Russian writers in french press at the turn of the XIX-XX century. Newspaper “L’Aurore”

Minasian Sofiya Vital'evna ORCID: 0000-0002-5169-2161 PhD in Philology Senior Researcher, Associate Professor; Gorky Institute of World Literature of the Russian Academy of Sciences 344022, Russia, Rostov-On-Don, lane Zhuravleva, 102/105, office 128 suffi@mail.ru Other publications by this author

Introduction

The turn of the century is a golden period in the history of the press, when printed publications remain the only mass media. If the industrialization of the press began back in the days of the Second Empire ^[1,2,3], then censorship delays its real development for a long time. It was not until July 29, 1881, that a law was passed that placed power in the hands of the "newspapermen". Freedom of the press and distribution is proclaimed. The masses, thanks to the appearance of a one-time sale for five centimes per room, get access to the press. The press takes to the streets, settling in kiosks and railway stations. From 1880 to 1899, the number of printed publications in the capital grew from 900 to 1800, and by 1910 reached 2,753 titles ^[4].

The establishment of freedom of the press comes at a time of ideological searches in a variety of directions: from monarcho-syndicalism to Jewish anarchism. The clash of ideological attitudes leads to a division into left-wing and right-wing newspapers. Political affiliation became an obligatory component of the press of that time, whether it was a literary, economic or social newspaper.

The newspaper "L'Aurore" adhered to leftist views. Its founder, Ernest Vaughan (1841-1929), from 1881 to 1888, directed the newspaper L'Intransigeant (Uncompromising, 1880-1948), which initially fought for equality, but soon changed its ideological course towards the right–wing press and nationalism. Vaughan will embody the failed first attempt in "L'Aurore". E. Vaughan's associates were Urbain Goye (1862-1951), former editor of the newspaper Le Soleil (The Sun, 1873-1922), anti-militarist, anti-Semite and "monarcho-socialist"; Georges Clemenceau (1841-1929), Republican, future Prime Minister of France, who advocated the country's anti-colonial and anti-clerical policies. The editors of the newspaper were Arthur Rank (1831-1908), a Republican, senator, Freemason, and Bernard Lazar (1865-1903), an anarchist and theorist of libertarian Zionism. So the political views of the representatives of this publication were very diverse.

The culmination of this confrontation between the left and right press can be considered the coverage of the events in the Dreyfus case. L'Aurore has forever entered the history of the press as the publication on the pages of which Emile Zola's pamphlet "I accuse" ("J'accuse...!") was published on January 13, 1898 ^[5] In defense of French army officer Alfred Dreyfus, accused of espionage, W. Goye supported Dreyfus, guided by his anti-militarist views. For J. The Clemenceau Dreyfus case became, in particular, a study of the state of affairs in the French army. It was he who suggested the title for Zola's article. From 1899 to 1903, about 700 articles on the Dreyfus case were published.

Zola's article not only witnessed an ideological split, it served as an impulse for the category of educated people to loudly declare their disagreement and take an active opposition opinion. From this moment on, the concept of "intellectual" comes into use, which has a bright social orientation. Starting from the next issue, L'Aurore publishes signatures of famous people every day (E. Zola, A. France, M. Proust, L. Blum, etc.) demanding to review the Dreyfus case ^[6][24]. Already on January 23, 1898, J. Clemenceau created a trend by using the word "intellectual" in his article, which he italicized ^[7]. A week later, the newspaper Le Journal (Gazeta) will publish a response from the nationalist writer Maurice Barres (1862-1923): he will call "these imaginary intellectuals destructive waste in society's effort to form an elite" ("Ces prétendus intellectuels sont un déchet fatal dans l'effort tenté par la société pour créer une élite " ^{[8, p.1]}.

