Journal archive

Abstract: The article reports a study of reviews written by A. A. Blok, which were published as part of the preparation of the repertoire for the new Soviet theater. The novelty of the article lies in the application of a socio-historical approach to the works of the poet, who considered the plays to be documentary evidence of his time. For the first time, the article presents newspaper materials about competitions of plays initiated by the state and serving as a basis for Blok’s review. The discussion of the editorial board of the “Bulletin of Arts” with the poet in the cultural and political context was considered and the author’s independence from momentary assessments of the historical situation was demonstrated. For the first time, the biographies of the authors of the plays in question were clarified. The author of the play “The City” (Natalya Lvovna Yurieva), designated in the manuscript as “Mr. Novikov”, and in the first publication as “Tverskoy”, has been discovered. The relevance of the work lies in the need to systematize Blok’s evaluation criteria as a reviewer who sought to preserve aesthetic parameters, despite ideological pressure in the changing social and cultural environment. Despite the desire to make high art accessible, he condemns superficiality and formalism in drama, focusing on the truthfulness and depth of the characters and situations portrayed, and the inadmissibility of turning dramatic art into propaganda. Having expressed a negative opinion about staging all these plays, Blok noted the everyday truth and reliability of characters in A. Neverov’s play “Zakhar’s Death”. Blok dwelled on other plays in less detail: he noted the “rather complex intrigue” of Rodionov’s play and praised the “symbolic techniques” of the author of “The City”. Blok raises the question of mutual incompatibility of the principles of accessibility and aesthetic value of a piece of drama. Thus, the play “Fish Riot” by Byvalov, because of its low artistic level, was considered by Blok below the standard of aesthetic assessment, despite its accessibility to a mass audience. Blok analyzes the ideological background of the plays and expresses concerns about the simplified perception of complex social processes. He notes that, despite the fact that the works are proposed to be considered from the point of view of “revolutionary spirit”, their content often turns out to be socially truthful and therefore far from new trends. So, Blok’s analysis of “revolutionary” plays makes it possible to understand the context of the time, the role of the state in the formation of theatrical culture, as well as to identify the artistic parameters that guided the poet when reviewing dramatic works. The poet’s aesthetic approaches set the evaluation code for compiling the repertoire of the new Soviet theater.

About the author(s) :

Elena I. Kolesnikova

Institute of Russian Literature (Pushkin House) of the Russian Academy of Sciences
(Saint Petersburg, Russia)

ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4441-565X

Publication Timeline:

Date of receipt: 08.11.2025; date of publication: 29.12.2025

References:

A. Blok o revolyutsionnom repertuare. Iz neizdannykh rukopisey. (O p′esakh Neverova «Zakharova smert′», Rodionova «V dni revolyutsii», Tverskogo «Gorod», Byvalova «Rybiy bunt») = A. Blok about the revolutionary repertoire. From unreleased manuscripts. (About Neverov’s plays “Zakharov’s Death”, Rodionov “In the Days of the Revo-lution”, Tverskoy “City”, Byvalov “Fish Riot”). (1922). Herald of Arts, 2, 8.

Ben, E. M. (1985). «Vsyakoe delo dolzhno stat′ bol′shim...» = “Every business must be big”. Questions of Literature, 2, 179–188.

Byvalov, E. S. (1929). Kak ya stal moryakom. Vospominaniya E. Byvalogo (Zyuyd-Vest) = How I became a sailor. Memoirs of E. Byvalov (Zuid-West). Pioneer, 15, 10.

Dikushina, N. I. (1987). Blok i Lunacharskiy = Blok and Lunacharsky. Literary heritage (vol. 92, book 4), 272–306. Moscow: Nauka Publishing House.

Erenburg, I. G. (1990). Lyudi, gody, zhizn′. Vospominaniya: v 3 t. T. 1 = People. Years. Life, in 3 vols. Vol. 1. Moscow: AST Publishing House, 328-329.

Feldman, O. M. (2018). Soobshchenie V. V. Dmitrieva o postanovke «Zori» v Teatre RSFSR Pervom v 1920 godu. Stenograficheskiy otchet zasedaniya brigady po «Istorii sovetskogo teatra». 8 marta 1934 goda = Message of V. V. Dmitriev about the production of “Dawns” at the Theater of the RSFSR First in 1920. Shorthand report of the meeting of the brigade on the “History of the Soviet Theater”. March 8, 1934. Theatre Questions, 496–527.

