Literaturna misal

Table of Contents 1957 issue 1

Whenever a new magazine was launched, there was always talk about the reasons why it was being published. And we are compelled to begin with such an explanation. And we do so with the deep conviction that Literary Thought, as a magazine devoted specifically to aesthetics, literary criticism, and literary history, is truly born out of necessity. A great creative revival is gradually taking place in our country. Issues that were neglected in the past but which needed to be brought to light are coming to the fore with increasing urgency. The magazine will discuss the fundamental questions of aesthetics. Its pages will clarify the laws of artistic creation, the place of the subject in art, and the qualities and characteristics of the "aesthetic." The magazine will pay particular attention to issues related to the psychology of the creative process. This important area remained outside the scope of our literary studies for almost the entire period after September 9. The blame for some incorrect assessments and unhealthy guidelines must also be sought in the waning interest in the problems of the psychology of creativity.

Question: How should we understand the concept of realism? Is it possible, and to what extent, to truthfully reflect reality in works of art belonging to other art movements? Answer: By realism, I understand the creative method and movement that formed under certain historical conditions and changed significantly during different historical periods. It seems to me, as well as to a number of scholars, that realism in Western Europe first emerged during the Renaissance, finding its most powerful expression in the works of Shakespeare. One of the fundamental distinguishing features of realism lies in its unique approach to the creation of a typical character. By freeing itself from mythological ideas about human personality and will, realism came to depict character in its deepest individualization, in its self-development. Whereas in previous eras, literature, in creating characters, proceeded from previously "given" aesthetic norms that determined for themselves the ideal, the sublime, or the ugly.

1960 Book 1 Contents

The victory of 9. IX. 1944 opened a new era both in the socio-political development of the Bulgarian people and in the development of Bulgarian science. The people's power, the Bulgarian Communist Party have always emphasized that the construction of a socialist society is impossible without the comprehensive development of all branches of science and are constantly making efforts to create the necessary conditions for its flourishing. And if the natural, mathematical, technical sciences were harnessed to the creation of the material base of society, then the humanitarian sciences had to contribute to the formation of a new consciousness, of new moral, ethical, philosophical views in people - builders of socialism and communism. Hence the special importance of science, which deals with the problems of literature - one of the most active factors for ideological Education and re-education, for the creation in man of a new worldview, a new socialist worldview.

The famous Ukrainian magazine "Vse Svіt" in its first issue of this year published an article about the great merits of Academician Todor Pavlov in the field of Marxist-Leninist aesthetics. The article emphasizes that the name of the Bulgarian scientist is well known to the Ukrainian reader, who has more than once encountered his philosophical and literary-aesthetic articles in Russian. The article was written on the occasion of the commendable initiative of the State Publishing House for Fiction in Kiev, which for the first time publishes a separate voluminous collection of literary-critical and aesthetic studies in Ukrainian under the general title "Питання теориї та историї літерутури" (Problems of Literary Theory and History).

The previous issue of "Literary Thought" included the article by the young literary critic Lyuben Georgiev "Three Rivals". The author poses and examines in his own way some questions of our contemporary lyric poetry and expresses an opinion on the development of the three, in his opinion, the foremost poets among the young" - Ivan Radoev, Georgi Dzhagarov and Pavel Matev. The editorial staff expected that Lyuben Georgiev's article would arouse a number of objections, would provoke a dispute over many assessments and some general conclusions. But without such polemical "snaps" the broad exchange of opinions and assessments that Comrade Todor Zhivkov spoke about in his speech to the writers could not have taken place.

1960 Book 2 Contents

1960 Book 3 Contents

The literary theory section at the Institute of Bulgarian Literature discussed the work of junior research associate Atanas Natev - Purpose or End-in-itself of Art? (Critical Observations on Neo-Kantian Aesthetics in Bulgaria). The author dedicated his work to the problem of the penetration of neo-Kantian aesthetics in Bulgaria - he examines the works of its supporters and the results of their activities. The work is divided into seven chapters: Theoretical zigzags of a thesis; The psychological vow of aesthetics; Purpose or social aimlessness of art; The specific purpose - social justification of art; Tendency and tendentiousness of art; Exiled knowledge and Aesthetic pleasure and art. The pivotal chapter is the fourth, which contains the author's aesthetic credo - in it he seeks to provide a scientific justification for his thesis on the specificity of art. According to Natev, the specificity of art (in the most general sense) comes not from the subject, not from the object, but from a special social need. Artistic images, after appropriate objectification, can become art only if they gain a public, if they enter social circulation.

1960 Book 4 Contents

1960 Booklet 5 Contents

Several areas of our national culture and literature are associated with the name of Nikolay Liliev, in which the late man worked silently and apostolically for decades. One of our great poets, Liliev has embedded his name in the pantheon of prominent masters of Bulgarian verse. Despite the symbolism, under his human, noble and sophisticated pen, songs of beauty and humanity rang out. In them, the Bulgarian language revealed its musical and sound magic, and our verse became a more flexible, more elegant and more reliable instrument for expressing subtle states of mind. Academician Liliev has special merits for the founding of the Institute of Literature at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. He was one of its first organizers and for years took the most active part in the work of the Institute with his extensive literary knowledge and linguistic culture. Death found the poet as a playwright at the Sofia National Theater, where his great art of translation was unfolded. Having mastered several European languages ​​to perfection, Liliev gave a series of brilliant translations of famous works of classical and contemporary dramaturgy. Thanks to his subtle artistic feeling, foreign works sounded on our native stage with all their richness. His articles and statements on the issues of artistic translation contained many accurate and subtle observations. Until his last days, he did not leave his post as a playwright, bent over the text of new plays or guiding young playwrights with his competent word.

1960 Booklet 6 Contents

In two meetings - on September 29 and October 13 of this year, the Scientific Council at the Institute of Literature in an expanded composition discussed the work of Alexander Nichev on Aleko Konstantinov. The work has a monographic character and includes the following sections: Introduction: Biography; Literary Attempts; To Chicago and Back; Bai Ganyu; Feuilletons; Poetics; Aleko Konstantinov and Bulgarian Social Democracy. The reviewers Emil Stefanov and Rozalia Lykova evaluate Nichev's work as the first comprehensive scientific monograph on the life and work of our great writer. They see its positive qualities both in the collection of valuable and in many respects new factual material, and in the analysis of this material. "Everywhere in his book, Nichev has carefully, in detail, and with the necessary arguments explained Aleko's ideological and political development," emphasizes Emil Stefanov. "For the first time in our Literary History, Aleko's ideological positions have been widely and thoroughly examined and explained."

On October 4 and 15, 1960, the Section of Bulgarian Literature until the Liberation continued the discussion of the materials for the collection dedicated to Lyuben Karavelov. Diverse and rich, still insufficiently studied and illuminated, the creative work of the editor of "Svoboda" provides for study interesting problems in the fields of literature, journalism, folklore, ethnography, linguistics. This to a significant extent predetermines not only the diversity of the topics that will be included in the collection, but also the striving for originality in their development. Svetla Gyurova's article, for example, "Lyuben Karavelov as the 143rd editor of P. Hitova's book "My Journey through the Stara Planina" is a successful attempt to give a true idea of ​​Karavelov's editorial manner through Hitova's memoirs. Comparing the original of the work and its first edition, made by P. Berkovski, with the text printed in 1873, the author comes to the conclusion that Karavelov, without making changes to the content, makes creative corrections” to the language, composition, imagery and social sharpness of the work. Along with tracing the editorial work on the Memoirs, Gyurova also provides an idea of ​​the work as a whole, of the interest shown in it in some Slavic countries and of the place it occupies in Bulgarian Renaissance literature. Highlighting the undeniable merits of the article, which were also pointed out in their statements by Prof. M. Arnaudov and Prof. P. Dinekov, the reviewer Docho Lekov expressed a wish to place more emphasis on those Karavelov’s additions that have a social and political character, to expand the concluding part of the work and to bring unity to the bibliographical notes.

1961 Book 1 Contents

The Declaration of the Representatives of the Communist and Workers' Parties and the Address to the Peoples of the World, discussed and adopted at the November Conference in Moscow and published in the press of all countries, are two historical documents that have excited the honest and peace-loving people of the five continents of the globe. With their analysis of the historical moment in which we live, they illuminate the path of humanity in our era and point out the most important problems facing it for solution, presenting a developed program for the fulfillment of the most human duty: eliminating the danger of a new, terrible war. As the vanguard in the development of humanity, communists from all over the world can best understand this model of creative Marxism-Leninism. The wisdom of the documents enriches their understanding of contemporary reality; the tasks set are close to them, and in their fulfillment they see the meaning of their lives. Clarity of the situation has always been a primary ally for communists, and decisiveness of action is measured by the magnitude of the task set. The statement speaks definitely of the historical mission of communists: "Communists see their historical mission not only in eliminating exploitation and misery on a world scale and forever excluding from the life of human society the possibility of any war, but even in the modern era to deliver humanity from the nightmare of a new world war. The communist parties of all countries will devote all their strength and energy to the realization of this great historical mission."

Main problems: a) Historical, comparative-historical and typological study of the Slavic languages, b) Study of the interaction of Slavic and non-Slavic languages ​​and the question of "language alliances" and c) Problems of descriptive Slavic linguistics in relation to applied linguistics.