Thus, with the filing of L'Aurore, a struggle of opinions will begin in the press, the main driving force of which will be the idea of engagement. An intellectual of the turn of the century has an active political position and is understood as "a person of culture, creator or mediator who finds himself in the position of a politician, producer or consumer of ideology" ("un homme du culturel, créateur ou médiateur, mis en situation d'homme politique, producteur ou consommateur d'idéologie") ^{[10, p.10]}. An intellectual, in general, and an intellectual writer, in particular, is responsible for the ideological values of the generation. Since 1898, the authors of the articles " L'Aurore " regularly discuss what defines an intellectual, what are his moral values and responsibilities to society. Russian Russian writers have been appearing regularly in more than 350 specialized periodicals devoted to culture and literature since 1870 ^{[11, vol. 70, pp. 162-163]}, and in a number of publications Russian writers inevitably become an instrument of propaganda.

The mention of Russian writers and their works on the pages of L'Aurore, as a rule, by default, carries the idea of engagement and has a political connotation. Russian Russian newspaper articles, starting in 1898, make it possible to trace the role that the socialist press assigned to Russian writers, what vision of the Russian writer it had and how it used their image, biography and creativity to promote its ideology. This explains the selective interest of the newspaper: some Russian writers appear on its pages with enviable regularity, while others are rarely mentioned. The choice was made in favor of authors whose beliefs and statements corresponded to the views shared in the newspaper, or could be challenged. After all, it was Russian literature that "made the old world shudder from a new wave of justice and compassion" ("qui a communiqué à notre vieille Europe un frisson nouveau de justice et de pitié") ^[12].

The main part

The images of Russian writers serve as " L'Aurore " to promote the idea of rebellion and alternative development of society. So, from May to September 1901, the newspaper published propaganda letters "The Voice of the Peasant" addressed to the youth of Russia and signed with the pseudonym Moujik (Muzhik) ^[13-17]. He calls not for the overthrow of the tsar, but for the destruction of tsarism as such. In search of support for his anger from the French public, he mentions several times that at the age of 19, Nicholas II insulted the memory of Victor Hugo, saying that he did not understand why France organized a national funeral for a man who died "like a dog" ("comme un chien") ^[13,14]. According to the Peasant, the peasant reform of 1861 was not done by Alexander II, but by Russian writers. The merit of the abolition of serfdom belongs to A.N. Radishchev ("Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow"), A.I. Herzen, I.S. Turgenev ("Notes of a Hunter"), N.G. Chernyshevsky. They "forced" the tsar to make a reform, although it did not escape A. Leroy-Beaulieu (1842-1912), the author of The Empire of the Tsars, a historian who recently changed the French public's view of Russia, that Alexander II introduced a number of key restrictions ^[13]. The peasant sees the fear of tsarism before the power of Russian writers, speaking about their fate in Russia: D.I. Pisarev, thrown into the Peter and Paul Fortress at 24, and Chernyshevsky, exiled to Siberia at 33, would be alive if they had escaped the arbitrariness of the authorities. The peasant also mentions Herzen, Bakunin, Turgenev, Ogarev, Lavrov, Kropotkin, who found refuge in Europe ^[16].

The newspaper is impressed by the image of the Russian writer as a standard of public sacrifice made to Peru and the truth, which entails hunger, wandering and poverty. The decision to be a writer, according to L'Aurore, is self-denial, voluntary doom to suffering, a single battle with power. If the situation is different, then the newspaper questions talent itself, as if genius and rebellion are inseparable. So, in the issue of June 11, 1899, the author of an anonymous note expresses doubt that Pushkin was the father of Russian literature, as they say in Russia, calls him "something like the Slavic Byron" "... une espèce de Byron slave" ^[18] and likens "Eugene Onegin" to "Don Juan". Such an unflattering review is caused by the fact that, according to the journalist, Pushkin readily obeyed the emperor and therefore there was nothing heroic about him.

