A.N.ANNENKO

ROERICH AND GORKY - 2

How long ago did they stop learning the “Song of the Falcon” and “Song of the Petrel” by heart at school? By historical standards, quite recently. Nowadays, a modern researcher of the work of A. M. Gorky reflects:

“Gorky knew that it was impossible to “find” God. But is it possible to “build” it? Most likely, he internally doubted this, as he doubted everything in this world.

And then Gorky decided to try the “illusion” trick.

This was the most terrible and fatal mistake of his spiritual path!

Gentlemen! If the truth is holy
The world will not be able to find the road,
Honor the madman who inspires
A golden dream for humanity!

These poems by Beaumarchais, translated by V.S. Kurochkin, are recited by the drunken Actor in “At the Lower Depths,” staggering and holding his hands on the door frames, shortly before hanging himself. In essence, this became Gorky’s “suicidal” religion.”

New times, “new songs about the main thing.” However, the Gorky scholar probably knows that in the poem by P.J. Beranger, a supporter of “ utopian socialism", the line between "madness" and a breakthrough to new knowledge is not as obvious as it seems. The following lines follow in the poem “Mad Men”:

“Wandering along crazy roads,
A madman opened a New World to us.
A madman gave us the New Testament,
For this madman was God.
If tomorrow our land were the way
Our sun forgot to shine -
Tomorrow I would illuminate the whole world
The thought of some madman!” .

Which of the two heroes of this article was closer to this understanding of “mad men”? We will leave the answer to this question to the readers.

...More than thirty years ago, an article by Pavel Fedorovich Belikov was published “ Roerich and Gorky". The appendix included the publication of “Bibliography of the Works of N.K. Roerich” - an outstanding work that laid the foundation for the study literary creativity N.K. Roerich.

Actually, the article was written in order to facilitate the entry of the “Bibliography” into a scientific collection. “...This article,” wrote P.F. Belikov to Gunta Richardovna Rudzita on August 17, 1966, “needed to be compiled in such a way that it would arouse interest in the literary heritage of N.K. and would serve as a reason for the publication of “ Literary heritage"in the scientific works of the University of Tartu... In view of the fact that the next volume of works will be devoted to the Gorky materials, an appropriately compiled article was required...".

It was the publication of the “Bibliography”, to which P.F. Belikov devoted many years of work, that he considered very important for the further study of Roerich’s heritage. And he was rightfully proud of his work.

Nevertheless, the article, which in this particular case was of an auxiliary nature, convincingly demonstrates, decades later, the depth and breadth of knowledge of P. F. Belikov as a biographer of the great Russian artist and thinker. Despite the rather narrow scope of the study, Pavel Fedorovich managed to illuminate with the greatest possible completeness many circumstances of Roerich’s life that were unknown at that time. And if his predecessor, the author of the article “Gorky and Roerich” (Moscow, 1960, No. 9) A. Primakovsky, defined his priorities in the title, then Pavel Fedorovich indicated his own - “Roerich and Gorky”.

Re-reading now this first article by P.F. Belikov, published in Soviet times, one is convinced that neither its contents nor its conclusions are outdated. And this would be surprising - after all, the ideological attitudes in society have radically changed, the approach to these two outstanding figures of Russian history has changed - if it were not known about how responsibly P.F. Belikov approached the publication of his research. His research position was clear - “to write in such a way that subsequently one would only have to add to what was written, but would not have to cross out anything.” The article “Roerich and Gorky” is still fundamental on this topic.

However, over the past three decades, a lot of new documentary material has appeared. First of all, I was interested in those circumstances that related to the parallels in the life and work of these outstanding people. It seems that this will illuminate new facets and, most importantly, will serve to increase the depth of our understanding of N.K. Roerich’s life path.

The methodological basis was Lichtenberg’s idea of ​​a kind of dialogue, where “the author offers the words, and the reader offers the meaning.” Considering that the publication is intended for a competent audience familiar with the legacy of N.K. Roerich and P.F. Belikov’s article “Roerich and Gorky”, the author’s task is “not to cross out”, but “only to add”.

“OBEDIENT TO DREAMS...”

Certain aspects of the topic are of particular interest, and we will touch on them: the beginning of a creative path, attitude to revolutionary changes in Russia, ideological searches.

As a starting point, two articles from the “Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron” (1909), reflecting the view of enlightened contemporaries (S.A. Vengerov and A.I. Somov) on A.M. Gorky and N.K. Roerich in beginning of the 20th century.

“GORKY Maxim, lit. name izv. writer Alexei Maksimovich Peshkov, b. 1868. At the age of 7, G. became an orphan, and the struggle for existence and constant change of occupations and professions began for him. He traveled the entire south of Russia on foot, not disdaining any work. Beginning lit. G.'s activities date back to 1892. Gorky was in Tiflis at that time. He brought to the editorial office of Kavkaz a semi-fairy-tale essay from gypsy life, “Makar Chudra.” In 1895-97 the following stories appeared: “Mistake”, “Melancholy”, “Konovaly”, “ Former people”, “Malva”, “Mischief”, “Chelkash”, etc. Later, G.’s stories “Old Woman Izergil”, “Once in the Autumn”, “Song of the Falcon” were published. For the first time in all time noun. Russian In the book trade, Gorky's volumes began to sell out in tens of thousands of copies, soon reaching a colossal figure of 100 thousand. Each appearance of Gorky in public excited the present. sensation. From Russia, interest in G. quickly spread abroad. Since 1898, G. became an employee of the Marxist journal. "Life". Journal closed in the spring of 1901 due to allegory "Petrel". Soon G. was arrested, he was banned from living in capitals and universities. cities. Since the early 1900s, G. devoted himself to the theater. “The Bourgeois” (1901) and “At the Lower Depths” (1902), staged by the Stanislavsky Theater, went around all the stages of the world. On the eve of January 9 1905 G. took part in the famous writer's delegation to Prince Svyatopolk-Mirsky to ask him to prevent bloodshed. Almost all its members were captured and imprisoned in the fortress. G. was released after several weeks of imprisonment, which had a very bad effect on his fragile health. In the beginning 1906 G. went abroad, settled on the island of Capri and closely joined the Russian party work. social democracy. During his exile, he wrote, in addition to plays (“Enemies”, “Vassa Zheleznova”, “Eccentrics”, “Meeting”), a number of things. meaning inferior to his previous works, they still attracted attention (for example, the novel “Mother”).”

“ROERICH Nikolai Konstantinovich, b. 1974, historical painter. genre and landscape painter. Studied at St. Petersburg University. in law Faculty and Acad. arts, where his ch. the leader was Professor A. Kuindzhi. In 1898-1900 he lectured in St. Petersburg. archaeologist. Institute. He was the director of the drawing school at the Imperial Society. encouragement of the arts. The most important of his paintings are: “The Messenger”, “The City is being Built”, “Overseas Guests”, “Sinister”, “Reserved Place”.

Back in 1936, Ivan Bunin published information that the famous proletarian writer, the founder of socialist realism in literature, “was born into a completely bourgeois environment: his father was the manager of a large shipping company; mother is the daughter of a rich merchant-dyer...". Modern researchers agree that the real circumstances of A.M. Gorky’s life before his literary fame differ from the descriptions in his own literary works and even “autobiographies.” However, as Pavel Basinsky notes: “Debunking the real myth of Gorky the proletarian, Bunin for some reason “forgot” about his real labor early childhood» .

Gorky knew the hard physical labor from childhood, in his youth, he traveled all over Russia, and not as a traveler, but as a worker, changing one profession after another in search of income, he passed the art of “Tolstoyism” (in 1889 he even asked Leo Tolstoy for land and money for primary arrangement), was going to enter Kazan University. And he read and read... And then he began to write... And he emerged as one of the smartest and most educated people of his time.

Roerich's life circumstances are much more comfortable. A wealthy family, surrounded by educated people, the atmosphere of a capital city. He is six years younger than Gorky. But he started publishing earlier. The first publications of N.K. Roerich and A.M. Gorky are close in time - 1889 and 1892. Probably, both experienced a common feeling, which Georgy Adamovich wrote about: “In the nineties, Russia languished from “timelessness”, from peace and quiet: the only significant spiritual fact of those years - Tolstoy’s sermon - could not satisfy it. What was needed was coarser, simpler food, food designed for a different age - and into this calm, full of “thunderstorm” forebodings, Gorky burst in with his falcons and petrels like a welcome guest. What did he carry with him? Nobody knew for sure - and was it even possible?

The romantic story “Old Woman Izergil” was written in 1895. Woven into the fabric of this work are legends about the proud and cruel young man Larra, rejected even by death itself, and the noble Danko, who tore his heart out of his own chest in the name of saving other people:

“What will I do for people?! - Danko shouted louder than thunder.

And suddenly he tore his chest with his hands and tore his heart out of it and raised it high above his head.

It burned as bright as the sun and brighter than the sun, and the whole forest fell silent, illuminated by this torch great love to people, and the darkness scattered from its light and there, deep in the forest, trembling, it fell into the rotten mouth of the swamp. The people, amazed, became like stones.

Let's go! - Danko shouted and rushed forward to his place, holding his burning heart high and illuminating the way for people...”

Roerich in 1893 wrote a “Children's Tale” about the singer. Art for him is the highest gift that he can bring to people:

“I see that people will not consider me an enemy and I will not tear myself away from the world, for I sing, and the song lives in the world, and the world lives in the song; without song there will be no peace... A king, a man who has embraced love for all of nature, will he not find love in himself - for man?”

It is characteristic that in this early work Roerich touches on the topic of the intrinsic value of creativity. “I believe in myself in my song; in my song there is everything for me, and I sing the song for everyone! In song I love only myself, but in song I love everyone!”

There is no doubt that the work of Arthur Schopenhauer and Friedrich Nietzsche had a great influence on Gorky. He even grew a mustache, like a German philosopher. Nietzsche dared to proclaim: “The Old God is dead, the New God has not yet been born, therefore long live the superman!”

"Human! This is great! It sounds... proud!” says Gorky’s hero in the play “At the Lower Depths.” The idea of ​​Man with a capital M, Superman, was one of the most popular in the public consciousness of that time.

Educated people read Nietzsche:

“The Great Noon is when man stands in the middle of his path between animal and superman and celebrates his journey to sunset as his highest hope; for this is the way to a new morning.

And then the one who enters will bless himself for the fact that he was passing over; and the sun of his knowledge will stand at noon with him.

“All the gods died; now we want a superman to live” - this should be our last will on the great noon! –

The works of Friedrich Nietzsche made a great impression on Nicholas Roerich. P.F. Belikov wrote in the book “Roerich (An Experience in Spiritual Biography): “About Nietzsche, as a shaker of the morality of the bourgeois well-being and a singer of a strong personality who rebelled against the prejudices of N.K. always responded positively. Of course, the strength of personality or, in his words, “ideal egoism,” N.K. even in my youth I did not understand Nietzschean..."

On August 26, 1900, he writes to his fiancée Elena Shaposhnikova: “...I was thinking about our life abroad again (a joint trip was planned - A.A.) and I admire it more and more. In the meantime, we will strengthen our technique, together we will study the entire history of painting and music, as well as the most important philosophies (Read Nietzsche’s “second dance song” - isn’t it wonderful - it’s at the end of Zarathustra. What deep symbols he has!). And thus, after working for a year, we will return home fully armed...”

Unfortunately, Helena Roerich's letters from this period are unknown. But in the thirties, Elena Ivanovna Roerich wrote to her employees about the impression she received from reading the works of Friedrich Nietzsche: “This thinker-poet brought me a lot of joy! I had read it before, but now the entire depth of thought of this so unfairly slandered Thinker was revealed to me!”

She quotes him repeatedly: “Now I’m reading Thus Spoke Zarathustra.” The great thinker knew human nature well, for he felt all its power in himself. “It is difficult to live with people, because it is difficult to remain silent,” said Zarathustra. Also: “You have become taller, but the taller you are, the smaller you appear in the eyes of envy. But most of all they hate the one who flies”... How correct are the words of Zarathustra: “You are barren, that is why you lack faith. But whoever had to create always had his own prophetic dreams and his star signs - and he believed in faith! than a whirlwind of vengeance!”, they accused him and called him the Antichrist, and even now they continue to call him that! All that remains is to say: “Truly, that which is born to crawl cannot fly!” Great thinker, how much joy he brought me with his creation! With this echo of the Voice we know..."

