. But in essence it is this mixture of scattered throughout the diary vysokoidealnyh sentiment with details ultrazhiteyskimi only reinforces the old idea. Image Dobrolubova wins in vitality, as wins every portrait from imposing shadow. Before us is an idealist in the best sense of the word, but an idealist not iconic, but the blood in the veins and gloss of passion in the eyes. S. Vengerov.