Conflicts of Russian Classics: Why Great Writers and Poets Fought Among Each Other

2024 Author: Richard Flannagan | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-15 23:55

Readers are accustomed to looking in the biographies of brilliant classics only for good examples to follow. But great writers and poets are living people who are also characterized by passions and vices. In the history of Russian literature there are many stories of high-profile conflicts, quarrels and even duels, with the help of which geniuses defended their principles, ideology, fought against plagiarism, defended the honor of their women and simply expressed creative protest to their “unpleasant” colleagues.

Why Bulgakov and Mayakovsky hated each other

Bulgakov and Mayakovsky did not agree not only in literary but also in ideological terms. The enmity between them arose even before the personal meeting. The futurist Mayakovsky was the "mouthpiece of the proletarians", supported the Bolsheviks and at a certain period of his life was an ardent supporter of the revolution. He could not stand the deep and restrained Bulgakov, who did not have clear political views. When Bulgakov's play Days of the Turbins was allowed to be staged, Mayakovsky went berserk and urged people to ignore the performances.

Mikhail Afanasyevich, who received an excellent education and managed to work as a doctor, was also alien and incomprehensible to the “courtyard” poet. But he did not show open hostility and remained silent even when the enemy mercilessly "defeated" him in his satirical work "The Bedbug". In the mid-1920s, the two geniuses first met in the editorial office. Witnesses to the meeting said that connoisseurs of apt words looked at each other with a challenge and exchanged harmless barbs.

There were no serious conflicts and quarrels in real life between them, writers could talk peacefully in a common company and even play billiards. For battles, they used only literature and theater.

By 1930 Bulgakov was in a difficult financial position. His works were not published and were subjected to harsh criticism, plays were banned from staging. Driven to despair, the writer contemplated suicide. But he was ahead of Mayakovsky, whose affairs at that time, too, were not going in the best way. Contemporaries argued that Bulgakov was shocked and saddened by this event. Some believed that Mayakovsky's death saved Mikhail Afanasyevich from the same tragic end.

How Turgenev fell out with Dostoevsky

Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev was known as one of the most scandalous writers of his time. He was in conflict with Nekrasov, Goncharov and Dostoevsky, and Tolstoy even challenged the writer to a duel, which in the end never took place.

Dostoevsky met Turgenev in 1845 and, as often happened with the writer, at first was imbued with great sympathy for his new acquaintance. Having lost in the casino, Fyodor Mikhailovich even borrowed a large sum from Turgenev, which he could return only 11 years later.

However, under the influence of ideological and philosophical contradictions, friendly relations gradually grew into antipathy. Fyodor Mikhailovich supported the ideas of monarchism, Orthodoxy and Slavophilism, which the convinced Westernizer and atheist Turgenev could not accept.

In 1867, a final break occurred between the writers. Turgenev mercilessly criticized the works of his antagonist, considering him an upstart and braggart. He called the novel "Crime and Punishment" "prolonged cholera colic." And Fyodor Mikhailovich subtly answered him in his work. For example, Turgenev became the prototype of Karmazinov, a vain and outdated literary man from the novel The Demons.

Almost a year before his death, Dostoevsky made an attempt at reconciliation. When delivering Pushkin's speech at a meeting of lovers of Russian literature, he noted Turgenev's Lisa Kalitina among the wonderful artistic heroines. But Ivan Sergeevich ignored this gesture and retained his dislike even after Dostoevsky's death, caustically comparing him to the Marquis de Sade.

Why Mandelstam took revenge on Alexei Tolstoy

According to the memoirs of contemporaries, Mandelstam was an emotional person and a principled person. He fearlessly confronted offenders when it came to his honor, and even challenged some to a duel. One of these confrontations cost the poet his career and life.

In 1932, the Moscow writer Amir Sargidzhan, being drunk, allowed insults and assault on Mandelstam and his wife Nadezhda Yakovlevna. Osip Emilievich could not leave this unanswered and appealed to a comrades' court.

The judge in this case was the writer and "red count" Alexei Tolstoy. As a result, Sargidzhan was ordered to return 40 rubles of the debt to Mandelstam, and then - if possible. And the insult to Nadezhda Yakovlevna, with which the poet went to court, was generally ignored.