The editorial office received a letter from Dr. Penyo Rusev, which says: I would like to draw your attention to the following: 1. While examining the story "Andreshko", on page 51 (vol. 5, 1960 of the magazine "Literary Thought") M. Dragostinova writes that in my book "The Creativity of Elin Elin up to the Balkan War" a methodology was manifested that seeks to closely link the image with some real prototype; that in my opinion the spontaneous rebel Andreshko is a member of the Agricultural Union" and that by studying and observing the life and activities of this organization, Elin Pelin discovered his hero precisely in its ranks". By forcing and attributing all this to me, M. Dragostinova concludes: "Such an automatic application of historical facts will lead us to a completely empirical approach to literary phenomena". The statements attributed to me by M. Dragostinova are not in my book. On the contrary, in it I write: "The question of whether Andreshko belongs to the farmers or the socialists must be relegated to the circle of fortune-telling" (pp. 114-115). Moreover, I claim that "it is irrelevant" whether we attribute Andreshko to the farmers or the socialists of that time.

1961 Book 2 Contents

1961 Book 3 Contents

On February 25 of this year, the Scientific Council at the Institute of Literature reviewed the first volume of the collection "Problems of Children's Literature". The material of the collection is divided into three sections: General Questions", "Essays and Studies" and From the History of the Periodical Press". Reviewer Simeon Sultanov finds the initiative of the authors, who for the first time in our country have undertaken to compile a collection of studies and essays on the issues of children's literature, commendable. Although very late, this collection still does not cover all authors who have written for children, and does not exhaust all issues of children's literature, since little work has been done in this direction for years. Sultanov examines the three sections of the collection in detail. The first includes the articles: "Towards a Systematic and Basic Study of Children's Literature" by Krastyo Genov, "The Optimistic Character of Children's Literature" by Ivan Popivanov, and "The Educational Significance of a Fantastic Fairy Tale" by Zhecho Atanasov. The reviewer finds that Genov's article has a programmatic character and identifies a number of problems facing Bulgarian literary scholars. Sultanov points out the need for serious additions to this article, especially on issues related to our contemporary children's literature and artistic mastery. In his notes on Popivanov's article, the reviewer points out the interesting and important problem of optimism in children's literature and finds that the author does not hold his thesis convincingly enough that "critical realism cannot be spoken of in works for the youngest" and recommends not to get carried away with the analysis of some poems. Atanasov's study, which from the point of view of the educator poses the problem of the educational nature of the fairy tale, could have greater value if the author's thoughts were deepened and illustrated with more interesting examples from children's literature.

On March 2, 2011, the Scientific Council of the Institute of Literature discussed Boyan Nichev's work on Branislav Nušić. Reviewers Emil Georgiev and Kujo Kuev highlighted the merits of the work, in which B. Nichev demonstrated his research and analytical talent and ability to richly illustrate and document the creative path of the Serbian writer. In their assessments, they noted that the author successfully coped with the difficult task and that for the first time in scientific literature a more comprehensive study of Nušić's work will appear. Another, equally important feature of the work is that the author worked with inspiration and demonstrated a healthy aesthetic sense. The reviewers recommended that B. Nichev make some compositional corrections, focus his attention on a certain proportionality of the sections, analyze more fully Nušić's great comedies of recent times, highlight more shortcomings in the Serbian writer's work, which are present even in his best works, etc. Eight people participated in the discussions.

On May 10 this year, the Section of Slavic and Western European Literatures reviewed the work of Wanda Smohovska-Petrova "Two Images of Revolutionary Mothers and the Relationship Between Them". (T. T. Yezh "At Dawn" and "Mother" by M. Gorky). In his review of the work under review, Ivan Tsvetko pointed out that the author had focused her attention on a very interesting and previously unasked question. To prove her thesis, she cited all the known material. Smohovska points out that Gorky knew the novel "At Dawn", at the center of which the popular Polish writer of his time, Teodor Tomasz Yezh (Zygmund Milkowski), placed the image of a Bulgarian mother-heroine, created by him based on impressions of grandmother Tonka Obretenova. Pointing to Gorky's review of Yezh's book from 1899, Smokhovskaya finds a number of analogous situations in the process of inner growth in Gorky's and Yezh's heroines. The revolutionization of the consciousness of both women transforms, changes their emotional life. The author notes that the inner changes in them arise in the same way - they begin in both cases under the influence of their sons. Maternal love turns out to be the conductor through which the first sparks of revolutionary truth pass for them. The reviewer pointed out that analyzing the inner development of Two Images, Smokhovskaya does not show the slightest tendency to simplify or coarsen the problem posed. On the contrary, she sees it in its complexity and multifacetedness. Taking into account the essential differences between the two writers, the author only suggests that the image of Yezhov's grandmother Mokra could not fail to impress an artist like Gorky, and perhaps it was he who gave the first impetus, the first impulse for the great proletarian artist to place at the center of his novel precisely a mother who becomes a revolutionary under the influence of her son, that "in the crowded line of Russian women-mothers and revolutionaries - prototypes of Gorky's mother, headed by Anna Kirilova Zolomova", Yezhov's grandmother Mokra also occupies a peculiar, special place, whose prototype is the Bulgarian revolutionary grandmother Tonka. Smokhovska, of course, takes into account both the different ideological content and the different generalizing power of the two images. Whenever necessary, she draws attention to the fact that while Yezh is fighting against national slavery, Gorky is talking about the social liberation of the working class and the working people from the yoke of capitalism. Pointing out that the issue under consideration in Smohovska is posed quite legitimately and completely scientifically, Ivan Tsvetkov drew attention to some corrections and improvements to the work. In his opinion, one should consider whether such a detailed presentation of the image of Grandma Mokra is necessary. He also made a proposal to more specifically connect the assessment of "Mother" with Lenin's statement about the novel and to emphasize even more the expansive meaning of the image in Gorky.

1961 Book 4 Contents

In June of this year, at a joint meeting of the section for Bulgarian literature after the Liberation, for Russian classical and Soviet literature and literary theory at the Institute of Literature, the work "Some Problems of Humor and Satire in Soviet Literary Studies" by Velichko Valchev was discussed. The reviewer Boyan Nitchev finds that the author has diligently and conscientiously studied almost all the works of Soviet researchers published in the last ten years, who deal with the work of prominent Russian and Soviet satirists. The review in this area highlights questions about the specificity of the genre and artistic mastery, distinguishes the various shades of the comic, devotes significant space to the character of Soviet satire and its ideological positions, etc. The author focuses on the works of prominent Soviet literary scholars Ya. Elsberg, Yu. Borev, L. Ershov, V. Kirpotin, A. K. Bushmin. The reviewer finds that, in general, the first three sections of the article are informative in nature. The presentation is concise, there are no problems, and in places the content of the works under consideration is impoverished. B. Nichev evaluates the second part of V. Valchev's work as more interesting. In it, the author shows more in-depth observations and presents correct opinions. The reviewer pointed out that V. Valchev should develop this part in a broader plan, focusing on more recent published works and making more complete and comprehensive summaries. In conclusion, B. Nichev pointed out that V. Valchev's work has no specific goal and in this form is informative in nature. After serious cuts (in the first part), revision and recomposition of the material, it can be used for the review department of the Institute's Bulletin.

1961 Booklet 5 Contents

October 1917! The volleys of the "Aurora" heralded the coming of a new world. Landowner Russia, Russia of material poverty, reaction and suffering, was buried forever, so that the first socialist state could be born. The country of the Soviets, which was the first to dare to reject the wolfish laws of bourgeois society, became the pillar of hope for all toiling humanity. For decades now, the capital of the mighty Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Moscow, has been the gaze of all people who yearn for justice, peace and happiness. The first Soviet state, which took on the historical task of putting into practice the great ideas of Marxism-Leninism, was destined to go through many trials in order to chart the paths that lead to a world without plunderers and oppressors, a world of social justice, human happiness and spiritual beauty. And October 1961! The world followed with particular interest what was happening in white-stone Moscow. Here the tried and enthusiastic warriors of the party of the immortal Lenin, the mind and conscience of the heroic Soviet peoples, had gathered to evaluate the path traveled and, having learned from the past, to outline the tasks of the present and the future. At their XXII Congress they had to fulfill a historical mission - to discuss and approve the magnificent program for building a communist society - the society that the brightest minds of humanity had dreamed of. It is difficult for one to assess the entire historical significance of everything that was done in those October days to pave the way to the future, for the triumph of humanism and internationalism, of material prosperity and moral beauty. A new stage had begun not only in the development of the Soviet peoples, but also of the entire communist movement, in the life of all working humanity. In the remarkable reports of N. S. Khrushchev, in the wise and frank statements of the delegates revealed the enormous successes achieved since the 20th Congress, when the cult of personality was condemned, Leninist norms of party life were restored. With rare principle, with scientific depth and perspective, the issues of the theory and practice of the party were analyzed, the problems of our time were considered.

