L. N. Tolstoy's Pattern in the cultural landscape of Crimea

Kotliar Elena Romanovna PhD in Art History Associate Professor, Department of Visual and Decorative Art, Crimean Engineering and Pedagogical University named after Fevzi Yakubov 295015, Russia, Republic of Crimea, Simferopol, lane. Educational, 8, room 337 allenkott@mail.ru Other publications by this author     Reznik Oksana Vladimirovna Doctor of Philology Professor, Department of Library and Information Activities and Interlanguage Communications; Crimean University of Culture, Art and Tourism 295017, Russia, Republic of Crimea, Simferopol, Kievskaya str., 39, office 8 oreznik2005@yandex.ru

Gotsanyuk Natal'ya Yur'evna Head of the Promotion and Interaction Department at the State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education of the Republic of Crimea "Crimean University of Culture, Arts and Tourism" 295017, Russia, Republic of Crimea, Simferopol, Kievskaya str., 39, office 8 allenkott@mail.ru

The three main directions in cultural cognition are the definition of the multidimensional essence of culture, the laws of its development, the features and forms of its manifestation. In the cultural genesis of each region, a special place is occupied by the self-identification of ethnic and religious groups in the process of ontogenesis and phylogenesis, which, however, does not violate the integrity of a single socio-cultural space ^{[2, p. 6]}.

D. S. Likhachev introduced the term ecology of culture into the scientific thesaurus, understanding it as the idea of saving the socio-cultural space by recognizing the intrinsic value of all types of culture that make up it ^{[7, p. 94]}.

The ideas of the integrity and unity of culture based on the interaction and integration of ethnic groups and civilizations as unique cultural subjects, despite the identification of individual "cultural and historical types", are contained in the work of the Russian cultural critic and sociologist, one of the founders of the civilizational approach in history, Nikolai Yakovlevich Danilevsky (1882-1885): "Russia and Europe: A look at cultural and political relations of the Slavic world to the German-Roman world" ^[3]. Danilevsky called the cultural-historical type or civilization the community of science, art, religion, political, civil, social and economic development of ethnic groups in the designated territory, the main parameter of proximity of which is the kinship of languages. Among the patterns of determination of cultural and historical types described by the author, the following statement is significant: "A civilization peculiar to each cultural and historical type only reaches completeness, diversity and richness when the ethnographic elements that make up it are diverse - when they, without being absorbed into one political whole, using independence, form a federation or the political system of states" ^{[2, p. 113]}.

The arguments of D. S. Likhachev and N. Ya. Danilevsky relate to multicultural regions (including Crimea), in which the cultures of each of the numerous ethnic groups and groups of closely related peoples represent a unique whole, while not violating the boundaries of their own ethnic identity. It is impossible to appeal to the concept of the dialogue of cultures of the Crimea without referring to the concept of "cultural landscape".

The term cultural landscape is based on a number of concepts put forward by scientists who have analyzed it from different angles. Based on the concept of the noosphere, designated by the Russian encyclopedic scientist Vladimir Ivanovich Vernadsky (1863-1945), D. S. Likhachev introduced the term homosphere, characterizing it as "a sphere of influence and impact on the surrounding world of human activity" ^{[7, p. 91]}. In D. S. Likhachev's research on the ecology of culture, the historical landscape he called is described as a natural and cultural territorial complex formed as a result of long-term interaction between man and nature, his economic and socio-cultural activities ^{[7, p. 144]}.

Since the early 1990s, special attention in world science has been paid to cultural landscapes as a specific complex heritage that ensures interaction, interpenetration and interdependence of cultural and natural components. The UNESCO "Operational Guide for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention" introduced the definition of "cultural landscape" and established its place among significant sites. In this document, the term "Cultural landscape" appears as the result of the "joint creation of man and nature", indicating the determining role of economic, social and cultural factors in the interaction of man and his environment. With regard to Crimea, this definition is logical and meets such parameters as a clear definition of the geocultural region, as well as the presence of distinctive cultural elements in it.

The Soviet and Russian geographer and specialist in classification theory Vladimir Leopoldovich Kagansky (born 1954) described the cultural landscape as an archetype with a number of aspects inherent in it, which, in addition to the factors of geography, the transformation of the surrounding nature by people, include semiotic, ethical, sacred and aesthetic components. "A cultural landscape is an earthly space, the living environment of a sufficiently large (self–preserving) group of people, if this space is both integral and structured, contains natural and cultural components, and is mastered utilitarianly, semantically and symbolically" ^[5]. According to V. L. Kagansky, the cultural landscape is inherently dialectical, as it combines natural and cultural components, while combining continuity and discontinuity, a positive neighborhood of autonomous components, transitional contact zones, and the coexistence of various strata of the population. The author presented a metaphor in which the cultural landscape is represented by a "carpet of places", an "iconic text", which requires a change of points of view and dynamics in space to comprehend ^[5].

