Acmeism is a poetic movement that began to take shape around 1910. The founders were N. Gumilyov and S. Gorodetsky, they were also joined by O. Mandelstam, V. Narbut, M. Zenkevich, N. Otsup and some other poets, who proclaimed the need for a partial rejection of some of the precepts of “traditional” symbolism. Mystical aspirations towards the “unknowable” were criticized: “Among the Acmeists, the rose again became good in itself, with its petals, smell and color, and not with its conceivable likenesses with mystical love or anything else” (S. Gorodetsky). Accepting all the basic provisions of symbolism, which was considered a “worthy father,” they demanded its reform in only one area; they were against the fact that the Symbolists directed “their main forces into the region of the unknown” [“they fraternized with mysticism, then with theosophy, then with the occult” (Gumilyov)], into the region of the unknowable. Objecting to these elements of symbolism, the Acmeists pointed out that the unknowable, by the very meaning of the word, cannot be known. Hence the desire of the Acmeists to free literature from those obscurities that were cultivated by the symbolists, and to restore clarity and accessibility to it. “The main role of literature,” says Gumilyov, “was seriously threatened by mystic symbolists, for they turned it into formulas for their own mysterious contacts with the unknowable.”

Acmeism was even more heterogeneous than symbolism. But if the Symbolists relied on the traditions of romantic poetry, the Acmeists were guided by the traditions of French classicism of the 18th century. The goal of the new movement is to accept the real world, tangible, visible, audible. But, rejecting the symbolist deliberate obscurity and inarticulateness of verse, which envelops the real world in a foggy veil of mystical allegories, the Acmeists did not deny the existence of the otherness of the spirit or the unknowable, but refused to write about all this, considering it “unchaste.” At the same time, the opportunity was still allowed for the artist to approach the border of this “unknowable”, especially where the conversation is about the psyche, the mystery of feelings and confusion of spirit.

One of the main provisions of Acmeism is the thesis of “unconditional” acceptance of the world. But the ideals of the Acmeists collided with the social contradictions of Russian reality, from which they sought to escape, trying to isolate themselves in aesthetic problems, for which Blok reproached them, saying that the Acmeists “do not have and do not want to have a shadow of an idea about Russian poetry and the life of the world in general.”

Acmeism proclaimed the task of literature to be “beautiful clarity” (M.A. Kuzmin), or clarism (from the Latin clarus - clear). The Acmeists called their movement Adamism, associating with the biblical Adam the idea of ​​a clear and direct view of the world. The Acmeists tried with all their might to return literature to life, to things, to man, to nature. “As Adamists, we are a bit of forest animals,” Gumilyov declares, “and in any case we will not give up what is bestial in us in exchange for neurasthenia.” They began to fight, as they put it, “for this world, sounding, colorful, having shapes, weight and time, for our planet earth.” Acmeism preached a “simple” poetic language, where words would directly name objects. In comparison with symbolism and related movements - surrealism and futurism - one can highlight, first of all, such features as the materiality and this-worldliness of the depicted world, in which “each depicted object is equal to itself.” From the very beginning, the Acmeists declared a love of objectivity. Gumilyov called for looking not for “shaky words”, but for words “with a more stable content.” Thingness determined the predominance of nouns in poetry and the insignificant role of the verb, which is completely absent in many works, especially in Anna Akhmatova.



If the Symbolists imbued their poems with an intense musical element, then the Acmeists did not recognize such an unlimited intrinsic value of verse and verbal melody and carefully took care of the logical clarity and substantive clarity of the verse.

Also characteristic is a weakening of verse melodiousness and a tendency towards expressions of simple colloquial language.

The poetic narratives of the Acmeists are distinguished by laconicism, clarity of lyrical plot, and sharpness of conclusion.

The creativity of Acmeists is characterized by an interest in past literary eras: “Nostalgia for world culture” - this is how O. E. Mandelstam subsequently defined Acmeism. These are the motives and moods of Gumilyov’s “exotic novel”; images of ancient Russian writing by Dante and the psychological novel of the 19th century. from A. A. Akhmatova; Antiquity by Mandelstam.

The aestheticization of the “earthly,” the narrowing of problematics (as a consequence of ignoring the true passions of the era, its signs and conflicts), the aestheticization of little things did not allow the poetry of Acmeism to rise (fall) to reflect real reality, primarily social. Nevertheless, and perhaps due to the inconsistency and contradictory nature of the program, the need for realism nevertheless expressed itself, predetermining the future paths of the most powerful masters of this group, that is, Gumilyov, Akhmatova and Mandelstam. Their inner realism was well felt by their contemporaries, who at the same time understood the specificity of their artistic method. Trying to find a term that replaces the full-meaning word “realism” and suits the characteristics of Acmeism, V.M. Zhirmunsky wrote in the article “Overcoming Symbolism”:

“With some caution, we could talk about the ideal of the “Hyperboreans” as neorealism, understanding by artistic realism an accurate, little distorted by subjective mental and aesthetic experience, the transfer of separate and distinct impressions of primarily external life, as well as mental life, perceived from the external, most separate and distinct side; with the caveat, of course, that for young poets it is not at all necessary to strive for naturalistic simplicity of prose speech, which seemed inevitable to former realists, that from the era of symbolism they inherited an attitude towards language as a work of art.”

And indeed, the realism of the Acmeists was marked by obvious features of novelty - primarily, of course, in relation to symbolism.

There were many differences between the Acmeists, which emerged almost from the very beginning of the emergence of this group. Rarely did any of them adhere to the proclaimed manifestos - almost all of them were broader and higher than the proclaimed and declared programs. Everyone went their own ways, and it is difficult to imagine more dissimilar artists than, for example, Akhmatova, Gumilyov, Mandelstam, whose creative destinies took shape in internal polemics with Acmeism.

About the poetic flow:

Acmeism (from the Greek akme - the highest degree of something, blossoming, maturity, peak, edge) is one of the modernist movements in Russian poetry of the 1910s, formed as a reaction to the extremes of symbolism.

Overcoming the Symbolists’ predilection for the “superreal”, polysemy and fluidity of images, complicated metaphors, the Acmeists strove for sensual plastic-material clarity of the image and accuracy, precision poetic word. Their “earthly” poetry is prone to intimacy, aestheticism and poeticization of the feelings of primordial man. Acmeism was characterized by extreme apoliticality, complete indifference to the pressing problems of our time.

The Acmeists, who replaced the Symbolists, did not have a detailed philosophical and aesthetic program. But if in the poetry of symbolism the determining factor was transience, the immediacy of being, a certain mystery covered with an aura of mysticism, then a realistic view of things was set as the cornerstone in the poetry of Acmeism. The vague instability and vagueness of symbols was replaced by precise verbal images. The word, according to Acmeists, should have acquired its original meaning.

Highest point in the hierarchy of values ​​for them there was culture, identical to universal human memory. That is why Acmeists often turn to mythological subjects and images. If the Symbolists focused their work on music, then the Acmeists focused on the spatial arts: architecture, sculpture, painting. The attraction to the three-dimensional world was expressed in the Acmeists' passion for objectivity: colorful, sometimes exotic detail could be used for purely pictorial purposes. That is, the “overcoming” of symbolism occurred not so much in the sphere of general ideas, but in the field of poetic stylistics. In this sense, Acmeism was as conceptual as symbolism, and in this respect they are undoubtedly in continuity.