According to the publication, the path of a true genius is lined not with fame, but with hardships. A striking example of sacrifice to journalists is F.M. Dostoevsky and a quote from his letter in which he "begs" ("on l'entend mendier") ^[19] and asks for money to be sent to him, explaining to his friends that he can no longer see his wife Anna starving. This example, taken from L'Aurore, pursues a different goal: not to complain about fate and power, but to magnify need by criticizing the idea of literary prizes and, in particular, the proposal to include a literary nomination in the Rome Prize. The Rome Prize has a long history of existence, from 1663 to 1968. It was awarded to young artists, sculptors, architects and, since 1803, composers. In case of financial patronage, the winner of the competition could go to Rome for a period of three to five years.

Maurice Le Blond (1877-1944), followed by Saint-Georges de Bouillier (1876-1947), two friends and founders of naturism, express the opinion that in their time the powerful of this world are trying to deprive young writers of independence. They tempt them with the opportunity to write, but not for the sake of an idea, but for the sake of reward and recognition by those who distribute these awards. According to the authors, great minds never needed recognition, and the hardships of their lives served as the material of their creations, helped readers feel that they were not alone in their suffering, ignited the flame of hope in the hearts of the suffering. Thus, in a pathetic outburst, Maurice Leblon says that in exile, and not in a luxurious castle, Dostoevsky created his masterpieces: "in the heart of the terrible Siberian penal servitude, he was able to hear and remember the tragic lamentations of human suffering" ("au fond des bagnes terribles de la Sibérie, qu'il a pu entendre et retenir les plaintes tragiques de la douleur humaine") ^[12]. This glorification and romanticization of the pain and deprivation of a creative personality have something in common not only with the engagement of an intellectual, but also with the image of the damned poets favored by French culture.

If Dostoevsky's name appears on the pages of L'Aurore as a journalistic device to describe the indescribable, then the figure of Leo Tolstoy appears where a socialist newspaper needs an example of unquestionable authority. So, on February 25, an article in support of E. Zola "A book that should be written" is published. Attacking the authorities who sentenced E. Zola to prison on February 23, 1898 for libel (he managed to escape to England), the author of the article Lucien Decave (1861-1949), a writer and one of the founders of the Goncourt Prize, ends his message with an instructive, in his opinion, story about Tolstoy. Once the courtiers expressed their bewilderment to Tsar Nicholas II that he endured the sermons and exhortations of Leo Tolstoy, to which the tsar replied: "this is an apostle.., I do not want to make a martyr out of him" ("- C'est un apôtre... j'ai pas envie d'en faire un martyr") ^[20]. According to Decave, by their actions, the French authorities turned Zola into a martyr.

Very soon Tolstoy himself speaks out in his defense. On March 15, 1898, L'Aurore published the opinion of Tolstoy, who was surprised that the younger generation did not support Zola in his protest against chauvinism and anti-Semitism. According to Tolstoy, Zola's position proves to Europe that France retains the signs of a civilized country, and things are not as bad there as they might seem ^[21].

L.N. Tolstoy on the pages of "L'Aurore"

It should be said that Leo Tolstoy is the most mentioned Russian writer in the newspaper. His name appears so often that it allows you to trace the path that the editors of the socialist newspaper traced for this great writer.

Initially, they assigned Leo Tolstoy the role of a man with an incommensurable sphere of influence on his contemporaries, whose word was able to captivate the masses. The social, philosophical, and political positions of the writer were beneficial to the socialists. The newspaper constantly uses striking expressions: "the apostle of Yasnaya Polyana" ("Apôtre de Yasnaia Poliana") ^[22], "a teacher as great for us.. as Jesus is for Christians" ("Maitre aussi grand à nos yeux que... le Christ aux yeux des chrétiens") ^[20], "the only true emperor of Russia" ("seul véritable empereur de Russie") [Ibid.], etc.

