Prokudin Boris Alexandrovich

Nikolai Chernyshevsky is one of the most prominent radical thinkers of the 19th century. This article attempts to answer two questions. First, can Chernyshevsky be considered a revolutionary? The second is whether the novel “What Is to Be Done?” is propaganda of the revolution? In Soviet times, the dominant point of view was that the novel contains a call for revolution. In the post-Soviet period, the point of view began to dominate that Chernyshevsky was not a revolutionary, but a reformer. And the novel contains a call for peaceful activity. According to the author, both positions are incorrect. They characterize the need of readers of different epochs to see Chernyshevsky as a revolutionary or reformer. Chernyshevsky does not propagandize in the novel “What Is to Be Done?” peaceful development or revolution, the novel is a reflection on possible scenarios for the development of the country.

“What Is to Be Done?” is one of the most famous political novels of the 19th century. For a long time, Russian science has been dominated by the view that the novel contains a call for revolution. This article attempts to prove that the novel “What Is to Be Done?” is not a call to action, it is a reflection on possible scenarios for the development of the country. The main text of the novel is a set of behavioral models for young raznochinets. These models are designed for peaceful life in the capitalist society of autocratic Russia. But, in addition, Chernyshevsky hints at the possibility of a revolutionary scenario. If the government will refuse liberal reforms, suppresses dissent, prevent young people from building new economic relations, the answer will be a revolution.

This article presents the stages of politicization of Russian literature in the era of the Great Reforms. The first stage is the end of the reign of Nicholas I (1848–1855), the second is the period of preparation for the Great Reforms (1855–1861), the third is the period of the Great Reforms (1861–1866), the fourth is the period of the end of the Great Reforms (1866–1881). The first period can be characterized as the period of the emergence of political literature, as yet without a pronounced social ideal. Censorship increased during this period, but important features of the liberal ideal were articulated in the literature. The second period was characterized by the weakening of censorship, the emergence of a number of new newspapers and magazines. Then literary criticism begins to play an important social role and the maximum politicization of the literary process takes place. At the same time, a patriarchal social ideal was formulated in a number of works of art. The third period was distinguished by the fact that raznochintsy authors began to play an important role in literature. This led to the emergence of opposing parties of “nihilists” and “anti-nihilists”, as well as to the emergence of the phenomenon of the anti-nihilist novel. First half of 1860 became the time of the formation of a social ideal of raznochintsy. The fourth period can be characterized as a period of reflection on the results of the Great Reforms, as a time for writers to rethink their views and develop new ideas about the social ideal.