It is noteworthy that in this letter Elena Ivanovna combines two names - Nietzsche and Gorky. The popular saying: “Those born to crawl cannot fly!” from Gorky's "Song of the Falcon", written in 1895. These words refer to Uzhu, who personifies petty-bourgeois complacency in contrast to the dying brave Falcon, who is defeated but not broken:

“The madness of the brave is the wisdom of life! O brave Falcon! In battle with your enemies, you bled... But there will be time - and drops of your hot blood, like sparks, will flare up in the darkness of life and many brave hearts will be ignited with an insane thirst for freedom and light!

Let you die!.. But in the song of the brave and strong in spirit You will always be a living example, a proud call to freedom, to light!”

More than once the Roerich family recalled another work - “The Song of the Petrel”. Gorky called for spiritual emancipation and renewal:

“Over the gray plain of the sea, the wind gathers clouds. Between the clouds and the sea, the Petrel soars proudly, like black lightning.

Now touching the wave with his wing, now soaring up to the clouds like an arrow, he screams, and the clouds hear joy in the bold cry of the bird.

In this cry is the thirst for a storm! The power of anger, the flame of passion and the confidence of victory are heard by the clouds in this cry.

Seagulls moan before the storm - they moan, rush over the sea and are ready to hide their horror before the storm at its bottom.

And the loons also groan - they, the loons, cannot enjoy the battle of life: the thunder of blows frightens them.

The stupid penguin timidly hides its fat body in the cliffs... Only the proud Petrel soars boldly and freely over the sea gray with foam!..

Flocks of clouds burn with blue flames over the abyss of the sea. The sea catches the arrows of lightning and extinguishes them in its abyss. Like fiery snakes, the reflections of these lightnings curl into the sea, disappearing.

Storm! A storm is coming soon!

This brave Petrel soars proudly between the lightning over the angry roaring sea; then the prophet of victory shouts:

Let the storm blow stronger!..”

Subsequently, they took only the narrow social context of the “Song” of the “storm herald”, supposedly a prediction of the 1905 revolution. But in fact, at that moment - in 1901 - this work was perceived much more widely - as a symbol of purification and emancipation of consciousness, spiritual achievement. In the essay “Gorky” Roerich speaks of “his scope and broad consciousness”: “Yes, the author of “Petrel” could not help but be a great poet. Through all the deviations of life, along all the paths of his versatile talent, Gorky followed the path of the Russian people, containing all the versatility and richness of the people’s soul...”

However, one cannot discount the fact that, as a modern author notes, there was also a direct call: “Maxim Gorky followed a path different from all Russian intellectual writers. He devoted himself to the order of revolutionaries. The fatal connection with Lenin and the Bolshevik Party only strengthened his dream of universal equality and brotherhood, and it was here that the Petrel grunted: “Storm! There's a storm coming soon!"

And yet, even such subtle literary connoisseurs as Alexey Remizov saw more: “The essence of Gorky’s charm lies precisely in the fact that in the circle of beasts, inhumanity, he spoke in a loud voice and in new images about the most necessary thing for human life - about the dignity of man... »

It is appropriate to recall here Nikolai Konstantinovich’s poem “To Them.” It was written in 1902, and reflects his closeness to the creative quests of Nietzsche and Gorky.

“I am taller than you, blind fools!
You are always crawling in the mud,
On the vaults of the blue sky
Raise your head without daring.
And always complaining, suffering
Self-created melancholy,
Expecting death with fear,
You are all bent over under the bag.
I'm taller than you! Obedient to dreams,
I saw heaven, heaven and hell -
And the grief of an indifferent life
And death will not frighten me.
I did not accumulate a pile of treasures -
And I’m proud of it! You couldn't
Rise with them from the ground
And I’m floating everywhere without them!”

Roerich wrote to Elena Shaposhnikova in 1900:

“You write that we are the most ordinary people; Let's be modest and say that all people are ordinary, they eat, drink, and talk in the same manner. But for our success, we ourselves must not consider ourselves ordinary people - then courage and confidence will disappear, and without these qualities you will not take any city.

At the moment of creativity, and creativity manifests itself, as we know, in everything, down to the slightest gesture and intonation, every person considers himself above everyone else (this feeling is completely instinctive), considers everything his own and one cannot blame him for this (bad) feeling, because otherwise there would be no creative impulse, and every creative impulse, of course, gives more happiness to people (does it cause a smile, laughter, joy, consciousness of good and evil) than any calculated methodological activity. This same creative moment is important not only for those who perceive its result, but also for the author himself, who is cleansed spiritually, momentarily throwing off all the dust and dirt imposed on humanity by the age-old, as it is called our culture, which has so broken and humiliated our basic human dignity and turning people into some kind of ink forms with labels.

It is for these moments that art is so highly valued! Would people begin to honor his representatives so much, who from the economic side are ulcers of the state!”

“Fortunately,” Roerich is convinced, “the spirit still reigns over practice, and until then, don’t even dare think about your everyday life, but think about how many different happy feelings you can give to humanity and create your own among the common joy.”

Also in 1900, Gorky explained in a private letter: “What is the general task of literature, of art? To capture in colors, in words, in sounds, in forms what is best, beautiful, honest - noble in a person. Right? In particular, my task is to awaken a person’s pride in himself, to tell him that he is the best, most significant, most precious, sacred thing in life and that besides him there is nothing worthy of attention...”

It is impossible not to notice the general understanding of the purpose of art, but also the subtle differences in the views of the two cultural figures.

Close relations between Roerich and Gorky were established at the very beginning of the 20th century. “It happened,” he recalled, “that Gorky, Andreev, Blok, Vrubel and others came one by one in the evenings, and these conversations were especially meaningful. No one knew about these conversations with the green lampshade down. They were needed, otherwise people would not strive for them. As soon as someone entered, the rhythm of exchange was disrupted, silence ensued and people hurried home. It’s a pity that conversations during the night are not recorded anywhere. So much was touched upon that had never been noted either in the meetings or in the writings...”

There is no doubt that in these conversations with Gorky the problems of “intelligentsia and revolution” were also discussed. As you know, their opinions differed here. Gorky wrote in 1908: “The artist is the herald of his people, his battle trumpet and first sword, the artist always and insatiably thirsts for freedom - there is beauty and truth in it! He must know who the enemy of the people is, he must know with what chains his country is bound and how to break his chains - he knows this if he hears the beating of his country - his mother ... "

In Roerich’s opinion, it is not the artist’s job to look for “enemies of the people.” Even during the First World War, he emphasized the active role of art “in preparing the high paths.” “If art serves the Motherland,” he wrote at the height of the war in the article “Parting Words,” “then, of course, you need to bow to it. And this service, of course, is not in official images, but in the exaltation of taste, in the growth of self-knowledge, in the uplifting of the spirit.” He argued that "artistic insight lies at the root of great impulses." The “Power of Roerich,” which he “revitalized” in his paintings, is a country where a person is free from chains, where “meaningfulness, feat and knowledge” are needed.

But it is important to note that Roerich had an idea of ​​the views of the Social Democrats not from hearsay, but practically from first-hand experience. And not only from Gorky. During these same years, another good friend of his, Leonid Andreev, was extremely close to the Bolsheviks. He even provided his Moscow apartment for a meeting of the Bolshevik faction of the Central Committee of the RSDLP. True, Andreev’s revolutionary euphoria passed quickly.

At the beginning of the century, Roerich also had friendly relations with the young poet and art collector Leonid Semyonov-Tien-Shansky (1886-1959), who in 1905 published the book “Leonid Semyonov. Collected Poems" in the St. Petersburg publishing house "Grif". At the beginning Russo-Japanese War Leonid Semyonov-Tyan-Shansky led the jingoistic demonstration of students. On January 9, together with the workers, he walked in the front rows, and was saved from execution only by falling, along with the dead and wounded, face first into the snow.

This event caused him to literally be reborn. Previously, he convinced that the Tsar needed to be saved from seditionists, but now he spoke publicly that the shooting of a peaceful demonstration was “such an abomination that there is no name.” The poet began to assert: “The king cannot be trusted. The old regime must die. Our duty is to fight it until our last breath.” In letters to Blok, he writes about his admiration for reading Marxist and democratic literature. The poet's changed views led him to revolutionary activity. It is known that “in the summer of 1906 he was captured for revolutionary agitation among the peasants, escaped, was caught, beaten half to death, and put in Kursk prison.” His bride, Masha Dobrolyubova, a beauty from Smolensk, was a member of the Socialist Revolutionary military organization, but not finding the resolve to commit a terrorist act, she committed suicide a week before Semyonov-Tien-Shansky was released from prison in December 1906.

There is no reason to assume significant influence young poet on N.K. Roerich, but the very fact of the relationship testifies to conversations where Semyonov-Tien-Shansky argued that “the king cannot be trusted,” in which there were disputes on the social problems of our time, the ideas of Marxism and revolutionary democrats were discussed.

It is known that Roerich held different views on social development. However, relations with the poet were not interrupted. In 1910, Nikolai Konstantinovich painted the painting “Svetovit’s Horses”. “The idea of ​​white majestic horses grazing in the sacred oak forests of Lithuania has long attracted me,” he wrote in the essay “Lithuania” in 1936. – Horses ready to help humanity! Lightning-fast messengers, already saddled, already waiting for the cry! I told my friend Leonid Semyonov-Tyan-Shansky about this idea, and he, like a sympathetic poet, was fired up by this image. Soon, coming to me, he brought the poem “White Horses”.

It is well known that Roerich always followed an independent path. And although he could discuss any problems with a variety of people, he did not welcome situations in which his name was used in public disputes. And if necessary, he found ingenious solutions.

Nikolai Konstantinovich recalled in his essay “Passing”: “Novovremsky Burenin somehow got into the habit of scolding me in several feuilletons in connection with Gorky and Andreev. We, of course, did not pay attention to this barking. But Kuindzhi had a different opinion. He maintained a kind of reverence for the printed word and believed that Burenin’s swearing should be extremely unpleasant for me. No matter how much I tried to convince him otherwise, he still insisted: “Whatever you say, this is very bad. And the main thing is that if Burenin has already started, he will not lag behind.” I suggested to Kuindzhi that I would stop these attacks, but Kuindzhi just shook his head. Soon I was lucky enough to meet Burenin at the theater. To his traditional “How are you?” I answered: “I live well, but people are too evil.” “What’s the matter?” - inquired Burenin. “Yes, you often mention me now, and people pester me with questions about how much I paid you.” Burenin even blinked his eyes and from then on never even mentioned me. Kuindzhi laughed a lot when he learned about what had happened..."

Despite the fact that Gorky was fascinated by the “religion of socialism” in its practical application for many years, friendly relations between them were not interrupted. They had a lot in common. And above all, love for Russian culture, the desire to preserve and improve it. Of course, Roerich highly valued Gorky’s literary talent and sought to enlist his support. “Dear Alexey Maksimovich! - writes the artist on November 4, 1916. - I am sending you the proof. I will be sincerely grateful for all your comments. It would be nice to see each other: there is so much ozone in your words and your eyes look far away. My deepest regards to Maria Feodorovna. Roerich, sincerely devoted to you."

Much connected them in their spiritual quest.

In the journal “Questions of Philosophy”, in 1991 (No. 8), an article by M. Agursky “The Great Heretic. Gorky as a religious thinker", which shows those facets of the writer and thinker who were there before hidden:

“Gorky was familiar with theosophy already in the nineties, but in 1912 his interest in it intensified. He began to study medieval theosophy, alchemy and other esoteric teachings. He was very interested in the Rosicrucians... From theosophy, Gorky perceives its central concept - the idea of ​​man as a microcosm. Of the later theosophists, Gorky greatly valued Fabre D'Olivet and Edouard Shure. Shure's book "The Great Initiates" was one of Gorky's favorite readings. Shure's view of the end of the world as the end of cosmic development, as the victory of spirit under matter, should have been dear to Gorky. Talking, for example, about the day of Brahma (i.e., the end of the world in Indian esotericism), Shure says that this would mean the complete absorption of matter by spirit. Gorky could also look for justification in Shure’s theosophy for his usual secrecy. After all, according to Shure, it is extremely important. , so that the hidden truth is not revealed to those who are not yet prepared for it. The revelation of truth is a process in time. It begins from Rama and is brought to Shure to Christ. Gorky was familiar with such a major theosophist as Roerich, but he had much more connections. him among the anthroposophists, and there was no clear line between theosophists and anthroposophists, especially since the founder of anthroposophy, Dr. Steiner, was at first general secretary League of Theosophists. The Russian magazine "Bulletin of Theosophy" often published Steiner. Among the anthroposophists, Gorky maintained the closest ties with Bely and Voloshin..."

