[000:00:00;00] in general, this is a wonderful exchange, such a barter, freedom is an oyster, genius, in russia there are only two classes, slaves of the sovereign autocrat and slaves of farmers, but in russia only beggars and philosophers can be free, spiransky said this, i want to insert one more detail here , and serf russia is, first of all, central russia, because they say: about alexander ii we already had poland, there was finland, that is, the core of serfdom is central russia, in the west in asian, so to speak, additions to russia and even some national, so to speak, siberian places there, so when we just need this little note, when we say

serf russia, we still need it. he abolished serfdom in the baltic provinces of iceland and lefland, and many then hoped that he had abolished it, this was a rehearsal, and then there would be abolition in russia, but no, yes, but no, which pushed for the abolition of serfdom, finally, because nicholas was the first to really understand, he said that serfdom was evil, absolutely right, but to cancel it would be an even greater evil, he is afraid of the revolution, but attempts to contain it. ultimately led russia to a severe defeat in the crimean war, russia has not lost wars on its territory since peter ii, well , it loses the war there, and loses the war, everyone understands this, then in russia, because of serfdom, alexander ii, the future tsar- liberator, he, sitting in these very secret committees, was in positions sometimes more conservative than his father, he was not at all brought up as a reformer, but after the disaster, if you call a spade a

spade for then. russia's crimean war, russia is losing to whom? england and france, with modern weapons, with factory production, yes, uh, russian infantry dies from rifle fire at those distances at which it cannot approach for its effective fire, respectively, steamships, among the british and french, a well-known history, synoptic battle, nakhimov smashes the turkish fleet, sank the turkish fleet, and with turkish coastal batteries, one boat escaped, an english steamer under the turkish flag, yes, yes, yes, yes, well, you said that, well, they were afraid of the revolution, that’s all true, and alexander ii, when he was forced after the crimean war to undertake all sorts of reforms, and when we speak about serfdom , about the abolition of serfdom, you still need to understand that by itself, i don’t know, any decree, any order, there, go freedom, something

like that, didn’t work. therefore, we spent a very long time working on the technology of all this, and it was impossible to just let the peasants go, it was necessary to do something with these new free people, it was necessary to help them, on the one hand, and on the other hand, there was the concern of the landowners themselves, they cared about their own safety, therefore, when we say great reforms, the abolition of serfdom in 1861, this is only a part. all these reforms, well, in general, in short, this is a whole complex of reforms, therefore , when we talk about the reform of the abolition of serfdom, we must complement everything, including glasnost, it was not under gorbachev that the word appeared, the brother of alexander ii, konstantin, who headed , was restoring the russian fleet after the crimean war, he wrote about the need for openness

in his department in order to solve... the tasks of restoring this fleet, everything again really stems from this failure, the impetus was given, of course, of course, first of all why , in order to raise industry, especially the military , free working hands are needed, in the west serfdom, which was finally finished off by the napoleonic wars, it did not imply ownership of the personality of the peasant himself, and the peasants could still leave and become workers in the first manufactories, then factories and so on , our situation is different: in general , capitalism develops in the presence of three conditions, and three markets: the capital market, the presence of free capital, the labor market and the sales market, in russia there are problems with all of these three things, free working hands, serfs, the sales market, the purchasing power of the same serfs is minimal, and, accordingly, the main source of capital, there are too few merchants - this is the state, it was the state that should have given this impetus and should have

started these gigantic transformations. you are absolutely right that the abolition of serfdom is only the first, huge, but first step; then it was necessary to reform the entire edifice of the russian empire, which happens during the great reforms. this is a historical podcast of russia. the west is on the swing of history, today we are dealing with serfdom and the process of its abolition. just now i thought, there is such a parallel with peter the great, because peter’s reforms were a forced matter, he created an army and this led to other reforms. the reforms of alexander ii were also forced and the same. one thing leads to the other, because well, a building, so to speak, without piles , it cannot collapse, only from this side, to load or unload, and at the same time an interesting point is that, well, at least for me, if

peter’s reforms i i perceive it as a kind of greatness, a great thing, and the reforms of alexander ii, although in scale, so to speak, are quite comparable. and i somehow look at the reforms of alexander ii, well, how can i tell you, with regret that they were partial, although the reforms of peter the great were also partial, i think the difference is that peter the great, firstly, the reforms began, they were of course forced for the country, but it was peter’s desire, he could also to start these reforms, either fyodor alekseevich, or fyodor alekseevich, but peter started, he wanted it, alexander ii , as you said, did not want, finally, peter was catching up with