1961 Booklet 6 Contents

1961 Booklet 6 *** - Contents of the 5th anniversary of "Literary Thought" - 1961

1962 Book 1 Contents

Humanity is facing new great prospects, illuminated by the decisions of the 22nd Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The Congress demonstrated the living embodiment of the creative thought of Marxism-Leninism in guiding ideas. Since its adoption of a program for economic construction, for the development of social relations and culture, we feel how today's socialist society is gradually approaching communism. With its decisions, the Congress raised to a great height precisely that active work of thought that transforms theory into practice, and practice into theory. With the program for the construction of the communist society long dreamed of and suffered by mankind, the grandiose vision is connected in a single whole with the creative daily work, with the organizational work that is currently necessary. The program expands and enriches our concrete ideas about the shape of future society. It points to the enormous progress that will be made in the field of economics and social relations. It continued the scientific development of the questions of socialist democracy, of the role and significance of Marxist-Leninist ideology, of the political, moral, and aesthetic re-education of the people. One of the important tasks of the congress was practical measures for the final elimination of the harmful consequences of the cult of Stalin's personality. It is impossible to move forward, to new conquests, without eliminating everything that was layered during the cult of Stalin's personality and which prevented the creation of normal conditions for the creative activity of the masses and the individual, for the development of the forces and capabilities of the collective in the construction of communist society.

What are the main stages in the development of the mutual relations between the Slavic Literatures? 2. What does comparative Slavic literary studies contribute to the development of literary theory and practice? 3. What are the main problems of the comparative study of the South Slavic Literatures? 4. What are the forms of influence of one literature on another (based on material from Slavic literatures)? 5. What is the role of the assimilation of foreign literary works in the periods of formation of Slavic national literatures? 6. What is the role of the Russian revolutionary democrats in the emergence and development of materialist literary thought in Slavic countries? 7. What phenomena from Slavic literatures have had an impact on the development of non-Slavic literatures? 8. Can some common typological features and common stages in the development of satire in Slavic literatures be identified? B 9. What is the significance of the study of the relations between Slavic literatures and other arts? 10. What is the role of the creative individuality of the writer in the general process of literary development (with regard to Slavic literatures from different eras)? 11. How to create a unification of literary terminology? 12. When did literature for young people arise in the individual Slavic literatures?

On January 4 of this year, an expanded meeting of the Scientific Council of the Institute of Literature at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences was held, at which the scientific work carried out in 1961 was reported. In the report, delivered by the director of the Institute, Corresponding Member G. Tsanev, both the scientific-organizational and scientific-research activities of the institute were thoroughly examined, the achievements and weaknesses of the institute staff in fulfilling the tasks on the scientific plan were indicated. Now, after the historic decisions of the XXII Congress of the CPSU and the November Plenum of the Central Committee of the Bulgarian Communist Party, the rapporteur pointed out, conditions have been created for a complete overcoming of dogmatism and citationism, for creative discussions on issues of literary theory, history and criticism based on Marxist-Leninist teachings. The creative discussions and disputes, always conducted in a communist party spirit, will help clarify many problems, will raise our literary studies to a higher level, will help create highly artistic socialist-realist literature. Mr. Tsanev consistently addressed the individual tasks of the annual plan. During the year, work continued on the four-volume history of Bulgarian literature. The first volume - Old Bulgarian Literature - discussed back in 1960, has already been finally edited and prepared for publication. It will be published by the end of the current year. Volume two - Renaissance Literature - was to be discussed by the end of 1961. Unfortunately, one of the members of the author team did not fulfill the obligations undertaken in a timely manner and another author had to be sought to write these chapters. The volume will be finally completed by March and its discussion will begin immediately - first by the author's team, and in June it will be put up for wide discussion in order to be published by the end of the year. Most of the chapters of volume three have also been written, which will also be discussed by the end of the current year. Work is also underway on volume four. During the year, a significant part of the contributors have worked on individual topics related to the development of Bulgarian literature in its various periods, on the connections of our literature with the literatures of other peoples, on individual writers and literary phenomena, as well as on more general or more special theoretical questions. The development of topics affecting the development of our literature from its inception to the present day helps to one degree or another to clarify the nature of the literary process, to reveal the ideological and artistic wealth of individual creators, and to use them to create new, full-fledged socialist-realist works.

1962 Book 2 Contents

1962 Book 3 Contents

On March 29 and April 2 of this year, an extended meeting of the scientific council was held at the Institute of Literature at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, at which the five-year activity of the journal “Literary Thought and the perspective plan for 1962” was discussed. Present were: Prof. Georgi Tsanev, Prof. Pantelei Zarev, Prof. Petar Dinekov, Prof. Emil Georgiev, Prof. Mihail Arnaudov, Prof. Stoyan Karolev, the scientific secretary of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences Stoyko Bozhkov, Snezha Avramova from the founding party committee at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, senior scientific associates Georgi Dimov, Krastyo Genov and Efrem Karanfilov, scientific associates Iskra Panova, Minko Nikolov, Ivan Tsvetkov, Boyan Nichev, Krastyo Kuyumdzhievi who became associates of the institute. In his report, the editor-in-chief P. Zarev addressed the participants in the discussion with an appeal for the most active participation and careful assessment of the five-year activity of the magazine, in order to help the editorial board improve the writing of "Literary Thought", to enrich it and make it more interesting for the reader. He noted the particularly favorable time in which the discussion is taking place and the new inspiring tasks that the XXII Congress of the CPSU set for literary science and the overall development of socialist society. What had been started since the XX Congress of the CPSU was now confirmed with new, even more powerful force and persuasiveness: clearing away everything old and stifling that prevents the material and spiritual forces of the new system from unfolding and opening up new horizons for socialism, for the international communist movement, for socialist thought. B. emphasized the need to enrich the cultural and spiritual life of socialist society, to make new achievements in this direction, and pointed out the ways for the further development of socialist democracy and the complete elimination of the methods created during the cult of personality.

1962 Book 4 Contents

The literary heritage of Boyan Penev has not been collected and systematized. The eightieth anniversary of the birth of our great literary historian and critic should be an occasion to return to this heritage, to search for the valuable in it, which will benefit us in our further work. Penev's work is complex and contradictory. In it, the method of the serious scientist, the literary historian and erudite is combined with the subjectivist passions of the critic, who is more than once extreme in his conclusions, biased in his attacks. However, in Penev's works, even when they do not stand the test of time, we will always be impressed by the author's personality, categorically prominent and independent, comprehensively prepared and artistic. The overall assessment of Penev's work has yet to be carried out and it will be an important moment in the common efforts to assimilate everything positive and significant in our literary heritage. In this booklet, the magazine "Literary Thought" publishes several letters from Penev's correspondence to his wife, the poet Dora Gabe. The letters have a double meaning. First of all, they are a document characterizing Penev's personality. They contain information about Penev's attitude to important social issues (for example, the letter of September 22, 1912, written on the occasion of Penev's mobilization during the Balkan War), the breadth of his interests, his special literary and musical culture are evident. The letters also reflect his distinctive temperament and style. Second, the letters provide valuable material for some of the literary relations of the time. The names of Yavorov and Pencho Slaveykov, with whom Boyan Penev maintained close contact, are intertwined in them. Penev's attitude towards Yavorov is not free from a certain bias, which is evident both in the categorical opinions about the moral character of the poet, and in the clearly untenable views about Yavorov's nature as an "unchangeable given" or about the reasons for Yavorov to write "At the Foot of Vitosha". But our Literary Science is obliged to know the literary life of the time from sources, regardless of what subjective and incorrect moments in these sources it may encounter.

1962 Booklet 5 Contents

In the party's activities, congresses have always been the most important forum for taking stock, for checking what has been accomplished and for drawing up the general lines of future development. How much more does this apply to the upcoming VIII Congress of the Bulgarian Communist Party! It is called upon to sum up the major results of a period of fruitful work and to adopt a plan for a communist offensive over the next twenty years. Our people have already deployed their initiative in the pre-congress discussion of the draft directives. They have adopted as their main goal the great economic task set by the party: to complete the construction of socialism and gradually move on to the extensive construction of the material and technical base of communism. The grandiose program in its scope envisages accelerating the pace of economic restructuring. In 1980, Bulgaria should be a country with a seven-fold increase in industrial production and an almost tripled agricultural output compared to 1960. This means fully revealing and fully utilizing the natural and material resources of our homeland, pursuing even faster rates of electrification, and bringing the struggle for technical progress to the forefront in all economic sectors.