In the article by M. Agursky there is a section called “Parapsychology”. Since it talks about the time in which both heroes of the article worked, I think it would not be superfluous to quote it almost in full:

“...Gorky early discovered a deep interest in literature on the occult, which they now prefer to call parapsychology. According to Roerich, Gorky said that while traveling in the Caucasus (somewhere in 1892), he saw living images of Indian cities on clean sheets album, which was shown to him at the fair by a wandering Indian. With all his inherent realism, Roerich says, Gorky was absolutely confident in the vitality of the images shown to him then.

For Gorky, occult phenomena were an integral part natural phenomena, but still unexplored and incomprehensible. Gorky must have become acquainted very early with Schopenhauer's interpretation of occult phenomena. He argued that since, according to Kant, time, space and causality are only categories of the mind, any physical activity of the brain in which these categories are somehow excluded can combine events that are usually separated in space and time and not causally related. Thus, in a dream, when external signals do not enter the brain, Kantian categories are excluded. The same thing happens when the brain is isolated from external stimulation even in a waking state, such as in complete darkness or silence. In this case, the mental activity that gives rise to dreams can also give rise to waking visions. Gorky also knew well the works of the greatest German occultist Karl Du Prel back in the nineties.

Gorky's interest in occult phenomena is visible in Children of the Sun. Liza Protasova experiences a premonition of misfortune at the very moment when her fiancé commits suicide, being far from her. This interest sharply intensified for Gorky in 1908, when he was faced with a scientific hypothesis that was convincing to him, according to which human thought can be directly transmitted over a distance and unconsciously perceived by other people. It must be said that during this period the belief in the direct transmission of thought was very widespread both in the West and in Russia. Gorky, for example, knew Guyot well, whose work “Art from a Sociological Point of View” directly stated: “Transmission of nervous oscillations and correlative states of mind constantly exists between all living beings, especially between those who are grouped in society or in a family and who thus constitute a special organism... Unconscious and direct transmission over a distance of movements and mental states body with the help of simple nerve currents seems undeniable under certain conditions, for example, during somnambulism and even during simple excitement nervous system" Such an antagonist of Gorky as the modern publicist Mikhail Menshikov was convinced that there is a certain mental field created by human society, at least in cities. This field, as Menshikov believed, has a huge impact on social processes and explains the so-called mass psychology. Such prominent Russian psychiatrists as Sikorsky and Bekhterev were convinced of the possibility of transmitting thoughts over a distance. No one, however, could offer a satisfactory hypothesis as to what this mechanism might be.

Gorky found the hypothesis of the Moscow psychiatrist Naum Kotik about the mechanism of thought transmission over a distance satisfactory. Kotik's experiments were first published back in 1904, but even Bekhterev questioned them. One way or another, Kotik, who is now mentioned in many treatises on parapsychology (he died in 1920), had a huge influence on Gorky, who considered his experiments one of the greatest scientific achievements. From him he borrowed the term “psychophysical processes,” which for him was synonymous with the word “occult.” In 1908, Kotik published the work “Emanation of Psychophysical Energy,” which was soon translated into German and French, and Kotik himself was invited to work in the Paris laboratory of P. Curie.

The cat came to the following conclusions:

1. Thinking is accompanied by radiation special type energy;

2. This energy has mental and physical properties;

3. As a mental phenomenon, it is directly perceived by the brains of other people and produces there the same images as in the brain of the emitter;

4. As a physical phenomenon, it has the following qualities: a) circulates inside the body from the brain to the limbs and vice versa; b) accumulates on the surface of the body; c) penetrates the air with difficulty; d) penetrates obstacles with even greater difficulty; e) circulates from a body with a greater psychic charge to a body with a lesser psychic charge.

Kotik's hypothesis was especially attractive to Gorky because psychophysical processes, according to Kotik, were accompanied by the transformation of matter into energy. Gorky first mentions Kotik in a letter to Pyatnitsky in 1908: “There is a small book by Dr. Kotik “Emanation of Psychophysical Energy” - if you took the time to look at it, you would see in it amazing experiments in the transmission of thought. These experiences are something wonderful, they prove that thought and will are one essence!

I wonder whether control experiments will be carried out and what their results will be."

Gorky mentioned Kotik several times in letters and notebooks before 1926, but never publicly. This is probably due to the fact that Kotick's hypothesis has never received full recognition. However, Gorky used his term “psychophysical processes” until the end of his life.

It would be a mistake to look at Kotik as a mystic. He was a scientist and believed that the energy he was talking about was an as yet unknown natural force. Moreover, there were those, such as Konstantin Kudryavtsev, who reproached Kotik precisely for his positivism.

One way or another, after 1908, “psychophysical” processes that determine social processes in the world occupy a central place in Gorky’s thinking. He begins to understand the progress of humanity as a process of accumulation of brain matter in people who have overcome their animal zoological individuality. These people are essentially the elite of humanity, which, through the direct transfer of psychophysical energy to the rest of humanity, includes it in the process of active transformation of nature.

Gorky’s letter to Kondurushkin (1908) says: “The further, the more active the life of humanity becomes, for the psychic energy of humanity is growing quantitatively and developing qualitatively.”

This slow and painful process is shown in the symbolic novel “The Life of Matvey Kozhemyakin”, where, under the guise of the town of Okurov, the initial zoological state of humanity is shown, into which the psychophysical energy of the active elite gradually penetrates drop by drop: “To break the strong loops of hopeless boredom, which first irritates a person , says Gorky, “awakening the beast in him, then quietly killing his soul, turning him into a stupid beast, so that he does not suffocate in the tight nets of the town of Okurov, continuous exertion of all the strength of the spirit is required, a stable faith in the human mind is necessary. But only communion gives it. to the great life of the world, and it is necessary that, like the stars in the sky, the fires of all hopes and desires, inextinguishably burning on the earth, should always be clearly visible to man.” Psychophysical processes occur in the people, and not in a random gathering of people - a crowd. Moods have a huge impact on the progress of mankind, and pessimism and optimism are not just a passing mood of this or that person. This is a certain psychophysical state. At the same time, preaching optimism or pessimism are opposing psychophysical processes.

The progress of humanity becomes a function of the accumulation of brain matter, which emits energy that positively and actively affects the entire world. From this point of view, war not only destroys human lives, but also destroys the most valuable brain matter on which the salvation of the world from evil depends...

Literature and art, which most actively change the psychophysical state of the world, acquire a huge role, but they can be a force of both progress and reaction. The writer and artist have a huge responsibility. They become creators of new life, just like scientists...

In Russian culture at the beginning of the 20th century, there was a movement of theurgists who believed that every spiritually strong person could influence the process of transforming the world. Among them were Andrei Bely, Florensky, Voloshin, Chulkov, Olga Forsh. Gorky knew these Christian theurgists and sympathized with them, but only insofar as their active attitude towards life and attempts to change it was concerned...”

If we remember, as Roerich wrote, about his meetings with Gorky alone, then, of course, they discussed these topics.

It was not without reason that “when it was necessary to find a quick solution in one large literary organization, I asked Gorky about his opinion. He smiled and answered: “What’s there to talk about, it’s better that you, as an artist, feel what and how it should be. Yes, yes, just feel it, because you are an intuitionist. Sometimes, beyond reason, you need to suffice with the essence itself..."

“THE TEACHING CLOSE TO HUMANITY...”

Immediately after the February Revolution, Gorky and Roerich, together with other famous figures, organized the “Commission on Arts.” The meeting took place on March 4, 1917 in the apartment of Maxim Gorky, chaired by Roerich. A day later, a message appeared: “The Provisional Government fully agreed with the need to take measures to protect artistic values ​​and formed a commissariat for the protection of artistic values ​​as part of a member of the State. thoughts of P. Neklyudov, F. Chaliapin, M. Gorky, A. Benois, K. Petrov-Vodkin, M. Dobuzhinsky, N. Roerich, I. Fomin. In artistic circles, the question arose about the formation of a Ministry of Fine Arts instead of the imperial court.”

Roerich recalled: “...Work began with Gorky. An invitation flashed to be the Minister of Fine Arts."

It was not for nothing that, remembering those days, Roerich chose the word “flickered.” In November 1918, an article about N.K. Roerich was published in the newspaper “Russian List” (Helsingfors). “In the first days of the revolution,” the author wrote from Roerich’s words, “he almost accidentally ended up on the committee for the protection of art, where there was Benois, and Shchuko, and Chaliapin, and at the head ... M. Gorky.

The venerable artist remembers this committee without passion...

So it happened, they brought it in a car, all around were friends and comrades... nothing worked out..."

We must admit that Roerich is too demanding. It still happened. “It is impossible to name another organization that, from the very first days of the new system, would begin to show such state concern for the most diverse parties public life art,” writes a modern researcher of the activities of the Gorky Commission. But, as you know, Roerich was always distinguished by dissatisfaction with what had been achieved; he was always aimed at even greater milestones.
The article was published on the eve of the opening of an exhibition of paintings by N.K. Roerich in Stockholm. November 1918. It is no coincidence that the journalist was grammatically perplexed before mentioning the name of M. Gorky. Gorky is there, with the Bolsheviks, and Roerich is here, “with us,” abroad.

A few days later an article about Roerich was published in the Swedish newspaper “Exhibition of the world famous Russian artist in Stockholm. Professor Roerich about modern Russian art":

“Professor Roerich arrived in Stockholm on the last ship from Finland, where he has been living for a year, or can be counted since the beginning of the Bolshevik revolution... His exhibition will consist of more than a hundred works, some already known in Malmö, some just delivered from Finland. The professor could have shown much more if not for the situation in Russia, which forced him to go into exile, to leave his home in Petrograd with all the valuable objects of art, the fate of which he knows nothing about... Many artists and writers are in exile; they belong to the intelligentsia, which must be destroyed. Everyone who remained must take the Bolshevik path: the writer Maxim Gorky and the great singer Chaliapin. Many were killed or fled..."

Did Roerich go into exile? A negative answer to this question is contained in the article by P.F. Belikov. I also expressed my thoughts in the article “...And the Great Romantic.” Let's add a few touches within the framework of the raised topic.

Let's go back a little. After joint participation in the “Commission” and the “Special Meeting” on art matters, the life paths of Gorky and Roerich diverged.

“The artist worked in this meeting until May 19,” writes his biographer Nina Selivanova, “until he and his family went to Finland, near Serdobol, to the estate of Relander, with whom there was an agreement back in December 1916...” Gorky in May 1917 started publishing a newspaper New life”, where he could fully tell “the city and the world”: who is the “enemy of the people”, “what chains bind his country and how to break his chains...”. Editor and chief publicist in the series " Untimely thoughts“led the fight for a new, democratic Russia, for the development of culture, education, and science; With extraordinary sincerity and excruciating pain, he criticized some of the actions of first the Provisional Government, and then the government of his friend Lenin.

N.K. Roerich carefully reads the “New Life” sent from Petrograd. He is concerned about the situation in which the culture of a great country finds itself. On July 17, 1917, N.K. Roerich writes from Serdobol to A.N. Benois: “Every day brings terrible news. Remember that I live on Yhin-lahti, and translated: on Unity Bay. The word itself reminds us of what is needed to save culture, to save the heart of the people. Is it really possible to return to cultural indifference again? Is it really possible to think about free life without knowledge, without the joy of art. Should art descend to the crowd, or should it powerfully raise the crowd to the found limits of art? Will art soon be needed by the crowds? I trust humanity, but I'm always afraid of crowds. There are so many contradictory emanations above the crowd. There are so many harmful inhuman things...”

And at the same time, recalling the “Gorky Commission”, he notes: “We create pictures, but maybe we should sit on the Commissions? Who knows? Your letter reminded me a lot from our seats...”

Gorky was also mentioned in the same letter. The difficult problem of exporting art treasures abroad was discussed on the pages of Novaya Zhizn in June 1917. In the dispute between Gorky and Benoit, Roerich is on the latter’s side: “Gorky, speaking out against your view, again missed the mark...”. Fearing, however, that a particular case threatens unity, he calls: “We must unite with all our might for culture and art. Whatever attitude we meet, we must tell each other that we will swear to defend our cause, for which we exist in the first place ... "

To be fair, it must be said that Gorky was in the thick of things at this time. Especially after the Bolsheviks came to power. His dream came true - the heroes of the story “Mother” got the opportunity to arrange the life for the triumph of which he called for in his works. However, the reality turned out to be very different from the dream. And a stream of criticism, requests and hopes fell upon him, a person close to power. Part of this flow spills out onto the pages of New Life. When the official Pravda makes the accusation: “Gorky spoke the language of the enemies of the working class,” the writer replies: “No matter in whose hands the power is, I retain my human right to be critical of it. And I am especially suspicious, especially distrustful of a Russian person in power - a recent slave, he becomes the most unbridled despot as soon as he acquires the opportunity to be the ruler of his neighbor...” A peculiar echo of Roerich’s thought about the power of the crowd...