A distinctive feature of the Acmeist circle of poets was their “organizational cohesion.” Essentially, the Acmeists were not so much an organized movement with a common theoretical platform, but rather a group of talented and very different poets who were united by personal friendship. The Symbolists had nothing of the kind: Bryusov’s attempts to reunite his brothers were in vain. The same thing was observed among the futurists - despite the abundance of collective manifestos that they released. The Acmeists, or - as they were also called - "Hyperboreans" (after the name of the printed mouthpiece of Acmeism, the magazine and publishing house "Hyperboreas"), immediately acted as a single group. They gave their union the significant name “Workshop of Poets.” And the beginning of a new movement (which later became almost a “mandatory condition” for the emergence of new poetic groups in Russia) was marked by a scandal.

In the fall of 1911, a “riot” broke out in the poetry salon of Vyacheslav Ivanov, the famous “Tower”, where the poetry society gathered and poetry was read and discussed. Several talented young poets defiantly left the next meeting of the Academy of Verse, outraged by the derogatory criticism of the “masters” of symbolism. Nadezhda Mandelstam describes this incident as follows: “Gumilyov’s “Prodigal Son” was read at the “Academy of Verse,” where Vyacheslav Ivanov reigned, surrounded by respectful students. He subjected the “Prodigal Son” to real destruction. The speech was so rude and harsh that Gumilev’s friends left the “Academy” and organized the “Workshop of Poets” - in opposition to it.”

And a year later, in the fall of 1912, the six main members of the “Workshop” decided not only formally, but also ideologically to separate from the Symbolists. They organized a new commonwealth, calling themselves “Acmeists,” i.e., the pinnacle. At the same time, the “Workshop of Poets” as organizational structure preserved - the Acmeists remained in it as an internal poetic association.

The main ideas of Acmeism were set out in the programmatic articles by N. Gumilyov “The Heritage of Symbolism and Acmeism” and S. Gorodetsky “Some Currents in Modern Russian Poetry”, published in the magazine “Apollo” (1913, No. 1), published under the editorship of S. Makovsky. The first of them said: “Symbolism is being replaced by a new direction, no matter what it is called, whether Acmeism (from the word akme - the highest degree of something, a blooming time) or Adamism (a courageously firm and clear view of life), in any case, requiring a greater balance of power and a more accurate knowledge of the relationship between subject and object than was the case in symbolism. However, in order for this movement to establish itself in its entirety and become a worthy successor to the previous one, it is necessary that it accept its inheritance and answer all the questions it poses. The glory of the ancestors obliges, and symbolism was a worthy father.”

S. Gorodetsky believed that “symbolism... having filled the world with “correspondences”, turned it into a phantom, important only insofar as it... shines through with other worlds, and belittled its high intrinsic value. Among the Acmeists, the rose again became good in itself, with its petals, scent and color, and not with its conceivable likenesses with mystical love or anything else.”

In 1913, Mandelstam’s article “The Morning of Acmeism” was also written, which was published only six years later. The delay in publication was not accidental: Mandelstam’s acmeistic views significantly diverged from the declarations of Gumilyov and Gorodetsky and did not make it onto the pages of Apollo.

However, as T. Skryabina notes, “the idea of ​​a new direction was first expressed on the pages of Apollo much earlier: in 1910, M. Kuzmin appeared in the magazine with an article “On Beautiful Clarity,” which anticipated the appearance of declarations of Acmeism. By the time the article was written, Kuzmin was already a mature man and had experience of collaboration in symbolist periodicals. Kuzmin contrasted the otherworldly and foggy revelations of the Symbolists, the “incomprehensible and dark in art,” with “beautiful clarity,” “clarism” (from the Greek clarus - clarity). An artist, according to Kuzmin, must bring clarity to the world, not obscure, but clarify the meaning of things, seek harmony with the environment. The philosophical and religious quest of the Symbolists did not captivate Kuzmin: the artist’s job is to focus on the aesthetic side of creativity and artistic skill. “The symbol, dark in its deepest depths,” gives way to clear structures and admiration of “lovely little things.” Kuzmin’s ideas could not help but influence the Acmeists: “beautiful clarity” turned out to be in demand by the majority of participants in the “Workshop of Poets.”

Another “harbinger” of Acmeism can be considered In. Annensky, who, formally being a symbolist, actually paid tribute to him only in the early period of his work. Subsequently, Annensky took a different path: the ideas of late symbolism had practically no impact on his poetry. But the simplicity and clarity of his poems were well understood by the Acmeists.

Three years after the publication of Kuzmin’s article in Apollo, the manifestos of Gumilyov and Gorodetsky appeared - from this moment it is customary to count the existence of Acmeism as an established literary movement.

Acmeism has six of the most active participants in the movement: N. Gumilyov, A. Akhmatova, O. Mandelstam, S. Gorodetsky, M. Zenkevich, V. Narbut. G. Ivanov claimed the role of the “seventh Acmeist,” but such a point of view was protested by A. Akhmatova, who stated that “there were six Acmeists, and there never was a seventh.” O. Mandelstam agreed with her, who, however, believed that six was too much: “There are only six Acmeists, and among them there was one extra...” Mandelstam explained that Gorodetsky was “attracted” by Gumilyov, not daring to oppose the then powerful Symbolists with only "yellow mouths". “Gorodetsky was [by that time] famous poet..." IN different time The following people took part in the work of the “Workshop of Poets”: G. Adamovich, N. Bruni, Nas. Gippius, Vl. Gippius, G. Ivanov, N. Klyuev, M. Kuzmin, E. Kuzmina-Karavaeva, M. Lozinsky, V. Khlebnikov, etc. At the meetings of the “Workshop,” unlike the meetings of the Symbolists, specific issues were resolved: the “Workshop” was a school for mastering poetic skills, a professional association.

Acmeism as a literary movement united exceptionally gifted poets - Gumilyov, Akhmatova, Mandelstam, the formation of whose creative individualities took place in the atmosphere of the “Workshop of Poets”. The history of Acmeism can be considered as a kind of dialogue between these three outstanding representatives. At the same time, the Adamism of Gorodetsky, Zenkevich and Narbut, who formed the naturalistic wing of the movement, differed significantly from the “pure” Acmeism of the above-mentioned poets. The difference between the Adamists and the triad Gumilyov - Akhmatova - Mandelstam has been repeatedly noted in criticism.

As a literary movement, Acmeism did not last long - about two years. In February 1914, it split. The "Poets' Workshop" was closed. The Acmeists managed to publish ten issues of their magazine “Hyperborea” (editor M. Lozinsky), as well as several almanacs.