the west, and alexander ii was fleeing from the revolution, so between catching up and running, huge difference, i would still say that he was running rather from possible. external defeat, since during the crimean war the english admiralty had already made plans for the dismemberment of russia, and there was also a story that the british wanted to move the fighting after the crimea further into russian territory, the french said no, you know, we already went deeper once , in the twelfth year, so it’s without us, and without an ally on the continent the british don’t fight, so it didn’t work out here, there’s an interesting point that the people who abolished serfdom were people who were formed in the nicholas era, including in these very secret committees that looked at all this, that did not occupy the highest positions, but just when this old nicholas public was demolished by the very first resignations of alexander ii, it was impossible to work with these people anymore, their

another generation appears, an interesting episode, one of the leaders of the editorial commissions that developed the project for the abolition of serfdom was yakov rostovtsev, a man who betrayed the decembrists, nicholas i, but who apparently, he was tormented by his conscience all his life. and who was considered a conservative, and he, when he took office, he began to work towards a more radical abolition of reforms, and also, and some historians believe that his relatively early death, he did not live to see the abolition of serfdom, led to the fact that they were abolished in a more conservative way than, for example, milyutin assumed, and than yakov rostovtsev, accordingly, that is, he thus atone for the guilt of betrayal by realizing what the decembrists wanted to do, this is an interesting question, these reforms , this... and he wrote the following: if you don’t go too

deep into history and don’t bother the shadow of peter the great, what are you and i doing, the beginning of our westernization is connected with the reforms of alexander ii. well, this is some very radical point of view. relative, because the conditions under which serfdom was directly abolished are very important here , yes, let’s remember these conditions, the conditions caused mass discontent among the christians when they announced a decree on getting rid of serfdom, imperial decree, the troops in the russian empire were put on alert because they expected there would be no dispute. followed in confusion. for the russian peasant, freedom without land is like freedom without air for us. the russian cross does not think of this. but the peasant received the land for ransom. and the ransom was determined here in a very interesting scheme, not according to the market value of the land, but according to

the amount of quitrent that the peasant paid to the landowner before the abolition of serfdom. the quitrent was to be capitalized at 6% per annum. that is, one quitrent, you can draw a formula like this, yes, an annual quitrent is 6% of the ransom. accordingly, if the quitrent was, for example, 10 rubles, then the peasant had to pay 166 rubles 67 kopecks. the peasants had no more such money, so the ransom that the peasants owed. the state paid for them, the peasant contributed only 20%, the rest was paid for by the state, and the state, now many viewers will probably remember the mortgage, yes, for 49 years the peasants had to, well, from generation to generation to the state at a percentage, again the same, to pay, and if they didn’t even have 20%, they remained temporarily obligated, only after the liquidation of the temporarily obligated state in 1881, they

finally became. free, if - the peasant had a desire to immediately free himself, he could take a couple of dessiatines , leave the rest of the land to the landowner, then, as he called it, he received this chicken allotment and was free, many peasants did this, why, because they believed that this the will is not real, not royal, and then there will be a real royal will, they will give all the land, so now there is no need to agree to a redemption operation, and that’s not all, the courtyard christenings were not given land, almost, how many there are, there were 5-6% of them, remember, firs in the cherry orchard, which he said that there was thunder and lightning flashing before a great misfortune, before what, his interlocutor asks him, the firs answers , before the will, for him the will is a misfortune, why, because he is a servant, a serf peasant, a landowner, he can simply be thrown into the street, they had to beg, and most the best part of the land, one last detail, sections in the provinces, especially black earth ones, were determined... the maximum land that the peasants could receive, this

maximum is less than the land that the peasants had previously cultivated, and the fact that the excess was cut off from 20 to 25 % of the christian lands, of course, the christians were unhappy, i found it here, i just want to read something, this is from a letter addressed to alexander, prince boratynsky, this is 1800... and he wrote that the last word of the reform will be said when the complete liberation of the russian people will reach individual, encourage the private property of the peasants and you will strangle the birth of communism, strengthen family morality and lead the country along the path of progress, there are no stronger guarantees for legal advancement as property , personal freedom, so alexander is a letter: and