The artist at this time was already deprived of the opportunity to read “New Life” - “they stopped sending it to me a long time ago,” he notes in a letter to A.N. Benois on December 5, 1917. There he also reports that he sent to Petrograd a project for the Free Academy, which should replace the School of the Society for the Encouragement of the Arts. He adds: “When damn pain and fever don’t incapacitate me, I work. I managed to read a few things... I managed to read a few things necessary books. When you are in silence, I advise you to read them. We especially need the “Proclamation of Ramakrishna,” a very serious, and most importantly, teaching close to humanity...”

Added to the ill health are worries about the fate of the School. The need to save the School at this time becomes a priority for him. In letters he is informed that “a certain Brik” from the Union of Artists with “one futuro-poetry”, “some modern types (maybe Mayakovsky, and someone else was named) wanted to arbitrarily occupy the School for the study of cubists, considering that the School is outdated...” The secretary of the OPH I.M. Stepanov complains in a letter on December 14, 1917: “Life here is going topsy-turvy, and today is not like yesterday, and it’s like this every day, and there’s no end in sight...”

At the end of December 1917, Roerich came from Finland to Petrograd to discuss and make a decision on his project for the Free Academy. According to Nina Selivanova: “School students and some artists told him that if he met Lunacharsky, he would give him an unlimited loan to finance any endeavors...” Let’s not guess why he also did not turn to Gorky, a very influential person at that time , who was besieged by petitioners for sometimes insignificant reasons, but this fact cannot be ignored.

The situation at the School was resolved, but the implementation of the Free Academy project was postponed until better times. Returning to Finland, Roerich soon found himself out of reach of his colleagues at the School. Communication with Petrograd was interrupted. Under these conditions, Roerich began to consider options for his future life arrangement. As you know, in November 1918, exhibitions of his paintings began in Scandinavian countries...

At the same time, among the northern expanses of Ladoga and the Karelian blue lakes, he creates, in addition to very significant paintings, a whole series literary works - cycles of poems, subsequently published in the book “Flowers of Moria”, plays, the story “Flame”, a number of articles. The preparatory materials contain the following lines: “I have a job. I love art. He is my support. And in future lives I want to be an artist. I believe that creativity is needed on all paths of humanity”; “And prophetic dreams guided us. And the friend of my life, my wife Lada, saw the light on all our paths. She found the guidance of the spirit. And she strengthened our path"; “The moods born of life gave parables: Sacred Signs, Friends, Boy.” At the very beginning of the article “Unity,” written in the fall of 1917, the lines are “Failed equality. A crippled brotherhood. Unconscious great freedom, not combined with great knowledge...”

And further: “What do the wild hordes of “Bolsheviks” and their associates with a strong attraction to robbery and violence have in common with socialism?.. The Russian Bolsheviks can be inalienably proud of one thing, that they dealt a mortal blow to socialism. Let the future unity of knowledge and spirit replace the dead letter. Let humanity purify itself and firmly destroy the scoundrels and fools who believe in them. Stupidity must be eradicated.

And the one who would write in historical research heroic pages of Bolshevism, he will tell the most disgusting lies. We are amazed at the senselessness and lack of culture of what is happening. Shameful self-destruction! A mediocre, bloody [tragedy] with robberies. A real revolt of slaves against knowledge. Are the lofty principles of unity so immeasurably far from these savages?.. In the name of unity, in the name of creative freedom, in the name of legality, let the people hurry to remove the Bolsheviks and those traitors who are with them...”

“With them” - Gorky. This is not the place to give a detailed analysis of the reasons that led Gorky to collaborate with the Bolsheviks. It is enough that how honest man and a writer who prophesied about the coming to power of the proletariat, worked in the Bolshevik press and was friends with the leaders, he definitely could not avoid this cooperation. Roerich, unlike Gorky, had no moral obligations to the new government.

Gorky actually became a hostage to his own calls for a social “storm,” his previous relationship with Lenin, and his work in general. Roerich could have found himself in such a situation, let us allow ourselves a smile, if the ancient Slavic state of the “Pomorians” had been revived, the heroes of his picturesque “Power” would have come to power...

“Storm Herald”, it must be admitted, showed himself heroically in this difficult situation. He was not like those about whom he wrote metaphorically: “The stupid penguin timidly hides its fat body in the cliffs...”. Christian thinker and cultural historian Georgy Fedotov responded to the death of M. Gorky in 1936 with remarkable words: “Gorky of the era of the October Revolution (1917 - 1922) is the apogee of man. No one has the right to forget what Gorky did during these years for Russia and for the intelligentsia...” This is not the place to list his many good deeds. Let us just turn to his passionate journalism of that time. Just as mercilessly as he criticized the Provisional Government, Gorky attacked those actions of his friends that contradicted his beliefs.

He publishes “Untimely Thoughts” in his newspaper “New Life” about the “insane activities of the people’s commissars”:

“The reformers from Smolny do not care about Russia; they are cold-bloodedly dooming it to be a victim of their dream of a world or European revolution...

People's Commissars treat Russia as material for experiment; the Russian people for them are the horse that bacteriologists inoculate with typhus so that the horse produces anti-typhoid serum in its blood. This is exactly the kind of cruel experiment doomed to failure that the commissars are carrying out on the Russian people, not thinking that an exhausted, half-starved horse might die...”

“Lenin, Trotsky and those accompanying them have already been poisoned by the rotten poison of power, as evidenced by their shameful attitude towards freedom of speech, personality and the entire sum of those rights for the triumph of which democracy fought.

Blind fanatics and unscrupulous adventurers are rushing headlong supposedly along the path to a “social revolution” - in fact, this is the path to anarchy, to the death of the proletariat and revolution... Isn’t it the same way Lenin’s power grabs and drags into prison all those who disagree, as did the Romanov power ?.. Having imagined themselves as Napoleons from socialism, the Leninists tear and rush, completing the destruction of Russia - the Russian people will pay for this with lakes of blood...” What does Gorky see as a way out? He addresses his worker heroes: “I don’t care what they call me for this opinion about the “government” of experimenters and dreamers, but the fate of the working class in Russia is not indifferent to me.

And as long as I can, I will repeat to the Russian proletarian:

You are being led to destruction, you are being used as material for inhuman experimentation, in the eyes of your leaders you are still not a human being!”

One cannot help but recall the famous proclamation of Gorky’s hero “Man – that sounds proud!” And his bitter understanding is that it doesn’t work that way. In our times, Viktor Shenderovich used the lines: “A man sounds proud, but looks disgusting”...

The similarity of the thoughts of Roerich and Gorky on the cultural policy of the new government was obvious, although one is located among the vastness of Finnish nature, and the other is in the boiling public life of Petrograd. But it should be noted that the Bolsheviks’ rise to power and their actions caused universal condemnation at that moment - from their closest associates, Social Democrats, to monarchists.

At this time, Roerich enthusiastically studied the works of Ramakrishna, Vivekananda, and read the Bhagavad Gita. And, apparently, he remembers conversations with Gorky.

"For last days teachers reminded us of the paths of the spirit,” he writes in the article “Unity.” - The teachers knew that the time of great quest was coming. This time should be led by the revelation of the spirit..."

Roerich reminds:

“The sermons of the prophets, ridiculed by “sound” people, always seemed like dreams. But it was not everyday meetings, not the fictitious decisions of the crowd, but the broadcasts of the chosen ones that always built the main paths of life.

Those who imagine themselves as ready-made bearers of world unity must remember that all the dirt of life, slander and personal scores are immensely far from the bright dream of unity. Meanwhile, deep philosophical teachings, which alone can bring closer the triumph of conscious truth and unity, are encountered by people of little knowledge without any attention. And if the preachers of extreme socialism themselves are personally so insensitive, so far from the fundamental principles of unity, then it means that humanity is not yet organized to perceive the great idea...”

... Of course, Gorky’s newspaper was closed already in July 1918. But it doesn't stop cultural activities, his thoughts on the fate of humanity, which social reformers in Russia are trying to solve. He rethought a lot.

Notable in this regard is his conversation with A.A. Blok during their collaboration in the editorial office of World Literature. It is appropriate to first recall a short episode. When Blok stopped going to Religious and Philosophical meetings, he explained this to Roerich with the words: “They talk about the Ineffable there” (it is interesting that the medals awarded to the laureates of the Alexander Blok Prize (our heritage magazine) are engraved with the words of the poet: “I told you the Unearthly").

Blok asked the writer’s opinion about his article “The Collapse of Humanism.” Gorky cautiously expressed several opinions. And suddenly the poet asked: “What do you think about immortality, about the possibility of immortality?”

Gorky referred to Lamennais, a French publicist and philosopher of the first half of the nineteenth century. During this period of fierce polemics with Lenin, his interest in the “Christian Socialist” was not accidental. He told Blok that “maybe Lamennais is right: since the amount of matter in the universe is limited, it should be assumed that its combinations are repeated an infinite number of times in infinity of time. From this point of view it is possible. that in a few million years, on a gloomy evening in the St. Petersburg spring, Blok and Gorky will again talk about immortality, sitting on a bench in the Summer Garden..."

Blok demanded that Gorky not refer to someone else’s point of view, but express his own.

“Personally,” said Gorky, “I prefer to imagine a person as an apparatus that transforms so-called “dead matter” into psychic energy and someday, in the immeasurably distant future, will transform the entire “world” into pure psyche.

I don’t understand - panpsychism, or what?

No. For there will be nothing but thought, everything will disappear, transformed into pure thought; only she will exist, embodying all the thinking of humanity from the first glimpses of consciousness to the moment of the last explosion of thought.

“I don’t understand,” Blok repeated, shaking his head.

I suggested that he imagine the world as a continuous process of dissociation of matter. As matter decays, it constantly releases types of energy such as light, electromagnetic waves, Hertz waves and so on, this also, of course, includes the phenomena of radioactivity. Thought is the result of dissociation of brain atoms; the brain is created from elements of “dead”, inorganic matter. In the human brain matter this matter is continuously transformed into psychic energy. I allow myself to think that someday all the “matter” absorbed by a person will be transformed by his brain into a single energy - mental. She will find harmony within herself and freeze in self-contemplation - in the contemplation of the endlessly varied creative possibilities hidden within her.

“A dark fantasy,” said Blok and grinned. - It's nice to remember that the law of conservation of matter is against it.

And I like to think that the laws created in laboratories do not always coincide with the laws of the universe unknown to us. I am convinced that if we could weigh our planet from time to time, we would see that its weight is consistently decreasing.

“All this is boring,” said Blok, shaking his head. - The matter is simpler; the fact is that we have become too smart to believe in God, and not strong enough to believe only in ourselves. As the support of life and faith, only God and I exist. Humanity? But is it possible to believe in the rationality of humanity after this war and on the eve of the inevitable, even more brutal wars? No, this fantasy of yours... creepy!”

“In fact,” writes the current leading researcher of the life and work of A.M. Gorky, Pavel Basinsky, “Gorky’s “fantasy” preceded the philosophical discoveries of the twentieth century: V.I. Vernadsky and Teilhard de Chardin. And Blok’s completely religious thought followed in line with the “metaphysical egoism” of Konstantin Leontiev...”

WAYS OF IMPLEMENTATION

Let us present here Roerich’s thoughts at that time in the article “Unity”:

“They may tell me that the unity of humanity is generally impossible, because it contradicts the imperfect human nature. But I emphasize that the absolute idea must be spoken of outside the contingent conditions of our environment.

Our race is, of course, not adapted to this phenomenon of existence. But the next race, perhaps the closest, under altered biological conditions of life, with the same degree of enlightenment of the spirit, with the knowledge of the mighty, with the rational use of the forgotten forces of nature, will create a truly possible human world unity. Where personal aspirations will be surpassed by zeal for the common good. But our inept, shaky steps are only vague dreams of what is clearly possible on our planet with the same visible stars. We are not yet fundamentally equipped for a new, peaceful, bright life. But we must hurry. We need to strengthen and raise our spirit. It is necessary to create people who can give birth to a humanity capable of looking into the dazzling face of the sun of unity...

And you can put all this into practice... Before us is the path of transforming the culture of mechanical, materialistic intellect into a culture of spirit. Into the bright life of the blessed, powerful, enlightened spirit... Spiritual creativity must come. Can't come any other way. We need to restore spiritual creativity. Remember the guidance of the spirit..." Probably, Roerich recalls his poem "It will help" (1916) from the suite "To the Boy":

“...You smiled.
You fell silent. You didn't answer.
Boy, spirit guidance
call more often
it's in your life
will help."