Accordingly, we can talk about the cultural landscape, in particular, of the multiethnic Crimea, as a mosaic in which the overall picture is created with the help of many separate diverse components (languages, household and religious traditions, culture of mastering nature, semiotics of art, architectural traditions, etc.) ^[11].

The definition of the term "cultural landscape" is impossible without referring to interdisciplinary research, in particular, to regionalism. The subject of such research is the analysis of the development of specific cultural trends within a given geographical space, determined by climatic, landscape, territorial and administrative boundaries. Of particular interest for research on regional culture are multilingual, multiethnic, and multi-confessional regions.

The works of Dmitry Nikolaevich Zamyatin (born 1962), a geographer, cultural critic, founder of the Center for Humanitarian Studies of Space of the Russian Scientific Research Institute of Cultural and Natural Heritage named after D. S. Likhachev, presents an interdisciplinary field of research called humanitarian geography, which initially developed within the framework of anthropogeography, and later – within the framework of economic and socio-cultural geography.economic geography. This branch of science is a synthesis of cognitive geography, cultural landscape studies, figurative (imaginative) geography, sacred geography, mythogeography ^[4]. The concepts of imaginative geography include such terms as regional identity (regional self-awareness), figurative-geographical space, mental-geographical space, local myth, cultural landscape. The author presents the "geographical image" as a system of interrelated symbols, archetypes and stereotypes characterizing the designated territory and directly dependent on the development of its culture.

The functions of the cultural landscape are periodically transformed – from a specific place to a tourist route, due to the significance of the original source. The categories of cultural landscapes include recognition, personalization, cultural significance, location, and the actualization of this region in the historical period.

D. N. Zamyatin focused on the role in the formation of the geographical image of various cultural texts (the term was introduced into the thesaurus of basic concepts of cultural studies by A. Ya. Flier, based on the works of the famous Russian cultural critic and semiotic Yuri Mikhailovich Lotman (1922-1993) ^[9], as well as philologist, orientalist, philosopher Alexander Moiseevich Pyatigorsky (1929-2009). We are talking about both verbal (literature) and non-verbal texts, in particular, visual art, music, architecture, as well as the importance of local myths in this process.

According to Diana Sergeevna Berestovskaya, Doctor of Philosophy (1934-2020), "Crimea is a multicultural space, irreducible to one foundation, to ethnic one–dimensionality" ^{[2, p. 12]}. The history of Crimea, due to its geographical location on the way "from the Varangians to the Greeks", at the intersection of trade routes, has been associated since ancient times with the constant change of ethnic groups, government entities, trade and other professional ties that have left their mark on the culture of Crimea.

Russian philosopher, mathematician and political scientist Oleg Arshavirovich Gabrielyan (born 1956) considers Crimea's autonomy to be a unique characteristic, due not only to the peninsular nature of the place – topos, but also to its inner essence, idea, and stable structure of being – logos. Citing historical examples proving the logic of the autonomy of Crimea, O. A. Gabrielyan notes the political contextuality of the ontological essence of Crimea, "this ecumene with its diversity of cultural worlds gave rise to various Crimean "texts": literary, architectural, toponymic, demographic and many others" ^{[2, p. 21]}. At the same time, the author draws attention to the fact that none of these texts has become overwhelming, dominant.

Yu. M. Lotman, based on the theory of French structuralists, put forward the theory of the semiosphere, a space with clear boundaries consisting of separate cultural layers. According to Lotman, the semiosphere is characterized by a continuum of different texts that are understandable from each other's point of view. Thus, the internal diversity and heterogeneity of the filling of the semiosphere constitute its unique integrity ^[9]. In one of his publications, Yu. M. Lotman argued: "Just as the biosphere uses solar energy to process the inanimate into the living (Vernadsky), culture, relying on the resources of the surrounding world, turns non-information into information" ^[10]. In the same way, a cultural representative transforms the surrounding world directly or indirectly into a cultural landscape.

Thus, the set of ideas that have developed in public opinion about a particular cultural landscape appears as a set of cultural texts, both verbal and visual-auditory, sacred-philosophical, and valuable. In this sense, the Crimean cultural text is distinguished by a large number of diverse factors, including both descriptions of nature and numerous historical events related, among other things, to important cultural and religious markers (such as the adoption of Christianity by Prince Vladimir in Chersonesos, the foundation of monasteries, mosques, madrasas, kenas, etc.). Over time A certain part of the population associates a particular landscape with historical and cultural personalities, and the question arises of preserving specific cultural realities marked by previous generations ^[1].

