From the Poet of Stagnation to the Prophet of Revolution: Metamorphoses of Anton Chekhov’s reception
The article traces the reception of Chekhov’s image and works from 1880-1900s, and its continuation in Stalinist culture. The transitional (from realism to modernism) nature of Chekhov’s works initially forced 19th century critics to negatively assess the “lack of ideology” and the “accidentality” of his poetics, and later to present Chekhov as an exponent of “longing for a common idea” and “a fighter against vulgarity”. The claims that Chekhov was outdated or, conversely, becoming relevant, were strictly correlated with the periods of stagnation/revolutionary activity. Similar patterns can be observed in Soviet criticism. In the 1920s, anti-Chekhovian moods were fairly characteristic for avantgarde artists, as well as representatives of the vulgar sociological method who criticized him harshly. After WWII, critics tried to present the “pessimistic” and sophisticated author as a bearer of Soviet dogmas and a predecessor of Soviet literature. For example, Vladimir Ermilov’s works used rhetorical strategies based on the opposition of “intuitive striving for freedom” vs “suppressive social reality”, which led Chekhov to the conclusion about the need for radical social changes. With the help of such rhetorical devices, the mournful “singer of stagnation” was transformed into a “prophet of revolution”. The task of connecting Chekhov to the humanistic tradition was solved by ascribing to him sympathy for the “little man” and “working man”. All such substitutions were done by equating the author’s and his heroes’ evaluative position. Many features of the “Soviet” Chekhov image can be traced back to Chekhov’s lifetime criticism, and therefore the outdated works of Soviet scholars can serve a clear example of cultural recycling, in which seemingly abandoned old ideas are reworked anew.