Книжка-1

1968 Book 1 Contents

"I am afraid of those comrades who, as soon as they start writing or speaking, see only the clear scheme of the external world and hostilely avoid the labyrinth of the soul." This is how the hero-narrator of the unfinished, recently published novel "Achilles' Heel" confesses to us. In these words, as well as in the entire first chapter - a kind of reflection, a philosophical-psychological essay, we clearly perceive the own voice and gaze of the writer, Dimitar Dimov. "Is it," the communist narrator further asks, "the richness, diversity, subtlety and depth of thoughts and feelings that the immense complexity and beauty of the external world awaken in us, some kind of heresy?" No, of course not. After all, it is precisely from this wealth of the soul that the fruits of material and spiritual labor spring.... Indeed, it is precisely in it that the possibilities of the new man who builds socialism lie hidden! The greatness in the soul of modern man is not in some steel (according to the famous expression) monolithicity and hardness, in the absence of shortcomings and contradictions. It comes not from some "guild decency" in his morality, but from the courage with which he faces the truth, from the heroic firmness with which he overcomes the difficulties around him and within himself. That is why we should not hide his weaknesses, his vices, we should not decorate his character with "trinkets."

The strangest thing that critics allow themselves is to suspect the artist of infidelity to his own work. And yet this is precisely what makes criticism artistic. To reveal the moral or socio-political resonance of the work, to highlight the cognitive-psychological moments in it, to assess its historical veracity - without all this, criticism would not fulfill its serious mission. However, none of these criteria, nor all of them together, are capable of achieving an artistic assessment. It can only be discussed when one penetrates the work's own logic - when one sees the internal expediency, in the spirit of which individual, even interesting in themselves, details would turn out to be unnecessary deviations or the shortcoming of "something" would stand out, undesirable roughnesses, imperfections, etc. would stand out. On this basis, the critic can make artistic demands on the author. And we would be making a grave mistake if we decided that we had entered a purely formal area.

The perception, experience and understanding of works of art is a very complex process of creativity. The work that the reader, listener or viewer does is related, similar, in a certain sense opposite to that done by the poet, composer or painter. As in the process of artistic creation, all components of the human psyche, all the drivers of the soul, all its sides and elements participate in that of artistic perception.

Svetoslav Milarov is among those Bulgarian figures from the Bulgarian Renaissance era who, although not consistent supporters of the revolutionary program of the Bulgarian Communist Party in Bucharest, always had in mind the national interests and the sacred ideal of national freedom in their lives and activities. His Renaissance ideal of a free and democratic Bulgaria unswervingly imposed a progressive orientation on all his journalistic and public activities before and after the Liberation, directed against Ottoman slavery and the despotic regime of Battenberg-Stambolov. It is no coincidence that some of his contemporaries, who knew him more closely and even communicated with him, confess in their memoirs their admiration for both his high literary culture and for the views and those traits of his character that show the patriotism of the publicist, writer and man Milarov, the purity of his thoughts and ideals. "In vain would we search among the heroes of the latest Bulgarian literature for another face so enchanting, another face that would inspire the deep sympathy that the martyr Svetoslav Milarov inspires. Botev alone stands at an untouchable height in our hearts...Poor, poor Svetoslav Milarov, Dr. Krastev exclaimed pathetically shortly after his tragic death in 1892. What unspeakable feelings filled his great and noble soul when the executioner stepped forward to lead him on the last, longest journey of his wandering life. What a bitter irony of fate! The great idealist of the new Bulgaria is a robber for the Bulgarian state and it has no other crown for him, except - the crown of the gallows!" The death sentence and its execution also shocked Milarov's Croatian friend Jovan Hranilović, who long before and also after 1892 expressed his admiration for his personality and patriotic activities. "Eternal sufferer, eternal martyr, fearless fighter," he wrote to him on August 3, 1876, "I see you in my thoughts, I marvel at you, I congratulate you." And the national writer Ivan Vazov, who had a precise criterion for personalities and deeds of national significance, felt sympathy and respect for Milarov, which characterized his attitude towards the first figures of the Renaissance and post-liberation era.