The dialogue of cultures, the mutual study of texts of each other's cultures, as an interaction, leads to understanding and acceptance of each other (tolerance) and at the same time to the formation of one's own identity, i.e. it is a necessary condition for the optimal development of both each of the subjects and the further development of the cultural landscape as a whole.

Important aspects of this study are the identification of individual texts and codes of cultures and their elements in the general multilingual space of the Crimean ecumene, as well as the fixation of their visual and meaningful transformation as a result of the inevitable mutual influence in the process of long-term coexistence in close proximity.

One of the significant patterns of the cultural landscape in general, and Crimea in particular, is the role of outstanding personalities who have contributed to the culture of the region. The personalities of individual cultural figures have, on the one hand, a pronounced individual character, and on the other, they are united by the impression of both the amazing nature of Crimea and the richness of its cultural heritage, which they supplemented with their cultural and creative activities ^[15]. At various times, Crimea became the theme and inspiration for famous poets Adam Mickiewicz (1798-1855), Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin (1799-1837), Maximilian Alexandrovich Voloshin (1877-1932), writers Anton Pavlovich Chekhov (1860-1904), Alexei Maximovich Gorky (1868-1936), Ilya Lvovich Selvinsky (1899-1968), Ivan Sergeevich Shmelev (1873-1950), ethnographers Nikolai Yakovlevich Danilevsky (1822-1885), Evsey Isaakovich Peisakh (1903-1977), artists Ivan Konstantinovich Aivazovsky (1817-1900), Konstantin Alekseevich Korovin (1861-1939), Konstantin Fedorovich Bogaevsky (1872-1943), composers and musicians Alemdar Sabitovich Karamanov (1934-2007), Alexander Afanasyevich Spendiarov (1871-1928), Ilyas Temirovich Bakhshish (1913-2000), architects Alexei Nikolaevich Beketov (1862-1941), Nikolai Petrovich Krasnov (1864-1939), Pavel (Bogos) Yakovlevich Saferov (1873-1914) and many other cultural figures.

A number of cultural figures visited Crimea following in the footsteps of their predecessors who visited it earlier and published their notes, descriptions and works of art dedicated to Crimea. Thus, in pre-revolutionary Russia, the geographical dominants associated with the name of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin were the first to be identified. The poet visited Crimea, focusing, in turn, on Adam Mickiewicz's lines dedicated to the peninsula. It is also impossible to deny the influence of romantic literature on travelers, in particular, the lyrical work "Childe Harold's Pilgrimage" by George Gordon Byron (1788-1824), which was a kind of example of poetic travel for readers of the nineteenth century. This work served as a source for young travelers of the idea of visiting places mentioned by writers, and in turn formed a fashion for describing their impressions in an epistolary or memoir heritage.

With the increase in social mobility during periods of social upheaval and change, one can notice the increasing role of demiurges – personalities of leaders whose importance cannot be overestimated. These leaders form new ideas in the public consciousness, provoke the development of society and its value changes. Such leaders certainly include the personality of the outstanding writer, educator, philosopher, publicist of the Golden and Silver Centuries of Russian Culture, Leo Nikolaevich Tolstoy (1828-1910), whose Crimean pages of biography and creative heritage undoubtedly occupy a significant place in the Crimean cultural landscape. The integrity of the writer's cultural personality allows us to move from the local term "Tolstoy places" to more significant categories linking culture, literature, history and tourism.

Literary critic V. V. Kuryanova in his monograph "The Crimean text in the works of L. N. Tolstoy" notes that "the works of any writer selected on a regional basis can always (or almost always) be divided into two large groups: 1) works that describe or mention a given area (its toponyms, realities) and 2) works that are indirectly related to a certain geographical space ..." ^[6]. Also, in our opinion, the Crimean realities can be divided into two groups from a cultural point of view: places associated with specific facts of Leo Nikolaevich Tolstoy's biography – a place of service, a place of treatment, a place of visit, etc., and the second type – places reflected in the work of the specified author. This classification determines the connection between the real and associative perception of the selected landscapes ^[6].

The first group of "Tolstoy" cultural and historical landscapes should include, first of all, those associated with the Crimean War and the "Sevastopol Stories" (1884-1885) ^[14]. Crimea in the works of Leo Tolstoy is traditionally perceived as "Sevastopol pages". Sevastopol nature and seascapes in the work appear as a medium for dramatic events taking place in the "Sevastopol Stories". A number of literary scholars identify Crimea as "an extraliterary background that had a significant impact on the literary work of Leo Tolstoy" ^[14].