“Symbolism was fading away” - Gumilev was not mistaken in this, but he failed to form a movement as powerful as Russian symbolism. Acmeism failed to gain a foothold as the leading poetic movement. The reason for its rapid decline is said to be, among other things, “the ideological unadaptability of the movement to the conditions of a radically changed reality.” V. Bryusov noted that “the Acmeists are characterized by a gap between practice and theory,” and “their practice was purely symbolist.” It was in this that he saw the crisis of Acmeism. However, Bryusov’s statements about Acmeism were always harsh; at first he stated that “... Acmeism is an invention, a whim, a metropolitan quirk” and foreshadowed: “... most likely, in a year or two there will be no Acmeism left. His very name will disappear,” and in 1922, in one of his articles, he generally denies it the right to be called a direction, a school, believing that there is nothing serious and original in Acmeism and that it is “outside the mainstream of literature.”

However, attempts to resume the activities of the association were subsequently made more than once. The second “Workshop of Poets,” founded in the summer of 1916, was headed by G. Ivanov together with G. Adamovich. But it didn’t last long either. In 1920, the third “Workshop of Poets” appeared, which was Gumilyov’s last attempt to organizationally preserve the Acmeist line. Poets who consider themselves to be part of the school of Acmeism united under his wing: S. Neldichen, N. Otsup, N. Chukovsky, I. Odoevtseva, N. Berberova, Vs. Rozhdestvensky, N. Oleinikov, L. Lipavsky, K. Vatinov, V. Posner and others. The third “Workshop of Poets” existed in Petrograd for about three years (in parallel with the “Sounding Shell” studio) - until the tragic death of N. Gumilyov.

The creative destinies of poets, one way or another connected with Acmeism, developed differently: N. Klyuev subsequently declared his non-involvement in the activities of the commonwealth; G. Ivanov and G. Adamovich continued and developed many of the principles of Acmeism in emigration; Acmeism did not have any noticeable influence on V. Khlebnikov. IN Soviet time the poetic style of the Acmeists (mainly N. Gumilyov) was imitated by N. Tikhonov, E. Bagritsky, I. Selvinsky, M. Svetlov.

In comparison with other poetic movements of Russian Silver Age Acmeism, in many ways, seems to be a marginal phenomenon. It has no analogues in other European literatures (which cannot be said, for example, about symbolism and futurism); the more surprising are the words of Blok, Gumilyov’s literary opponent, who declared that Acmeism was just an “imported foreign thing.” After all, it was Acmeism that turned out to be extremely fruitful for Russian literature. Akhmatova and Mandelstam managed to leave behind “eternal words.” Gumilyov appears in his poems as one of the brightest personalities of the cruel times of revolutions and world wars. And today, almost a century later, interest in Acmeism has remained mainly because the work of these outstanding poets, who had a significant influence on the fate of Russian poetry of the 20th century, is associated with it.

Basic principles of Acmeism:

Liberating poetry from symbolist appeals to the ideal, returning it to clarity;

Refusal of mystical nebula, acceptance of the earthly world in its diversity, visible concreteness, sonority, colorfulness;

The desire to give a word a specific, precise meaning;

Objectivity and clarity of images, precision of details;

Appeal to a person, to the “authenticity” of his feelings;

Poeticization of the world of primordial emotions, primitive biological natural principles;

Roll call with the past literary eras, the broadest aesthetic associations, “longing for world culture.”

Acmeism is a movement that originated in Russian poetry in 1910 as an alternative to symbolism at the time of its crisis. This was the time when “the poetic youth were already clearly aware that continuing to dance on their symbolic rope over the abyss of the universe was not only risky, but also in vain, since the spectators, who were tired of the cardboard suns and stars stuck on the black calico of the symbolic sky, began to yawn and run away. The magazine “Libra”, around which the most significant representatives of this trend were grouped, ceased to exist. The magazine "Apollo", which has appeared at the present time, has given shelter to former "Vekhi" members, although it has not become for them parents' house. There was no unity and agreement among representatives of this trend and in their views on future fate symbolism, on poetic creativity. Thus, V. Bryusov considered poetry only an art, and V. Ivanov saw in it religious and mystical functions.

The emergence of Acmeism was also due to the urgent need of the time. “Symbolism was born at a moment of historical decline and spiritual desert. His mission was to restore the rights of the spirit, to breathe poetry again into a world that had forgotten about it. Acmeism... appeared in Russia to meet the great challenge of the 20th century: 1914, 1917, and for some in 1937,” says Nikita Struve.

On October 20, 1911, “Echo of the Poets” was created (not a coincidence and the very name, which expressed the attitude towards poetry as a craft), which became the forerunner of Acmeism. The main core of the Workshop were M. S. Gumilyov, A. A. Akhmatova, O. E. Mandelstam, V. I. Narbut, M. A. Zenkevich. In October, the first issue of the magazine “Hyperborea” (“Wind of Wanderings”) was published.

The first discussions related to the emergence of a new literary movement began shortly after the creation of the Workshop. On February 18, 1912, in the editorial office of the Apollo magazine, at the next meeting of the Academy, V. Ivanov and A. Bely made reports on symbolism. Objections proclaiming separation from symbolism were made by their opponents - M. Gumilyov and S. Gorodetsky, who announced the creation of a literary school - Acmeism.

Acme - from Greek, which means the highest degree of something, color, blooming time. Thus, Acmeism meant a flowering life full of strength, apogee, higher development, an Acmeist - a creator, a pioneer who glorifies life in all its manifestations... On the Acmeists’ shield it was written: clarity, simplicity, affirmation of the reality of life.”

In contrast to S. Gorodetsky (see his report “Symbolism and Acmeism”, 1912), M. Gumilev believed that Acmeism comes out of symbolism and has points of contact with it. In his article, published for the first time in the Apollo magazine in 1913, “The Legacy of Symbolism and Acmeism,” M. Gumilyov reveals common features and the differences between Acmeism and Symbolism. He believes that Acmeism should become a worthy heir to the movement that preceded it, perceive its heritage and answer the questions it posed.

The defining feature of the aesthetic concept of the Acmeists was the objection to the “obligatory mysticism” of the Symbolists. “I’m afraid of all mysticism,” said Nikolai Stepanovich (Gumilev), “I’m afraid of rushing into other worlds, because I don’t want to give the reader bills that will be paid not by me, but by some unknown force.”

But as a counterweight to the Symbolists, the Acmeists affirmed the ideals of beauty, which were born from the aestheticization of nature itself. “Free nature” and the enjoyment of it were proclaimed to be the highest beauty of the world. In the atheistic manifesto of S. Gorodetsky, “Some trends in modern Russian poetry,” the “inextricable unity of earth and man” is promoted and an attempt is made to instill in art a new worldview—Acmeism.

Acmeists call the ideal of man “the primordial Adam,” whom they wanted to see as cheerful, spontaneous and wise. Hence the Acmeists have the courage to call a spade a spade, as well as a courageous, sober view of the material world.

The word was proclaimed to be the single artistic value of the verse, and the importance of its material side was emphasized. The main thing in a word is its “conscious content, Logos,” which is not integral part content of the word, but acts as its formal component. The content of the word was proclaimed by its form.

O. Mandelstam saw the main feature of the Russian language because it is a “Hellenistic” language. The Russian language does not need foreign symbolism, since the language itself is already symbolic in its essence and gives the poet images.