These topics deeply worried Roerich, as evidenced by his Serdobol interlocutor in 1918, Joseph Vladimirovich Gessen, later editor of the Berlin emigrant newspaper “Rul” and publisher of the multi-volume “Archive of the Russian Revolution”. True, he presented them in a simplified version, these were not close to him, public figure, questions.

“When we got to know each other better,” wrote I.V. Gessen later, who, by the way, published N.K. Roerich’s book “Flowers of Moria” in 1921, “he increasingly began to talk about mysterious forces, unreasonably rejected by civilization, about the many achievements of the ancients cultures that disappeared without a trace, about telepathy, cases of which, as if on purpose, were discovered in our relations, and, finally, he admitted his deep attachment to Theosophy and declared that, if not for the children, he and his wife would willingly move to India, to the Theosophical Community. I didn’t really believe it, but it turned out that he really went to India, visited Tibet, and took his sons with him, then charming promising boys who worshiped their father. His artistic creativity, unusually prolific, clearly reflected theosophical aspiration...” There is no doubt that these topics were also touched upon in conversations between Roerich and Leonid Andreev, who lived in Finland not far from Roerich.

However, the main thing that worried the writer then was the fight against Bolshevism. The most famous and widely published appeal against the Bolsheviks was Leonid Andreev’s article “S.O.S.” 1919. Andreev chose N. Roerich’s painting “Sword of Courage” for the cover of a separate brochure. Of course, Gorky’s name came up more than once in their conversations.

Letters have been preserved where Andreev talks about a Finn who came to him and brandished a revolver - “threatening to kill M. Gorky”, condemns the actions of his former friend. Andreev is categorical: “What it means to work completely against conscience, Gorky shows. In the latest issue of “Liberator,” a Bolshevik American magazine that for some reason was sent to me, there is his article “Follow Us,” i.e. for Soviet Russia and her wisdom - and what a pathetic, pathetic, mediocre, insignificant article this is! When a poet and prophet begins to lie, God punishes him with impotence - such is the law of eternal justice ... "

In March 1919, in the Helsingfors emigrant newspaper “Russian Life”, Roerich published the article “Towards Time”. The name itself says that thoughts are caused by experienced events. Roerich writes:

“What I’m saying is not a commonplace, not an empty word. I will say with conviction the aspiration of achievement: the only support in life is knowledge and art. It is in our difficult days, in our difficult times, that we will firmly remember these bright engines...

And now I will turn to you who remained in the doomed city; to those of you who are of international importance (there is no doubt that A.M. Gorky is one of the first among them - A.A.)! And to you, friends who exist in dispersion!

You, who preserve and close something. Do not close your conscience and do not cover up murderers and traitors with your meaning.

Understand that there are things so evil that you cannot even approach them. Remember that the end does not sanctify the means. Knowledge and art do not live on these harmful roots. Finally, distinguish signs from essence. Has the conscience also shut itself up?

Let my call seep through to you, and let your heart tell you where the true people are and where is your Motherland, in the name of which you must bring your strength and knowledge.

And you, friends in dispersion! Let my call seep through all your obsessions to you too. Let us connect with invisible wires of the spirit. I appeal to you, I call you: in the name of knowledge and beauty, for struggle and labor, let us unite..."

“In the autumn of 1919 in London,” writes a commentator on the collection, “a brochure was published, dated the day of Andreev’s death (September 12, 1919), containing a passionate denunciation of the cultural policy of the Bolsheviks: Roerich N. Violators of Art. London, 1919." It is the “passionate denunciation” cultural Bolshevik policies” brought Gorky and Roerich closer, despite the different life situations in which they found themselves. However, there was a significant difference. If Gorky during this period called “Follow us,” Roerich warned: “We are not yet fundamentally armed for a new, peaceful, bright life. But we must hurry. We need to strengthen and raise our spirit. It is necessary to create people who can give birth to a humanity capable of looking into the dazzling face of the sun of unity...”

Therefore, in the article “By the Time,” he wrote: “Do not join the ranks of the forefathers of Bolshevism. There is no return from there. After all, there is so much light work. Every person counts, and few, infinitely few people. And the structure of the temple is great, and close, and immutable...”

And then he quotes from the Bhagavad Gita:

“Know that That which pervades all things is indestructible. No one can lead to the destruction of That One, the Unshakable.” “There is no expenditure of effort or violation here; even incomplete knowledge saves from great fear.”

“This sinful great fear must be cast out,” he concludes.

The paths of “spiritual creativity” led Roerich to India. There was no question of any expulsion. This was a thoughtful decision by the artist. It is possible that he was impressed by the situation in which M. Gorky found himself after the revolution.

After exhibitions in Scandinavia, England and America, Roerich went to the homeland of the creators of the Bhavagadgita, Ramakrishna, Vivekananada, Tagore, Aurobindo Ghosh.

If he had not done this and joined the new government, he might have faced the fate of Valery Bryusov, who called October “the most solemn day of the earth.” The Bolsheviks provided the poet and writer, the founder of Russian symbolism, the author of the books “Fiery Angel”, “Teacher of Teachers”, with a number of posts; he sat and presided, but the creative person in him died. And Bryusov, the same age as Roerich, died on October 9, 1924, two months shy of the age of 51...

In 1921, Blok died, who wrote an honest article about responsibility “The Intelligentsia and the Revolution,” and whom the Council of People’s Commissars at its meeting refused to release to Finland for treatment. Despite Gorky's repeated requests.

In the autumn of the same 1921, Gorky went abroad. If earlier this was presented as a departure for treatment at Lenin’s “friendly request”, now researchers come to the conclusion that Gorky “could not agree with Lenin about his place in the revolution”, “Gorky with his “social idealism” was expelled by the “people's power”... " And he himself felt a depressing feeling and disappointment...

The emigration was split into irreconcilables, loyalists, ideological sympathizers and those who simply worked for Moscow. IN in a certain sense Abroad, both Roerich and Gorky found themselves in a similar position - they shunned all sorts of groups. Both experienced a creative takeoff.

In 1924, Roerich from India wrote to V.A. Shibaev about his book “Paths of Blessing”: “Send two copies of the book (in Russian new spelling) to Gorky in Berlin with a letter attached (address at the Grzhebin publishing house).” The preface to the book “Paths of Blessing” expresses the artist’s main aspirations:

“N.K. Roerich, through the storms of destruction, through the darkness of misunderstanding and through the walls of enemy obstacles, brings into the Future the unspilled cup of Beauty and Wisdom. And thus he becomes one of the greatest spiritual leaders of our time, to whose voice younger generations should listen with special sensitivity.

It is to young and new people that the good thoughts of the author - Paths of Blessing - are directed. Convincingly and cheerfully true understanding beauty, Roerich calls to the feat of joyful labor. And he is the first to turn his words into action by the example of his own rare initiative, tireless work and feat, love and search for those treasures of the spirit that, perhaps, will soon open the gates to an unprecedentedly new and joyful life, the Blessed One.

N.K. Roerich not only believes in this, but he undoubtedly knows many things that the world does not yet know, with all its scientific progressiveness, but that sooner or later all those thirsting for true creative knowledge will have to know...”

Apparently, I wanted to discuss a lot with Maxim Gorky.

On August 15, 1924, Roerich wrote to Shibaev: “...Meet me in Paris around December 20...Won’t you find out if Gorky is there?”

But the meeting with the homeland took place in the summer of 1926. It must be admitted that the currently available explanations of the motives, content and results of the “Moscow trip” cannot be considered satisfactory. Let us only note that N.K. Roerich showed maximum diplomatic skill, which allowed, in particular, to visit Altai. It was there that he planned to organize a center, university or City of Knowledge.

Within the framework of the topic of the article, it is impossible not to mention the fact of a conversation with the People's Commissar of Education A.V. Lunacharsky, a longtime acquaintance of A.M. Gorky. At the beginning of the century (1908), the Bolshevik People's Commissar, together with M. Gorky, A. A. Bogdanov, V. A. Bazarov, published the book “Essays on the Philosophy of Collectivism.” The book was sharply criticized by Lenin for “god-building”, for interpreting the ideas of the Austrian physicist and philosopher E. Mach, who believed that the initial concepts of classical physics (space, time, motion) are subjective in origin, the task of science is to describe them. M. Gorky’s story “Confession” (1908) also caused controversy. The God-builder there is the people, and the most outstanding achievement of the people's God-building is early Christianity, before it was perverted by the church, which Gorky hates. M. Gorky, together with A. V. Lunacharsky and A. A. Bogdanov, preached the theme of God-building at the Capri party school for workers, which caused his differences with Lenin, who cursed “flirting with the little god.”

In those same years, Gorky’s programmatic work was published - a poem, or story in rhythmic prose, called “Man”:

“My weapon is Thought, and firm confidence in the freedom of Thought, in its immortality and the eternal growth of its creativity is an inexhaustible source of my strength!

Thought for me is an eternal and the only non-false beacon in the darkness of life, a fire in the darkness of its shameful delusions; I see that it burns more and more brightly, illuminates the abyss of secrets more and more deeply, and I walk in the rays of the immortal Thought, following it, everything is higher! and - forward!

For Thought there are no indestructible strongholds, and there are no unshakable shrines either on earth or in the sky! Everything is created by her, and this gives her the sacred, inalienable right to destroy everything that could interfere with the freedom of her growth ... "

The poem caused a flurry of negative criticism. There the apotheosis of a proud man was presented, who is not just alone in the Universe, “on a small piece of earth, rushing with elusive speed somewhere into the depths of immense space,” not just “courageously moving - forward! and – higher!”, but will certainly come “to victories over all the secrets of earth and sky.”

“Gorky could draw arguments against materialism,” writes M. Agursky, “first of all, from the philosophy of nature of the German philosopher and chemist Ostwald, as well as from the French philosopher and physicist Le Bon. Both argued that the cause of all natural phenomena is not matter, but energy, which they considered as an indestructible substance capable of endless transformations, and not as some attribute of matter. Ostwald extended the concept of energy to all mental and social phenomena and measured the progress of mankind by the measure of energy accumulated in a given society. According to Ostwald, the concept of energy removed the opposition between matter and spirit

Gorky, of course, knew energetism directly from the works of Ostwald, but the influence of energetism on him sharply increased thanks to his then friend, the outstanding left Bolshevik Bogdanov. Bogdanov also made energyism part of his philosophical program and believed that it eliminated the very contradiction between materialism and idealism. For Bogdanov, only the difference between physical and spiritual experience mattered, and he considered the concepts of matter and spirit to be erroneous..."

There is no doubt that in the person of A.V. Lunacharsky, N.K. Roerich met an enlightened Bolshevik. Perhaps in the future there will be materials discussed by N.K. Roerich and A.V. Lunacharsky about the problem of combining communism with Buddhism.

In Moscow, N.K. Roerich left a series of paintings “Maitreya (Red Horseman)”. “By chance” Gorky, who came from Sorrento, learned about this Roerich gift. He lived abroad for seven years - until July 27, 1928, when he again set foot on Soviet soil.

Gorky was greeted “like a king”: he was “gifted” with Ryabushinsky’s mansion, dachas in Gorki and in the Crimea. After he finally moved to his homeland in 1931, the walls of the dining room in Gorki were decorated with paintings by his longtime friend: “The Horse of Happiness”, “The Stronghold of the Walls (Bon-po Monastery)”, “The Banner of the Future”, “The Power of the Caves”, “ Whispers of the Desert (Tale of the New Era)", "Maitreya the Conqueror", "Red Horses (Horses of Happiness)", "The Appearance of the Time".

V. M. Khodasevich recalls: “On one of my visits to Gorki in 1935, in the dining room I saw eight paintings by N. Roerich hanging on the walls. They illuminated the rather uncomfortable large dining room and amazed (as always Roerich's things) with some kind of glow of colors. These paintings are mainly remembered for their color - golden lemon, orange and crimson. As I was told, Roerich was passing through the USSR from the Himalayas to America and left these things in Moscow. Alexey Maksimovich liked these pictures. True, he only said about them: “curious things.” Gorky valued Roerich’s earlier works more and paid tribute to him as one of the largest original Russian artists.”