 One of the most striking episodes of Leo Tolstoy's service in the Crimea can be considered the Battle of Chernorechensk. Tolstoy observed the results of command errors, analyzing them in order to then describe the events primarily as an officer, not a tourist or researcher. The uniqueness of the writer's approach and the depth of his philosophical thought is manifested not only and not so much in the fixation of events that he witnessed and participated in, but in the piercing humanism that is inherent in his reasoning about the fate of both ordinary soldiers and officers. The writer accurately notices the aggravation of both positive and negative traits of the characters, which is typical for acute social tragic periods. The heroism inherent in Volodya Kozeltsov's enthusiastic youthful maximalism differs from the mature perception of the events of his older brother, Mikhail, but the special tragedy lies in the fact that both of them die as victims of the French, although these sacrifices do not ultimately bring victory. The battle at the Tavern Bridge (Chernaya River) is connected with the real bridge and viaduct, which have only partially survived. This place requires cultural support, as well as restoration.

Tolstoy also stayed in Eski Orda (Lozovoye) for quite a long time. The monument erected in this regard is practically not visible to tourists. The Soviet-era stop, reflecting images of the Crimean War, currently requires restoration and relocation of the monument. A static and at the same time detailed landscape is designed to create a certain picture of reality. The "Tolstoy" realities of this period include the village of Kermenchik – now the village of Vysokoe, where a small fortress of the XIV century is located, the village of Fatisaga (Golubinka), the Baydar Valley, the Bakhchisarai Palace, where the writer may also have been. The diaries of Leo Tolstoy mention Crimean toponyms: Simferopol, Bakhchisarai, but they are devoid of any value. Gaspra deserves special consideration: Leo Tolstoy's stay there in 1901 was long and emotionally intense. The role and importance of Crimea as a wonderful place of aesthetic peace, healing both body and soul, from the writer's point of view become more obvious if we recall how it is mentioned in other works of Tolstoy. So, in the story "The Devil" Crimea acts as the antithesis of the main character's estate, a place of desired peace: "I would advise you to go. It will be easier for you and her. And you know, my advice is to go to Crimea. The climate of obstetrics there is wonderful, and you will get to the most grape season" ^{[12, p. 245]}.

The identification of such realities, which are not directly reflected in the guidebooks, is also due to the reconstruction of the Tolstoy pattern of the Crimean landscape. It is not known exactly when the writer left Crimea for the first time. The house in Simferopol, where L. N. Tolstoy stayed in the apartment of the doctor, local historian and public figure Nikolai Vladimirovich Pleshkov (1823-1900), is decorated with a memorial plaque.

The second vector of the formation of the "Crimean pattern" by L. N. Tolstoy is due to a subtle, poetically sublime perception of the aesthetics of the Southern coast of Crimea, when the author's attention is transferred from the narrowly specific realities of wartime directly to small, but significant for an individual details of personal biography. L. N. Tolstoy praised the Crimean nature as healing for body and soul, depicting an idyllic life: "They had a wonderful two months in Crimea. Eugene had so many new impressions that everything that had been erased, it seemed to him, completely from his memory. In Crimea, they met former acquaintances and became especially close to them; in addition, they made new acquaintances. Life in Crimea was a constant holiday for Eugene and, besides, it was also instructive and useful for him." ^{[12, p. 247]}. Tolstoy notices that his hero returns home a different, new man, free "from the old horrors" ^{[12, p. 248]}, happy.

 For the second time, in 1885, Lev Nikolaevich returned to the Crimea, accompanying to the south a sick friend, a famous chess player, a scion of the princely family of Sergei Semyonovich Urusov (1827-1897), whom the writer met during the Crimean War in Sevastopol. This time they stayed in Simeiz, where Sergey Ivanovich Maltsov (1810-1893), a representative of one of the most powerful entrepreneurial dynasties of Russia, lived. L. N. Tolstoy was here a little, traveling more in the Crimea: Alupka, Yalta, Sevastopol. The writer conceived the story "Ilyas" (see publications in the journal "Crimean Archive", 2014).  This period of life is practically not recorded in memorial form on the territory of Crimea, and a survey of tourists indicates that many do not know at all about the "peaceful", i.e. unrelated to the Crimean War, episodes of the writer's life.

For the third time, L. N. Tolstoy came to the Crimea in order to heal himself after an illness. It is known that in Crimea he was visited by outstanding Russian writers A.M. Gorky and A. P. Chekhov, who were also treated at the Crimean resort and left their significant mark on the cultural landscape of Crimea. Tolstoy noted: "I am glad that both Gorky and Chekhov are pleasant to me, especially the first one" ^{[13, p.140]}.