answered through count shuvalov, he writes to the prince : i am happy that i can from now on predict the serious future of the great, useful idea of ​​​​exercising a second slavery, perhaps worse than serfdom, of communal use of the land. i have no doubt that a significant majority will speak out in terms of your views, then the case will be won in spite of all the petersburg reds, in which case they will inevitably give a big battle, since all their future hopes will perish with the destruction of this social and socialist ulcer, it is interesting that already at this time we are talking about reds, about socialist ideas, about communism, communism, yes, that is, the authorities understood, but, but did nothing, but did what they decided to do, they only

preserved the community, on the contrary , including why fiscal interests, taxes it’s easier to collect from the community, and only stalypin will reach the community, in the sense of an attempt to abolish it, when from my point of view it will be largely too late, yes, according to the analysis of a number of western specialists who visited russia, analyzed, so to speak, stolepin's reform, they just wrote that, in general, everything is going well... great, and in a few years, if all this is implemented at all, russia will generally be invincible, as they believed, they wrote so, so stalepin in some way then, in some way sense, he won the battle, he lost the war, but he lost the war to the god chronus. today we are dealing with the issue of the abolition of serfdom, this is a historical podcast, russia-west.

on the swing of history, the main problem was that serfdom was abolished, but a whole series, as they used to say, and indeed, this is a completely appropriate term, remnants of serfdom remained, they stretched like such weights on the legs, and strengthened the stratification in russian society. the problem was that really, well looked at all these issues completely differently, so to speak, even the most advanced, as they say now, individuals, i found here , there was such a moment, the magazine landowner, defended the interests of the nobility, insisted that everything should be left as... is the economic index magazine recommended that the authorities follow the western experience, that is, it stood on the side of personal land ownership, the influential magazines sovremennik and russian conversation advocated communal land ownership, but for

completely different reasons, the contemporary saw in the russian community there is something like a western commune, which, conversations saw in the community a kind of sacred umbilical cord that connects the russian people with its ancient slavic past, therefore it was simply impossible to satisfy all this diversity of opinions of everyone, you can turn to economics, see the results, indeed, at first there will be some decline associated. free labor, by the way, it is important to add here that very cheap labor, the russian worker received the least in europe, but thanks therefore, thanks to these reforms, thanks to subsequent financial and economic reforms

that formalized the development of capitalism, russia at the end of the 19th century came out third in the world in terms of economic growth, second only to the usa and germany, and sometimes. germany was already going nose to nose, nevertheless, the mina existed, lenin wrote at the time , yes, you can refer to the authority of vladimir ilyevich, that 1861 gave birth to 905, that he meant that they demand christier in 905, the abolition of segments , place the land because the peasant continued to believe that no one’s land, god’s land, and god’s means christian, the land should belong only to the one who works on it, that’s what remained these... these segments, these redemption payments, canceled only in as a result of the first russian revolution, up to this point the peasants continued to pay and overpay, by the way, for the highest market value of land, this all led to the radicalization of the russian peasantry and led to the radicalization of peasant youth, and yet russia then at the end of the 19th century, the beginning of the 20th century, the demographic factor, this is

a very young country, the average average russian - who is that? this is a young peasant, 17-19 years old, who understands that... the current situation, in general, he has no prospects in life, after the abolition of serfdom, this began, well, i already said that alexander ii began to flee from the revolution, radical forces in russia began to flee to the revolution and this began a race for survival, to a large extent, because after the abolition of serfdom in connection with that discontent... which you are talking about you say, populists, they were waiting for, so to speak, a peasant socialist revolution, that on the wave of discontent, the peasants would begin to speak out. the christians, with all their discontent, nevertheless, were not ready to overthrow the father of the king, at that moment, faith in the good king had not gone anywhere, it had not gone anywhere, so they called him peasants -

such passive material, the idea arose of this ... who themselves did not want to flare up, to set fire with the help of terror, in fact, from there, from those times, begins, the story is about attempts to rock russia using the most radical methods, i don’t quite agree here, because after all, the reaction of terror appeared as a reaction to the very brutal suppression of going to the people, the process of 1993. yes, when some of the people there, which had consequences, this is a simultaneous process , in fact, and this, to a large extent, was in the nature of some kind of revenge, of course, and this too, the end of the reformer is known to us, as a result of the grenewitzsky bomb, yes, several