For a long time Nikolai Konstantinovich did not know where the painting suite he left in Moscow was located. I also didn’t know that numerous of Gorky’s guests became spectators of his paintings. Only a small part of them is listed by Valentina Khodasevich: “Stalin, Kalinin, Molotov, Kuibyshev, Radek, Zhdanov, Kirov, Mikoyan, Bulganin, Yagoda, Pogrebinsky, Averbakh, Kirshon, I. Mints, E. Malinovskaya, Bubnov, Olga Bubnova, Stetsky, Voroshilov, Budyonny, Shcherbakov, A.N. Tolstoy, Vs. Ivanov, Fadeev, Fedin, Leonov, A.A. Ignatiev, Burenin, Pinkevich, Nemirovich-Danchenko, R. Simonov, M. Koltsov, I. Ilyin, Marshak, Mikhoels, Babel, Khalatov, Ionov, Chagin, Seifullina, Ladyzhnikov, Kukryniksy, P.D. and A.D. Korin, Irina Shcheglova, N. Altman, V. Yakovlev, Bogorodsky, S. Uranova, Forsh, Malakhovsky, A. Tikhonov, Oborin, Shostakovich, A. D. Speransky, L. N. Fedorov, Irma Yaunzem, Yudina, Romain Rolland , Wells, Malraux, Elsa Triolet, Aragon, E.P. Peshkova, M.F. Andreeva...” Such a composition of spectators could bring honor to any artist. Moreover, it was not ordinary people who looked at not ordinary sketches, but the programmatic things of an artist-thinker. Unfortunately, Nikolai Konstantinovich learned that Gorky had the paintings only during the war years from a letter from Igor Grabar.

And in an essay written after the death of A.M. Gorky in 1936, he mentions: “He really wanted to have my painting. From what I had at that time, he chose not a realistic landscape, but precisely one from the so-called “pre-war” series - “City of the Condemned,” exactly one that would respond primarily to the poet. Yes, the author of “The Petrel could not help but be a great poet...”.

N.K. Roerich wrote this in 1936. By this time, his books “Paths of Blessing”, “Power of Light”, “Fiery Stronghold”, “Sacred Watch” were published... The essay “Gorky” was included in the book “Indestructible”.

Books were published in which the Teaching of Living Ethics was published. There is no information yet about whether Gorky knew about them or not. It is known that in the personal library of A.V. Lunacharsky, with whom they, of course, resumed communication, there were Roerich publications published in the 1920s, including the book “Community” (Mongolian edition of 1927).

Letter from A.M. Gorky, written to journalist Boris Agapov a month and a half before his death, shows that he remained faithful to the concept of the psychophysical transformation of the world. Commenting on Agapov’s book “Matter for the Creation of the World,” Gorky writes: “Matter is transformed by incorporating human energy into it... You take matter as something continuously fertilized by the energy of people, the work of their thoughts and imagination.”

In those same years, N.K. Roerich wrote the essay “Parapsychology,” in which he briefly outlined his thoughts on “the study of the energy of thought.”

Having brought various examples from the field of study of “the subtlest energies gradually captured by humanity,” Roerich concludes: “The final dome of all these quests will be that main area that now goes under the name of parapsychology, for it is based on the same great primal, or psychic energy. The dream of thought has already taken shape in the science of thought. Human thought, anticipating all discoveries, is already rushing through space and reaches human consciousness precisely “from blue sky" Human brain activity is equated to electrical phenomena; More recently, biologist G. Lakhovsky argued that all ethical teachings have a definitely biological basis. And in this way, Lyakhovsky’s work confirms the experiments of Dr. Anita Muhl with an electrical apparatus that clearly marks the quality of thought. Even the myth of the invisibility cap receives scientific confirmation in open rays that make objects invisible. So, everywhere, instead of recent denials and mockery, new boundless knowledge is emerging. All deniers can only be advised: “Know more and do not plug your ears with the cotton wool of criminal ignorance.” It has been said since ancient times that ignorance is the progenitor of all crimes and disasters.

Whether there will be parapsychology, whether there will be a science of thought, whether psychic or primal energy will be discovered, one thing is clear, that evolution imperatively directs humanity towards finding the subtlest energies.

Unprejudiced science rushes in search of new energies into space, this boundless source of all forces and all knowledge. Our century is the era of an energy worldview."

In a letter to one of his collaborators in 1940, Roerich wrote: “The ancient peoples understood the meaning of changes in existence much better than modern civilizational sages. How many times has it been repeated in ancient teachings that death does not exist, but only a change of shell. “We will not die, but we will change.” This short formula says it all, but people somehow do not pay attention to this basic statement of the law of existence. You write that you strive to quickly move into the Subtle World. It is correct that you think about this transition, because the consciousness must be prepared for this, but to speed up this transition in any way will be tantamount to an unsuccessful premature operation. Everyone must complete a task in the dense world: it is impossible to be a deserter! All the elements that make up our shells, dense and subtle, must naturally complete their earthly manifestation in order to thereby unhinderedly join life in the Subtle World... It is in the spheres of the spirit that attraction is especially acute. After all, the spirit is, first of all, a magnet. A beautiful heart, as an exponent of the spirit, is the best conductor or bridge among the spheres. Thought, as the subtlest energy, is the basis of the Subtle World, and a good thought is the strongest creative force. There everything is created by thought and destroyed by thought. And earthly thoughts have the same purpose, so you can imagine how important it is to send creative and beautiful thoughts into space. These good thoughts will intertwine with beautiful, subtle thoughts (“from there”), and the result will be a strong contact. The influences “from there” are constant, and people, instead of accepting them gratefully, try to brush them aside like annoying flies. Remember, “as below, so above,” and this axiom of eternal uninterrupted life must be firmly grasped by everyone. Life continues in subtle forms and, alas, often even too reflective of our earthly stay. All this is an axiom, but so many distortions and wildest ideas have piled up in earthly life that wonderful meaning indisputable truths and axioms became obscured. A person, when crossing, does not fall into a “cold abyss,” but continues his path, using his savings...”

The life of N.K. Roerich testifies that he always felt the relationship between his activities and Cosmic creativity. Apparently, A.M. Gorky was close to this understanding. N.K. Roerich’s essay about M. Gorky ends with inspired words of recognition: “He carried his cup of service to humanity unspilled. On behalf of the League of Culture, we bring our sincere feelings to the memory of Gorky, which will firmly and brightly establish itself in the Pantheon of World Glory.”

They had many things in common - they were great workers and great romantics. Where a pragmatist thinks and retreats, a romantic, inspired by a lofty idea, moves forward. Romantics and artistic natures, they showed themselves in life as spiritual leaders who considered our earthly issues on a cosmic scale. The fate of humanity - and no less - was what their enlightened minds and restless spirits struggled with. They had different views on how to achieve a fair social system, but we see individuals who influenced the era. If we discard the ironic connotation in the word “Kulturträger”, which appeared in relation to the “imperialist-colonialists”, then they were great Kulturträgers in the true meaning of the German concept of bearers of culture, and in the Russian language of devotees of culture.

For four decades A.M. Gorky stood at the center of the cultural life of Russia. Until the end of his life, he felt the ardent love of his admirers; artists, writers, painters, and scientists were drawn to him. He helped many, saved many from repression. Thanks to him, many cultural and educational programs were born.

Did Gorky feel like a petrel in a “golden cage”, in “The Doomed City”? Did the comrade-in-arms of the myth-makers of the idea of ​​building a Man with a capital M with the help of a social revolution understand that he was defeated?

Did the knight of humanism, the singer of the Man of the Future, see the hidden springs of the new system when he wrote the article “If the enemy does not surrender, he is destroyed”? Karl Radek joked ambiguously: “I propose to call our life Maximum Bitter.” How did his mind justify the actions of the Bolshevik leaders? His soul protested. An unambiguous order for an essay about “best friend” Soviet writers» he did not comply.

In those same years, Roerich experienced a great tragedy. At the pinnacle of worldwide recognition, his plans were first opposed by influential forces, and then betrayed by his American students. Those with whom he began to implement the Teaching of Living Ethics, on whom he hoped, with whom he shared his most secret dreams. But this did not in the least affect N.K. Roerich’s conviction in the vitality of the ideas he proclaimed.

His passionate dream of recent years is to return to his homeland. This is a topic for a separate study. It is known, for example, that Roerich’s followers in Latvia, which later became part of the USSR, who were entrusted with negotiations, were unable to achieve a positive solution. An entry appears in the diary of R.Ya. Rudzitis, which contains the words of Mikhail Vetrov, secretary of the Soviet embassy and security officer: “Everything here is old, and if so, then let your Roerich sit in his Himalayas.”

...Recognition at home came years later.

The idea of ​​the high purpose of culture, which inspired Gorky and Roerich, is still in demand. For many years, government officials, remembering culture, referred to the authority of A.M. Gorky. Times have changed.

Symptomatic, in this regard, is the statement on the “topic of the day” by the Chairman of the Federation Council Commission on Culture, Alexander Dzasokhov, in an interview with the newspaper “Culture” under the heading “Culture has a healing value”:

“...The main thing is not to reduce funding for culture even now during the financial crisis. Let me remind you that when there was the Great Depression in the United States, and its influence spread throughout the world, our great compatriot, Nicholas Roerich, wrote a book. She is still quite famous and North America, both in Europe and among our intelligentsia, too, where he philosophically and logically explained that just in times of crisis, culture can help people get through a difficult period - with its spirit, its beauty, its art...”

“As a politician,” explained this statesman, who captured not the letter, but the spirit of N. Roerich’s book he read, “I give culture priority attention: it has a healing value. Otherwise, people rush into another space of life - one that is by no means creative. In general, I have always believed that many issues can be resolved through culture...”

A legitimate question arises, so what's stopping you? Here is an excerpt from P.F. Belikov’s book “Roerich. The Experience of a Spiritual Biography,” which he wrote until the end of his life. Modern scientific thought, he writes, is approaching the recognition of the Subtle World, but there is one problem:

“The situation is worse with the person himself. We still find on Earth many “humiliated and insulted”, many irreconcilably warring parties, so many “philistines” who do not want to see beyond their own noses, so as to appear in Space and extend a hand to someone with the words: “We are your brothers.” according to reason,” will be the greatest lie and deception. Rather, we are “brothers in unreason,” and such people have nothing to do in Space. It is no coincidence that some science fiction writers cannot otherwise imagine penetration into outer space as a “space war” with aliens...

New time opens up new distances, and the main provisions of Genesis must be repeated in accordance with the new, Cosmic era of life on Earth. The teaching was given in advance, and it is not surprising that rethinking did not occur in human consciousness, at least not among the masses. Distant worlds, although they have been talked about since the first book, were at that time still so far away, so unattainable, that messages about them were somehow abstract. When the Teaching of Living Ethics was given out, there were hundreds of problems, and it did not occur to anyone that their solution would depend on how humanity’s entry into Cosmic life was decided. Individual voices of scientists were not taken into account, and the "occult" sciences, despite Blavatsky's "Secret Doctrine", continued to consider "initiations" with all their human accessories at the level of fading times.

They continue to do this to this day, ignoring new aspects of the Teaching and perceiving only those provisions that fit well into their worldview, undisturbed by the Cosmic worldview. Meanwhile, like one drop of a new substance introduced into a complex chemical composition, The cosmic worldview must change human thinking radically... There are still few, very few people for whom the earthly plane is obligatory, equal and equivalent to the Subtle Worlds, the plane of Existence. All of them are closely connected with each other, and the tragedy is not that someone recognizes only the material plane, but someone recognizes the complete priority of the spiritual over the material. The tragedy lies in the fact that the harmonious connection between them is lost, and we attribute our earthly laws to the Subtle Worlds, and make the material plane dependent on the Subtle manifestations of the “otherworldly”. Meanwhile, in the diversity of Existence, some of the laws are identical for all states, some are knowable by analogy, and some are inherent only in individual planes of Existence and never invade other planes. This circumstance is most difficult for humanity to comprehend in its general mass, because it itself is very diverse.

And to the new one, Space Age the difference in human consciousness will make itself felt especially acutely. Indeed, for the consciousness of the “Stone Age” it is first necessary to master the consciousness of the “Bronze Age”, and then take care of mastering the concepts of the “Iron Age” and, finally, the Cosmic Age. Therefore, if in the Stone Age it was enough to have one answer to one question, now it is necessary to have a thousand answers in stock for the same question. Commensurability should suggest which of the thousand in a given case will be correct. The books of Living Ethics give us these thousand answers and lessons of commensurability. Containing all the foundations of previous Teachings, they equip us with a completely new method of relating to people and the diversity of Being. This new method is necessary if we recognize the presence Cosmic life and they included our Planet among it... Without community, without the unity of humanity, Space will be closed to us..."

Reference: Not content with the concepts of “individuality” and “state”, which were used in the 18th century and the liberalism of the 19th century, Saint-Simon gives a place between them and even a predominant meaning to “society”, in which the individual is an organic particle, the state in relation to the individual - something derivative. In general, with all his teaching about society, Saint-Simon associated his name with the first stage of the evolution of positivism, and the views he expressed in recent years regarding the working class made him the founder of socialism.

