Literary worker [Bozhan Angelov]

It is difficult to find a Bulgarian writer of my generation who, in one way or another, has not gone through the literary school of Bojan Angelov. And it is easy to explain why this is so: barely having crossed the threshold of high school, through his "Stylistics" and his "Theory of Prose and Poetry" we first began to penetrate the technique of artistic creativity. However, this meeting with the author was necessitated by the requirements of a single program, pursued a single educational goal, and usually ended in the lower grades, without leading to any lasting reflections. Thus, most of us became acquainted with the textbook and teacher without getting to know his research and literary-critical assessments of Bulgarian writers. And if this is the case even with those who learned from his books, even less awareness can be expected from the younger generation: very often they have not even heard his name. That is why the collection "Literary Articles", which was published recently and contains some of Bozhan Angelov's more characteristic works, comes just in time to respond to a ripe need. It will help our new reader to become acquainted with a little-known writer, with whom until now mainly specialists have dealt, and at the same time it will enable many older readers to convince themselves that the author of some textbooks on literary criticism was not an ordinary dry theorist, as they seem to think from old memory, but was primarily concerned with the problems of living Bulgarian literature. The collection "Literary Articles" is divided into three sections, which combine similar works: on folklore (1), on the history of Bulgarian literature (II) and critical essays on some prominent Bulgarian writers (III). To the last section, without being connected by subject with the others, two articles on sensational literature have been added. Obviously, the aim of the compiler was to present the author in such a way that the reader, after getting acquainted with the book, would gain a relatively complete idea of ​​the main directions of his literary work. And it must be said that methodologically this approach is correct. However, I have one objection of a practical nature, which concerns part two of the book.