The author's diary notes, poignant in their purity, related to the end of his life, containing generalized philosophical conclusions about the beauty of the surrounding world and the pursuit of truth, purity and sublimity, were associated with Crimea. The following entry deserves special mention: "Today, it seems, December 1st. Yesterday was very good" ^{[13, p. 140]}. An inaccurate chronology ("it seems") and at the same time an enthusiastic assessment of the surrounding nature, which gives spiritual comfort despite physical illness.

"December 26, 1901. Gaspra. It got better, then worse again. I went to Yalta to spend the night and got heart disease there. ^{[13, p. 141]} In this context, L. N. Tolstoy makes an unusual conclusion at first glance: "The immediate task of life is so clearly visible. It is to replace a life based on struggle and violence with a life based on love and reasonable consent" ^{[6, p.141]}. The beautiful landscapes of Bolshaya Yalta, majestic cliffs, the sound of the sea and cypresses gave the writer strength and hope for recovery and new achievements.

Another paradoxical, at first glance, conclusion is related to the new year: "Today is January 22, 1902. [Gaspra. He was ill almost all the time, that is, he was approaching death. And he lived quite well" [13, p.142]. This quote speaks about the depth of the writer's perception of the surrounding landscape, when even the realization of a possible imminent death does not prevent him from enjoying the beautiful nature, breathing in the clean sea air and contemplating the beauty around.

It was in the Crimea, in Gaspra, that L. N. Tolstoy expressed the following judgment: "Ah, how beneficial the disease is. She, at least at times, shows us what we are and what our life's work is" ^{[13, p.143]}. This expression reflects the depth of the author's philosophical thought, that truth is known in comparison, and in the face of illness and death, many goals that seemed important earlier lose their relevance, and eternity, goodness and beauty become tangible.

The last entries are quite realistic: "May 25, 26, 27, 1902. Gaspra. I've been outdoors for three days, first four, five and now six hours. I'm recovering a little bit. These were attempts at death, that is, a new birth, and rest was given" ^{[13, p.145]}.

Having no property in the south, Count Tolstoy took advantage of the invitation of Countess Sofia Vladimirovna Panina (1871-1956). On September 8, 1901, Lev Nikolaevich and his family came to Gaspra and stayed here until September 1902 – you can see the exposition in the museum room of the Yasnaya Polyana sanatorium. But the house church, which L. N. Tolstoy attended, was demolished. According to relatives, at first the writer felt better, but soon Lev Nikolaevich caught a cold and became seriously ill. At the height of the illness, the situation was so difficult that the attending doctors lost hope of recovery. The family discussed the issue of burial. Taking into account the will of Lev Nikolaevich, who did not want his relatives to have trouble with his body, they decided that the burial should be in the Crimea. For this purpose, a small plot of land was purchased in the neighborhood. He was not needed, but this story is firmly embedded in the chronology of the formation of the cultural image of the Tolstoy landscape.

         Thus, after analyzing the "Tolstoy places" in the culture of the Crimea, we can state the following:

The cultural landscape of Crimea, which is a synthesis of unique natural zones and the centuries-old cultural heritage of ethnic groups, languages, state entities, religious and philosophical component, thus represents a motley mosaic of independent cultural patterns that enrich the overall picture of its perception.

A separate role in shaping the cultural landscape in general and Crimea in particular belongs to outstanding cultural figures, whose bright personality adds unique colors and uniqueness to it. Such cultural figures, of course, include the great writer, humanist, educator Lev Nikolaevich Tolstoy. The Tolstoy pattern of the Crimean cultural landscape consists of both places in Crimea that the writer visited at different times, and those mentioned by him in his works of art, as well as memoirs and diaries.

The Crimean "Tolstoy" landscape has a unique cultural value, since various places in the Crimea mentioned by the author become an environment in which historical events take place, where the characters of the writer's works of art appear, as well as real personalities from his environment.

The second aspect of L. N. Tolstoy's contribution to the cultural landscape of Crimea is the author's philosophical understanding of the natural aesthetics of a unique geographical space, its association with goodness, eternity, truth, beauty, that is, a direct connection with spiritual values, and, most importantly, the transfer of this conscious wisdom through the mastery of words to readers.

 It is difficult to overestimate the role of Leo Nikolaevich Tolstoy in culture and literature, the more important it is to preserve the memory of the places where he lived and worked. In this regard, the restoration and preservation of these memorial (associated with the memory of an outstanding personality) realities as a material cultural heritage is considered an urgent direction of cultural tourism.