предмета

I have always been amazed by the almost incredible indifference with which many literary facts in our country are usually passed over. Unknown names appear, new books are published, questions are raised, and periodicals often not only do not write about them, but do not even note them. And this applies not only to translated literature, which for some unknown reason is not given any attention, but also to quite a few works by Bulgarian writers who are vitally connected with the development of our literary word. That is why, without having resigned myself to this practice, I have already become accustomed to this practice and I am not surprised that a critical book like "Four Fiction Writers" by Simeon Sultanov, which I had to edit as part of my official duties, remains unnoticed by the literary press for nearly a year and a half after its publication. Note, however: I say unnoticed, but not unnoticed by readers, which is something else. I emphasize this because I know for a fact that despite the disrespect shown towards it, this book made an impression on all those interested in literary criticism and was very well received. And if I return to it today, I do so not so much to fill some gap in the reader's mind, but rather for another, more important reason - to note some positions that are of a principled nature and give cause for reflection. First of all, anyone who has read "Four Fiction Writers" will agree that this is a complete book - a book with a physiognomy. It is known that, in the beginning, national Literature is created in the periodical press and is affirmed through it. And this applies not only to small types, not only to what is conceived by the malice of the day, but very often also to great literary works that leave a lasting mark behind them. That is why we can say about most Books that they are born twice - once on the pages of magazines and newspapers, often as a result of a commission, and a second time united by a single title in a common cover. However, since one can collect not only what is conceived and realized as a whole, but also what is the fruit of chance, in this second birth one often falls into passions and reaches an unwanted automatism. As a result, books appear that contain heterogeneous works that are difficult to unite not only in volume, by subject and by meaning, and even by genre. And this unacceptable practice, of course, affected literary criticism: here too, there is an effort to present to the reader everything that the author has written - even the literary notes in the daily newspapers and speeches at meetings. Thus, in recent years, quite a few voluminous collections of articles have appeared in our country, which are compiled in a very mechanical manner and, along with the significant, which deserves attention, also contain things that have no literary value. That is why Simeon Sultanov made an all the stronger impression with his efforts to deviate from a practice that sometimes seems insurmountable, and to present to the readers under one common title four uniform monographic essays on four prominent representatives of the Bulgarian short story: G. P. Stamatov, Georgi Raichev, Angel Karaliychev and Iliya Volen. In this way, he presented himself with a first book (if we do not count the separately published study on Angel Karaliychev) that no young critic has presented himself with in recent years - with a book that contains nothing accidental, nothing thoughtless, and speaks of such literary requirements that are usually the first sign of emerging creative maturity.

The restoration of the Leninist spirit in the field of ideology after the 20th Congress of the CPSU gave impetus to the rapid development of Soviet aesthetics. The period of stagnation, of scholastic reasoning, far from the living problems of art and the aesthetic needs of the people was gradually replaced by serious scientific research, with numerous discussions, with a significant increase in research culture. Of particular interest were the problems of the nature of the aesthetic, of the subject and methods of aesthetic science, of the connections with communist construction. The fighting, offensive line is being revived In our aesthetics, the best traditions left to us from the time of Marx, Engels and Lenin are being revived. Among the numerous new aesthetic literature, the small in volume, but very rich in content and problems, book by the famous Soviet art theorist L. N. Stolovich "Subject of aesthetics" stands out. We are accustomed to the bad habit of books on aesthetics being, as a rule, thick, with large deviations, filled with vague reasoning, which so scares creators of artistic values ​​and repels them from the significant questions of theory. And therefore even the volume of the book under consideration can be a pleasant surprise, especially since it has been a long time since I have read such a brief, so clear and at the same time such a complete exposition of some basic questions of aesthetic science. Stolovich's work has the following structure. The first chapter examines the main results of the discussion on the nature of the aesthetic in recent years. The core of the book is the second chapter - on aesthetics and the essence of the aesthetic. But perhaps the most interesting is the third chapter, with a number of new considerations. - on the limits and methods of aesthetics. The generalizing Fourth Chapter examines the place and tasks of aesthetics in the aesthetic education of working people.