In deliberate symbolization, Acmeists saw the cause of the death of the real dynamic nature of language. Therefore, they strived for semantic simplicity and clarity, “purity” of vocabulary material. When the Symbolists reduced the symbol of the main artistic principle, the Acmeists used it as one of the tropes. "We do not agree to sacrifice other means of poetic influence to him and seek their complete consistency." Striving for simplicity and clarity, a sense of the material world, the Acmeists resorted to detailed sketches of things and objects; therefore, the principle of detailing became for them a canonized artistic technique. They revived the architectural harmony and completeness of the composition of the verse. “The spirit of construction, architecturalness is the recognition of the suitability of things, of reality as such (without correlation with another reality), this is the recognition of the three-dimensional dimension of the world, not as a prison, not as a burden, but as a God-given palace.”

The material for construction, the supporting elements of the composition were the word, color, light, flavor, space, line, which contributed to the picturesque, decorative style (G. Ivanov, G. Adamovich, V. Junger), plasticity, gesture were used (M. Gumilyov, O. Mandelstam).

Therefore, in order to seek and find peace in oneself, to live in peace with oneself and the world, to write logically, to be clear in one’s statements, to love the word, to be a masterful architect, to restrain chaos with a clear form, another principle of Acmeist poetics assisted - the principle of claricism ( excellent clarity), developed by G. Kuzmin.

The main literary genre of the Acmeists is constant lyricism. Lyrical miniatures, sketches from life, and sketches were created. An attempt is being made to revive the classical forms of ancient Greek poetry. Adamovich, Verkhovensky, Stolitsa, Kuzmin restore the bucolic genres of idyll, pastoral, and eclogue in their work.

Acmeism poetry was marked by an increased tendency towards cultural associations; it echoed past literary eras. “Longing for world culture,” - this is how O. Mandelstam later defined Acmeism. “Each direction feels in love with one or another creator of the era. And it is no coincidence that the exponents of the ideas of Acmeism, the “foundations” of its structure were Shakespeare, who showed “ inner world man,” Rabelais, who sang “the body and its joys, wise physiology,” Villon, who “told... about life,” and Théophile Gautier, who found for this life “in art worthy clothes of impeccable forms.” To combine these four moments in oneself is the dream that unites the people who so boldly called themselves Acmeists.

", the central figures of which were the founders of Acmeism N. S. Gumilyov, A. Akhmatova (who was its secretary and active participant) and S. M. Gorodetsky.

Contemporaries gave the term other interpretations: Vladimir Piast saw its origins in the pseudonym of Anna Akhmatova, which in Latin sounded like “akmatus”, some pointed to its connection with the Greek “akme” - “edge”.

The term “acmeism” was proposed by N. Gumilyov and S. M. Gorodetsky: in their opinion, symbolism, which is experiencing a crisis, is being replaced by a direction that generalizes the experience of its predecessors and leads the poet to new heights of creative achievements.

The name for the literary movement, according to A. Bely, was chosen in the heat of controversy and was not entirely justified: Vyacheslav Ivanov jokingly spoke about “Acmeism” and “Adamism”, Nikolai Gumilyov picked up randomly thrown words and dubbed a group of poets close to him Acmeists .

Acmeism was based on a preference for describing real, earthly life, but it was perceived asocially and ahistorically. The little things of life and the objective world were described. The gifted and ambitious organizer of Acmeism dreamed of creating a “direction of directions” - a literary movement reflecting the appearance of all contemporary Russian poetry.

Acmeism in the works of writers

Literature

  • Kazak V. Lexicon of Russian literature of the 20th century = Lexikon der russischen Literatur ab 1917. - M.: RIK "Culture", 1996. - 492 p. - 5000 copies.
  • - ISBN 5-8334-0019-8 Kikhney L. G.

Acmeism: Worldview and Poetics. - M.: Planet, 2005. Ed. 2nd. 184 p. ISBN 5-88547-097-X.


Links

Wikimedia Foundation.

    2010. See what “Acmeism” is in other dictionaries:

    - (from the Greek flourishing, peak, edge) a literary movement that reflected new aesthetics. trends in early art 1910s, which covered not only literature, but also painting (K. Korovin, F. Malyavin, B. Kustodiev), and music (A. Lyadov... Encyclopedia of Cultural Studies Acmeism, plural no, m. [from Greek. akme – top] (lit.). One of the trends in Russian poetry in the tenth years of the 20th century, which opposed itself to symbolism. Big dictionary foreign words

    . Publishing house "IDDK", 2007. acmeism a, plural. No m. (… Dictionary of foreign words of the Russian language acmeism

    - a, m. acmé f. gr. vertex. An extremely reactionary bourgeois-noble movement in Russian literature that arose in 1912-1913. The poetry of the Acmeists was characterized by individualism, aestheticism, formalism, and the preaching of art for art's sake. SIS... ... Historical Dictionary of Gallicisms of the Russian Language

    - (from the Greek akme the highest degree of something, blooming power), a movement in Russian poetry in the 1910s. (S.M. Gorodetsky, M.A. Kuzmin, early N.S. Gumilev, A.A. Akhmatova, O.E. Mandelstam). Overcoming the symbolists' predilection for the superreal,... ... Modern encyclopedia

    - (from the Greek akme, the highest degree of something, flowering power), a movement in Russian poetry in the 1910s. (S. M. Gorodetsky, M. A. Kuzmin, early N. S. Gumilev, A. A. Akhmatova, O. E. Mandelstam); proclaimed the liberation of poetry from symbolist impulses to... ... Big Encyclopedic Dictionary ACMEISM, acmeism, pl. no, husband (from Greek akme top) (lit.). One of the trends in Russian poetry in the tenth years of the 20th century, which opposed itself to symbolism. Dictionary

    ACMEISM, huh, husband. In Russian literature of the 20th century: a movement that proclaimed liberation from symbolism. | adj. Acmeist, oh, oh. Ozhegov's explanatory dictionary. S.I. Ozhegov, N.Yu. Shvedova. 1949 1992 … Ozhegov's Explanatory Dictionary

    Acmeism- (from the Greek akme the highest degree of something, blooming power), a movement in Russian poetry in the 1910s. (S.M. Gorodetsky, M.A. Kuzmin, early N.S. Gumilev, A.A. Akhmatova, O.E. Mandelstam). Overcoming the symbolists’ predilection for the “superreal”,... ... Illustrated encyclopedic Dictionary

    - (from the Greek akme - the highest degree of something, blooming power), a movement in Russian poetry in the 1910s. Acmeism arose from the literary school “The Workshop of Poets” (1911 14), which was headed by N. S. Gumilyov and S. M. Gorodetsky, the secretary was A. A. Akhmatova, in ... ... Literary encyclopedia

    . Publishing house "IDDK", 2007. acmeism a, plural. No m. (…- a, only units, m. Modernist movement in Russian poetry of the early 20th century. (see also modernism). When Acmeism was born and we had no one closer to Mikhail Leonidovich [Lozinsky], he still did not want to renounce symbolism (Akhmatov). Related... Popular dictionary of the Russian language

Books

  • History of Russian literature of the Silver Age (1890s - early 1920s) in 3 parts. Part 3. Acmeism, futurism and others. Textbook for bachelor's and master's degrees, Mikhailova M.V.. The textbook reflects the history of Russian literature of the 1890-1920s, presents creative individuals, directions, modifications of artistic practices, the specifics of genre searches, ...

