The work of G. R. Derzhavin awakens the brightest feelings, makes one admire his talent and simplicity of presentation of ideas. The work “Monument” was programmatic for the poet. It contains his most important life values. For more than two hundred years, readers have loved this work and consider it one of the wonderful examples of an autobiographical poem.
Theme and idea
The first thing that needs to be mentioned when preparing an analysis of Derzhavin’s “Monument” is the theme of the work. It consists in glorifying poetic creativity, as well as affirming the high purpose of the poet. The author likens the poems and odes that he wrote during his life to a wonderful monument. G. R. Derzhavin is the founder of autobiographical creativity in all Russian literature. He chose glory and greatness as the main theme of his works.
The theme of Derzhavin’s “Monument” - the immortality of poetry - is illuminated not only in this poem, but also in many other works of the poet. In them he reflects on the role of art in society. Derzhavin also writes about the poet’s right to popular love and respect. The main idea of the poem is that art and literature contribute to education and the spread of beauty in society. They also have the ability to correct vicious morals.
“Monument” of Derzhavin: history of creation
Derzhavin wrote his poem in 1795. It refers to the mature stage of the court poet’s work. At this stage, he was already summing up his life and work, comprehending the path he had traveled, trying to understand his place in literature, as well as the history of society. The work “Monument” was created by the poet based on Horace’s ode; it is its free interpretation. The main characters of Derzhavin’s “Monument” are the Muse and the lyrical hero. The poem is autobiographical. The image of the poet is not detached from everyday life, he is one with it.
The poet's poem consists of four stanzas. Let us continue the analysis of Derzhavin’s “Monument” by analyzing its content. The first stanza contains a direct description of the monument. The poet emphasizes its strength using a hyperbole comparison: “Metals are harder... higher than the pyramids.” This monument is not subject to the passage of time. And just from this description, an attentive reader can conclude that in reality the Derzhavin monument is intangible.
In the second stanza, the author asserts his own immortality and emphasizes that his poetry is nothing more than a national treasure. And in the third stanza the reader learns about how great the poet’s glory will be in the future. The fourth describes the reasons for this fame: “I dared to speak the truth with a smile in a funny Russian style.” The poet also turns to his Muse. The final lines of Derzhavin’s poem “Monument” express the poet’s independence from the opinions of others. That is why his work deserves true immortality. In his poem, the poet shows the lyrical hero as a proud, strong and wise man. In his work, Derzhavin foresees that many of his works will live even after his death.
“Monument” by Derzhavin: artistic means
In his poem, the poet openly addresses the readers. After all, only by serving the truth, a writer and artist acquires the right to originality and independence. The main idea that a student can mention in the analysis of Derzhavin’s “Monument” is this: the value of creativity lies in its sincerity. Sincerity is one of the main features of Derzhavin's poetry.
The originality of the work is conveyed by the poet as follows:
- The size of Derzhavin’s “Monument” is iambic hexameter. With its help, the poet conveys a leisurely escape from the hustle and bustle.
- The sublime structure of his thoughts corresponds to the simplicity of the style, achieved through the use of pompous expressions and fairly economical literary means of expression. The poem uses cross rhyme. The genre of Derzhavin’s “Monument” is ode.
- The solemn sound of the work is given by the vocabulary of high style (“brow”, “proud”, “dared”).
- G. R. Derzhavin gives a majestic image of poetic inspiration through the use of numerous epithets and metaphors. His muse crowns herself with the “dawn of immortality”, and her hand is “leisurely”, “at ease” - in other words, free.
Also, for the sake of completeness of the literary analysis, it is necessary to mention the main images in Derzhavin’s “Monument” - these are the Muse and the lyrical hero. In the work, the poet addresses his inspiration.
What exactly is the merit described in the “Monument”?
So, we can conclude that the poet’s merits lie in his ability to tell the truth to rulers unbiasedly and with a smile. In order to understand the seriousness of all these merits of Derzhavin, it is necessary to trace the path of his ascent to the poetic Olympus. The poet was mistakenly recruited as a soldier, although he was a descendant of impoverished nobles. The son of a widow, Derzhavin was doomed to serve as a soldier for many years. There was no place for poetic art in it. However, even then Gavrila Romanovich was visited by poetic inspiration. He diligently continued to educate himself and also write poetry. By coincidence, he helped Catherine become empress. But this did not affect his financial situation - the poet barely made ends meet.
The work “Felitsa” was so unusual that for a long time the poet did not dare to publish it. The poet alternated his appeal to the ruler with a description of his own life. Contemporaries were also amazed by the description of base matters in the ode. That is why in his poem “Monument” Derzhavin points out his merit: he “proclaimed” the “virtues of Felitsa” - he managed to show the ruler as a living person, to describe her individual characteristics and character. This was a new word in Russian literature. This can also be discussed in the analysis of Derzhavin’s “Monument”. The author's poetic innovation consisted in the fact that he managed to write a new page in the history of literature with a “funny Russian style.”