Gerasimov, Yu. K. (1964). Aleksandr Blok i sovetskiy teatr pervykh let revolyutsii = Alexander Blok and the Soviet theater of the first years of the revolution. Blok’s collection, 321–343. Tartu: Tartu State University.

Ivanova, E. V. (2012). Aleksandr Blok: Poslednie gody zhizni = Alexander Blok: The last years of his life. Saint Petersburg: Rostok Publishing House, 608 p. EDN VVUGEH.

Knipovich, E. F. (1987). Ob Aleksandre Bloke. Vospominaniya. Dnevniki. Kommentarii = About Alexander Block. Memories. Diaries. Comments. Moscow: Soviet writer Publishing House, 19–20.

Masanov, I. F. (1958). Slovar′ psevdonimov russkikh pisateley, uchenykh i obshchestvennykh deyateley: v 4 t. T. 3 = Dictionary of pseudonyms of Russian writers, scientists and public figures, in 4 vols. Vol. 3. Moscow, 164.

Medvedev, P. N. (Ed.). (1928). Dnevnik Al. Bloka (1917–1921) = Al. Blok’s Diary (1917–1921). Leningrad: Writers’ Publishing House in Leningrad, 275 p.

Moldovanova, E. G. (1968). Aleksandr Blok i Repertuarnaya sektsiya Narkomprosa = Alexander Blok and Repertoire Section of the People’s Commissariat of Education. Soviet archives, 6, 104–105.

Orlov, V. N. et al. (Eds.). (1962–1963). Blok Aleksandr Aleksandrovich. Sobranie sochineniy: v 8 t. T. 6–7 = Blok
Alexander Aleksandrovich. Collected works, in 8 vols. Vol. 6–7. Moscow; Leningrad: Goslitizdat Publishing House. Leningrad branch.

Perchik, L. S. (2007). Khudozhestvennaya literatura Yuzhnogo Urala: puti stanovleniya = Fiction of the South Urals: Ways of becoming. Bulletin of the Chelyabinsk State Academy of Culture and Arts, 1(11), 39–50. EDN JSAEZX.

Rakitin, V. I., Sarabyanov, A. D. (2013). Entsiklopediya russkogo avangarda: Izobrazitel′noe iskusstvo. Arkhitektura. T. III, kniga 2: Istoriya. Teoriya. L – Ya = ncyclopedia of the Russian avant-garde: Fine Arts. Architecture. Vol. III, book 2: History. Theory. Moscow: Global Expert & Service Team, 816 p.

Russkie dnevniki. A. Blok = Russian diaries. A. Block. Moscow: Soviet Russia Publishing House, 515 p.

Skachko, A. E. (1922). Zadachi gosudarstva v oblasti iskusstva = State tasks in the field of art. Herald of Arts, 2, 2–3.

Sobranie sochineniy Aleksandra Bloka: v 7 t. T. 6 = Collected works of Alexander Blok, in 7 vols. Vol. 6. (1923). Berlin: Alkonost, 335 p.

Tverskoy, N. (1920). Vlast′. Dram. predstavlenie v 4-kh d., 5-ti kart. Nikity Tverskogo = Power. Druma presentation in 4 acts, 5 scenes. Moscow: State Publishing House, 47 p.

Ural literaturnyy. Kratkiy biograficheskiy slovar′ = Ural literary. Concise biographical dictionary. (1988). Chelyabinsk: South Ural Book Publishing House, 228.

Vysochayshe utverzhdennoe mnenie Gosudarstvennogo Soveta «Ob ogranichenii proizvodstva i prodazhi iskusstvennykh sladkikh veshchestv» = The highest approved opinion of the State Council “On limiting the production and sale of artificial sweet substances”. (1902). Complete Collection of Laws of the Russian Empire, Collection III. Vol. XX, no. 18748. June 5, 1900. Saint Petersburg.

Zholobova, G. A. (2012). Mekhanizm pravovogo regulirovaniya torgovli iskusstvennymi sladkimi veshchestvami i soderzhashchimi ikh pishchevymi produktami v Rossiyskoy imperii na rubezhe XIX–XX vekov = The mechanism of legal regulation of trade in artificial sweet substances and food products containing them in the Russian Empire at the turn of the 19^th–20^th centuries. Scientific Notes of the V. I. Vernadsky Taurida National University. Legal Sciences Series, 25(64), 2, 17–33.