attempts, unsuccessful ones, and then, yes, a successful attempt, this period, or something, i would put an end to here, because... then the period of the outright freezing of alexander ii begins, this is a separate story to a large extent, this is a continuation and a separate story, well, the unsuccessful reign of the last russian emperor. pobedonostsev spread his owl's wings over russia after the eighty-first year, yes, now we understand that. without the abolition of serfdom, russia simply might not have happened, because the plans were appropriate, as we have already said, there were plans for partition, and the lag was becoming disastrous, but what comes next is the agrarian question , the main question of russia, because the bulk of the population is a village, it is a peasantry, they tried not to touch it,

they tried to freeze it in every possible way, so this played, of course, we have already talked about this, but it is very important to emphasize again, it subsequently played a disastrous role, because this main question remains in the first russian revolution in the seventeenth year, even too, that is, it lasts until the seventeenth year, this the problem with the agrarian question, of course, of course, of course, i think that the topic ... of serfdom, it lasts until, as you said, the seventeenth year, it to a huge extent predetermined the entire future path of russia, played its role, negative

in general, completely before abolition, and negative, due to the gender in principle of russian society, which, first of all, as you correctly noted, consisted of peasants, so yes, this is a very important point, and yes, if russia had not abolished serfdom, she had chance of falling apart altogether, these... ended up largely detonating in 1917. this is a historical podcast russia and the west on the swing of history. today we tried to deal with the issues of abolition of serfdom. pyotr romanov was with you. and sergei soloviev. study history with us. all episodes of the historical podcast of russia west on the swing of history

can be viewed on the website of the first channel 1tv. hello, this is the podcast life of the wonderful with you, me, its host, writer alexey varlamov, and today we will talk about pushkin. in february 1921, blog wrote two texts. dedicated to pushkin. one of them is a poem named after the pushkin house. the second is an article about the appointment of a poet. and in this article, the blog wrote that our memory from childhood keeps the cheerful name pushkin. this name fills many days of our lives, the bag names of commanders, emperors, inventors of torture, murder, torturers and martyrs, next to them... the easy name pushkin, in six months the block will not exist, but in the same

article he will write that pushkin killed lack of air, in a sense, it killed blok, but the question is: was pushkin really so cheerful and so light, because in fact, if you think about his work, about his fate, it was gloomy, heavy, sad there was quite a lot there. well, let’s remember at least the feast during the plague, the bronze horseman poem , the pages of pugachev’s uprising in the captain’s daughter, and even many of pushkin’s poems, for example, the famous one written on one of his birthdays, a vain gift, a random gift, why do i need life? given, pushkin had a lot of sad things, and nevertheless, a cheerful, easy name, and blok is absolutely right here, but for some reason here is an example of extraordinary luck , the unlucky poet, sashka ryukhin, talks about pushkin, from

roman bulgakov, master margarita, remember, when he returns from the madhouse from ivan bezdomny , who accused him of sashka ryukhin of mediocrity, in such a sad melancholy mood, sashka is driving in a truck along tver boulevard, suddenly he sees the cast-iron figure of a man who indifferently... looks in front of him, looks at him and says these very words: he was lucky, he was lucky, this white guard shot at him, shattered his hip, ensured his immortality, no matter what he did, no matter what step he took, all this led to his glory, the impression is that these are the thoughts not only of ryokhin himself, but also of bulgakov, who certainly cannot be called mediocre, but the mystery of pushkin, the mystery of pushkin also attracted bulgakov very much, it is no coincidence, by the way, that in the thirties

bulgakov would write a play by alexander pushkin , in this play, he will not dare to bring pushkin’s stage, it would be all dedicated to pushkin, the tsar will be there, benkendor will be there, dzhukovsky will be there, of course there will be natalya nikolaevna, dantes, danzas, but pushkin himself will not be there, there will not be a single pushkin remarks, because bulgakov simply does not dare to say anything on behalf of pushkin, the charm of pushkin’s influence on russian culture , of course, is immeasurable, enormous, there is some kind of secret in this, pushkin’s life is known to us, if not raised. then by week exactly, or most likely by hour, the impression is that we we know everything about him, on the other hand, the impression is that we don’t know anything about him, and we continue to be surprised by him, and we continue to discover him and not understand what it is, pushkin is our everything, apollo grigoriev once said, it’s ours,