40714

Acmeism(from the Greek akme - the highest degree of something, blossoming, maturity, peak, edge) - one of the modernist movements in Russian poetry of the 1910s, formed as a reaction to extremes symbolism .

Overcoming the symbolists’ predilection for the “superreal,” polysemy and fluidity of images, complicated metaphors, acmeists they strived for sensual, plastic-material clarity of the image and accuracy, precision of the poetic word. Their “earthly” poetry is prone to intimacy, aestheticism and poeticization of the feelings of primordial man. For AKM e ism was characterized by extreme apoliticality, complete indifference to the pressing problems of our time.

Acmeists, who replaced the Symbolists, did not have a detailed philosophical and aesthetic program. But if in the poetry of symbolism the determining factor was transience, the immediacy of existence, a certain mystery covered with an aura of mysticism, then as a cornerstone in poetry Acmeism a realistic view of things was put in place. The vague instability and vagueness of symbols was replaced by precise verbal images. The word, according to acmeists should have acquired its original meaning.

The highest point in the hierarchy of values ​​for them was culture, identical to universal human memory. That's why it's so common acmeists appeals to mythological subjects and images. If the Symbolists were guided by music in their work, then acmeists— on spatial arts: architecture, sculpture, painting. The attraction to the three-dimensional world was expressed in passion acmeists objectivity: a colorful, sometimes exotic detail could be used for purely pictorial purposes. That is, the “overcoming” of symbolism occurred not so much in the sphere of general ideas, but in the field of poetic stylistics. In this sense . Publishing house "IDDK", 2007. acmeism a, plural. No m. (… was as conceptual as symbolism, and in this respect they are undoubtedly in continuity.

Distinctive feature Acmeist circle of poets was their “organizational cohesion.” Essentially acmeists were not so much an organized movement with a common theoretical platform, but rather a group of talented and very different poets who were united by personal friendship. The Symbolists had nothing of the kind: Bryusov’s attempts to reunite his brothers were in vain. The same thing was observed among the futurists - despite the abundance of collective manifestos that they released. Acmeists, or - as they were also called - “Hyperboreans” (after the name of the printed mouthpiece Acmeism, magazine and publishing house "Hyperborea"), immediately acted as a single group. They gave their union the significant name “Workshop of Poets.” And the beginning of a new movement (which later became almost a “mandatory condition” for the emergence of new poetic groups in Russia) was marked by a scandal.

In the fall of 1911, a “riot” broke out in the poetry salon of Vyacheslav Ivanov, the famous “Tower”, where the poetry society gathered and poetry was read and discussed. Several talented young poets defiantly left the next meeting of the Academy of Verse, outraged by the derogatory criticism of the “masters” of symbolism. Nadezhda Mandelstam describes this incident as follows: “Gumilyov’s “Prodigal Son” was read at the “Academy of Verse,” where Vyacheslav Ivanov reigned, surrounded by respectful students. He subjected the “Prodigal Son” to real destruction. The speech was so rude and harsh that Gumilyov’s friends left the “Academy” and organized the “Workshop of Poets” - in opposition to it.”

And a year later, in the fall of 1912, the six main members of the “Workshop” decided not only formally, but also ideologically to separate from the Symbolists. They organized a new community, calling themselves " acmeists", i.e. the top. At the same time, the “Workshop of Poets” as an organizational structure was preserved - acmeists remained in it as an internal poetic association.

Main ideas Acmeism were set out in program articles N. Gumileva"The legacy of symbolism and . Publishing house "IDDK", 2007. acmeism a, plural. No m. (…" and S. Gorodetsky "Some trends in modern Russian poetry", published in the magazine "Apollo" (1913, No. 1), published under the editorship of S. Makovsky. The first of them said: “Symbolism is being replaced by a new direction, no matter what it is called, . Publishing house "IDDK", 2007. acmeism a, plural. No m. (… whether (from the word akme - the highest degree of something, a blooming time) or Adamism (a courageously firm and clear view of life), in any case, requiring a greater balance of forces and a more accurate knowledge of the relationship between subject and object than was the case in symbolism . However, in order for this movement to establish itself in its entirety and become a worthy successor to the previous one, it is necessary that it accept its inheritance and answer all the questions it poses. The glory of the ancestors obliges, and symbolism was a worthy father.”

S. Gorodetsky believed that “symbolism... having filled the world with “correspondences”, turned it into a phantom, important only insofar as it... shines through with other worlds, and belittled its high intrinsic value. U acmeists the rose again became good in itself, with its petals, smell and color, and not with its conceivable likenesses with mystical love or anything else.”

In 1913, Mandelstam’s article “ MorningAcmeism", which was released only six years later. The delay in publication was not accidental: acmeistic Mandelstam’s views significantly diverged from the declarations of Gumilyov and Gorodetsky and did not make it onto the pages of Apollo.

However, as T. Skryabina notes, “the idea of ​​a new direction was first expressed on the pages of Apollo much earlier: in 1910, M. Kuzmin appeared in the magazine with an article “On Beautiful Clarity,” which anticipated the appearance of declarations Acmeism. By the time the article was written, Kuzmin was already a mature man and had experience of collaboration in symbolist periodicals. Kuzmin contrasted the otherworldly and foggy revelations of the Symbolists, the “incomprehensible and dark in art,” with “beautiful clarity,” “clarism” (from the Greek clarus - clarity). An artist, according to Kuzmin, must bring clarity to the world, not obscure, but clarify the meaning of things, seek harmony with the environment. The philosophical and religious quest of the Symbolists did not captivate Kuzmin: the artist’s job is to focus on the aesthetic side of creativity and artistic skill. “The symbol, dark in its deepest depths,” gives way to clear structures and admiration of “lovely little things.” Kuzmin's ideas could not help but influence acmeists: “beautiful clarity” turned out to be in demand by the majority of participants in the “Workshop of Poets.”

Another "harbinger" Acmeism can be considered In. Annensky, who, formally being a symbolist, actually paid tribute to him only in the early period of his work. Subsequently, Annensky took a different path: the ideas of late symbolism had practically no impact on his poetry. But the simplicity and clarity of his poems were well understood acmeists.

Three years after the publication of Kuzmin’s article in Apollo, the manifestos of Gumilyov and Gorodetsky appeared - from this moment it is customary to count down the existence Acmeism as an established literary movement.