Georgiev, Emil. The flourishing of Bulgarian literature in the 9th-10th centuries. S., BAS, 1962 r. 348 p. Karakashev, Vl. Kamen Zidarov, Literary-critical essay. S., Bulgarian writer, 1962 r., 128 p. Nichev, Boyan. Branislav Nusic. S., BAS, 1962, 292 p. Konstantin o v, Georgi. Realist writers. S., Nar. culture, 1962 book III, 326 p. Dimo ​​v, Georgi. Krum Grigorov. Literary-critical essay. S., Bulgarian writer, 1962, 128 p. Dineko v, Petar. Renaissance writers. S., Science and art. 1962, 364 p. Stoyanov, Lyudmil. People and writer. Literary and public articles. S., Bulgarian writer, 1961, 346 pp. Bogdanov, Ivan. The genre diversity of literature. S., People's Youth, 1962, 115 pp. Karanfilov, Efrem. Heroes and characters. Essays. Varna, State Publishing House 1962. Book I. Dreamers, 204 pp. Nikolov, Malcho. Life and literary memories. S., Bulgarian writer, 1962, 174 pp. Georgiev, Lyuben. Hristo Smirnenski. S., People's Culture. 1962, 222 pp. Karakostov, Stefan. Russian dramaturgy in the 50s-60s and 70s of the 19th century and its reflection in the Bulgarian theater. S., Science and Art, 1962, 467 pp. Genov, Krastyo. Nikola Lankov. Literary-critic. essay, S., Bulg. a writer. 1962, 100 pp. Petrov, Zdravko. Meetings with big and small. S., Bulg. writer, 1962. Sestrimski, Ivan. Maria Grubeshlieva. Lit.-crit, essay. S., Bulgarian writer, 1962, 119 pp. Pondev, Peter. Masters of the story. Elin Pelin. Jordan Yovkov. S., Bulg. a writer. 1962, 337 pp. Vladimirov, Dramaturgy and co-temporality M. et al., Soviet writer, 1962, 202 pp. Vorobyev, L. V. Philosophical and socialist views of Lyubena Karavelova. (M.), Moscow. Univ. 1962, 196 pp. Zhirmunskyi, V. Narodnyi ge roicheskoi epos. Comparative historian, essays. M. and others. Goslitizdat 1962, 435 pp. Zelinsky, K. On the border of two epochs. Literary meetings 1917-1930 2 ed. M., Goslitizdat, 1962, 308 pp. Zibelchinskaya, L. Notes on literary mastership. M., Soviet writer, 1962, 196 pp. Kontorovi h, V. Notes to the writer on a modern essay. M., Soviet writer, 1962, 372 pp. Meilah, V. Pushkin's artistic thinking as a creative process. M. and others. Academician of Science USSR, 1962, 250 pp. Basic problems of Soviet literature at the present day. M., 1962, 312 pp. Problems of socialist realism (Collection of articles). M., Soviet writer, 1961, 556 pp. Troshchenko, V. Articles on poetry. M., Soviet writer, 1962, 256 pp. Turkov, A. Poetry creations. M. Soviet writer, 1962, 255 pp. Zeitlin, A. G. Work of the writer. Вопросы psychology of creativity, culture and techniques of writer's work. M., Soviet writer, 1962, 592 pp. Shumsky, A. M. Gorky and the Soviet essay. M., Soviet writer, 1962 404 p.

1962 Booklet 6 Contents

This year, the famous French anti-fascist writer Jean-Paul Sartre visited the Soviet Union for the second time. A full seven years separate the date of his previous visit in 1955 from the current one. After his return, Sartre shared his impressions of the cultural life of Soviet society in several interviews. Of particular interest is his interview with the Warsaw weekly "Politika". It is dedicated to the beneficial changes that have occurred in Soviet culture and, more specifically, in literature after the 20th Congress of the CPSU. The Soviet press reprinted this interview (see the journal, Voprosy literatury, vol. 10, 1962), noting that it contains controversial moments. But the conclusion about the socialist perspective on contemporary art that Sartre reached is indisputable. Sartre's thoughts are indicative of the attractive impact that the successes of Soviet culture after the 20th and 22nd Congresses of the CPSU have on broad circles of progressive Western intelligentsia. Since we believe that it is also of interest to our reader, we publish the most essential parts of the interview. - Above all - says Sartre - what is striking in comparison with 1955 is the extraordinary diversity, breadth and versatility of intellectual interests, the spirit of healthy discussion, the free expression of different points of view, without which the cultural life of society is unthinkable.

We are including in abridged form Yevgeny Yevtushenko's statement on Soviet poetry, printed in the magazine "Young Communist", vol. 10, 1962, under the title "We are the heirs of great poetry". We are omitting the entire part of the statement dedicated to Russian classical poetry, in which one finds brilliant, penetrating characteristics of Russian poets. Yevtushenko is undoubtedly the most generously gifted, the brightest representative of the young generation of Soviet poets that took shape in the years after the 20th Congress of the CPSU. His poetry is characterized by a keen sensitivity to the civil and moral problems of socialist society, youthful intransigence to any Falsehood, dead ossification and bureaucratic arrogance. In it, the pure voice of incorruptible truth, deep sincerity and frankness, the civic excitement of a person inspired by the greatness and holiness of the communist ideal sound. His latest poems "Fears" and "Stalin's Heirs" testify to the civic maturity and manliness of the poet, to his keen eye, to his ability to see things in their essence and depth and not to be afraid to show them to us. It is precisely these qualities of his poetry that always gather full audiences and make Yevtushenko a favorite post of today's Soviet youth. Yevtushenko's article is directly related to the conversations about young Soviet poetry and to the All-Union Conference of Young Writers in Moscow in December of this year.

1962 Booklet 6 *** - Contents of the 4th anniversary of the magazine "Literary Thought" - 1962.

1963 Book 1 Contents

The famous American writer John Steinbeck received the Nobel Prize in Literature for his novel "The Winter of Our Discontent". On this occasion, articles about the writer's creative path and personality were published in American newspapers. Two of them were published in the Soviet weekly "Abroad", from where we take them for our magazine. To the Bulgarian reader, John Steinbeck is known for his novels "The Wrath of the Ants" and "Tortilla Flat", as well as for the story "The Pearl".

In early November 1962, the scientific council of the institute held an extended meeting at which the Bulletins of the Institute of Literature (issues 7 to 11 inclusive) were discussed. Senior research associate Stoyko Bozhkov presented a report on the Bulletins. He traced the history of this institute publication, its character and tasks, the circle of its collaborators, its characteristic achievements and weaknesses. Then the rapporteur was asked questions, which he answered. 11 research associates took part in the speeches. Iskra Panov shared her impressions of the latest booklets of the Bulletins. They contain a section of materials that are clearly defined by genre - publications and scientific communications. Their scientific value cannot be disputed. Then comes a section of studies and articles that are at a more primary stage of scientific processing. They are something in between documentary materials and historical and literary studies. These are the works that occupy the main share of the published production in the Bulletins. There is a complete lack of materials on contemporary topics, as well as theoretical studies. One gets the impression of thematic disarray. Only the volume dedicated to Smirnensky is thematically focused. It turns out that articles and studies that are related to more current issues go to the journal "Literary Thought", larger works are published as separate books, and for the Izvestia there are things that are primarily related to older literature.

On December 20 of this year, an expanded meeting of the scientific council was held, at which the work of the Institute of Literature in 1962 was reported. The management report, presented by the director of the institute, Georgi Tsanev, examined in detail the scientific research and scientific organizational activities of the institute, gave assessments of the work of the sections, departments and the "Ivan Vazov Museum", clarified the issue of the state of the personnel, the material and technical base, etc. The work of the scientific workers in 1962 took place in the light of the XXII Congress of the CPSU, the April and November Plenums of our party. This was a year of great tension and sharp disputes, a turning point in which, from the high tribune of the historic Eighth Congress of the Bulgarian Communist Party, the cult of personality and the associated dogmatism, scholasticism, pseudoscientific interpretation, dispassionate registration of facts, doctrinaireism... A remarkable year in which the truthful word of the party sounded with enormous force, reality was given abundant light, the great importance of the entire ideological front, of our literary science, was emphasized. The historic Marxist-Leninist decisions of the Eighth Congress of the Bulgarian Communist Party opened up a wide field for calm, independent work to the scientific staff of the institute, brought complete democratization into the disputes, mobilized the forces of the scientific workers for an even more active, merciless struggle against revisionism and the influence of bourgeois ideology, against the remnants of the cult. This was a year of a rapid, healing process that brightened the atmosphere and the situation in the institute and gave the opportunity to overcome all kinds of petty, personal ambitions, to strengthen a single, cohesive scientific team. The decisions of the April and November plenums are of great importance and the scientific workers of the institute sought to apply them specifically in the tasks that lay before them. for consideration.

In two meetings (on November 15 and 22 of this year) of the scientific council at the Institute of Literature, the works for the Slavic Congress by Emil Georgiev - General Laws in the Development of Slavic Literatures"; Kuyu Kuev - The Idea of ​​Slavic Unity in the Poetry of Petar Preradovich" and Georgi Dimov - "Traditions of Russian Revolutionary-Democratic Aesthetics in the Formation and Development of Bulgarian Literary Criticism" were discussed by the scientific council at the Institute of Literature. The meetings were attended by more than 30 researchers, associates and literary critics, who took an active part in the discussions. Both discussions were chaired by the director of the Institute of Literature Georgi Tsanev. The following spoke on the reports for the Slavic Congress: Kr. Genov, B. Nichev, P. Dinekov, L. Minkova, V. Smohovska-Petrova, G. Valchev, Efrem Karanfilov, St. Karolev, Il. Konev, Iv. Tsvetkov, M. Nikolov, A. Todorov, etc. Finally, the chairman G. Tsanev summarized the speeches. On the report of Em. Georgiev, he pointed out that the author had taken on a very difficult task - to establish general regularities in the development of Slavic literatures and therefore perhaps had not resolved all the questions on the topic. It is necessary for Em. Georgiev to focus even more on socialist realism and Marxist-Leninist methodology, to bring to the fore the specific regularities in the development of Slavic literatures, to clarify some inaccurate positions, to shorten long quotations and for the author to take into account the notes of those who spoke. On the report of K. Kuev, the chairman noted that the work was topical and interesting, saturated with materials from the life and work of Petar Preradovich. G. Tsanev expressed the opinion that the work would gain more if it were systematized by problems, but even in this form the work should be condensed and tightened. It was emphasized that Georgi Dimov's report was correctly constructed, convincing, not only stating facts, but also developing in depth the issues of the influence of Russian revolutionary-democratic aesthetics in the formation and development of Bulgarian literary criticism. It was recommended to the author to make some additions.

