ИСТИНА

В предпринятом за последние десятилетия разносторонне широком и обновленном изучении литературы "серебряного века" до сих пор остается недостаточно освоенной область литературно-критической мысли. Издаются сочинения крупнейших ее деятелей и исследования о них. Но за этими пределами находится многочисленный ряд литературных критиков, хорошо известных в свое время и принадлежащих к самым различным направлениям (в том числе, постоянных литературных обозревателей в важнейших периодических изданиях), которым современное литературоведение пока еще не уделяет должного внимания. Специальных работ о них очень мало, или они вообще отсутствуют. Заметим, что и работам об иных наиболее крупных представителях литературно-критической мысли тоже свойствен подобный недостаток: например, значительно больше подчас известны их исследования обобщенного философско-эстетического характера либо о литературном прошлом, равно, как их художественное творчество, нежели их реакция на современный им литературный процесс, которая является основным предметом данного исследования. Между тем без подробного обращения ко всему этому обширному филологическому материалу невозможно создание полной, сложно целостной и одновременно сложно противоречивой картины изучаемой литературной эпохи. Результатом исследования станет подготовка фундаментального коллективного труда. Он ставит своей целью восполнить этого рода существенные пробелы.

Перевести вGoogleBingThe field of literary-critical thought is still insufficiently developed in the comprehensive and updated study of the literature of the "silver age" undertaken over the past decades. The works of its major figures and research on them are published. But beyond these limits there is a large number of literary critics, well known in their time and belonging to a variety of directions (including permanent literary reviewers in the most important periodicals), which modern literary criticism has not yet paid due attention. There is very little or no special work on them. It should be noted that works on other major representatives of literary-critical thought also have a similar drawback: for example, their studies of a generalized philosophical and aesthetic nature or of the literary past, as well as their artistic creativity, are much more known than their reaction to the literary process that is the main subject of this study. Meanwhile, without a detailed reference to all this extensive philological material, it is impossible to create a complete, complex holistic and at the same time complex contradictory picture of the studied literary era. The result of the study will be the preparation of fundamental collective work. It aims to fill this kind of significant gaps..The field of literary-critical thought is still insufficiently developed in the comprehensive and updated study of the literature of the "silver age" undertaken over the past decades. The works of its major figures and research on them are published. But beyond these limits there is a large number of literary critics, well known in their time and belonging to a variety of directions (including permanent literary reviewers in the most important periodicals), which modern literary criticism has not yet paid due attention. There is very little or no special work on them. It should be noted that works on other major representatives of literary-critical thought also have a similar drawback: for example, their studies of a generalized philosophical and aesthetic nature or of the literary past, as well as their artistic creativity, are much more known than their reaction to the literary process that is the main subject of this study. Meanwhile, without a detailed reference to all this extensive philological material, it is impossible to create a complete, complex holistic and at the same time complex contradictory picture of the studied literary era. The result of the study will be the preparation of fundamental collective work. It aims to fill this kind of significant gaps.