Acmeism has six of the most active participants in the movement: N. Gumilyov, A. Akhmatova, O. Mandelstam, S. Gorodetsky, M. Zenkevich, V. Narbut. For the role of "seventh" acmeist" was claimed by G. Ivanov, but such a point of view was protested by A. Akhmatova, who stated that " acmeists there were six, and there never was a seventh.” O. Mandelstam agreed with her, who, however, believed that six was too much: “ Akmeistov only six, and among them there was one extra...” Mandelstam explained that Gorodetsky was “attracted” by Gumilev, not daring to oppose the then powerful Symbolists with only “yellow mouths.” “Gorodetsky was [by that time] a famous poet...” At different times, the following took part in the work of the “Workshop of Poets”: G. Adamovich, N. Bruni, Us. Gippius, Vl. Gippius, G. Ivanov, N. Klyuev, M. Kuzmin, E. Kuzmina-Karavaeva, M. Lozinsky, V. Khlebnikov, etc. At the meetings of the “Workshop,” unlike the meetings of the Symbolists, specific issues were resolved: the “Workshop” was a school for mastering poetic skills, a professional association.

Acmeism as a literary movement, it united exceptionally gifted poets - Gumilyov, Akhmatova, Mandelstam, the formation of whose creative individualities took place in the atmosphere of the "Poets' Workshop". Story Acmeism can be considered as a kind of dialogue between these three outstanding representatives. At the same time, from “pure” Acmeism The above-mentioned poets were significantly different from the Adamism of Gorodetsky, Zenkevich and Narbut, who formed the naturalistic wing of the movement. The difference between the Adamists and the Gumilev-Akhmatova-Mandelshtam triad has been repeatedly noted in criticism.

As a literary movement . Publishing house "IDDK", 2007. acmeism a, plural. No m. (… did not last long - about two years. In February 1914, it split. The "Poets' Workshop" was closed. Acmeists managed to publish ten issues of their magazine “Hyperborea” (editor M. Lozinsky), as well as several almanacs.

“Symbolism was fading away” - Gumilyov was not mistaken in this, but he failed to form a movement as powerful as Russian symbolism. Acmeism failed to gain a foothold as a leading poetic movement. The reason for its rapid decline is said to be, among other things, “the ideological unadaptability of the movement to the conditions of a radically changed reality.” V. Bryusov noted that “for acmeists characterized by a gap between practice and theory,” and “their practice was purely symbolist.” This is where he saw the crisis. Acmeism. However, Bryusov’s statements about Acmeism were always harsh; At first he stated that “... . Publishing house "IDDK", 2007. acmeism a, plural. No m. (…- an invention, a whim, a metropolitan quirk" and foreshadowed: "... most likely, in a year or two there will be no Acmeism. His very name will disappear,” and in 1922, in one of his articles, he generally denies it the right to be called a direction, a school, believing that there is nothing serious and original in Acmeism no and that he is “outside the mainstream of literature.”

However, attempts to resume the activities of the association were subsequently made more than once. The second “Workshop of Poets,” founded in the summer of 1916, was headed by G. Ivanov together with G. Adamovich. But it didn’t last long either. In 1920, the third “Workshop of Poets” appeared, which was Gumilyov’s last attempt to organizationally preserve acmeistic line. Poets who consider themselves to be members of the school united under his wing Acmeism: S. Neldichen, N. Otsup, N. Chukovsky, I. Odoevtseva, N. Berberova, Vs. Rozhdestvensky, N. Oleinikov, L. Lipavsky, K. Vatinov, V. Posner and others. The third “Workshop of Poets” existed in Petrograd for about three years (in parallel with the “Sounding Shell” studio) - until the tragic death of N. Gumilyov.

Creative destinies of poets, one way or another connected with acmeism, developed differently: N. Klyuev subsequently declared his non-involvement in the activities of the commonwealth; G. Ivanov and G. Adamovich continued and developed many principles Acmeism in exile; on V. Khlebnikov . Publishing house "IDDK", 2007. acmeism a, plural. No m. (… did not have any noticeable impact. In Soviet times, poetic manner acmeists(mainly N. Gumilyov) was imitated by N. Tikhonov, E. Bagritsky, I. Selvinsky, M. Svetlov.

In comparison with other poetic movements of the Russian Silver Age . Publishing house "IDDK", 2007. acmeism a, plural. No m. (… in many ways it seems to be a marginal phenomenon. It has no analogues in other European literatures (which cannot be said, for example, about symbolism and futurism); the more surprising the words of Blok, Gumilyov’s literary opponent, who stated that . Publishing house "IDDK", 2007. acmeism a, plural. No m. (… was just an “imported foreign thing.” After all, it is . Publishing house "IDDK", 2007. acmeism a, plural. No m. (… turned out to be extremely fruitful for Russian literature. Akhmatova and Mandelstam managed to leave behind “eternal words.” Gumilyov appears in his poems as one of the brightest personalities of the cruel times of revolutions and world wars. And today, almost a century later, interest in Acmeism has been preserved mainly because the work of these outstanding poets, who had a significant influence on the fate of Russian poetry of the 20th century, is associated with it.

Basic principles of Acmeism:

- liberation of poetry from symbolist appeals to the ideal, returning it to clarity;
- rejection of mystical nebula, acceptance of the earthly world in its diversity, visible concreteness, sonority, colorfulness;
- the desire to give a word a specific, precise meaning;
— objectivity and clarity of images, precision of details;
- appeal to a person, to the “authenticity” of his feelings;
— poeticization of the world of primordial emotions, primitive biological natural principles;
- a echo of past literary eras, the broadest aesthetic associations, “longing for world culture.”

"To the earthly source of poetic values"

Lydia Ginzburg

In 1906, Valery Bryusov stated that “the circle of development of that literary school, which is known as “ new poetry", can be considered closed."

From symbolism a new literary movement emerged - Acmeism - which contrasted itself with the first, at a time of its crisis. He reflected new aesthetic trends in the art of the “Silver Age”, although he did not completely break with symbolism. At the beginning of his creative path young poets, future acmeists, were close to symbolism, attended “Ivanovo Wednesdays” - literary meetings in the St. Petersburg apartment of Vyacheslav Ivanov, called the “tower”. In Ivanov’s “tower” classes were held for young poets, where they learned versification.

The emergence of a new movement dates back to the early 1910s. It received three non-identical names: “acmeism” (from the Greek “acme” - flowering, peak, highest degree of something, edge), “Adamism” (from the name of the first man Adam, courageous, clear, direct view of the world) and “clarism” (beautiful clarity). Each of them reflected a special facet of the aspirations of the poets of a given circle.

So, Acmeism is a modernist movement that declared a concrete sensory perception of the external world, returning the word to its original, non-symbolic meaning.

The formation of the platform of participants in the new movement takes place first in the “Society of Zealots” artistic word"("Poetry Academy"), and then in the "Workshop of Poets", created in 1911, where the artistic opposition was led by Nikolai Gumilyov and Sergei Gorodetsky.

“The Workshop of Poets” is a community of poets united by the feeling that symbolism has already passed its highest peak. This name dates back to the time of medieval craft associations and showed the attitude of the participants in the “guild” to poetry as a purely professional sphere activities. "Workshop" was a school professional excellence. The backbone of the “Workshop” was formed by young poets who had only recently begun to publish. Among them were those whose names in subsequent decades made up the glory of Russian literature.

The most prominent representatives of the new trend included Nikolai Gumilyov, Anna Akhmatova, Osip Mandelstam, Sergei Gorodetsky, Nikolai Klyuev.