Wikipedia Help: The idea of ​​phalansteries (phalanxes). Francois Marie Charles Fourier - French philosopher, sociologist, one of the representatives of utopian socialism...
“300 families of villagers, united in an association, would have one wonderful barn, instead of 300 worthless ones, one good establishment for making wine, instead of 300 bad ones,” and so on. No less beneficial will be the introduction into all branches of a large production system, the use of the best machines, and cultivation of the land according to soil conditions. The work itself will be much more productive thanks to the enthusiasm and competition that will embrace the members of the association - especially since competition here will not disappear, but will only lose its acute character, which gives it a conflict of interests. The fact is that all the works here will be distributed between “passionate series”; everyone, without distinction of gender or age, chooses the occupation that attracts him most, and has the right to change several series on the same day; here everyone will find their favorite activities, and no one will want to indulge in idleness. The results of the labor of all members of the phalanx will flow into its common storage facilities, and from here they can receive everything they need: in this way there will be no need for any intermediaries in the exchange of goods, and internal trade itself will disappear. At the same time, however, private property and inequality of wealth are preserved in the phalanx. Everyone will have a separate room in accordance not only with their inclinations, but also with their condition, and will eat and dress as anyone wants and can. There is no trace of communism here: everyone will be the owner of the products of their work, starting from children 4.5 years old, and, despite the commonality of life and work in passionate series, everyone’s activities will be paid according to the amount of labor expended, according to the quality of the work, according to the strength of his talent and the amount of capital invested in the enterprise. The total income of the phalanx will be divided into twelve parts, of which four will come from capital, five from labor, three from talent, theoretical and practical knowledge. Not only that: for a more correct assessment, all work will be distributed according to the degree of attractiveness, degree of difficulty and usefulness, and depending on these properties will be paid. Only in the distribution of products received by the phalanx, Fourier did not allow individual freedom: in all other respects it is the supreme principle.

Honor to the madman who brings / to humanity a golden dream
From the poem “Mad Men” by the French poet Pierre Jean Beranger (1780-1857) translated (1862) by Vasily Stepanovich Kurochkin (1831 - 1875):
Gentlemen! If the truth is holy
The world doesn't know how to find a road,
Honor the madman who inspires
A golden dream for humanity!

• - The psychedelic blues group “Cat Which” was formed in 1987 in the village of Golyelovo from the partial merger of two teams that no longer existed by that time - “Sacvoyage” and “Stress”...

  Small Encyclopedia of Russian Rock

• - adverbial expression Does not require punctuation. No, the bells hummed joyfully, and Whitebeard was greeted with honor and honor, like a commander. D. Mamin-Sibiryak, Okhonin's eyebrows...

  Dictionary-reference book on punctuation

• - WHICH, oh, oh, places. 1. question. and allied Which one in order or which one of several. K. hour? I forgot what year it was. 2...

  Dictionary Ozhegova

• - This word is of Indo-European nature. Initially - “of two”, in contrast to kts, which had the meaning of “of several”...

  Etymological dictionary Russian language Krylov

• - Obsesslav. Indo-European character, Avest. katāra-, Greek-Ionic. koteros “which of the two”, etc.). The original meaning is “which of the two”...

  Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language

• - Wed. Give everyone their due... Rom. 13, 7. See To each his own. See Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto the Gods the things that are God...

  (orig. spelling)

• - See WEALTH -...
• - for the umpteenth time adv. quality-circumstances decomposition Not for the first time; repeatedly...

  Explanatory Dictionary by Efremova

• - in a human way...

  Russian spelling dictionary

• - Wed. Give everyone their due... Rom. 13, 7. See to each his own. See reward...

  Mikhelson Explanatory and Phraseological Dictionary

• - by mercy, love for neighbor Wed. Let the law punish them first - and then you can “” feel sorry for them... P. Boborykin. Decay. 3. Wed. I feel sorry for them... not only, but because they are mine, that I... raised them.....

  Mikhelson Explanatory and Phraseological Dictionary

• - By humanity - by mercy, love for one's neighbor. Wed. Let the law punish them first - and then it will be possible to feel sorry for them “according to humanity”... P. Boborykin. Decay. 3. Wed. I feel sorry for them.....
• - See HELP -...

  V.I. Dahl. Proverbs of the Russian people

• - again, again, again, again, again...

  Dictionary of synonyms

• - humanely, humanely, out of love for humanity, humanely,...

  Dictionary of synonyms

• - adverb, number of synonyms: 2 humanly humanly...

  Dictionary of synonyms

"Honor to the madman who will cast / Humanity in a golden dream" in books

No. 7. Bike “A man with a golden mean.” Part 3. “Golden Ilyushenka”

From the book 111 tales for teachers author Zashirinskaya Oksana Vladimirovna

No. 7. Bike “A man with a golden mean.” Part 3. “Golden Ilyushenka” Ilyushenka was sitting on his favorite kitchen stool and dangling his legs. After the incident with the butter he ate, he couldn’t look at it. After this incident, his mother explained to him that every person has

Chapter 14 Which one are you? Which world? Your everyday reality as an expression of specific probable events

Chapter 14 Which one are you? Which world? Your everyday reality as an expression of specific probable

Chapter 15 Which one are you? Which world? Only you can answer How to free yourself from restrictions

From the book The Nature of Personal Reality. Part 2 by the author

Chapter 15 Which one are you? Which world? Only you can answer How to free yourself from restrictions (22:41–22:47.) So, I will start the next chapter, or, if you want, we can end the session earlier. (“No, continue. I feel fine,” I said, although a little tired.)Chapter 15: “Which

Chapter 2 One hundred years later. The Golden Age of Pericles. Is it really that golden?

From the book World history uncensored. In cynical facts and titillating myths author Maria Baganova

Chapter 2 One hundred years later. The Golden Age of Pericles. Is that really the case?

Essay fifth Uzbek, or the “golden age” of the golden horde

From the book Kings of the Horde. Biographies of khans and rulers of the Golden Horde author Pochekaev Roman Yulianovich

Essay fifth Uzbek, or the “golden age” of the golden horde (Khan,

Honor to the madman who brings / to humanity a golden dream

From the book Encyclopedic Dictionary catch words and expressions author Serov Vadim Vasilievich

Honor to the madman who will inspire / Humanity with a golden dream From the poem “Madmen” by the French poet Pierre Jean Beranger (1780-1857) translated (1862) by Vasily Stepanovich Kurochkin (1831 - 1875): Gentlemen! If the holy world does not know how to find the road to truth, honor the madman who

What should we call it: in honor of our grandmother or in honor of our favorite football team?

From the book I'm Pregnant! What awaits you and what no one warned you about author Fofanova Natalya

What do we call it?

And this Jean Dupont, who is in fact nothing more, who is less and less someone, who evaporates through all the pores of his body, stops once more, then stops more and more often in this rushing stream and no longer asks the question, and doesn’t even wait for an answer: he himself became a leader

From the book On the Path to Superhumanity by Satprem

And this Jean Dupont, who is in fact nothing more, who is less and less someone, who evaporates through all the pores of his body, stops once more, then stops more and more often in this rushing stream and no longer asks the question, and not even

From the author's book

10.4. The identification of the Golden Grail with the Golden Cradle of Jesus also follows from the legend of King Arthur. As we have already said, the history of the Grail is closely connected with King Arthur. It is possible, by the way, that in this case the name ARTHUR ended up in the old story as

Honor to the madman

From the book Newspaper Trinity Option # 43 author Trinity Option Newspaper

Honor to the Madman One can, of course, argue about whether Gorky should be considered a classic. One can recall the assessments given by the writer and playwright in “Klim Samgin” to the Russian educated stratum of that time: for this today it is no longer necessary to read the novel itself. Gorky now in general

12. I, I Myself, am your Comforter. Who are you that you fear a man who dies, and the son of man who is like grass?

author Lopukhin Alexander

12. I, I Myself, am your Comforter. Who are you that you fear a man who dies, and the son of man who is like grass, 12-13. They contain a reproach against cowardly and short-sighted people who are afraid of human insignificance, but forget about the power of Divine omnipotence

2. Blessed is the man who does this, and the son of man who holds fast to it, who keeps the Sabbath from desecration and guards his hand from doing any evil.

From the book The Explanatory Bible. Volume 5 author Lopukhin Alexander

2. Blessed is the man who does this, and the son of man who holds fast to it, who keeps the Sabbath from desecration and guards his hand from doing any evil. Blessed is the man... who keeps the Sabbath from desecration... The thought is very close to the famous words

11. Then His people remembered the days of old, the days of Moses: where is He who brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of His sheep? where is He who put His Holy Spirit in his heart, 12. Who led Moses by the right hand with His majestic arm, divided the waters before them to make an eternal name for Himself, 13. Who

From the book The Explanatory Bible. Volume 5 author Lopukhin Alexander

11. Then His people remembered the days of old, the days of Moses: where is He who brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of His sheep? where is He who put His Holy Spirit in his heart, 12. Who led Moses by the right hand with His majestic arm, and divided the waters before them to make for Himself

50. then the master of that servant will come on a day on which he does not expect, and at an hour on which he does not think,

From the book The Explanatory Bible. Volume 9 author Lopukhin Alexander

50. Then the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect, and at an hour when he does not think (Luke 12:46). The idea is the same as that developed in the previous speech - about the surprise of the second coming of Christ, about the need for constant vigilance and waiting and the corresponding

7. The Lord, the God of heaven (and the God of earth), who took me from my father’s house and from the land of my birth, who spoke to me and who swore to me, saying: (to you and to) your descendants I will give this land - He will send His angel before you, and you will take a wife for my son (Isaac) from there; 8. if he doesn’t want to

From the book The Explanatory Bible. Volume 1 author Lopukhin Alexander

7. The Lord, the God of heaven (and the God of earth), who took me from my father’s house and from the land of my birth, who spoke to me and who swore to me, saying: (to you and to) your descendants I will give this land - He will send His angel before you, and you will take a wife for my son (Isaac) from there; 8.

Vladimir Vakhrushev
"Gentlemen, if the truth is holy..."
review

"Gentlemen, if the truth is holy..."

Boris Egorov. Russian utopias. Historical guide. St. Petersburg, “Art - St. Petersburg”, 2007, 415 pp.

Beranger's poem “Mad Men” (“Les Fous”), known to us from V. Kurochkin’s translation, could serve as an epigraph to those hundreds, and perhaps thousands of studies that are devoted to the problems of utopia and utopian consciousness, its role in world history. Pathetically and with anguish, the Actor recites in Gorky’s play “At the Lower Depths”:

Gentlemen, if the truth is holy
The world won't be able to find its way,
Honor the madman who inspires
Humanity has a golden dream.

The poet found the surprisingly accurate word “le fou”, which in French means both a fool and a court jester who had the privilege of sometimes telling the bitter truth. Moreover, the utopian version of this “madness” embodies a whole tangle of tragic paradoxes of human existence: people cannot help but dream of have a wonderful life (best example here is Don Quixote), they bring utopia to life and are convinced that the realization of a bright dream leads to dystopia. But utopia does not die, we are all doomed to step on the rake again and again...

Hence the eternal relevance of the topic, hence the interest in the next book dedicated to this topic. Its author is a well-known person in world philological science, one of the founders of the Moscow-Tartu semiotic school, former for many years closest friend and colleague of Yu. M. Lotman. B.F. Egorov also works as a culturologist, see his fundamental research “Essays on the history of Russian XIX culture century" 1 . The book about Russian utopia is a logical continuation of this work, as well as other works of the scientist dedicated to Russian literature and criticism of the century before last.

Based on a large amount of factual material, B.F. Egorov draws our attention to “classical” works like “What is to be done?” Chernyshevsky and to little-known things like the encrypted utopian projects of N.V. Kukolnik or the novel “Earthly Paradise” (1903) by K.S. Merezhkovsky, the brother of the famous writer.

The scientist experienced certain (and quite understandable) difficulties in trying to give his own definition to the phenomenon being studied. He writes: “I<…>I expand (or narrow?) the concept and define utopia as a dream of an ideal life in any scale and volume<...> ” (italics by the author. - V.V.). “In the utopian area I include not only printed<…>texts, but also oral stories and ideas, not only works of art, but also treatises, letters, essays<…>" In our opinion, we are not talking about any “narrowing” of the concept; on the contrary, “utopia as a dream” is actually understood as a kind of “megagenre” that essentially includes any genres. Exactly any, that is, not only verbal (speech in Bakhtin’s terminology), but also picturesque (pastoral, idyllic landscapes), musical, architectural (temple as an “earthly paradise”), gardening (garden as a hortus conclusus, a minimal resemblance to Eden) . The researcher is mainly engaged in the analysis of verbal utopian genres and the personalities of their creators, but sometimes talks about the reflection of utopian themes in other areas of art.