1963 Book 2 Contents

The creators of artistic values ​​are a few people marked by fate, who cross the borders of many countries, inspiring more than one generation. The significance and the charming power of these creative personalities are all the greater and more comprehensive, the more organic the connection between artistic achievements and public behavior, between ideological-aesthetic insights and civic-ethical positions. Such people, like a beacon, attract the eyes of all who live with the impulses of a more intense spiritual life, possessed by higher ideals for social well-being and moral elevation. Readers turn to the work of such artists in order to become related to their soul and thinking, to find support for their torments and searches. Such a source of wisdom and knowledge, of ideological-aesthetic experiences and civic-humanistic ideals is undoubtedly the creative biography of Lyudmil Stoyanov, who has already crossed the last quarter of a century. For more than half a century, the personality of the writer and citizen Lyudmil Stoyanov has been towering in our literary and cultural life. It evokes love and gratitude not only in our country, but also among the cultural community of other countries. His life and creative path is truly rarely instructive. Many of the problems of the time, the anxieties and insights of several generations, the trends of our national literary and cultural development for decades have found embodiment in his work. Having gone through harsh trials, having paid tribute to the fashionable aesthetic trends of the beginning of the century, L. Stoyanov demonstrated ideological and moral stability, overcoming dangerous passions, in order to harden and rise later with all his stature as a humanist creator and a communist citizen.

In issue 4 of the journal "Literary Thought" a note by Lyuben Georgiev "For greater objectivity of scientific information" was published, in which the editorial staff of the "Abstract Bulletin" at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Department of Literary Studies was subjected to criticism. On the occasion of this criticism, the editor of the bulletin, Dr. Krastyo Genov, issued a counter-reply, which was placed in issue 6 of the journal. In response to his explanations, the journal received a new note from L. Georgiev. It analyzes the objections raised by Dr. Genov and establishes that the editor of the bulletin in fact rejects all critical remarks. L. Georgiev writes: Of the 14 cases of omitted books and two collections, the editor has reason to protest only one - the book by M. Yanakiev, which was published a year earlier and accidentally ended up on the list of Books from 1961.

On 16. I. of this year, in the section on Bulgarian literature before the Liberation, three works were discussed: by Iliya Konev - Hristo Botev in Serbian and Croatian literature, by Docho Lekov - Karavelov's interest in the folklore and ethnography of the Slavic peoples, and by Stefka Tarinska - The development of the feuilleton during the Bulgarian Renaissance. The following spoke: prof. P. Dinekov, S. Baeva, D. Lekov, St. Tarinska, P. Totev, B. Nichev. The work of Il. Konev was positively evaluated in view of the interesting topic and its development. The chapter on the influence of Botev's poetry on the work of the Croatian poet August Harambašić was indicated as the most valuable. The author was recommended to introduce greater systematicity and proportionality into the presentation and to increase the analysis of the examples.

1963 Book 3 Contents

1963 Book 4 Contents

The speech of Dr. Todor Zhivkov before the workers of the cultural front "Communist ideology - a principle of our literature and art" came in time to draw our attention to some disturbing phenomena in the education of our youth, in our cultural life, in our literature and art. That is why it found full approval among our intelligentsia and among the entire working people. This speech is an expression of the special attention with which our Party has always treated the development of artistic culture in our country. Although caused by various harmful phenomena and manifestations in the field of art and literature, it goes far beyond the tasks of just fighting against these phenomena and manifestations. It raises fundamental ideological questions that affect the very essence of our today's literature. Dr. Todor Zhivkov's speech also acquires a programmatic character. Its essence is directed towards the further development of art and literature along the path of socialist realism. And not only of art and literature - it also gives instructions for the development of our literary studies.

On June 24, 1963, an expanded meeting of the scientific council was held at the Institute of Literature, at which a report of the institute's management was discussed in connection with the speech of Dr. Todor Zhivkov to the figures of culture and art. The report, delivered by the director of the institute, Prof. Georgi Tsanev, analyzed the scientific research work of the institute's staff in connection with the main tasks outlined in the speech of the first secretary of the Central Committee of the Bulgarian Communist Party. Both the work of the institute as a whole and the individual mistakes and indulgences in the work of the research associates were criticized. The prospects for the development of the institute were also outlined, as well as the most important immediate tasks arising from the spirit of the party's requirements for Marxist-Leninist literary studies. Georgi Dimov, Iliya Konev, Hristo Dudevski, Krastyo Genov, Toncho Zhechev, Vanda Smohovska, Ivan Tsvetkov, Georgi Valchev, Iskra Panova, Stoyko Bozhkov spoke on the report, highlighting the great importance of the speech for the development of our literary studies. The associate of the Department of Culture and Art of the Central Committee of the Bulgarian Communist Party, Dr. Alexander Dunchev, who was present at the meeting, also made a statement.

Dear readers, "Literary Thought" has established itself as an authoritative journal on issues of aesthetics, literary theory, literary history and literary criticism. The journal has received recognition not only in our country but also abroad. In the coming year, the editorial board will make efforts to maintain the high level of the journal and to illuminate a number of new issues of literary history, literary theory, aesthetics and literary criticism on the pages of the journal. Problems of our literary development during separate periods will be examined, as well as artistic features in the work of prominent representatives of our literature - Karavelov, Botev, Vazov, Slaveykov, Yavorov, Aleko Konstantinov, Elin Pelin, Smirnenski, Vaptsarov and others... The journal will feature portraits of prominent contemporary writers, as well as critical assessments of the nature and features of the more significant works of art. "Literary Thought" will continue to include research works on theoretical problems of style and artistic method, of literary movements and genres, of poetry studies, of the language of artistic creation... The editorial board's concern will be to acquaint our readers with the problems that are being discussed in socialist countries and in the West. TO "Literary Thought" will continue to fight for scientific illumination of the processes of the development of contemporary art both in our country and abroad. The magazine will be useful to anyone who is interested in issues of fiction, to high school teachers, students and pupils. It will continue to be a valuable advisor to our contemporary writers in their creative work. Annual subscription - 2.60 leva. FROM THE EDITORIAL OFFICE

Dear readers, "Literary Thought" has established itself as an authoritative journal on issues of aesthetics, literary theory, literary history and literary criticism. The journal has received recognition not only in our country, but also abroad. In the coming year, the editorial board will make efforts to maintain the high level of the journal and to illuminate a number of new issues of literary history, literary theory, aesthetics and literary criticism on the pages of the journal. Problems of our literary development during separate periods will be examined, as well as artistic features in the work of prominent representatives of our literature - Karavelov, Botev, Vazov, Slaveykov, Yavorov, Aleko Konstantinov, Elin Pelin, Smirnenski, Vaptsarov and others... The journal will feature portraits of prominent contemporary writers, as well as critical assessments of the nature and features of the more significant works of art. "Literary Thought" will continue to include research papers on theoretical problems of style and artistic method, literary movements and genres, poetry studies, the language of artistic creation... The editorial board's concern will be to familiarize our readers with the problems that are being discussed in socialist countries and in the West. "Literary Thought" will continue to fight for scientific illumination of the processes of the development of contemporary art both in our country and abroad. The magazine will be useful to anyone interested in issues of fiction, to high school teachers, students and pupils. It will continue to be a valuable advisor to our contemporary writers in their creative work. Annual subscription - 2.60 leva. FROM THE EDITORIAL OFFICE

1964 Book 1 Contents

On December 30, 1963, an expanded meeting of the Scientific Council was held, at which the report on the scientific and research activities of the institute in the past 1963 was discussed and adopted. In his report, the director of the institute, Stoyko Bozhkov, made an analysis of the main achievements and weaknesses in scientific work and outlined the upcoming tasks. He considered the past year under the sign of the struggle to establish the Leninist line in the development of our art and literature. The party leadership's concern for the purity and sharpness of our ideological weapons, the principled struggle against the influences of bourgeois ideology and decadent Western culture helped to unite the forces of creative workers, to focus attention on the sound principles of party and nationalism. The open, clear and truthful party criticism of a number of passions, which found the brightest expression in the speech of Dr. T. Zhivkov "Communist Ideology - the Supreme Principle of Our Literature and Art" helped to create an atmosphere of greater trust between artists, to unite forces and, by rejecting the contagious rot of decadent literature, lack of ideas and formalism, to direct efforts towards creative development of the problems of our contemporary development.