Poet, fabulist, feuilletonist, author of aphorisms, epigrams, travelogues, memoirs, literary and theatrical articles, works for children, Dimitar Podvarzachov is truly a complex nature, distinguished by his bright creative individuality. Having spent a difficult childhood as an orphan, nurtured with the ideals of the Narodniks, with his first poems (printed in "Na dezhda" and "Bulgarian Collection") he attracted the attention of Iv. Vazov, who assigned the young poet Nedezdi. In his literary collection "Rays of Poetry" 1901, G. Bakalov included poems by Podvarzachov with emphasized critical realism. "Among the poems of Podvarzachov's young works - he writes in the preface - they are distinguished by greater artistic endurance and originality, above all they meet the most important requirement of democratic and humane creativity." Having fallen under the influence of populist-socialist ideas at the beginning of the century, the young poet later deviated from this solid realistic beginning, his poetry became impoverished of militant thoughts and moods, and in a number of his works he sang not of the people's suffering, but of his personal woes. This is evident from the titles of the poems "Sorrow", "Without a Path", "Abyss", "Curse", "Grave", etc., printed in the magazines "Khudozhnik", "Savremennik" and in the magazine "Zveno" edited by him, 1914, written in the spirit of symbolist poetry. But Hr. Radevski rightly claims: "Symbolist motifs are not very characteristic of him. Podvorzachov is above all a humorist, an active judge of social struggles, and the poetry of symbolism is characterized precisely by alienation from public life" ("Art and Criticism", 1939, vol. 8). Podvarzachev did not close himself off in the knightly castles of solitude, did not enclose himself with icy walls, did not escape from the crowds. He lived with the anxieties of his time and established himself as a poet, humorist and satirist. When the first years of our century were at their brightest, D. Podvarzachov edited several humorous publications ("Bulgaria", 1904-1909, "Osa", 1909-1910, Smyah", 1911-1914), where he included humorous works of a markedly satirical nature. This already clearly speaks of the poet's lively connection with the people. The only book he published during his lifetime, the collection of feuilletons "How the Devil Reads the Gospel" (signed with his most popular pseudonym, Hamlet Prince of Denmark), confirms the idea that the poet valued his humorous works above all - he established himself as one of our most prominent fabulists and feuilletonists.

Kostenets, July 30, 1951 Georgi Konstantinov In Moscow, where he was sent for treatment, Assen Raztsvetnikov died of blood cancer... Last year he lived here, near me, for a whole month. From here, Kamen Zidarov, then director of the National Theater, took him to the "Dr. Racho Angelov" hospital to the famous Dr. Tsonchev... (Kamen Zidarov was born in Draganovo and he and Assen loved each other very much.) I had known Assen Raztsvetnikov since 1922. He had completed several semesters of Slavic philology and literature when I enrolled, and he was already threatening to leave philology because he found it boringly dry and transfer to the Faculty of Law. He wrote and published poems that did not stand out with any special qualities. I knew him better as a student - Assen Kolarov - and as a passionate communist. For a long time, we both sat on the same bench.

In 1922, the twenty-year-old Kazi published his first book under the title "The Blue Chrysanthemum". Svetoslav Minkov published his first book with Dimir Polyanov, born three years earlier. He debuted alongside the then-young Vla. The latter's collection of short stories was entitled "Death". Not long after, their names appeared on the pages of the magazine "Zlatoroga", around which some of the most famous writers of the time were grouped. Minkov's friends liked to joke about the title of his book, asking him in which garden he had seen a "blue chrysanthemum", when chrysanthemums are usually yellow and white. Of course, the joke did not irritate or anger Minkov, he accepted the tease with that typical Minkov smile, in which there was both shyness and mystery. He did not answer with words, he was by nature silent, I would even say withdrawn into himself. In those years, Minkov still loved meetings in the shady Sofia pubs, and there among friends, in the haze of tobacco smoke, in front of a glass of wine, he became talkative and spoke, rather told things, sometimes very bizarre, incredible, in which he seemed to believe, because what he said had an accent of faith, of conviction. But he was funny.

