Български

A huge area of ​​Bulgarian literature has not yet attracted the attention of our researchers - anonymous literature. Bulgarian anonymous literature hides significant riches. Touched by individual researchers, on specific occasions, it has not yet been the subject of systematic research by bibliographic workers, historians, writers and publicists. Over a long series of decades, reasons of a diverse nature have forced many writers, public figures, publicists and all other workers of the pen to conceal their names, not to indicate them on their publications either with pseudonyms or with any initials or signs. Together with pseudonyms, various types of mystifications (regarding the author, year, place of publication, publisher, etc.) and plagiarism - anonymous works are one of the forms of what is called literary fraud in bibliography. Some authors also include the so-called subliminal works 2 (pseudonyms and apocrypha) in this group. In terms of scope and distribution, pseudonyms and anonymous authors have the greatest importance among the various types of literary fraud. And in our country, as elsewhere, over the years the number of individual anonymous publications (let alone anonymous articles) has constantly grown, reaching today, in my estimation, 30,000 copies, that is, approximately 18% of all books published in our country since the Liberation! Some see anonymity as a great social evil, but such opinions have prevented this interesting cultural and social phenomenon from spreading, because, along with some of its negative sides - which, by the way, only reactionary forces have abused - anonymity has served as a shield for progressive public figures of all times and peoples, and under its protection their ideas have inspired the masses of the people in their fight against reaction.

The periodicals from the era of our national revival often surprise us with the insight and sober ideological and aesthetic sense of the first Bulgarian Literary Critics. In them, next to the angry correspondence against the centuries-old slave system or the naive poetic work of some teacher, we often come across reviews of original and translated works of art or articles of a theoretical nature. Sometimes they are laconic and informative, sometimes detailed and categorical. Their authors are not always original. In most cases, they even popularize ideas and beliefs created and adopted in other countries dozens of years earlier. But even when they paraphrase or borrow textually, our literary pioneers do so not in order to be proclaimed by the ignorance of their compatriots as talented thinkers or as founders of movements and schools, but because of the utilitarian spirit of the time and for tactical considerations before the official political authorities. However, both as popularizers and as original The Bulgarian Renaissance writers and literary figures always lived with the problems and creative pathos of our literature. The influence of Russian realistic thought on their literary-critical views is undeniable. However, we do not set ourselves the task of tracing how and to what extent it was realized, we will limit ourselves to pointing out that almost all Bulgarian Renaissance writers were able to soberly use what they had learned both as writers and as literary critics. This is evident above all from their articles and notes, in which some of the problems of realism as a creative method in fiction are raised and examined. The literary-critical views of Karavelov, Botev, Nesho Bonchev, which reflect a relatively more mature stage in Bulgarian criticism, will not concern us in this case. By referring only at certain moments to some articles by our established literary critics, we will try to trace the concepts of Other Renaissance writers on our literary development, in order to see that the struggle for realism in Bulgarian literature until the Liberation was a struggle not only of individual, albeit great, writers, but a collective work of an entire literary generation. And since realism finds its fullest expression in literary prose, we will limit ourselves to indicating how literary criticism then greeted the first attempts in the field of "Bulgarianized" and original fiction, how some of our writers understood their tasks, what tasks they assigned to narrative creativity.

We have received your letter, together with the material. We are glad that our youth, although in foreign countries they are busy with the difficult science of courses, do not forget the great and sacred duty to the dear and dear fatherland, and this phenomenon shows that our people want to live a long and lasting life - God willing! Work, brother, work, while your strength is fresh, your energy strong and your imagination ardent: do not let this fiery and winged time fly away uselessly into the irretrievable eternity of eternity. We are glad of this phenomenon and we will place your works in Trud with great pleasure. Polish literature is rich in stories, and you are there among it: from it, from German and etc. choose the color and that which is in accordance with our reviving our young literature - things that will bring tangible benefit to our people. From the letter itself and from the material it is clear that you work conscientiously and accurately. May your example serve as an example to other young people! Even though we do not know each other personally, we see that you have spirit and talent: do not let your talent go to waste - reveal it to the world and, God forbid, may it take refuge and fly over Bulgarian life, inspiring it and leading it to the beautiful and morally useful.

The centenary of the publication of the collection "Bulgarian Folk Songs" and the death of its compilers Dimitar and Konstantin Miladinov gave a favorable occasion to writers, historians, folklorists and linguists to shed light on new aspects of the life and literary work of the Two Brothers, to make a comprehensive assessment of their role, place and significance in the Bulgarian Revival. Nikola Tabakov's book "The Miladinov Brothers. A Biographical Sketch" appeared one year after the celebrated anniversary. The interest shown in it, however, showed that the attention of the Bulgarian reader to the two Revivalists was not accidental and jubilee. The author of the book, as is evident from the title, set himself a modest task - to popularize the life path of the Miladinovs. However, considering that in figures like Dimitar and Konstantin the biographical in most cases intertwines with the creative individual, Nikola Tabakov necessarily had to touch upon literary, folklore and other issues. Miladinovtsi have attracted Nikola Tabakov's attention for a long time. He is one of the publishers of their works, the author of articles about their magnificent work. Some controversial issues surrounding their life and activities have occupied him for a long time. And he digs through archives and old periodicals, compares data and opinions. In this way, Long-term persistence outlines in his consciousness two images from the past, which he "shares" with the reader as he "perceives" and feels them.

