This article discusses Vladimir Vasil’evich Veidle (1895–1979), a philosopher and scholar of cultural study of the Silver Age and a brilliant expert on Alexander Pushkin’s works. The focus is on the evolution of Veidle’s views on Russian-European identity. The unique aspect of the thinker’s position, especially given that his émigré works belong to what scholars have called “New Westernism,” is that, in contrast to the Russian “anti-Westernizers,” who defended the concept of a separate and self-sufficient “Russian civilization,” Veidle believed that Russia loses nothing by being in Europe; on the contrary, it acquires its cultural identity. Veidle considered the work of Pushkin, whose “Europeanness” and “Russianness” were inseparable, as evidence of this. In his émigré works, Veidle challenged Dostoevsky’s hypothesis about the “universal responsiveness” of Pushkin’s art and, through profound philosophical and cultural study analysis, showed that Pushkin himself “set limits” on his own “omni-responsiveness,” while remaining a principled disciple of “cultural Europeanism.”
Mikhail Pavlovets in his article «Tatyana's Sweet Ideal» writes about evolution of Tatyana Larina image (Aleksander Pushkin, «Eugene Onegin») in Russian literature schoolbooks.
The diversity of the Decembrist projects of the Republican government assumed in Russia has not yet been fully studied. The Decembrists did’t have a common understanding of how to build a new political regime after the coup d'état. And it's not just the differences between P. Pestel and N. Muravyov. M. Orlov and N. Turgenev had their own projects of republics. Pushkin reflected on the ideas of eternal peace in connection with the unification of mankind into a single family (Republic).
The article focuses on the institutional interactions between the literary field and the institutions of the Ministry of Public Education in 1824–1826. In this context, the author explores the editorial and censorial background of the first chapter of Eugene Onegin (1825) and Poems by A. Pushkin (Stikhotvoreniia Alexandra Pushkina, 1826), and argues that Minister Shishkov played a significant role in the emergence of both editions. Moreover, the newly discovered official letter by Shishkov, regarding the unwelcome publication of Pushkin’s Poems at the departmental printing house, allows to clarify the censorial history of one more prominent edition of the period — Eda and The Feasts (Piry) by E. Baratynskiy (1826).