We gathered at the apartment of one of the members of the “Workshop”. Sitting in a circle, one after another they read their new poems, which they then discussed in detail. The responsibility for leading the meeting was assigned to one of the syndics - the leaders of the "Workshop".

The syndic had the right to interrupt the speech of the next speaker using a special bell if it was too general.

Among the participants of the “Workshop” “home philology” was revered. They carefully studied world poetry. It is no coincidence that in their own works one can often hear someone else’s lines and many hidden quotes.

Among their literary teachers, the Acmeists singled out François Villon (with his appreciation for life), François Rabelais (with his inherent “wise physiology”), William Shakespeare (with his gift of insight into the inner world of a person), Théophile Gautier (a champion of “impeccable forms”). We should add here the poets Baratynsky, Tyutchev and Russian classical prose. The immediate predecessors of Acmeism include Innokenty Annensky, Mikhail Kuzmin, and Valery Bryusov.

In the second half of 1912, the six most active participants in the “Workshop” - Gumilyov, Gorodetsky, Akhmatova, Mandelstam, Narbut and Zenkevich - held whole line poetry evenings, where they declared their claims to lead Russian literature in a new direction.

Vladimir Narbut and Mikhail Zenkevich in their poems not only defended “everything concrete, real and vital” (as Narbut wrote in one of his notes), but also shocked the reader with an abundance of naturalistic, sometimes very unappetizing details:

And the wise slug, bent into a spiral,
Sharp, lidless eyes of vipers,
And in a closed silver circle,
How many secrets the spider weaves!

M. Zenkevich. "Man" 1909–1911

Like the futurists, Zenkevich and Narbut loved to shock the reader. Therefore, they were often called “left-wing Acmeists.” On the contrary, on the “right” in the list of Acmeists were the names of Anna Akhmatova and Osip Mandelstam - two poets who were sometimes recorded as “neoclassicists”, meaning their commitment to a strict and clear (like the Russian classics) construction of poems. And finally, the “center” in this group was occupied by two poets of the older generation - the syndics of the “Workshop of Poets” Sergei Gorodetsky and Nikolai Gumilev (the first was close to Narbut and Zenkevich, the second to Mandelstam and Akhmatova).

These six poets were not absolute like-minded people, but seemed to embody the idea of ​​balance between the two extreme poles of contemporary poetry - symbolism and naturalism.

The program of Acmeism was proclaimed in such manifestos as “The Legacy of Symbolism and Acmeism” by Gumilyov (1913), “Some Currents in Modern Russian Poetry” by Gorodetsky, and “The Morning of Acmeism” by Mandelstam. In these articles, the goal of poetry was to achieve balance. “Art is a state of balance, first of all,” wrote Gorodetsky. However, between what and what did the Acmeists primarily try to maintain a “living balance”? Between “earthly” and “heavenly”, between life and being.

Worn rug under the icon
It's dark in a cool room -

wrote Anna Akhmatova in 1912.

This does not mean “a return to the material world, an object,” but a desire to balance” within one line the familiar, everyday (“Worn rug”) and the lofty, Divine (“Worn rug under the icon”).

Acmeists are interested in the real, not the other world, the beauty of life in its concrete sensory manifestations. The vagueness and hints of symbolism were contrasted with a major perception of reality, the reliability of the image, and the clarity of the composition. In some ways, the poetry of Acmeism is the revival of the “golden age”, the time of Pushkin and Baratynsky.

S. Gorodetsky, in his declaration “Some Currents in Modern Russian Poetry,” spoke out against the “blurring” of symbolism, its focus on the unknowability of the world: “The struggle between Acmeism and symbolism... is, first of all, a struggle for this world, sounding, colorful, having shapes, weight and time...", "the world is irrevocably accepted by Acmeism, in all its beauties and ugliness."

The Acmeists contrasted the image of the poet-prophet with the image of a poet-craftsman, diligently and without unnecessary pathos connecting the “earthly” with the “heavenly-spiritual”.

And I thought: I won’t flaunt
We are not prophets, not even forerunners...

O. Mandelstam. Lutheran, 1912

The organs of the new trend were the magazines “Apollo” (1909–1917), created by the writer, poet and historian Sergei Makovsky, and “Hyperborea”, founded in 1912 and headed by Mikhail Lozinsky.

The philosophical basis of the new aesthetic phenomenon was pragmatism (philosophy of action) and the ideas of the phenomenological school (which defended the “experience of objectivity”, “questioning of things”, “acceptance of the world”).

Almost the main one distinctive feature“Workshop” developed a taste for depicting earthly, everyday life. Symbolists sometimes sacrificed outside world for the sake of the inner, hidden world. The “tsehoviki” decisively made a choice in favor of a thorough and love description real “steppes, rocks and waters”.

The artistic principles of Acmeism were entrenched in his poetic practice:

1.​ Active acceptance of colorful and vibrant earthly life;
2.​ Rehabilitation of simple objective world, having "Shapes, weight and time";
3. Denial of transcendence and mysticism;
4.​ Primitive-animal, courageously firm view of the world;
5.​ Focus on the picturesqueness of the image;
6.​ Transfer of a person’s psychological states with attention to the bodily principle;
7.​ The expression of “longing for world culture”;
8.​ Attention to the specific meaning of the word;
9.​ Perfection of forms.

Fate literary acmeism tragic. He had to assert himself in a tense and unequal struggle. He was repeatedly persecuted and defamed. Its most prominent creators were destroyed (Narbut, Mandelstam). First World War, October events 1917, the execution of Gumilyov in 1921 put an end to the further development of Acmeism as a literary movement. However, the humanistic meaning of this movement was significant - to revive a person’s thirst for life, to restore the feeling of its beauty.

Literature

Oleg Lekmanov. Acmeism // Encyclopedia for children “Avanta+”. Volume 9. Russian literature. Part two. XX century M., 1999

N.Yu. Gryakalova. Acmeism. Peace, creativity, culture. // Russian poets of the “Silver Age”. Volume two: Acmeists. Leningrad: Publishing house Leningrad University, 1991

In 1911, the “Workshop of Poets” arose in St. Petersburg - a literary association of young authors close to symbolism, but looking for new paths in literature. The name “workshop” corresponded to their view of poetry as. for a craft that requires high technology verse. The “Workshop of Poets” (1911–1914) was headed by N. Gumilyov and S. Gorodetsky, the secretary was A. Akhmatova, the members included G. Adamovich, Vas. Gippius, M. Zenkevich, G. Ivanov, O. Mandelstam, V. Narbut and other poets. The emergence of the “Workshop” was preceded by the creation of the “Academy of Verse” by the Symbolists, at whose meetings young poets listened to speeches by recognized masters and analyzed poetic rhythms.

The literary organ of the “Workshop of Poets” was a thin “monthly of poetry and criticism” called “Hyperborea” (St. Petersburg, 1912–1913), whose editor-publisher was the poet M. L. Lozinsky. The magazine considered its task to continue “all the main victories of the era, known under the name of decadence or modernism,” and thus found itself confined to a narrow circle of purely aesthetic issues. Great importance to reveal the creative position of a new literary group also had an artistic and literary magazine “Apollo” (St. Petersburg, 1909–1917), initially associated with the Symbolists. In 1910, an article by M. A. Kuzmin “On Beautiful Clarity” appeared in it.