Mandelstam was beside himself with rage and told Tolstoy that he would never forgive him for this. The opportunity to take revenge presented itself to him only two years later. Having met with the "red count" in the publishing house, the poet in front of everyone gave him a slap in the face with the words: "I punished the executioner who issued a warrant for beating my wife." Tolstoy showed countless restraint and did not respond to the insolence of his opponent. But for Mandelstam, this act had the most sad consequences.

The incident received wide publicity, and the public in this conflict was not on the side of the poet. Maxim Gorky was one of the first to comment on this: "We will show him how to beat Russian writers!"

After a while, Mandelstam was arrested. Some colleagues in the shop associated this with the very slap in the face of the "count". The poet himself was sure that the point was in the anti-Stalinist poem "we live without feeling the country", which Pasternak rightly called "suicide."

Mandelstam died in a transit camp from typhus. Real literary fame came to him many years after his death, and his life became a symbol of the tragic fate of the poet of the Soviet era. Akhmatova will call Tolstoy a disgusting anti-Semite who "caused the death of the best poet of that time."

Bunin's jealousy for the glory of Nabokov

Nobel laureate Ivan Bunin is rightfully considered one of the most significant writers of his time. However, the significant contribution to the development of Russian prose did not prevent the writer from being branded as an unceremonious and “bilious” egoist, not shy in expressions. He called Gorky "a monstrous graphomaniac", Mayakovsky - "a cynical and harmful servant of Soviet cannibalism", and Zinaida Gippius - "an unusually disgusting soul."

Particularly noteworthy are the strained relations between Bunin and Nabokov. They were born 30 years apart, and when Bunin was already a literary master, Nabokov embarked on a literary path. The beginning of their acquaintance can be characterized as a relationship between a teacher and an admiring student. In 1921, Nabokov sent a letter to his idol, in which he asked for an assessment of his poems.

From time to time, Ivan Alekseevich released restrained praise to the young writer and said that none of the beginners could compare with him. Gradually, from a timid beginner, Nabokov turned into a self-sufficient author with his own specific handwriting. He began to be recognized in the literary world, and the number of fans increased rapidly.

Bunin's entourage more and more often noted that Nabokov was his only competitor. The aging genius did not want to put up with this state of affairs and began to be jealous of the named student for his popularity.

After many years of friendly communication in letters, the two geniuses met by chance in a restaurant. Nabokov was disappointed with this meeting - it turned out that he was not at all interested in the idol. Later, the writers met more than once in the circle of mutual acquaintances, but the communication was cold and "depressingly humorous." The student sarcastically called the master "Lekseich Nobel" and ridiculed his inherent arrogance. In 1933, Nabokov wrote to his wife that Bunin had become like "an old skinny turtle …". At this time, he no longer hesitated to show his superiority and disdainful, condescending attitude towards the old master, who once aroused youthful admiration in him.

Towards the end of his life, Bunin disowned his first meeting with Nabokov, calling him a "pea buffoon" and declaring that he had never sat with him in any restaurant.

What Brodsky and Yevtushenko did not share

Yevtushenko and Brodsky met in 1965 after the return of the second from exile for "parasitism." It is noteworthy that it was Yevtushenko who headed the campaign to free the young rebel poet, in which Jean-Paul Sartre, Italian politicians and other influential personalities of the 20th century also participated.

Returning from exile, the poet Yevgeny Alexandrovich called to the restaurant "Aragvi". At first, they were very friendly, Brodsky even spoke at Yevtushenko's poetry evening. But when in 1972 the question arose about the expulsion of the former from the USSR, their relationship changed dramatically. After one of the conversations in the KGB building, Joseph Alexandrovich accidentally ran into an old friend. Yevtushenko came there to pick up "anti-Soviet" books confiscated at customs. Brodsky immediately suspected him of cooperation with the special services and snitching. Over the years, this resentment only intensified, acquiring more and more understatement.

Upon Brodsky's arrival in the United States, Yevtushenko contributed to his enrollment in the teaching staff of Queens College. But when the poet himself wanted to teach there, Brodsky decided to take revenge on him and sent a letter to the college leadership, where he offered to refuse the Soviet writer in the work. Later, Evgeny Alexandrovich read this letter and was deeply shocked.

Since then, the poets have not seen each other and have not talked, but Yevtushenko flew to Brodsky's funeral in New York, and in his interviews he said that this quarrel was the main wound in his life.

And it is very curious, but what did they do writers and poets of the 20th century before they became famous.