Eichenwald Julius Isaevich( Literary critic)
Comments for Eichenwald Julius Isaevich
Biography Eichenwald Julius Isaevich
Born in 1872, the son of a popular rabbi in Odessa. In 1892 he graduated from the course at the Novorossiysk University in History and Philology, received a gold medal for the essay "Empiricism of Locke and the rationalism of Leibniz". Settling in Moscow, was secretary of the Philosophical Society and the editorial "Problems of Philosophy and Psychology". He lectures on the history of Russian literature at Moscow's women's educational courses at the University Shanyavsky and at the higher women's courses (Guerrier). Often, with great success, public lectures in Moscow and the provinces. From 1895, he published a series of articles and reviews in the Journal of Education ", . Problems of Philosophy and Psychology, . Dictionary Granata, . Courier, . "Scientific Word", . Petersburg "Words" (critical satires), . in "History of Russian Literature of XIX century" Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky, . in the collection of Pushkin's works, edited by Vengerov and other,
. Especially taking an active part in the "Russian Gazette", where in 1895 - 1902 years led a philosophical bibliography, and in Russian Thought, "where since 1902 gave an overview of the dramatic theater, and in 1907 - 1908 he was a member of the editorial board. A Literary Characteristics. out a separate publication entitled "Silhouettes of Russian Writers", I release in 1906 (M., 2 nd enlarged edition, Moscow, 1908), II - in 1908 (2 nd revised edition, Moscow, 1909), III - in 1910. Articles pedagogical and philosophical collected under the title "Private Pages" (Moscow, 1910). Separately, came as a book "Pushkin" (Moscow, 1908) and the brochure "Bryusov (Moscow, 1910).
The first two issues of "Silhouettes" won the Academy of Sciences in 1909, honorary reviews. A. Tale translated Apuleius' Cupid and Psyche "(Pantheon Literature", 1895), edited by him out of the book, Ellen Kay, "Century Child" (Moscow, 1905), Lange, "The Woman Question," Maimon, "Introduction to modern aesthetics (1909). Since 1899, in the translation and edited by A. out the complete works of Schopenhauer. "Silhouettes of Russian Writers assign A. noticeable, very unique place in contemporary criticism. Can be considered generally recognized for his dignity as a remarkable stylist. He certainly brilliant, figurative style, his critical articles something like poems in prose. Hence their famous pretentiousness. A. elation, however, organic and free stems from his enthusiasm for literature. Those writers, whom he loves, he represented the prophets, every word is full of sacred significance, we should talk about them in prayer. Article A. are attempts to create in us a purely impressionistic criticism, the problem is not so much interpret the author as to transmit the impression made by him on the criticism. His articles on Pushkin A. and calls the "Feedback Pushkin". With this extreme subjectivism, in the end, could make it up as a special kind of creativity. But A. claims and the objective meaning, it seems that he draws while silhouette, but still portraits.
Meanwhile, his silhouettes often lose all resemblance to the original, and this is mainly because a. - Literary historian, deliberately ignoring the history. A. comes from the fact that art is something totally self-sufficient and therefore deliberately refuses analyzing the writer in connection with the conditions of time and place. Relying on the authority of the German aesthetics Meiman, A. wants to convince the Russian reader, . brought up on the responsiveness to ethical and social demands of art and criticism, . that "the great masters and their great lovers, not only do not serve food of his era, . not only do not obey her, . and, . contrary, . often act in sharp contrast to her, and to modern society ";" artist, . who becomes a slave of social demands, . degrades it and their art, . and most societies ",
. Because of this attitude to the public, and. as biased as the most extreme advocates of utilitarian art. For A. satirist, nonpolitical offender, community members, whether it is Turgenev, condemned in advance. "This" artistic creativity is interested only in the contemplation of nature, problems and passions ... relationship to God. In religious matters hostility A. ideology does not apply to. - The best way to succeed A. Pushkin, because it is for him "divine". Beautifully transferred to a. "sweet" charm "Bakhchsarai Fountain, interesting comments about the" Miserly Knight, "" Mozart and Salieri ".
Weaker characteristics of "Boris Godunov" and "Eugene Onegin", precisely because here the main role played by everyday life and reality. - Individual volume of "Silhouette" is not uniform in the general tone. With the first "Silhouette", for A. the reputation of the critic, "obsaharivayuschego" those writers, which include well. This is true. But in II T. "Silhouette" A. with the same excess, with whom he had in I t. lavished praise, it becomes extremely intolerant towards the creation of ideological and social, as in III T. sharply negative characteristics even dominate. In I t. very informative sketches of Baratynsky, Tiutchev, Gogol, Lermontov, Garshin, Chekhov. With special warmth says A. Chekhov, which sees not so much pessimism as heartfelt sympathy to all the imperfect. In its quest to find all the elements of harmony, the critic saw in Lermontov, in the last years of his life, "enlightened peace with the world". Lermontov learned humility, he is not proud, and not evil, he was just miserable. "A quiet muse" Garshina attracts A. that it gives so many "moments of reconciliation" in the image of eternal struggle between good and evil. "Tireless Humanity Korolenko touching the critic, but he does not give him all the fullness of his sympathy, because it works Korolenko too many rights, and no smells of space"; bad that it is too clear, "that he is alien to every Mysticism. In Volume II of "Silhouette" A. interesting characteristics Maikova, Shcherbina, Feta, Polonsky, full of true joy, though in general adds nothing, the characteristic of Tolstoy; excellent colorful paper on Dostoevsky.
Infinitely highly of A. Dostoevsky - to the top of the world literature, but with delight contemplating superhuman strength of his spiritual identity, he, however, is full of horror at those abysses of sin and unbelief, which opened its creativity. Dostoevsky for him, "writer-devil", all his work - "own psychology in the faces, all of it - sick of its unprecedented revelation of the soul ... Contrary to conventional wisdom might be thought that Dostoevsky - the great atheist, not a Christian, namely, the Antichrist ". Painful impression article on Ostrovsky and Turgenev. Here the desire to throw out the history of literature historical element cruelly revenged criticism. What to say about the characteristics of Turgenev, which is literally not a single word mentioned about the social significance of "Notes of a Hunter", "Rudin", "Yesterday" and the result was dr.N without Turgenev Turgenev. A. do not hesitate to say that "Turgenev was not deep," that "in many respects, his work - a common place," he serious life events represents a "superficial and too light in color, that education had" unpleasant ". It is freeing itself from even such basic facts as a bold break with a new generation of Turgenev, the critic decided to say that Turgenev never forgot "about the youth, would not abase myself in your eyes. And, a single stroke of the pen by destroying everything that took place in Turgenev's great history of Russian literature, A. after that call that he likes to Turgenev: "Two friends", "Clock", "Story of Father Alexis". In characteristic Ostrowski critic does not want to separate from the stupidity bytopisatelya portrayed their way of life.
The third volume of "Silhouette", dedicated to writers of our day, goes even further along the path of arbitrary interpretations and unmotivated sympathies. You can explain why AA, with its cult of complete detachment from the evil of the day, like Bunin and do not like bitter. More difficult to understand why he nullifies detached from the conditions of time and place of Leonid Andreev, and absolutely impossible to understand the unprecedented harshness with which he attacked the Bryusov. In the extreme care with which Brousov trim his poems, the critic-impressionist, forgetting the "agony of the word" even in Pushkin's text, finds evidence that he was from "the Lord is not got no talent". Not to mention other, is extremely frequent in the A. whims of impressionism, we can not say that, in the end, they hurt the elegant talent A.S. Vengerov.