There is something remarkably optimistic in the unexpectedness of his seventieth birthday. Anyone who has recently met the silver-haired jubilee, hurrying through the streets of Sofia, or in a heartfelt conversation, among the villagers in Dragalevtsi or amidst the white expanses of his native mountains, has undoubtedly taken with him the impression of inexhaustible vitality and strong health. Anyone who has read the latest poems or has been in close contact with his poetry and fiction endeavors of recent years has become convinced that the poet Lamar enjoys not only physical vigor, but also enviable spiritual energy and youth. Even the most prejudiced seeker could not find in them the calmness, spiritual balance and calmness characteristic of the wise resignation of creative maturity.

Somehow suddenly his fiftieth birthday came. And it surprised others more than the poet, since youth always remains with people who nourish their energy with the vital juices of spiritual youth. And it is inexhaustible and does not recognize the physical limits of any age. It always awakens the inner human strength, increases the enthusiasm, flights of thought, inspiration and moral impulses. That is why Veselin Andreev remains the same noble fighter of the party, with a youthful soul, responsive to the masculine beauty in life and the new light of our ideal. The same party warrior and poet, with spiritualized and bright humanity, with moral purity and with an always cheerful, always sensitive and generous heart, always ready to give it to people.

His party and Rems comrades are among us. They not only remember "Vaskata" from Hayredin, but deep in their hearts they keep his example of a selflessly devoted comrade, of a selfless party fighter, of a passionate publicist and writer. They have preserved in their memory the light of his bright image and always point out to us his feat as a citizen, a revolutionary and an artist. They always speak of him with respect, with admiration, with adoration. But..... and with great pain. They sincerely regret that their wonderful comrade in battle with the enemy leaves his bones by the turbulent waters of the Ogosta and does not manage to develop as a fiction writer, despite his undeniable talent. They mourn the heartfelt enthusiast, the ardent bonsist, the inventive illegal activist, the organizer of the partisan movement... But they are also proud of him, because he is a standard-bearer of the generation that today fertilizes our literature. Next to him, in the ranks of the immortals, are Tsvetan Spasov, Atanas Manchev, Hristo Karpachev, Kiril Madzharov, Hristo Kozlev, Ivan Nivianin, Marko Angelov, Toncho Staevski and many others.

His star seemed to be happy. Clever, talented, ethical, he made an impression everywhere, was respected and loved. His creative path was one of continuous ascent. He was harsh towards his first critical works, which inevitably bore the imprint of another time that limited creative individuality, but we, the older ones who printed as editors, remember that we hardly noticed in them the mistakes of early youth. This young man, almost a teenager, was not only unusually clever, but, strangely enough, he was already wise. How and when he had acquired this wisdom at such an early age remained a mystery to his richly gifted nature.

The brothers Cyril and Methodius created the Slavic alphabet and became immortal. And some authors write thousands of pages with the same alphabet and no one remembers them after their death.

The early death of Dimcho Debelyanov (killed on October 2, 1916 near Demir Hisar during the First World War) is not a barrier to his not having a clear vision for poetry. Frost scorches the youth of our elegiac poet, but the voice of this youth - both intimate and sincere, both inconsolable and ecstatic - we hear in his songs. The star of this poet - an angel expelled from heaven, rises in the poetic firmament with great brilliance. This star shines even now above his forehead, above us, and above all those who love poetry and cannot live without it.

The last two or three months of the year bring a special excitement to French literary life. Numerous publishing houses are in a race to release new books, mainly books by young writers, by debutants, who participate in the competition for literary prizes. The tension reaches its peak in the second half of November, when the first literary prizes are announced. Before that, all sorts of "predictions" are made, guesses about one or another author, about one or another book. Of course, these suggestions also provide guidance, and often the literary prizes are awarded to some of the names that have already been launched. A healthy tradition has already been established in this regard, which, during this small section of the end of the year, causes a certain increase in interest among the public in the literary production offered to it. Literary barometers show the coefficient of sales of various books, among which novels occupy first place. On the competitive field, so to speak, they are at the forefront.