russian, russian, because look, in other cultures , in other literatures, in english, for example, shakespeare, he is recognized in england as the first poet, and he is also recognized throughout the world. the same can be said about dante, the same can be said about cervantes, about goethe, but can this be said about pushkin, he is not very well known in the world, he is not very well understood in the world , if we talk about russian culture, then tolstoy, dostoevsky, chekhov are much more famous, but pushkin is not, but why is this? in a sense, because... cannot be translated into foreign languages, he wrote very easily, and translating it probably won’t be a big deal, but when translating, all the charm, all the magic of pushkin’s text is lost, like the same sashka ryukhin, driving in this truck along tver boulevard, asking himself, well what he

wrote: a storm covers the sky with darkness, spinning snow whirlwinds, sometimes it winds up like a beast, sometimes it cries like a child, simple rhymes, comparisons, and yet, it seems to me, something yawns in every russian person when he reads this, when he hears this, hello prince, you are my beautiful, that you are as quiet as rainy day, she tells him, you are saddened by what, a load of melancholy consumes me, prince guidon answers her, again, everything is very simple, everything is endless, inexpressibly touching, how could he do this write why he got this one amazing gift. we truly never cease to be amazed at what this man was like. and indeed, the mystery of pushkin’s life, it would seem, is so well known to us. was pushkin happy? as a child, most likely not , we know a little about his childhood, but apparently, his relationships with his father, mother, and brothers and sisters were not very harmonious. and here, too, by the way, lies one

of the mysteries of pushkin’s work. because look, in the pushkin world, which is considered such perfection, which is considered the russian cosmos, which belinsky called, well, to be honest, eugene onegin, but in general this can be applied to the whole of pushkin, remember, belinsky said this famous phrase that eugene onegin is an encyclopedia of russian life, but note that in pushkin’s world, in his poems , in his stories, his stories, we practically do not meet large families, he has this... uniqueness, the uniqueness of children, which perhaps he needed to solve his own literary problems, and perhaps came from this incompleteness of his childhood experience, but this incompleteness was subsequently more than made up for by this amazing happiness, when pushkin ends up in the tsarskoye selo lyceum, here he was really lucky, lucky that it was precisely by

the time he grew up, by the time he... he turned 12 years old, this amazing educational institution was opened in russia, the lyceum in tsarskoye selo, which some consider in general to be such a model of a school, a model of education that combined a school with a university, while others say that in fact there is nothing unusual in the person and there was, again, a pushkin phrase from the novel in verse by eugene onegin, we all learned a little. something and somehow, it best characterizes learning at the lyceum. but in fairness, many wonderful people came out of the lyceum, including one of the future ministers of foreign affairs, chancellor gorchakov, poets came out, decembrists came out, sailors came out, it is impossible to overestimate the lyceum in pushkin’s life, and it is no coincidence that every october 19 he will write poetry dedicated

to the lyceum, this is a famous one, my friends, our union is beautiful, it is indivisible like a soul eternal. these are wonderful pushkin lines full of gratitude to his lyceum youth, and he was not the best student, he was somewhere... there he was third or fourth from the bottom in the then ranking, but nevertheless, lyceum friendship, this invaluable human experience communication, all this meant an extraordinary amount to pushkin, and friendship, the relationship between people, was perhaps the most important thing for him, much more important than political views, the idea of ​​conviction, although the idea of ​​conviction... of course, pushkin had, and we remember very well the school curriculum his so-called freedom-loving lyrics, we remember his revolutionary poems, we all learned

at school his message to chaadaev, love, hope, quiet glory, deception did not live long for us, we read the village, we read sadness, we know that that these poems caused outrage in the courtyard, the tsar and pushkin were threatened with terrible karma, sending him to himself. or exile him to solovki, and if not for the intercession of pushkin’s friends, koromzin, zhukovsky, who was the teacher of the royal children, it is unknown what fate would have awaited alexander sergeevich, but the state in this case acted very wisely and instructively, nevertheless treating this young rebel with care, and it seems to me that there is some very deep lesson in this, talented people do not develop... in a straight line, people least of all looks like some kind of scheme or some kind of instruction that he must follow, here is pushkin’s liveliness, pushkin’s rebellion, pushkin’s disobedience, pushkin’s