In 1898, the book "Thoughts of Tolstoy" was published – a collection of statements prepared by Osip-Lurie based on the Russian texts of the writer ^[23]. The newspaper "L'Aurore" covers this event. On November 3, a large article "Anti-Nationalist" by the writer Camille Mockler (1872-1945) appears, in which he expresses delight at the idea of Osip Lurie to combine about 450 thoughts and aphorisms of Count Tolstoy into a collection at a price of 50 centimes, that is, to make it accessible to the masses ^[24]. Mockler notes that the book allows us to see the evolution of Tolstoy from a novelist to a moralist and an apostle, and speaks of the need to introduce it into the educational process. The author points out the universality of Tolstoy's personal growth and philosophy, which will be understandable and useful to everyone. Mockler calls Tolstoy a man devoted to the ideals of democracy, who went from elitism to sublime simplicity. However, if you believe Mockler, the right-wing press believes otherwise: instead of talking about his personal growth and wisdom that came with the years, they tend to talk about the "sad extinction of the elder" ("une regrettable défaillance de vieillard") ^{[24, p.2]} and slander his excessive enthusiasm for religion. A similar rebuke had already arisen before and was directed at Eugene Melchior de Vogue (1848-1910), a former diplomat, member of the French Academy and popularizer of Russian literature in France, whose origin and right-wing views caused acute rejection of the newspaper. In the issue of November 4, 1897, the author of the note Decagon calls Vogue a "kakademik" who introduced Leo Tolstoy "to the civilized world not as a genius, but as a count" ("Ce cacadémicien... au monde civilisé, non comme un génie, mais comme un comte!") ^[25].

L'Aurore responds to the news of Tolstoy's excommunication from the church in February 1901 with a number of articles in support of the writer, again condemning the Russian government and reinforcing its point of view with information about student protests in the writer's homeland in response to the decision of the Holy Synod ^[26].

On September 13, 1901, newspaper editor Urbain Goye published an article "Vivat, Tolstoy!". According to the publication, Nicholas II hears this exclamation of the crowd during his visit to France in early autumn (the four-day stay of the emperor and his wife in Paris was intended for the army and navy, in particular, the naval review in Dunkirk). At that time, it was this call that symbolized the revolutionary movement in Russia and progress. Goye notes that even Tolstoy himself is no longer in control of the power of his influence: "Why exclaim at the sight of Nicholas: "Down with the tyrant! Down with the gallows! Down with the whip!" The name of Tolstoy, thrown in the face of the tsar, contains the same meaning" ("A quoi bon crier, sur le passage de Nicolas : "A bas le tyran! à bas les potences ! à bas le knout ! » Le nom de Tolstoï, jeté au tsar, a le même sens») ^[27]. The newspaper quite often prefers to see Tolstoy as a symbol of socialist and revolutionary propaganda. At the same time, inevitably, this desire contradicts Tolstoy's philosophy itself.

From praising the ideas of the "apostle of Yasnaya Polyana" at the end of the XIX century, from the beginning of the XX century, the newspaper turns to an open criticism of his worldview. This is due to Tolstoy's rejection of socialism, which is being talked about in France. Romain Rolland mentions that a Russian writer calls socialist intellectuals the worst of the supporters of the movement, who love not people, but only their ideas ^[28]. In the article "Tolstoyism" ^[29] dated March 26, 1901, the editor of the newspaper Urbain Goye attacks Tolstoy no longer with literary, but with public condemnation, reproaching him for promoting inaction, non-interference, apostasy. Of course, Tolstoy's ideas of nonviolent resistance and pacifist ideology contradict the goals of the publication, and his dislike of socialists forces the latter to renounce his teachings. They intend to turn the readers of L'Aurore away from the writer's ideas, trying to destroy the halo that the opposition community had previously created around Tolstoy.

Goye calls Tolstoy a false apostle who leads revolutionary-minded people astray from the true path. False because, being a great writer, according to Goya, Tolstoy masterfully describes suffering, which draws the suffering with him, but Tolstoy's ultimate goal disgusts Goya: he uses his genius to call the crowd to humility and expectation of retribution in another life. For the author of the article, Tolstoy is akin to the church, since his philosophy is at the service of the powerful, helps them control people and pacify the masses. Nevertheless, Goye prefers generalizations, avoiding direct reference to Tolstoy: "A man who turns slaves away from getting together, arming himself, acting is either a coward or a traitor: a coward wants to hide his cowardice behind beautiful words, and the traitor is paid for his safety by the masters" ("L'homme qui détourne les esclaves de s'organiser, de s'armer, d'agir, est un lâche ou un traitre : un lâche qui veut couvrir sa lâcheté de beaux prétextes ; ou bien un traitre paye pour procurer aux maitres de sécurité") ^[29].