1964 Book 2 Contents

In recent years, there has been no conversation between our contemporaries - builders of socialism and communism - that has not touched on the prevailing thought of the time, that has not turned into reflections on that turbulent and rapid movement forward that began after 1953-1956. Now we ourselves are amazed at the frozen kingdom of dogmas and ideas, at the cold majesty with which the cult had enveloped the most human, the most earthly, the ideal of social order that radiated so much light and warmth. The most democratic, the most mass teaching was threatened with becoming an inaccessible codex of once-for-all truths that inspired more trembling and fear and less subjugating with the charm hidden in them. The words of the young Marx were forgotten, that communism and humanism were synonymous, that at the center of our teaching lies the noblest idea of ​​human happiness and well-being, of the abolition of all violence, of everything ugly and inhuman, inherited from the bourgeoisie. The harsh revolutionary spirit, the awareness that history is made without mercy, that the laws of the class struggle are something inexorable and determine the choice of means, the line of behavior of revolutionaries, was exploited, brought to a one-sidedness that began to have the opposite effect. The ideology and practice of the cult of personality repelled with its brutality, brought turmoil into souls, hindered the true revolutionary education of the masses, instilled obedience and servility - the external grimace of indifference and cynicism, of wordless obedience.

1964 Book 3 Contents

A year has passed since the first secretary of our party, comrade Todor Zhivkov, delivered his programmatic speech "Communist ideology - the guiding principle of our literature and art". The main pathos of the speech was directed against bourgeois ideology and the channels of its penetration in our country. Its main meaning was to unite the ideological cadres for a more successful offensive against foreign ideological influence, for decisively overcoming deviations from Marxist-Leninist views and socialist realism in the field of culture and art.

1964 Book 4 Contents

The editorial board of the magazine addressed the fiction writers Andrey Gulyashki, Georgi Markov and Milcho Radev with the following questions: What paths did our socialist fiction travel during the 1920s? What main moments do you see in its development (respectively in the development of the novel, the short story or the short story)? What main problems and conflicts of our time are you particularly interested in? Which phenomena of socialist restructuring, which problems of the urban and rural man, of the intelligentsia and the youth occupy you in your work? Which obsessions do you consider harmful in contemporary fiction? What kind of foreign influences is it freed from in order to develop more fruitfully? What unfulfilled duty does our fiction have to the reader? What unsolved tasks do you see before it? What aspects of the tradition do you think can be fruitfully developed by the contemporary fiction writer? In what direction do you see the innovative searches of the contemporary fiction writer? In what direction are your own searches for new ways of expression? What new elements of fiction technique, genre enrichment, and genre blending do you think are part of the concept of contemporary fiction? How are they reflected in your own work as your own preferences?

1964 Booklet 5 Contents

1964 Booklet 6 Contents

1965 Book 1 Contents

When, about six decades ago, several literary excerpts appeared in a school periodical under the pseudonym Pavlusha, no one suspected that these were the first steps of an exceptionally gifted creative individuality, who would later manifest himself with an astonishing breadth of interests in various fields of human knowledge, with boundless dedication to great social and cultural ideals. And here today, the former Pavlusha crosses the threshold of the last quarter of a century with graying but youthfully lush hair, with a furrowed but serene and spiritualized face, with eyes shining with flame, hunched over by the burden of that enormous scientific and cultural heritage that foretells us, a heritage accumulated over decades, filling his entire existence with meaning and content. What a harmonious combination between the public figure and the thinker, between the man and the scientist! What an intense spiritual life, an epic life, filled with great trials and ceaseless quests, with penetrating reflections and creative daring! Today, the rich and versatile work of Todor Pavlov stands out brightly against the background of world Marxist thought, increasingly permanently holding and will hold the attention of contemporary and future generations, of all those burned by the flame to become related to the laws of social and cultural development, to penetrate the primordial essence of social and natural phenomena.

On January 4, this year, an expanded meeting of the Scientific Council of the Institute of Literature at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences was held, at which its work in 1964 was reported. A report on the scientific research activities of the associates was presented by the director of the institute, St. Bozhkov.

1965 Book 2 Contents

1965 Book 3 Contents

The two-volume collection "Art, Science and Culture in the Service of the People" by Dr. Todor Zhivkov, published on the initiative of the Union of Bulgarian Writers, is in the hands of readers. They will read in both volumes excerpts from program reports, excerpts from speeches, individual articles, interviews, congratulations and numerous statements on the most mature and current issues of literature, theater, cinematography, science, technical progress, education and the cultural revolution in our country, on the unresolved and important problems of propaganda and agitation, ideological work, the press, communist education, etc. The materials were written at different times and cover the period from the end of 1942 to the beginning of 1965. The two-volume collection opens with the article "On the Fight", published in the first illegal issue of the newspaper "Fatherland Front". This article reveals the author's positions and the great, fateful tasks that faced the people and "our suffering fatherland" at that time. The call for struggle and nationwide resistance is imbued with the characteristic revolutionary enthusiasm of that unique time, which nurtured a galaxy of patriots and heroes who created the anti-fascist epic. This is a call for national victory, a call for revolution, "so that the sun of freedom and happiness may finally shine over our tormented fatherland."

1965 Book 4 Contents

Avdzhiev, Gelo. Kiril Hristov. Lit. crit. essay. S., Bulg. writer, 1965. 112 pp. Alkaeva, L. O. Socialist humanism and art. M., Znanie, 1965. 80 pp. Arnaudov, Mikhail. Psychology of literary creativity. 2 ref. and add. ed. doctor: P. Zarev) S., Science and art, 1965. 528 p. (PeBegunov, Yu. K. Monument of Russian literature of the XIII century "Slovo o hibigeli Russkoi zemli". (Issledovaniya i teksy). M.-L., Nauka (Leningr. department), 1965, 231 pp. with ill.; 4 l. ill. and map. Beletsky, A. I. Избранные труды по теории литературы. Под общ. ред. Н. К. Гудзия (Сост. и примеч. А. А. Гозенпуда). М., Просвещение, 1964, 478 с.; 1 л. портр. Белоусов, А. Литература и время. Улан-Удэ, Бурят, кн. изд. 1964, 119 с. Берков, П. Н. Введение в изучение истории русской литературы XVIII века (In the 3rd century h.) L., Publishing House Leningrad. University, 1964. Bozhkov, Stoyko, Stoyan Stoimenov and Hristo Dudevski. Soviet literature in Bulgaria. 1918-1944. Collection of materials, memories and documents. Compiled and edited by... S., BAS, 1964. (BAS, Institute of Literature), item II, 492 pp. with portrait. and fax. Bondarev, Yu. V. Style and speech. M., Sov. Russia, 1965, 59 pp. Brandis, E. and Dmitrievsky, V. World of the Future in Science Fiction. M., "Knowledge, 1965, 47 pp. Weiman, R. "New criticism" and the development of bourgeois literary studies. History and criticism of the latest methods of interpretation. Per. with German (Introductory article by R. M. Samarina). M. Progress, 1965. 428 pp. V. masterskoy khudozhestnono slova. (Collection of articles. Ed. board: I.K. Beloded (opt. ed., etc.) Kyiv, Naukova dumka, 1965, 219 p. Questions of histories and theories of literature. (Collection of articles. Ed. council: V. G. Lartsev (ed.) etc.) Samarkand, 1964, 244 pp. Questions of modern literature. Soviet arm. literature. 1961-1962 (Collection of articles), 1964, 151 p Lyuben Genov. Yavorov's works: "On the Field", "Gradushka", "Armenians, "Song of My Song". S., Narod. Prosveta, 1965, 88 p. Georgiev, Emil. General and Comparative Slavic Literary Studies. S., Nauka i izkustvo, 1965. 399 p. Grossman, L. P. Dostoevsky. (2nd ed., corr. and add.) M., Mol. Gvardiya, 1965. 605 p. with ill. Gura, V. V. Pravda zhizni i masterstvo hudozhnika. (K 60-letiyu M. A. Sholokhova). M., Znanie, 1965. 46 p. with portrait. Danchev, Pencho. Aesthetics. Literary Criticism. Selected Works. S., Bulg. Pi satel, 1965. 303 with 3 l. ill., 2 faxes. Dimov, Georgi. Bulgarian Literary Criticism during the Revival. (Editor: Pantelei Zarev) S., BAS. 1965.406 p. (BAS. Institute of Literature). F. M. Dostoevsky in the Memories of Contemporaries. M. Khudozh. lit., 1964. T. 1, 439 p.

1965 Book 5 Contents

When we celebrate a milestone anniversary, the emphasis falls on what remains as a contribution to our literature. With Georgi Tsanev, there is more than enough on which to place such emphasis. His restless creative youth is connected with the rise of our revolutionary literature. With his very first article (in the newspaper "Mladezh", 1922), he defended the international element of Smirnensky, who, as a devoted "son of the people", sang the "desires of all humanity" for more beauty and happiness. Bourgeois critics denied the poet's right to become a "spiritual leader, prophet and mouthpiece of his people", so Georgi Tsanev, with his characteristic temperamental pen, denounced the impartiality of critics poisoned by the "prejudices" of the old world: "How little these gentlemen are interested in the culture that the proletariat creates. And they are always ready to deny: the scoundrels lie, the sincere do not know, do not recognize, do not understand. Because they look through glasses covered with the dust of the past. In his fiery articles from that harsh and romantic time, the critic directs young poets to the "revolutionary struggles for the realization of communism", to those dreams and reveries illuminated by the immense dawn of October. He demands from them to saturate their verse with the pathos of the "heroic", of the "struggle", but on a social basis. He pleads for their direct participation in the struggle and in the lives of the toiling people, in order to feel and experience closely their moods, feelings, desires, "in order to then "recreate them sincerely, naturally, without posturing." He denies the expressionless pathos, the naked rhetoric, the revolutionary phraseology, the meager feelings and moods, the lack of convincing images. He strives for a profound poetry that warms the souls and is felt by the people as "an indispensable, sincere experience." He dreams of significant artistic generalizations in literature, of mature works that will be imprinted in the mind and ignite the imagination. He assigns to the creator the fate of a restless trumpeter of his time and demands from him all his creative fire, all his inspired soul, in order to become a worthy singer of his class, in order to embody in artistic ideas and images the great proletarian ideal - communism. Enthusiastic about the conquests of the world proletariat, pointing the way to social poetry, Georgi Tsanev turns to the young proletarian poet: "Be sincere, write when you have something to say, when you cannot remain silent - and you will give valuable works, poetic creations that will speak to the hearts of others what they have tasted of yours."