The author understands the paradoxical connection between utopia and dystopia. He writes that even with Swift, “polemics and satire were hidden behind utopia. They, filling the entire space of the work, transform utopia into dystopia(italics by the author. - V.V.). Utopia can mix with and flow into dystopia.” Here a generalization arises - almost any utopia implicitly carries its own negation, “deconstructs” itself, in the language of Jacques Derrida. If the utopia is realized and even exists for a long time, say, in the form of a rural idyll, then it is still destroyed under the influence of external aggressive forces. Dostoevsky, as shown in Egorov’s book, brilliantly and paradoxically emphasized this point in “The Dream.” funny man“—one “sinner” easily destroyed an entire paradise! But this only means that destructive “germs” of all kinds of passions have always lurked in the souls of the innocent inhabitants of the blissful planet.

And - vice versa - in many dystopias elements of utopia are preserved - the Time Traveler sees in the kingdom of the Eloi the features of communism (“Time Machine” by Wells), “Beautiful new world” Huxley is truly “beautiful” with his abundance of material goods. Let us emphasize once again that a “pure” utopia per se (in itself) is, in principle, dystopian. Which is proved, not without a bit of shockingness, by Yu. I. Druzhnikov, arguing that Thomas More’s “Utopia” actually refutes the “dream of ideal life”! 2 More himself clearly hints at the “screaming contradiction” of his text at the end of the book, when he writes on behalf of the narrator: “Many customs and laws of this people (Utopians) immediately came to mind. V.V.), containing extreme absurdity.” Mohr hopes: “We will have time to think more deeply about this subject.”<…>It would be nice if this ever came true!” People had a chance to think “deeper” about this topic only several hundred years after the execution of the great utopian. We currently do not have the opportunity to go into a discussion of the reasons for such a “strange” (and bringing so much suffering and disappointment to people) connection between utopia and dystopia; this is the task of a special study. But one thing, in my opinion, is clear: the point is the terrible power of alienation, or, in other words, the irony of history, which, starting from the very emergence of humanity, turns its good undertakings and plans into something opposite. In addition, every utopian, willingly or unwillingly, invests in projects universal your benefits purely personal likes and dislikes that are unacceptable to the mass of people. Author's egoism fights altruism in utopias and turns them into dystopias.

Actually, almost the entire book of Boris Fedorovich Egorov, which is, as he himself writes, a “historical guide” to Russian utopias - from the most ancient up to the beginning of the twentieth century - is at the same time a clear guide to the “dismantling” of Russian utopian consciousness in all its varieties. This is a story full of drama, tragedy and not without comic episodes. The first section of the book is “Folk Legends and Attempts to Realize Utopias,” where the researcher gives an impressive overview of the most diverse folklore-mythological-literary products about heaven and hell, these “most ancient” forms of utopia and dystopia, about apocryphal tales about the Indian kingdom, Belovodye, the city Kitezh, etc. At the same time, it was noted that our ancestors, forced to work a lot and hard, and even in conditions of dependence on the boyars and princes, developed a persistent aversion to work as such. Here it was worth referring to the excellent article by E. N. Trubetskoy ““Another Kingdom” and its seekers in Russian folk tale” (1922), in which this outstanding religious philosopher and follower of Vl. Solovyova tries, in the spirit of theodicy, to reconcile the “Sophian” and “anti-Sophian” principles in Russian culture and life. “Just in a Russian fairy tale,” writes Trubetskoy, “sympathy for laziness and theft borders on the apotheosis of the lazy man and the thief” 3. Here the author condemns the Soviet government, which is implementing this “utopia of a slacker and a thief” 4. This folk utopia-dystopia, echoes of which we find in Plato’s “Chevengur”, according to E. N. Trubetskoy, is mixed with features of the Christian mood that permeates the fairy tale: “the secret of universal solidarity” of all life in the world, the “wise madness” of human sacrifice 5 .

Egorov says a lot about the Old Believers, Khlysty, Skoptsy, Doukhobors, who tried to defeat earthly wickedness and establish a divine life in this world. The random, but essentially symbolic roll call of two seemingly unrelated phenomena of Russian life is surprising. At the turn of the 17th - 18th centuries, Andrei Denisov, who “came from the impoverished Myshkin princes,” was famous among the Old Believers. Did the author of the novel “The Idiot” know anything about him? This is possible, because Dostoevsky was interested in the Old Believers. In any case, “almost namesakes”, the real Andrei Denisov and literary hero, Prince Myshkin, are similar in their desire to find the truth of God in this sinful world.

Egorov’s book sometimes reads like a fascinating novel of adventures—adventures of spirit and action. Before us appears a panorama of amazing events stretching through centuries, an endless gallery of heroes - brave, cunning, dexterous, smart and reckless, sometimes simply crazy, charming and repulsive. Such, for example, is the “colorful and mysterious” Pole Joseph Yelensky, who voluntarily lost his noble title, but came up with a grandiose plan to abolish serfdom, and at the same time to replace the “Mother Empress” with her son Paul on the throne. Paul received the throne without Elensky, but the latter was not at a loss and already under Alexander put forward a completely insane project of transforming the Russian state into a “religious, theocratic kingdom of eunuchs.” And for such an incredible audacity plan, he was simply exiled to a monastery. Wonderful are your works, Lord.

At all Russian XVIII The century is so saturated with utopians that it is time to call this time not only the Age of Enlightenment, but also a “fantasy” century. The tone was set by dreamer-kings and favorites like Potemkin and Zubov, “standing in a greedy crowd at the throne.” Many of their projects were implemented, but at what cost! It is difficult (and, perhaps, impossible) to say whether, for example, Peter’s reforms brought more benefit or harm. Boyar Fyodor Saltykov composed “Pronouncements profitable for the state” in 1714, in which he unfolded a grandiose plan to eliminate poverty and increase the well-being of the people. He writes a lot about the creation of libraries and the development of monumental propaganda. The projector was a peasant son, Ivan Pososhkov, who became a wealthy industrialist. In his “Book of Poverty and Wealth,” he preaches ascetic Christian norms of love and humility and condemns the “ungodly dances” introduced by Peter. Our writers were also utopians - Sumarokov, Knyazhnin, Kheraskov, Emin (Turkish by birth), Radishchev and others. Moreover, each of them had their own quirks and preferences, sometimes funny, sometimes just wild. Thus, the writer and astronomer Fyodor Dmitriev-Mamonov, a distant relative of Peter the Great, in the allegorical story “The Noble Philosopher” approvingly depicts a certain ant kingdom, in which black hard-working ants consider it their highest honor to kiss the ass of their rulers. Nice utopia! However, the work also contains “softer” versions of utopias, which vaguely echo the “interplanetary” fantasies of Lucian and Cyrano de Bergerac. A sad coincidence - Fyodor Dmitriev-Mamonov, like his namesake, Count Matvey Dmitriev-Mamonov (1790 - 1863), also a projector and opponent of the autocracy, were both mentally ill. At the same time, Mamonov II suffered for his attacks against the Romanov “Holsteins”: Nicholas I ordered him to be kept in custody and forcibly treated 6.

It has already been written more than once about the outstanding adventurer Maurice Benyovsky (1746 - 1786), a rebel and traveler exiled to Kamchatka, from where he fled with a group of assistants and on a captured ship reached the island of Taiwan, where he dreamed of creating the State of the Sun according to the models read from the books of More and Campanellas. Later, this dreamer built an “ideal state” already in Madagascar... As Egorov notes, these amazing deeds of the fugitive Pole begin “a sad series of Russian communist and socialist communities based on utopian plans.”

Most of B.F. Egorov’s book is devoted to Russian utopias of the 19th century, which, in terms of genre and ideological diversity, and even quantitatively surpass even the fantasies of the previous century. The artistic skill of utopian writers has grown noticeably, and new genre and thematic trends are appearing in utopian literature, for example, science fiction utopias. Attempts at the practical implementation of utopian projects have become more frequent, and here the first in XIX century turned out to be Count Arakcheev, who carried out the “idea” of Alexander I. In the system of military settlements we find a classic example of the transition of utopia to dystopia. The count turned out to be an excellent business executive, a predecessor of the “new Russians”: he introduces agriculture multi-field system, selection of livestock and seeds, earns crazy money and allocates a whole million rubles to the victims of the St. Petersburg flood of 1824! But he also introduces a cruel regime in his “ideal” settlements. This “projector” was branded by Saltykov-Shchedrin in the grotesque-satirical image of Gloomy-Burcheev, because of whom “history stopped flowing.”

The 19th century was a time of powerful activation of socio-political thought in Russia, which could not but affect the sphere of the “dream of an ideal life.” The rulers are doing their best to project, and the Decembrists are not far behind them. The founder of Kharkov University Vasily Karazin (1773 - 1842) turned out to be the first in Russia (and maybe in the world?) to author the idea of ​​regulating nature by controlling atmospheric electricity, which later attracted N.F. Fedorov and others. This idea was not implemented until now - yes, in my opinion, and it’s good that it did not come true, because in practice it could lead to a complete atmospheric catastrophe... Prince V.F. Odoevsky thought about the terrible consequences of radical human intervention in the structure of nature, who in one of The essays in the series “Russian Nights” (1844) depict a gigantic powder explosion splitting the globe and leading to the death of humanity. “Not even prominent authors of the 20th century reached such a dystopia,” writes B.F. Egorov.” This statement needs serious correction. As I. R. Shafarevich writes in the book “Socialism as a Phenomenon of World History” (1977), suicidal fantasies, ideas about the death of the world and its subsequent revival are characteristic of many mythologies, as well as the views of such utopians as Saint-Simon and Fourier, in the twentieth century they were picked up by G. Marcuse. And Jules Verne paid tribute to such fears in the satirical novel “Upside Down” (1889), where the heroes of a space flight around the Moon turn into crazy tycoons who want to “straighten” the earth’s axis for profit in order to change the climate and obtain unheard-of profits. Only an error in the calculations of the inventor Maston saves the globe from destruction.

The general conclusion from the wonderful book by B.F. Egorov: humanity has always dreamed and will never stop dreaming of a better life on earth, and now of existence in space. And, amazingly, no matter how bitter and even scary lessons No matter how life presents itself, over and over again turning any utopia realized in practice into a dystopia, people do not learn at all from mistakes. Why? Apparently, Freud is still right: two powerful impulses of our subconscious, libido and thanatos, still subjugate the human mind, which every now and then turns into great unreason, simply into madness. Into the craving for collective all-human suicide. How else can one explain the fact that even Alexander Bogdanov, a former comrade-in-arms of Lenin, but a meek man who really wanted happiness for people, in his utopian novel “Red Star” (1908) makes the Martian communist scientist Sterni dream of exterminating all the inhabitants of the Earth!

How to stop the transformation of utopias into their opposite? Nobody knows the answer yet.

Vladimir Vakhrushev.

Balashov.

1 In the book: “From the history of Russian culture.” T. 5 (XX century). M., “Languages ​​of Russian culture”, 1996, pp. 13 - 389.

2 Druzhnikov Yu. I. The Man Who Stopped Laughing. - “Vyshgorod” (Tallinn), 2003, No. 4, pp. 142 - 165.

3 Trubetskoy E. N. “Another Kingdom” and its seekers in Russian folk tales. - “ Literary studies”, 1990, No. 2, pp. 100 - 118.

4 Ibid., p. 105.

5 Ibid., pp. 106 - 108.

6 See: Lotman Yu. M. Matvey Alex. Mamonov. — “Scientific notes of the University of Tartu.” Vol. 78. Tartu, 1959, pp. 19 - 92.

1890 - economic growth 1894 - beginning of the reign of Nicholas the year - mass creation political parties A contradictory, anxious, crisis time. A person cannot withstand the stress, lives in a state of confusion, realizes loneliness, finds himself at the bottom of his life.

1. “You can’t kill twice” 2 “I’ll die without gasping” 3. “Here a woman is dying, her lips are already covered with earth” 4. “I’ll destroy you, devils” 5. “You have no soul, woman” 6. “Husband in a coffin, a lover in hard labor" 7. "I dream of dead people" 8. "Our nets brought a dead man" 9. "Let me at least die in peace" 10. "In Hamlet I played a gravedigger" 11. "I am tired of human words" 12 “Who loves you but the devil?” 13. “I drank away my soul, old man, I, brother, died.” 14. “Scream...roar...the dead don’t hear”

For me, not a single flea is bad. Petting a person is never harmful. Where should we feel sorry for the dead? We don't spare the living. We cannot feel sorry for ourselves. A person can teach goodness very simply. Those who seek will find! Those who really want it will find it! You just need to help them, you need to respect them!