All of Tolstoy's new statements set the newspaper against the thinker. For example, responding to a request from journalists from different countries (telegrams, letters, personal meetings) to speak about the Bloody Sunday on January 9, 1905, which the writer described as a "St. Petersburg atrocity," Tolstoy told them the same thing ^{[11, vol. 89, p. 11]} that he wrote in the article "On the social Movement" ^{[11, vol. 36, pp. 156-165]}. He denies the possibility of a revolutionary uprising, believing that the Russian people understand the revolution differently and are too poor to arm themselves. In his opinion, only a small part of the population wants an uprising, and changes in the country will take place through reforms, changes in morals and the flourishing of the religious spirit ^[20]. The response is not long in coming. Already on February 11, Alexander Ular (1876-1919), a specialist in the history of Russia, addresses Tolstoy with the main reproach: "We asked Tolstoy as a man: "Speak, teach us," the Fat apostle should be told: "Shut up, let the future speak" ("A Tolstoï, homme on a dit : “ Parlez, instruisez-nous. ” A Tolstoï, apôtre il faut dire… : “ Faites silence, laissez parler l’avenir”») ^[30]. According to Ular and other socialist publications, for half a century Tolstoy led the oppressed classes of society, opposed social injustice, and encouraged them to fight for rights. When, without apparent, or rather, logic objectionable to socialists, Tolstoy began to condemn the liberating actions of the masses and call for non-resistance, when he began to reproach the liberal movement for being divorced from the people and not promising the peasants the right to land ^[31], "L'Aurore" accused him of "literary snobbery" and refused to understand and accept Tolstoy, who condemns the revolution and the ideology of rebellion.

Saint-Georges de Bouillier in the article "On Tolstoy" dated January 19, 1908 ^[32] again criticizes the writer. He says Tolstoy is not a messiah, a reformer, or a defender of the poor. He chooses a denigrating tone, characterizing all of Tolstoy's work and beliefs as artificial, hypocritical and devoid of deep meaning. According to de Bouillier, in the writer's novels there are "incessant moral searches, but always without a single glimmer" ("il y a des intentions morales incessantes, mais jamais un vif éclair") ^[32]; the fact that Tolstoy does not like and does not want to touch money does not mean at all that he refuses the benefits that his income provides him. To strengthen his exposing position, the author of the article needs another authority, and he finds it in the person of Dostoevsky. Once again, Dostoevsky's difficult fate serves the journalistic style. De Buellier compares two great Russian writers, forgetting about their main craft and saying that, unlike Tolstoy, Dostoevsky suffered all his life for his beliefs and is a real martyr. In Tolstoy's teachings about religion and about Christ, de Buellier does not see revelation, and the truth promised by the writer turns into long-known dogmas, rewritten in a new way, they exude coldness and detachment. According to the author of the article, Count Tolstoy is masterfully given only descriptions of the life of secular society, which is familiar to him, but not alien to the poor class. He pushes Tolstoy into the background, bringing Gogol, Pushkin and Dostoevsky forward, calling them true innovators, without whom Russian literature would not have become what it is. The author of the article declares that Tolstoy does not love and does not understand Christ, his vision of Christ seems limited, that Dostoevsky fills his work with love for Christ earlier and deeper than Tolstoy. De Bouillier, in his pejorative analysis, does not hesitate to ask the question: "In general, is he a thinker?" ("Au fait, est-il un penseur?") [Ibid.].