This is the tenth book in a row by Efrem Karanfilov and is yet another proof of his diverse literary interests. This time, the subject of study is only Bulgarian authors - poets from different eras and generations, from Paisius to our contemporaries. In Paisius's story, the critic is struck by a twisted revolutionary passion and an unquenchable, eternal youth, which captivates him with its irrepressible drive. It forces him to express in one breath the fascination of the immortal Paisius' work over the modern reader. This work sounds to him like a heroic poem, it carries him with the violent strength of the Hilendar monk, it ignites him with his patriotic flame. He writes about Paisius in an uplifting manner, with a romantic coloring in the style and diction. Efrem Karanfilov is most strongly and sincerely moved when he discovers fighting moods in the poets. The deepest experiences and immediate excitements in his soul are awakened by the fanfare of the martial lyre, the revolutionary flight of poetry sparkling with youth and vitality.

The Bulgarian people first encountered Shakespeare a hundred years ago, when Romeo and Juliet was staged on our stage. Since then, his name and his work have become part of the cultural heritage and the Bulgarian cultural reality. Shakespeare's dramatic works are translated, staged, studied and researched. In the beginning, mainly translators wrote about Shakespeare. The first critical article about the great English playwright was the preface by I. P. Slaveykov to his translation of Julius Caesar (January 1880). The first Bulgarian researcher was, in a sense, B. Raynov, who translated twelve of Shakespeare's plays and wrote relatively extensive introductions to each of them. His translations are accompanied by numerous notes and explanations. Another one of Shakespeare's early translators, T. Ts. Trifonov, also wrote introductions in which he gave an assessment of the respective plays. These are works in which some observations and thoughts are found, but they are mainly popularizing and imitative.

The contemporary Bulgarian short story in its best examples interprets life phenomena from the perspective of the moral, political and social requirements of socialist society. The completely innovative life truth also determines the socialist-realistic character of the artistic truth of today's short story. The realization of this aspiration is the work of the original participation of talent, which in all cases is associated with the ability to observe and the imagination of the writer. Some argue that talent is a measure of artistic truth, which is achieved through an image realized through the prism of the personal point of view of the fiction writer. It is precisely this peculiar angle of perception of reality that allows us to draw some serious conclusions about the artistic mastery of life phenomena. For us, the short story is valuable not for the literal reproduction of life facts, but more for the ability to present life phenomena in a special light, emanating from a thoughtful and suffered attitude towards people, society and reality. Any attempt to ignore talent leads to a misunderstanding of the essence and specificity of the work of art. The process of realizing artistic truth is unthinkable without the writer's effort to affirm himself by discovering his theme, his vision of the world, and his personal manner of artistic expression. In this sense, for us, personal coloring is a path to finding the artistic truthfulness of the literary work. The realization of the modern story would be impossible without the presence in it of the complex truth about life. Pavel Vezhinov has a special place in the creation of our modern story. The theme of some still living symptoms of egoism appears for Vezhinov - the writer and the person, a main theme. Vezhinov strives in the battle against the loneliness of the human personality. In fact, he began as an artist of the social environment of the past, among which a person often loses his connection with it. The individual facts of the interrupted harmony in the relationship between personality and society are the basis for the writer, on which he artistically realizes true Dramatic states.

The French moralists, to whom the late Gerard Boer dedicated a book of insightful essays a few years ago, are, compared to other French writers, little known in our country. In the past, perhaps the only one of our great writers, Stoyan Mihaylovsky, showed a constant and lively interest in the French moralists, with whose "Maxims and Reflections" he liked to embellish his original writings. But Mihaylovsky did not deal with translations, in order to give us "selected pages" at least from those authors in whom he found a rich source of creative inspiration. In our periodicals of the past, fragments of the work of the French moralists are occasionally found, among whom La Bruyere and François de La Rochefoucauld are the most famous. Joubert, Chamfort and Vovnard, who lived later than the first two, are comparatively much less known in our country. Even Mikhailovsky, who was more carried away by the "reflections" of a certain Madame Svechin and whom he often quoted in his own writings, did not seem to have shown any particular interest in Joubert and Vovnargh. The latter, who had a short life, as he died at only 32 years old (1715-1747), compared especially to La Bruyere and La Rochefoucauld, is the most optimistic: Vovnargh believed in the noble impulses of the human heart and in the purity of its passions. Last year, a young French essayist and critic, Henri Bonnier, published Vovnargh's works in two volumes at the Hachet publishing house in Paris. It is also interesting to note that Vovnargh in one of his texts criticized some of La Rochefoucauld's "maxims."

One of the characteristic features of the contemporary literary process is its genre diversity. This applies equally to both fiction and literary criticism. Artistic aspirations and generalizations, the searches and insights of historical-literary and critical thought find expression in various genres and forms, sometimes very heterogeneous, but nevertheless interesting as evidence of the richness of literary life, of the diversity of creative individuals, of the different paths that writers and literary critics take to reveal truths of an ideological-aesthetic, biographical-creative, moral, and emotional nature.