писмо

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.

The letter we are publishing, owned by Dr. Lyuben Tanchev from Plovdiv, sheds light on Lora's attitude towards Yavorov. Six years have passed since their acquaintance (1906), Mina Todorova has long been deceased, and at the beginning of 1912, a friendship was established between Lora and Yavorov. But it is interesting to note that a few days after writing the letter to her aunt in Plovdiv, she sent a letter to Yavorov, full of despair and pessimism. The two letters are completely opposite in mood. While the first one exudes a healthy confidence that the friendship with the poet will end successfully, in the second Lora attacks him unfoundedly, calling him cruel and unjust. In her letters to her relatives, however, she resolutely declares that she will link her fate with Yavorov, and admires his character. She hastens to introduce him to the family circle, instructs her aunt to receive him well, to send her letters through him, etc. To confirm that she truly knew him, she compares him with her father Petko Karavelov, deceased at that time, whom Lora greatly respected and loved. It is known that P. Karavelov took great care of the education and upbringing of his children. And Lora rightly writes that he gave his soul for them. But as much as Lora had tender feelings of love and gratitude towards her father, she was as wary of her mother. She without hesitation declares that she has no intention of listening to her, accuses her of ruining her youth and, by force, forcing her to marry Dryankov. This time Lora decided to vigorously fight for her happiness. After Laura's death (1913), her mother Ekaterina Karavelova contributed too much to the accusations against the post, to his bitterness, which led him to suicide on October 16, 1914.

In early 1963, the famous progressive German director Erwin Piscator staged a one-act play in West Berlin: "The Vicar" ("The Deputy") by the young German playwright Rolf Hochhut. Since then, Hochhut's play has been performed in many European cities, in London and Basel, Stockholm and Paris. Everywhere it provokes violent reactions, disputes and discussions, which testify to its relevance and acute civic issues. The play is built entirely on historically verified facts. The reason for its writing is the behavior of Pope Pius XII, who did not utter a word to the Nazi authorities in order to protect the millions of innocent victims of Hitler's concentration camps, including Catholic Jews. The play sharply raises the question of the moral character and pseudo-humanity of the vicar (the vicegerent of God on earth), i.e. the pope. This character of hers awakens many passions. Ultra-clerical and neo-fascist circles in the West express their dissatisfaction with the play in various ways and try to disrupt the performances of the theaters where it is played. However, the author Hochut did not have revolutionary and even less anti-Catholic intentions in writing the play. Influenced by the anti-communist psychosis of Western propaganda, he refused to let Czechoslovak theaters stage his play. On this occasion, the famous Slovak writer Ladislav Mniačko, author of the recently acclaimed book "Blated Reports" in Slovak literature, published in issue 30 of the current year of the Slovak weekly "Kultural Life" an open letter to the German playwright Hochut, which touches on a number of more general issues and arouses general interest. Below we publish the text of the letter.

One of the most characteristic features of Dr. Krastev as a person is his civic virtue. Nurtured by this civic virtue and repeatedly expressed during his activities as a literary critic and public figure is his sincere concern for the fate of Bulgarian science and culture. Among the numerous articles by Dr. Krastev dedicated to issues of public life, perhaps the most interesting are the articles concerning educational work or spiritual life in Bulgaria in general. In these articles we encounter thoughts and characteristics of individual social groups, which often surprise us with their progressiveness: the lack of prospects for the bourgeois intelligentsia, deprived of any social ideals and "cultural aspirations", the indifference of the monarch to Bulgarian art and science, the question of the actual emancipation of women in the field of education. Dr. Krastev developed many times the thesis of the freedom of the worker of science and culture. It was sharply stated in the response to the letter of the Ministry of Public Education of 25. IX. 1896, by which Dr. Krastev was dismissed from the university for the second time. Dr. Krastev's opinion on all these issues is most fully manifested in his behavior during the university crisis of 1907. "Baptism of the university", which should be an "awakening of consciousness" and "a government act - an incomparable disgrace for a "cultural state" - This is his two-sided assessment of the events that took place on January 3-4, 1907: the youth demonstration, the booing of Ferdinand at the opening of the National Theater, the dispersal of the demonstrators with the police and, as a result, the issuance of the decree to suspend classes at the university for six months and to dismiss the members of the professorial body. Considering the energy of Dr. Krastev and the thoughts expressed in his other articles on the issue of the university crisis: "The Beginning of the End of the University Crisis" and "The University Question and the Class School", as well as the memories of contemporaries, he was obviously one of the inspirers and organizers of the determined resistance of the professorial body against the lawlessness of Ferdinand and his lackeys and one of the compilers of the two appeals "To the Bulgarian Society" and the third appeal - "Message", with which the negotiations between the professors and the government were terminated.