incredible craving for freedom, of course, these are the most important features of his personality, without which there would be no pushkin, a monarchist , there wouldn't be pushkin, a statesman, there would not have been pushkin the christian, because all this coexisted in this truth, but if we are already talking about this period of pushkin’s conditionally revolutionary youth, his closeness to the decembrists, sometimes pushkin was even called the ideologist of decembrism, then what here it must be emphasized that there was still a very important line that separated pushkin from his friends, namely the worldview line, pushkin was hardly capable of political murder, or indeed any murder, except of course duels, but this... is a completely different story, and if we remember the same ode, liberty, then with all its emotional intensity, with all its anger, it actually does not

call at all to crush the monarch, it calls on the monarch to respect the law, respect human dignity, for young pushkin, these were some very important criteria, and pushkin, paradoxically, if you like, is a constitutionalist, yes, there was no constitution in russia, but respect for human dignity is a very important feature, which he carried it through his entire life. and so again, no matter what step he took, yes , everything led to his immortality, everything was really lucky for him in life, he was sent to the south, here for him is a northern man, born, by the way, in moscow, which is also very important, yes, this is the geography of pushkin’s life. the truth is very important. a muscovite by birth, educated in st. petersburg or in the suburbs of st. petersburg, in tsarskoye selo, he ends up in the south in his youth, just when he needs

to be there, on the shores of the black sea, in crimea, in the steppes near odessa , in moldova, where his service took place, he meets completely different people, all this enriches him, he absorbs all this, all this results in his amazing... poetry, which is difficult to distinguish from his life , here is this wonderful romantic period in his life , which unexpectedly ends abruptly, as we all remember again in 1824, when the police, who are watching pushkin, intercept one of his letters, where he admits that he is taking lessons in pure atheism, that is atheism, in a state where christianity was the state religion, atheism was considered a serious crime, immediate punishment follows, this time pushkin is sent into exile to mikhailovskoye, in fact, this is

imprisonment, imprisonment is doubly offensive for him, that he is sent under the supervision of his own father , this is an amazing thing, this is the transformation that occurs with pushkin in the russian village, this is really, this is the story... of a young man who was raised, well, in such a european spirit, yes, who knew very well european literature, the french language, who was fascinated by european ideas that found an echo in his heart, who was fascinated by byron, who sympathized with the greek uprising, who dreamed of escaping from russia to see italy, but instead of all this, this man finds himself in a village, and there in the village, pushkin becomes a genius, it is there in the village that, perhaps, the work is created, after which

we can say that... pushkin is a romantic, pushkin carried away by passions, emotions, a whirlwind of feelings, pushkin becomes a thinker, he writes the greatest work of russian literature, the tragedy boris godunov, remember, when he wrote it, he exclaimed ida pushkin, ida son of a bitch, and buffoonery, but this exclamation, this is actually a very deep thing, a very deep recognition when a person... himself is not understands, does not fully understand, does not fully realize what he achieved, but what turned out to be amazingly deep in essence, in terms of penetration into russian history, into the russian soul, into the russian head, into the russian consciousness, this very tragedy appeared, in in which pushkin poses the most important questions of existence, in which pushkin appears as a philosopher, he is 25 years old, he is a boy, even already...

if we speak in modern times, and yet, he creates this work, written from a strictly orthodox position, himself in fact, strictly christian positions, despite the fact that in his life, in his upbringing , in his experience, pushkin was at that time still very, very far from christianity, but pushkin’s talent was ahead, ahead, as it seems to me, of himself, and here of course , here is the most important... concept in pushkin's fate, in pushkin's life, it was what he called the muse. and what goes back again, of course, to his lyceum youth, we all remember, these wonderful lines from the eighth chapter of eugene onegin, which thus begins in those days when in the gardens of the lyceum i blossomed serenely, willingly read apuleius, but did not read cicero , in those days in the mysterious valleys , in the spring, with swan calls... a platoon of those shining