On October 7, this year, the Scientific Council at the Institute of Literature discussed the work of Acad. Mihail Arnaudov "From the History of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. The Bulgarian Literary Society in Braila (1869-1876)". In their reviews, Assoc. Prof. Georgi Dimov and Nikolay Todorov give an affirmative assessment of the work, indicating in detail its merits and at the same time making some recommendations for its improvement. In his review, Georgi Dimov emphasizes the task that the author of the work set himself - to study the long-term process of maturing the idea of ​​organizing a scientific center, as a result of which the Literary Society in Braila was created. The work traces the activity of this cultural center for a certain period - until 1876, when it practically ceased to exist, and its activity was resumed after the Liberation under different socio-historical and cultural conditions. On a very broad scale and using rich factual material, Acad. M. Arnaudov focuses on the efforts of the Bulgarians for an independent educational and scientific-cultural life since the beginning of the 19th century, and in this way the exposition in many places turns into a history of the development of spiritual life in general during the Revival. The author's broad erudition has allowed him to build his study on a comparative-historical basis - he acquaints the reader with similar phenomena in neighboring and more distant countries, which could serve as an example for our Revival figures. An expert on that era, the author freely handles historical sources, presents materials of various nature, drawn from the periodical press, from correspondence, from general and literary works or from previous research. Thus, the reader has the opportunity to see how the idea of ​​organizing special societies or centers with the task of working for the advancement of Bulgarian enlightenment, education, culture, etc. is taken up by one or another figure, what content is put into it, in what specific form they want to carry out their patriotic undertakings. The author examines cultural and educational phenomena against the background of social reality. The difficulties that accompany the realization of this work are thoroughly presented. True thoughts are also expressed about the struggle between the two trends in emigration.

1965 Booklet 6 Contents

1966 Book 1 Contents

In recent years, significant progress has been noted in the development of literary studies in our country. There has been a tendency to create generalizing works in which problems of Bulgarian literature of national importance are examined and developed (History of Bulgarian Literature, Panorama of Bulgarian Literature, Development of Bulgarian Literary Criticism, separate periods of our old literature, etc.). Monographic studies on individual writers and literary trends have significantly increased. The attention of literary scholars is directed to essential problematic issues of artistry and style, the image and structure of the work of art, and the problems of genres. Along with this, there is an enrichment and expansion of the specific subject matter of scientific research, the theoretical base is expanding, and a broad exchange of opinions is developing on the basis of Marxist-Leninist methodology. On the other hand, there is a noticeable updating of literary problems in view of the requirements of our modernity.

1966 Book 2 Contents

1966 Book 3 Contents

1966 Book 4 Contents

1966 Booklet 5 Contents

In the first half of the current year, the Scientific Council of the Institute of Literature at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences decided to award the scientific degree "Candidate of Philological Sciences" to the senior lecturer at the Faculty of Slavic Philology of Sofia University "Kliment Ohridski" - Georgi Mitrev Markov and to the full-time postgraduate student at the Institute of Literature - Atanas Vassilev Slavov.

On June 2, the Scientific Council of the Institute of Literature at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences discussed and approved for publication a collection of studies that the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences and Sofia State University prepared on the occasion of the 1050th anniversary of the death of the outstanding Bulgarian and Slavic educator, teacher and man of letters Kliment Ohridski. It includes 24 studies by Bulgarian authors-historians, literary critics, linguists, specialists in the history of Bulgarian fine arts and music, as well as a bibliography of Bulgarian literature on Kliment Ohridski for the period 1945-1966.

On June 23, 1966, the Scientific Council at the Institute of Literature also discussed the work of senior research fellow Ganka Naydenova "The Romantic Image - a Symbol of the Creator". In his written review, Professor Stefan Stanchev made a detailed description of the work. According to him, Naydenova's work represents an original scientific study with a contributing character. The author's concepts are built on rich material from all of Western European literature. The material is treated originally with a view to the author's thesis. During the discussion of G. Naydenova's work, the following spoke: Professor Emil Georgiev, Professor Stoyan Karolev, senior research fellow Minko Nikolov, academician M. Arnaudev, senior research fellow Krastvo Genov and the director of the institute Stoyko Bozhkov. The speeches emphasized the importance of the topic, the richness of the material on which the work is built and the original analyses and author's concepts. It was emphasized that the work has contribution. The speakers made some recommendations: greater unification and stretching of the material in view of the central theme; greater precision of some formulations; the chapter on Bulgarian literature to be dropped because it feels artificially attached. In his closing remarks, the director of the institute, Stoyko Bozhkov, recommended that the author take into account the wishes made and unify the material in view of the topic set, to direct her attention to the concepts she deals with and which characterize phenomena that are different in their genesis.

1966 Booklet 6 Contents

1967 Book 1 Contents

Here is a sixtieth anniversary that surprised many. Not that sixty years is a long time, but Emilian Stanev's vitality and cheerfulness can rightly be envied by both forty and thirty-year-olds. Everyone who has had the opportunity to meet and talk to him has been amazed not only by his appearance, his lush black, unscented hair, his always cheerful movements, but also by his extremely mobile and restless thought, his turbulent imagination, his extraordinary spiritual energy. Emilian. Stanev is not among the most prolific writers, but it is difficult to imagine another writer who is so constantly busy with his work: not only in his office, but also on the street, in the garden, in the club, in a circle of friends - everywhere. He seems unable to survive a single day without thinking and talking about art, about his work. And despite the great preliminary work of the mind and imagination, what an impressive amount of paper Emilian Stanev writes for each chapter of his works. His critical, weighing thought is vigilant at its post, demanding new and new revisions. He is tireless in his pursuit of perfection, he is dedicated and selfless as a creator, both young and old can take an example from him.

For the first time, our magazine encloses the name of its editor in a mourning frame. Tragic circumstances dictated that this should be the name of the youngest member of the management of "Literary Thought", who with unusual conscientiousness and skill contributed to the development of the magazine for years. For all of us who shared our workdays with him, it was unbearably hard to lose the person on whose responsiveness and principle we had always relied so much. But even heavier is the loss for Bulgarian literary knowledge, of which Minko Nikolov was the most significant hope. Born in 1929 in the vibrant mountain town of Troyan, Minko Nikolov showed his literary talents at a very early age. At first, readers are introduced to the enthusiastic, somewhat clumsy, but completely in tune with his time and age poems of the provincial youth, who later, during the first years of his studies at the Philological Faculty of Sofia University, also showed his true gift - the rare gift of a literary critic and researcher. When in 1955 Minko Nikolov stood at the desk to defend his PhD thesis on the work of Hristo Smirnenski, he was already an established scholar with enviable achievements for his age. Years of hard and fruitful work followed for him as an editor, associate professor of Bulgarian literature at the Humboldt University - Berlin and senior research associate at the Institute of Literature of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. The years during which Minko Nikolov attained his creative maturity coincided with the time in which our literary studies, having shaken off the petty tutelage of dogmatism and administrativeism, took its first not very big, but decisive steps forward towards the actual scientific understanding of our national literary experience. And when we ask ourselves how the younger generation of literary critics and researchers helped to achieve the success of these renewal efforts, our answer will refer first and foremost to the creative work of Minko Nikolov. An inexplicable death for us took him away on the eve of the New Year, when people are so indulgent towards their hopes. It took him away from ours when it needed him most.

In 1966, the Institute of Literature was working on the following problems: History of Bulgarian Literature - a comprehensive work on the development of Bulgarian literature from the 9th century to the present day. The work is being worked on by a wide team. This year, volume 11 was printed, covering the historical development of Bulgarian literature during the Renaissance. Volume III - Bulgarian literature from the Liberation of Bulgaria to the end of the First World War - was also completed and discussed by the team of authors. It is about to be reproduced and widely discussed. Work is also underway on writing volume IV, which will be completed in 1967.

At the end of last year, the Scientific Council of the Institute of Literature at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences discussed and accepted for publication the work of Acad. Mihail Arnaudov "Kiril Hristov. The Man and the Poet". In his review, Krastyo Genov highlighted the merit of Mihail Arnaudov in tracing every step of the life and work of Kiril Hristov: a difficult and responsible task in revealing the sharp contradictions in the poet's creative biography. The author selects what is truly important and significant in the work and in the difficult life of the poet, bypassing the erroneous, inaccurate and artistically petty. He correctly identifies the individual traits of the personality and the creator, achieving an objective and convincing assessment of a life filled with contradictions of an ideological and moral nature, with torment and dissatisfaction. The monograph is particularly valuable with the rich factual material skillfully used by the author. He managed to present a broad picture of social reality and literary mores, including personal memories, observations, and excerpts from his interesting correspondence with the writer.