In the era of the Bulgarian Revival, deep and diverse processes are taking place, which fill the socio-economic and spiritual life with new content. On the basis of the objectively created historical prerequisites, the Bulgarian nation is formed, with all those components that accompany its affirmation. In long-standing efforts for national individualization, for the conquest of political and cultural independence, it manifests itself with unsuspected vital energy. National social, scientific, aesthetic thought is rapidly gaining strength.

The work K. Kuev on Chernorizets by Professor Hrabar is the result of several years of research work, remarkable for the scope and depth of the studies, for the fruitful respect for the "black" textological studies, for the comprehensive knowledge of every step of the movement of Slavic thought in this area. Its precursors were a number of smaller publications by the author, which outlined some of the main problematic elements of the future book. Against the background of the scientific literature on the notable Old Bulgarian writer, created over a period of nearly 150 years (its beginning, as is known, was laid by K. Kalaydovich in 1824) and including a significant number of valuable works - but works partially illuminating the issues surrounding Hrabar - the monographic nature of Kuev's work stands out. Compositionally, the book is divided into two heterogeneous parts - a literary-historical study and an edition of the Tale in 73 transcripts, of which 67 contain its entire text. But for its general spirit, for the appearance and for the new word of philological science, the synthesis of the author's literary-historical and textual awareness has proven decisive - an indisputable guarantee and at the same time a measure, an indicator of its real value. It is difficult to say whether there is a leading factor in this unity of mutually complementary knowledge; practically, what is more important is that the 57 transcripts published for the first time significantly broaden the horizons of the literary historian, suggest new statements of questions, correct or confirm already established positions.

On September 12, 2001, at Kiev University, Pavel Andreevich Bugaenko, a professor at Saratov University, successfully defended his doctoral dissertation on the topic "A. V. Lunacharsky and the Literary Movement of the 20s", published in a separate book. I begin with these preliminary clarifications, because not only the general readership, but also specialists in Bulgaria learn very little about what is published in the Soviet Union outside of Moscow and Leningrad. Perhaps this applies more to literary critics, because, as far as I know, every physicist or biologist must, in principle, be informed about all the novelties in his field, otherwise he risks starting to work on a problem that others have already solved. For specialists in the humanities, this rule does not always seem to be mandatory. And recently, a number of phenomena in the development of literary literature have been radically reassessed, and separate trends, styles, and aesthetic categories are being clarified in a different way; there are attempts to read the classics in a new way, etc.

In 1967, the Institute of Literature continued to work in the main areas of literary science in order to achieve new results in shedding light on the long-term development of Bulgarian literature and its individual periods, as well as in clarifying a number of basic problems of our contemporary literature and its connections with other national literatures; in order to pose and solve some theoretical problems and to propagate its achievements among the broad masses of the people, among literature teachers and youth.

In December 1967, at the Institute of Literature, the Section for Bulgarian Literature before the Liberation discussed and accepted for publication the research presented for the collection "Literature and Folklore". The discussion, conducted under the leadership of Prof. P. Dinekov, was attended by: Prof. B. St. Angelov, Prof. G. Dimov, Dr. Kr. Genov, research assistants B. Nichev, S. Baeva, D. Lekov, Tsv. Undzhieva, L. Grasheva, St. Tarinska and others. Thirteen works were accepted for publication: P. Dinekov - Literature and Folklore", B. Nichev - "Literary and Folklore Artistic Consciousness", Kr. Genov - "Observations on the Typology of Bulgarian Folk Poetry", St. Nikolova - Paterical Tales and Folklore", D. Lekov - Folklore and the Formation of Bulgarian Fiction during the Revival", Tsv. Undzhieva - Slaveykov's Feuilleton and Folk Art", V. Valchev - Pencho Slaveykov and Folk Art", St. Boyadzhieva - Petko Todorov's "Prayer" and the Folklore Tradition", P. Totev - "With Contemporary Bulgarian Satire and Folklore", Iv. Koynakov - Botev's Poetry and Bulgarian Folk Songs to the Armed Anti-Fascist Struggle 1941-1944", E. Ognyanova - Mama and Her Tales", N. Kaufman - "The Rhyming Verses in Our Folk Song",