THE PITFALLS OF MORALIZING IN AESTHETICS OF LEO TOLSTOY
The article examines the problem of Leo Tolstoy's moralizing on the example of his theoretical ideas. The author reveals the origins of moralizing and comes to the conclusion that, first, the Russian writer experienced the strong attention of French enlighteners and sentimentalism in the field of rational approach to improving society; second, the influence of traditional Russian culture with the priority of moral attitudes. Further, the author identifies and analyzes the absolutization of good in Tolstoy's aesthetic theory, his denial of the Trinity of truth, good and beauty. As a result of the study of the writer's aesthetic views, it is concluded that Tolstoy understands the essence of art as a translation of feelings, as a means of communication. The writer interprets art in a didactic and narrowly focused way, depriving the latter of its aura of mystery and denying art its role as a source of aesthetic pleasure. Tolstoy exaggerates the importance of morality in art. Tolstoy also denies art its elitism, considering the "singing of village women" more impressive than the works of the classics of culture. Tolstoy, considering himself a religious man, underestimates the role of mystical Christian revelation in art and life, which causes serious criticism from foreign and domestic researchers. The author also analyzes the writer's personal worldview, reveals the role of impressions received in childhood and youth. However, the author shows that in his works of art Leo Tolstoy reflects an ethical and aesthetic synthesis, embodies the relationship between the beautiful and the good. Thus, the author argues that the ideological rationalistic moralism of Tolstoy did not affect his artistic works, that in his artistic work the writer raised significant problems of contemporary culture, created three-dimensional multi-faceted realistic images using metaphorical, rich, expressive language and impeccable style. Tolstoy's personality and work are another example of the fact that the views and opinions of the artist may not coincide with his work.