In the last quarter of 1966, the Scientific Council of the Institute of Literature at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences decided to award the scientific degree "Candidate of Philological Sciences" to the regular graduate students at the institute, Stefana Tarinska and Docho Lekov.

In their written reviews, Prof. Georgi Tsanev and Assoc. Prof. Ivan Undzhiev made a detailed analysis of St. Tarinska's dissertation work, focusing primarily on the new things she brings to the topic. Stoyan Karolev, Petko Totev and Pantelei Zarev took part in the discussion of the dissertation. They emphasized the originality of the study. The author attempts to reveal Botev's journalism from its artistic side, points out the aesthetic value of Botev's prose, and acquaints the reader with his poetics. The work traces the feuilleton as a literary genre of the modern era, highlights Botev's mastery of composing and fabulating, and indicates his great skill in using the various forms of artistic journalism. Tarinska also has interesting observations about the internal movement, the internal dynamics of Botev's thought, of Botev's speech, which especially contributes to the emotional impact of Botev's journalism. The author emphasizes the polyphonic nature of Botev's feuilleton, studied as an artistic-journalistic entity not only literary-historically, but also literary-theoretically. The work clarifies a number of questions about the nature of Botev's prose, its appearance in intellectual and emotional terms, and this makes Tarinska's work an original phenomenon, a contribution to our literary science.

1967 Book 2 Contents

1967 Book 3 Contents

1967 Book 4 Contents

On June 12 of this year, senior research associate at the Institute of Literature Krastyo Genov successfully defended his doctoral dissertation on the topic "Romanticism in Bulgarian Literature". The defense took place in the large hall of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, where, in addition to the members of the Scientific Council at the Institute of Literature, researchers from other institutes, higher education institutions and many citizens were present. In their written reviews, Prof. Emil Georgiev, Prof. Pencho Penev and Prof. Georgi Dimov made a detailed analysis of the dissertation work.

At two consecutive meetings, the Scientific Council of the Institute of Literature at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences discussed and accepted for publication Vasil Kolevski's work "The Pathos of October", dedicated to the 50th anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution. In his review, Angel Todorov emphasized the importance of the topic, gave a positive assessment of the work and concluded that the influence of Soviet literature on Bulgarian is a profound regularity for the activation and development of our entire culture and literature. From this position, the author also considers the issue of the reflection and reception of Soviet literature in Bulgarian progressive periodicals from 1917 to 1944. Angel Todorov made a brief overview of the material presented in the book, emphasized its breadth, systematization and assessment from a modern scientific point of view. He characterized the study as seriously and competently written. He also made some critical remarks.

1967 Booklet 5 Contents

1967 Booklet 6 Contents

1968 Book 1 Contents

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.

1968 Book 2 Contents

1968 Book 3 Contents

1968 Book 4 Contents

1968 Booklet 5 Contents

1968 Booklet 6 Contents

On October 16, 1968, in Sofia, in the great hall of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, a solemn celebration was held on the occasion of the 90th anniversary of the birth of one of the most prominent representatives of Bulgarian literary studies - Acad. Mihail Arnaudov. The hall turned out to be cramped for the numerous admirers of the jubilee, among whom were prominent Bulgarian public figures, writers, scientific and cultural figures, students, and citizens. The presidium was occupied by Acad. Todor Pavlov, Acad. Angel Balevski, Acad. Pantelei Zarev, Acad. Vladimir Georgiev, Patriarch Kiril, Georgi Dzhagarov, Efrem Karanfilov, Stoyko Bozhkov - director of the Institute of Literature, and others.

1969 Book 1 Contents

On January 16, 1969, the Scientific Council at the Institute of Literature discussed the work of Prof. Yuri Konstantinovich Begunov - Ph.D. - Kozma Presbyter in Slavic Literatures. In addition to the members of the Scientific Council, the work of the extended meeting was attended by lecturers from Sofia State University "Kliment Ohridski", from the Higher Pedagogical Institute "Cyril and Methodius" in Tarnovo and researchers from the institutes of Bulgarian Language and Balkan Studies at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. This interest in the work is due both to its problematics and to the broad framework in which the study of the famous "Conversation" of Presbyter Kozma is set. The result of the joint work between the Institute of Literature at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Russian Literature (sector of Old Russian Literature) in Leningrad, the work of Yu. K. Begunov is new evidence of the fruitful Bulgarian-Soviet cooperation in the field of science.

1969 Book 2 Contents

Dr. Todor Zhivkov's new speech "Carry and raise our pure, holy and victorious banner even higher!", delivered on March 14, 1969 before the sixteenth reporting and election conference of the capital's organization of the DCMS, as well as all his speeches and reports, found a lively response among our entire public. It was perceived as a very timely party document, a logical continuation of the "theses" for creative work among the youth, as a vivid manifestation of exceptional care and complete trust in the youth of the homeland and in the artistic intelligentsia, which was particularly moved by the fact that the main part of the speech was devoted to current problems related to the current state of the ideological front. This remarkable speech once again emphasizes the need to raise the role of social sciences and ideological disciplines, which are gaining in importance today, when a fierce battle is being waged between communist and bourgeois ideology to win the minds and hearts of people all over the world. That is why the party's call to young communists to take up the proud banner of Dimitar Blagoev and Georgi Dimitrov in their own hands, to raise it even higher and to carry it pure, holy, victoriously - through all trials and difficulties is so categorical.

1969 Book 3 Contents

1969 Book 4 Contents

Habit nullifies surprise. However, there are comparisons that never cease to surprise us even when we should already be used to them. On the eve of the 25th anniversary of the September 9th People's Uprising, these comparisons are inevitable. After all, the meaning of every anniversary is to tear us away from the myopia of everyday worries - to raise us to a height from which the path we have traveled is embraced with a glance: to provoke us to reflect on near and distant prospects. And then repeatedly repeated statements begin to amaze us with their truthfulness. Things that we are used to surprise us again - by the way, also with the fact that they have become commonplace for us so quickly.

1969 Booklet 5 Contents

1969 Booklet 6 Contents

On April 24, 1969, the public defense of Hristo Yordanov's dissertation on the topic "Veselin Andreev - Life and Creativity" took place. In the presence of the members of the scientific council, the research associates of the Institute of Literature and many citizens, the reviewers Acad. Pantelei Zarev and Prof. Efrem Karanfilov read their reviews of the proposed work, emphasizing its merits: conscientious study of the material, penetration into the contemporary problems of our literature, kinship with the work of Veselin Andreev, building an accurate portrait of a moral and creative personality. In his review, Acad. P. Zarev emphasized that he fully shared the main concept of the dissertationist: the beauty and humanism of the socialist revolution give birth to poets and communists worthy of the traditions of our literature, coming from Botev. He also pointed out that the life and work of Veselin Andreev are presented in relief and so illuminated that they are turned into a truthful apology for communist ideas. Prof. E. Karanfilov pointed out that Yordanov comes to some interesting problems about the transition between realism and romanticism, about socialist humanism in our poetry, about revolutionary optimism, etc.

On May 29, 1969, the defense of the dissertation on the topic "Georgi of Elka Konstantinova Raychev. Life and Creativity" took place. The scientific supervisor was our late literary historian and critic Minko Nikolov, and the reviewers were Prof. Stoyan Karolev and Assoc. Prof. Zdravko Petrov. The members of the scientific council, literary workers and many citizens were present. The director of the Institute of Literature, Stoyko Bozhkov, who chaired the discussion, introduced those present to the content of the presented documents and gave a characteristic of the scientific achievements of the graduate student. The head of the section at the institute, Prof. Georgi Tsanev, presented the work of Elka Konstantinova, and the two reviewers read their reviews. Both emphasized the seriousness of the work done, the penetration into the world of the writer and the difficult time of its formation and creative realization.

Lilyana Grasheva's dissertation "Artistic Peculiarities of Old Bulgarian Literature", defended on 5. VI. 1969, is an aesthetic-theoretical study of the artistic originality and aesthetic essence of medieval literature. Learning creatively from Soviet medievalists (primarily from the school of the prominent Soviet literary scholar D. S. Likhachev), the dissertationist makes the first serious attempt to systematically study and comprehend from contemporary ideological and aesthetic positions the poetics of Old Bulgarian literature. The task set requires a deep penetration into the artistic and ideological world of the Middle Ages, rich scientific-aesthetic and methodological preparation. In the defended work, the dissertationist opposes a number of traditional concepts, which are an expression of prejudices and underestimation of the pictorial merits of Old Bulgarian Literature, considering it as a historically determined type of verbal creativity. At the same time, striving to By illuminating the real ideological and aesthetic values, Grasheva avoids the temptations of the modernizing idealization and modernization of the literary material. For the first time, the dissertationist makes a broader comparison of the aesthetic and creative ideas of the Old Bulgarian writers with those of Russian, Byzantine and Western European medieval writers. She proves that the Old Bulgarian writers are fully included in the main philosophical and aesthetic line of the European Middle Ages. The most significant contribution is contained in the third chapter of the dissertation ("Principles and Achievements of Artistic Image"), which presents the author as a researcher with an independent English thought, a keen sense of the artistic specificity of literary phenomena and a rich literary culture.