Unlike the Symbolists, Kuzmin proceeded from the idea that the artist must first of all come to terms with real life- “to seek and find peace within yourself with yourself and with the world.” The goal of literature was declared to be “beautiful clarity”, or “clarismus” (from the Latin word Clarus - clear).

Where can I find a syllable to describe a walk,

Chablis on ice, toasted bread

And sweet agate ripe cherries?

These often quoted lines, which opened the cycle “Love of This Summer,” against the backdrop of symbolist poetry, sounded like a glorification of the “cheerful ease of thoughtless living.” They were new and had a lower, “homey”, as A. Blok put it, intonation. Kuzmin looked at the world with slight irony. Life seemed to him like a theater, and art - a kind of masquerade. This was reflected in the same collection in the “Rockets” cycle. In the opening poem "Masquerade" there is a spectacle of an exquisite celebration with masks of characters from the Italian commedia dell'arte. Everything here is conventional, deceptive, fleeting and at the same time captivating with its fragile grace. In the last poem of the cycle, “Epitaph,” there are words devoid of tragic overtones about the death of a young friend, remembered for his easy attitude to life (“Who was slimmer in the figures of the minuet? Who knew better the selection of colored silks?”).

Three years after the publication of Kuzmin’s article. “On Beautiful Clarity” in the same “Apollo” (1913, No. 1) two articles appeared in which the program of a new literary movement was formulated: “The Heritage of Symbolism and Acmeism” by N. Gumilyov (in the table of contents of the magazine instead of the word “Heritage” there is “ Testaments") and "Some trends in modern Russian poetry" by S. Gorodetsky.

Continuously associated with symbolism (“symbolism was a worthy father,” writes Gumilev), the Acmeists wanted to rediscover the value of human existence, and if in the Symbolists’ view the world of objective phenomena was a reflection of a higher being, then the Acmeists accepted it as true reality.

Gumilyov proposed to call the new movement that replaced symbolism acmeism (from the ancient Greek word “acme”, meaning blooming power, highest degree, flourishing) or Adamism, which meant “a courageously strong and clear view of life.” Like Kuzmin, Gumilyov demanded that literature accept reality: “Always remember the unknowable, but not insult your thoughts about it with more or less probable guesses - this is the principle of Acmeism.”

About full acceptance real world Gorodetsky also wrote: “The struggle between Acmeism and symbolism, if it is a struggle and not the occupation of an abandoned fortress, is, first of all, a struggle for this world, sounding, colorful, having shapes, weight and time, for our planet Earth<…>After all sorts of “rejections,” the world was irrevocably accepted by Acmeism, in all its beauties and ugliness.” Gumilyov wrote: “As Adamists, we are a bit of forest animals”; Gorodetsky, in turn, argued that poets, like Adam, should re-experience all the charm of earthly existence. These provisions were illustrated by Gorodetsky’s poem “Adam,” published in the third issue of Apollo for the same year (p. 32):

The world is spacious and loud,

And he is more colorful than rainbows,

And so Adam was entrusted with it,

Inventor of names.

Name, find out, tear off the covers

And idle secrets and ancient darkness -

Here is the first feat. New feat -

Sing praises to the living earth.

A call to poeticize primordial emotions, elemental power primitive man found in a number of Acmeists, including M. Zenkevich (“Wild Porphyra”, 1912), reflected in increased attention to the natural biological principle in man. In the preface to the poem “Retribution,” Blok ironically noted that the Acmeists’ man is devoid of signs of humanism, he is some kind of “primordial Adam.”

The poets who spoke under the banner of Acmeism were completely different from each other, nevertheless, this movement had its own generic characteristics.

Rejecting the aesthetics of symbolism and the religious and mystical hobbies of its representatives, the Acmeists were deprived of a broad perception of the world around them. The Acmeist vision of life did not touch upon the true passions of the era, its true signs and conflicts.

In the 10s. Symbolism was “overcome” not only by the Acmeists, but to a large extent by the Symbolists themselves, who had already abandoned the extremes and life limitations of their previous speeches. The Acmeists did not seem to notice this. The narrowness of the problematic, the affirmation of the intrinsic value of reality, the fascination with the external side of life, the aestheticization of recorded phenomena, so characteristic of the poetry of Acmeism, its detachment from modern social storms allowed contemporaries to say that the Acmeist path cannot become the path of Russian poetry. And it is no coincidence that it was during these years that M. Gorky wrote: “Rus' needs great poet <…>We need a democratic and romantic poet, because we, Rus', are a democratic and young country.”

Revolting against the nebulae of the “forest of symbols,” the poetry of the Acmeists gravitated toward recreating the three-dimensional world, its objectivity. She was attracted by the external, mostly aestheticized life, “the spirit of charming and airy little things” (M. Kuzmin) or the emphasized prosaism of everyday realities. These are, for example, the everyday sketches of O. Mandelstam (1913):

Snow in quiet suburbs

The wipers are raking with shovels,

I'm with the bearded men

I'm coming, a passer-by.

Women in headscarves flash by,

And the crazy mongrels yap,

And the samovars have scarlet roses

They burn in taverns and houses.

The fascination with objectivity, objective detail was so great that even the world of spiritual experiences was often figuratively embodied in the poetry of the Acmeists in some thing. In Mandelstam, an empty sea shell thrown ashore becomes a metaphor for spiritual emptiness (“Shell”). In Gumilyov’s poem “I believed, I thought...” the metaphor of a yearning heart is also objective - a porcelain bell.

Enthusiastic admiration of “little things” and their aestheticization prevented poets from seeing the world of great feelings and real life proportions. This world often looked to the Acmeists as toy-like, apolitical, and evoked the impression of artificiality and ephemerality of human suffering. Deliberate objectivity to a certain extent justified itself when the Acmeists turned to architectural and sculptural monuments of the past or created cursory sketches of pictures of life.

Based on the poetic experience of the Symbolists, the Acmeists often turned to pause and free verse, to the dolnik. The difference between the verse practice of the Acmeists and the Symbolists manifested itself not so much in rhythm as in a different attitude to the word in verse. “For Acmeists, the conscious meaning of a word, Logos, is as beautiful a form as music is for Symbolists,” Mandelstam argued in the article “The Morning of Acmeism,” written at the height of literary controversy. If among the Symbolists the meaning of an individual word is somewhat muted and subordinated to the general musical sound, then among the Acmeists the verse is closer to the colloquial structure of speech and is mainly subordinated to its meaning. In general, the poetic intonation of the Acmeists is somewhat elevated and often even pathetic. But next to it there are often reduced turns of everyday speech, like the line “Be so kind as to exchange” (Mandelshtam’s poem “Golden”). Such transitions are especially frequent and varied in Akhmatova. It was Akhmatova’s verse, enriched with the rhythm of a living language, that turned out to be the most significant contribution of Acmeism to the culture of Russian poetic speech.