Thus, on the pages of L'Aurore, Tolstoy went from reverent worship and comparison with Christ and Moses to accusations of hypocrisy, indulgence of the authorities, and the assignment of the label of a false prophet. Tolstoy's name, which was mentioned so often before, appears less and less in the newspaper. If in September 1898 the newspaper is full of notes on the celebration of the 70th anniversary of Tolstoy's birth in Russia and Europe, congratulatory letters from publications from Russia and France are printed, it is said that Tolstoy inspired Nicholas II to a rescript on disarmament and peace ^[33], then the news of the death of the great writer occupies a modest place on the third on the page of the newspaper dated November 21, 1910. The article describes the last hours of the Russian writer's life and the last words he uttered in his mind after the last attack: "Millions of people are suffering on this earth, why are you madmen here and dealing with me alone?" ("Il y a sur la terre des millions d'hommes qui souffrent; pourquoi étes-vous là fous, à vous occuper de moi seul?") ^[32]. According to A. L. Tolstoy and other witnesses, the tone of this phrase was different from that presented by the newspaper, it was filled not with anger, but with religious exhortation: "I advise you to remember only one thing: there are a lot of people in the world except Leo Tolstoy, and you are looking at one Lion" ^[34]. The death of the great classic and his legacy are not widely covered in subsequent issues of L'Aurore, as one might expect. The Socialist newspaper consigns Tolstoy to oblivion.

Maxim Gorky and the Socialist Press

If Leo Tolstoy holds the lead in the number of mentions in "L'Aurore", then the second place belongs to Maxim Gorky. The special position of Tolstoy and Gorky is further confirmed when, in November 1908, the newspaper launched an advertisement for the sale of prints depicting famous personalities. The list of names consists mainly of French figures (Emile Zola, Clemenceau, Waldeck-Rousseau, Anatole France, Octave Mirbeau, Marcelin Berthelot, Duclos, Auguste Blanqui, Emile Combe) with the exception of two foreign representatives: Leo Tolstoy and Maxim Gorky, which confirms their popularity in the socialist environment.

On March 1, 1902, a large article by the journalist and politician Francis de Pressance (1853-1914) "All of Russia" appeared on the front page, where he talks about the isolation of the power of the Russian Empire from the roots of its people, who cannot heed the voice of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky. He talks about the mysterious Slavic soul, that now this concept of "mystery" is used to promote nationalism. According to the author, this inexplicable lies in the fact that Russia has always had a revolutionary, idealistic impulse, perhaps due to a special temperament or due to a confluence of historical events: "the Slavic spirit is elemental and irrepressible to the point of frenzy. He is familiar with sharp and tragic contrasts, unexpected decisions, sudden changes of active actions by infirmity, heroism by cowardice, furious rushes from skepticism to dilettantism, even more dangerous because of the unrestrained fuse"...l'âme slave est spontanément insatiable, ardente, Presque forcenée. Elle connaît les brusques et tragiques contrastes, les déclics de résolution, les chutes soudaines de l’intense au mou, de l’héroïque au lâche, les retours offensifs du scepticisme ou du dilettantisme, plus mortel encore en pleine ferveur d’action» ^[36]. He compares Russia, modern to him, with a sleeping Gulliver, chained by midgets, and notes that it is Russian literature that bears the imprint of this painful torment "... la Russie, ce géant couché dans les ténèbres et auquel, comme les Lilliputiens à Gulliver, une troupe fourmillante de nains ont mis des liens. Il est remarquable, encore que naturel, que la littérature russe, plus que celle d'un peuple libre, porte la marque, l'empreinte uniforme et invariable de cette douloureuse angoisse" [Ibid.]. For the Press, the works "War and Peace", "Anna Karenina", "Resurrection" by Tolstoy, "Crime and Punishment", "Idiot", "The Brothers Karamazov" by Dostoevsky, "From the Other Shore" by Herzen, "Nov" by Turgenev, "Podlipovtsy" by F.M. Reshetnikov share the same suffering, a passionate and vague longing.