in the silence, the muse began to appear to me, this muse that appeared to pushkin, young pushkin, and which, as we remember, further, he writes how she changed her appearance, how she accompanied him everywhere and how she turned, in the end, in mikhailovsky, to this humble and provincial young lady with a book in her hand, this is, of course, such a guiding a star that was in his destiny, which meant extremely much to him, and this destiny led him exactly like this, from moscow to st. petersburg, through the south, to mikhailovskoye, although he had been to mikhailovskoye before, but it was one thing when he came there in his youth of his own free will, and quite another when he found himself imprisoned there, but this imprisonment was psychologically difficult and unbearable for him, but apparently it was precisely this that created that tension, created that necessary friction between his soul and the circumstances in which he was, which

contributed to the fact that, firstly, to he became interested in deep, serious reading, because he reads the bible, he reads karamzin, he reads shakespeare, but he creates something absolutely of his own, something original, and dedicated to the precious memory of nikolai mikhailovich koramzin, but this is pushkin, this is real, this is genuine pushkin, this is the story of a king who came to power by stepping through blood, despite the fact that we don’t know whether this really happened in russian history, but pushkin wrote this way, then the same thing will happen in mozart and sollier, this pushkin’s view of some historical events, the historical figures who transform them, at least in literature , they absolutely make them legitimate, make them seem like facts of our life, our culture, everything he touches on turns out

incredibly profound , it turns out incredible talented and incredibly diverse, because in parallel with this, he writes eugene onegin, this famous novel in verse , which has no analogues in russian literature, in world literature, i think, neither, and the novel is extremely interesting because, unlike many other pushkin works that were created over a fairly limited period of time, eugene onegin was written for many years, as we know, yes, pushkin began writing it in southern exile, but the north is harmful for me, he finished writing it when already ended up in moscow, and then before... went to st. petersburg, and in fact, the bulden autumn , this is a new period in his fate, a new turn in his life, also extremely important, yes, when circumstances, plague, cholera lock the poet in the village of boldin

, this phenomenon is born, which we all know, yes, which is called boldin autumn, and where pushkin creates his brilliant works, both poems and small ones. belkina finishes the story, evgenia anegina finishes, and ends with what, yes, like us we remember that eugene onegin has an open ending, but there are beautiful words from anna akhmatova, eugene onegin ends with pushkin getting married, and in fact, pushkin’s marriage is another such stunning one that never ceases to arouse our attention. our interest, our disputes, a moment in his biography, because many people do not like natalya nikolaevna, many people believe that pushkin’s marriage was unsuccessful, and he should have married some other woman, and these and

such jealous attacks addressed to natalya nikolaevna from people of the highest degree respectable, because both akhmatova and... svyataeva, or for example, faina ranevskaya, in the diary entries of faina ranevskaya, you can simply see how she is seething with indignation, it would seem that she is natalya nikolaevna, who lived 100 years ago ago, but nevertheless, faina georgievna is simply filled with hatred for this woman, but let’s assume, okay, this is the female half, but let’s take the male half, vikkendiy vikkendivich verisaev, a wonderful russian soviet writer of the first half of the 20th century, the author of such a wonderful thing. which is called pushkin in life, and somewhere there he writes that if pushkin had paid attention not to goncharova, who , of course, was a beauty, but such an empty beauty, and who crossed the road, perhaps a much

more worthy girl, pushkin would be with her i would be happy, and the same thing was written by shchogalev, pavel elsech, such a wonderful pushkinist who studied the cannon duel. boris pasternak answered them all perfectly, pasternak wrote in such a way that pushkin should have married not goncharova, but shchogolev, all of us in further pushkin's work and then he would have lived to this day, then he would have written five sequels to eugene onegin, then he would have written another poltava, but pasternak goes on to say that he would not have understood such a pushkin, namely. nikolaevna, for whom she was a wonderful wife, this is pushkin , the real pushkin, the genuine one, we continue, this is a podcast about the life of the wonderful, i am with you, writer alexey varlamov, and we are talking

today about pushkin. it is well known that exile to mikhailovskaya, which could have resulted in permanent exile for pushkin, it ended, as we remember, with. that tsar nicholas ii wished to meet with pushkin. and after this meeting, which took place in moscow in september 1826, the tsar said that today he spoke with the smartest man in russia and pushkin really was such, and it seems to me, with exactly this seriousness, with this thoroughness, with with this depth he related to his family life, and natalya nikolaevna, somehow... something else corresponded to the role of his wife. another thing is that in the thirties years, the thirties of the 19th century, after pushkin got married, his position began to change, and in some sense change not for the better. the fact is that in the twenties