The Little Review, May 1916 (Vol. 3, No. 3) — John Shaqi
The Little Review, May 1916 (Vol. 3, No. 3)Various
General
The Little Review, May 1916 (Vol. 3, No. 3)
Various
Literature, Modern -- 20th century -- Periodicals
It is an enormous leap from Gogol to Korolenko[3], Gorky[4], and
Kuprin[5]. These are living authors, although they belong rather to the
past century in their motives and modes. Vladimir Korolenko is a writer
whose very name causes the heart of every Russian to beat with emotion.
Not for the greatness of his art: as an artist he ranks among the
lesser. It is the charm of his personality that places him far above all
his colleagues. His long years of exile in Siberia, his never-flagging
championship of the oppressed classes and races, his tireless
encouragement of the young beginners, and his smile, the deep, broad
smile that flows like a sunny stream through his writings, have endeared
him to his countrymen beyond parallel. Korolenko is the bridge between
the heroic, idealistic seventies and the ultra-individualistic moderns.
His stories are not idylls, yet they smile; he deals with tragedies,
describes horrifying situations, but he bears no ill feeling for the
universe, he loves it with all its evils and follies, loves it with that
keen understanding which spells forgiveness. Gorky tells us that he owes
to Korolenko not only his discovery and introduction to the public, but
also his style. I seldom trust an author’s self-criticism. Gorky differs
from his alleged teacher in his style as well as in his philosophy.
Korolenko is gentle, mild, refined, loving, forgiving. Gorky is rude,
loud, hating, revenging. Both have known misery and hardships, both have
rubbed shoulders with the humiliated and down-trodden. But Korolenko
came out of the crucible with a radiant smile, with universal compassion
and sympathy. Gorky neither forgets or forgives. His body and soul
shriek out vengeance for man enslaved, maimed, bestialized. Korolenko
and his “disciple” both exalt human personality, but the first does so
indiscriminatingly, wholesalely, while Gorky glorifies only the strong,
proclaims the “beauty of power”, and scorns the weak worms, the lazy
adders who are content to stagnate in the mire. Gorky’s philosophy may
appeal to us who have drunk from the waters of Zarathustra, but
Korolenko’s art is purer, free from preaching, and hence more
convincing.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account