Sensing the unstable spirit of the times, F. de Pressance insists that the new reading generation of Russia needs a new literary form. In his opinion, writers, drawing inspiration from folk culture, often do not find the golden mean, falling under the yoke of academicism or moving towards vulgarity, pornography, affectation. There is hope in his words that the new work will awaken the masses and help them realize their power and raise revolutionary fervor. It is no coincidence that Maxim Gorky's name appears in connection with the general socialist appeal of the article. It is on him that the author places the main hopes in the ideological evolution of the Russian novel. If the right-wing press looked at Gorky with curiosity, then for left-wing newspapers he becomes a denouncer, a literary fighter for their ideas: "I do not know if anyone expressed more strongly, with more symbolic realism, with such truthful poetry, the very lack of balance, the dizziness, the state of mind of the people of the late Middle Ages in the face of the problems of the twentieth century than Maxim Gorky in his short stories and two grandiose novels: "Foma Gordeev" and "Three". This writer has a gift" "Je ne sais si personne a rendu plus fortement, avec un réalisme plus splendidement symbolique et une poésie plus âprement exacte ce déséquilibre, ce vertige, cet état d'âme d'un peuple du haut moyen âge aux prises avec les problèmes du vingtième siècle, que Maxime Gorki dans ses nouvelles et dans ses deux puissants romans : Thomas Gordeief et Les Trois. Cet écrivain a le don" [Ibid.]. According to the author of the article, the authorities are afraid of the greatness of his spirit, the liberating power of genius. In all these words, one can feel the hope for changes in tsarist Russia, placed by the socialists of France, in particular, on Gorky.

On May 8, 1905, L'Aurore published an article without a signature under the heading "Maxim Gorky" ^[37]. The basis of the article is a study of the work of the writer A.M. Anichkova (pseudonym Ivan the Wanderer), one of the first translators of the writer's stories included in the collection "Vagabonds" ^[38]. It consistently tells about the difficult childhood and youth of the writer, who passed through hard work, poverty, wandering and craving for beauty, about his first literary publications. The author of the article defines Gorky's style as a "poem of vagrancy" ("le poème du vagabondage"), written by a tramp who lived surrounded by tramps. According to the article, the interest of Gorky's stories lies not in the development of intrigue, but in the description of fragments of life, morals, psychology of the declassified elements. The main difference between Gorky and the literary tradition of his predecessors, who portrayed the lower classes in Russia, is that in the past such characters were helpless and presented as pathetic creatures. Gorky's characters, being dreamers, philosophers, thinkers, as a rule, dissatisfied with the real state of the social order, for the first time pose a threat to the foundations. They show fatigue from the eternal conversations about good and evil. Empty chatter is replaced by a thirst for action.

Conclusion

The material under study demonstrates the unconditional attention of the Western left-wing press at the turn of the century to the images of Russian writers. The main message of the press's appeal to their names was the affirmation of socialist ideals and the idea of the writer's engagement, his unity with the people and opposition to the authorities. Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Gorky, etc. and their works appeared on the pages of the newspaper to affirm anti-militarism and anti-nationalism, to attack tsarism in Russia and call for a revolutionary revolt. The work of Russian writers and its interpretation in a left-wing newspaper naturally differs from the right, as the authors of the articles themselves have repeatedly pointed out. They cover other facts. As a result, journalists are more interested in the personalities of writers, their ideas and beliefs, and the interpretation of the social message of their works than their creative achievements.

Among other things, do not forget that the subtitle of the newspaper "L'Aurore" is "literary, artistic, social newspaper". The literary theme is listed first, but often plays a secondary role in maintaining and promoting ideology. This obvious observation shows the nascent power of speech and propaganda in the media. At the same time, the turn-of-the-century press demonstrates the importance of the figure of the writer-prophet, the writer-truth-teller, the writer-historian and his power over minds, which is mentioned more than once in "L'Aurore", for example, in connection with Leo Tolstoy. The influence of literature and art on public opinion of that time becomes undeniable, their importance in forming the base responsible for the informative field of a particular social group, their application in the social struggle in which Russian writers are in a special position.