Mention related to the ode "God"
Another of his merits, which the poet mentions in the work, is the ability to “talk about God in heartfelt simplicity.” And in these lines he clearly mentions his ode called “God,” written in 1784. It was recognized by Gavrila Romanovich’s contemporaries as the highest manifestation of his talent. The ode has been translated into French 15 times. Several translations have also been made into German, Italian, Spanish and even Japanese.
Fighter for truth
And one more merit, which is described in the poem “Monument” by Derzhavin, is the ability to “speak the truth to kings with a smile.” Despite the fact that he reached high ranks (Derzhavin was a governor, senator, and personal secretary of Catherine II), he did not stay in any position for a long time.
Derzhavin fought against embezzlers, constantly showed himself as a champion of truth, and tried to achieve justice. And these are the characteristics of the poet from the lips of his contemporaries. Gavrila Romanovich reminded nobles and officials that, despite their position, their lot was exactly the same as that of mere mortals.
Difference between Derzhavin and Horace
Of course, it cannot be said that Derzhavin’s work was devoid of pathos. However, the poet had the right to use it. Gavrila Romanovich boldly changed the plan that was laid down in the poem by Horace. He put in first place the truthfulness of his work and only in second place what, in the opinion of the ancient Roman poet, should be the focus of attention - the perfection of the poem. And the difference in the life positions of poets of two different eras is expressed in their works. If Horace achieved fame only because he wrote a good poem, then Gavrila Romanovich became famous for the fact that in the “Monument” he openly speaks the truth to both the people and the tsar.
A work that is easy to understand
Derzhavin was a prominent representative of classicism in literature. It was he who adopted European traditions, according to the rules of which works were composed in an elevated, solemn style. However, at the same time, the poet managed to introduce a lot of simple, colloquial speech into his poems. This is what he did to make them easy to understand for representatives of various segments of the population.
Criticism of the poem
Derzhavin composed his poem “Monument” to exalt and praise Russian literature. Unfortunately, critics completely misinterpreted this work, and a whole barrage of negativity fell upon Gavrila Romanovich.
He faced accusations of boastfulness and excessive pride. Derzhavin recommended to his fierce opponents not to pay attention to the solemn style, but to think about the meaning inherent in the work.
Formal style
The poem is written in the genre of ode, but to be more precise, it is a special type of it. The work corresponds to a high, solemn style. Written in iambic with pyrrhic, it takes on even greater majesty. The work is filled with solemn intonations and sophisticated vocabulary. Its rhythm is slow and majestic. The poet can achieve this effect by numerous homogeneous members of the sentence, the technique of syntactic parallelism, as well as a large number of exclamations and appeals. A high style is created with the help of vocabulary. G. R. Derzhavin uses a large number of epithets (“wonderful”, “fleeting”, “eternal”). There are also a lot of outdated words in the work - Slavicisms and archaisms (“erected”, “decay”, “despise the brow”).
Meaning in literature
We looked at the history of the creation of Derzhavin’s “Monument” and analyzed the works. In the final part, the student can talk about the role of the poem in Russian literature. In this work, Gavrila Romanovich continues the tradition of summing up life's results, which was laid down by Lomonosov. And at the same time, the poet managed to stay within the canons of such creations. This tradition was continued in the work of Pushkin, who also turned to the original source, but also relied on Derzhavin’s poem.
And even after A.S. Pushkin, many of the leading Russian poets continued to write poems in the “monument” genre. Among them, for example, is A. A. Fet. Each of the poets himself determines the meaning of poetry in the life of society, relying both on the literary tradition and on his own creative experience.
Gabriel Romanovich Derzhavin
The Almighty God has risen and judges
Earthly gods in their host;
How long, rivers, how long will you be
Spare the unrighteous and evil?
Your duty is: to preserve the laws,
Don't look at the faces of the strong,
No help, no defense
Do not leave orphans and widows.
Your duty: to save the innocent from harm.
Give cover to the unlucky;
To protect the powerless from the strong,
Free the poor from their shackles.
They won't listen! they see and don’t know!
Covered with bribes of tow:
Atrocities shake the earth,
Untruth shakes the skies.
Kings! I thought you gods were powerful,
No one is your judge
But you, like me, are passionate,
And they are just as mortal as I am.
And you will fall like this,
Like a withered leaf falling from the tree!
And you will die like this,
How your last slave will die!
Resurrect, God! God of the right!
And they heeded their prayer:
Come, judge, punish the evil ones,
And be one king of the earth!
From the second half of the 18th century, Russian poetry ceased to be a salon and backstage phenomenon, gradually exerting more and more influence on the life of society. Beautiful poems written in “high style” gave way to accusatory works, on which more than one generation of rebels and revolutionaries subsequently grew up. One of the first Russian poets who was not afraid to publicly denounce those who abuse their power was Gabriel Derzhavin. It was he who wrote the poem “To Rulers and Judges,” written in 1780.
By this time, the author had left his military career and was successfully mastering the position of state councilor. In parallel with his achievements in the social and political fields, Derzhavin began to publish his first poems, which brought him wide fame, first in salons, and later in the palace of the Empress. In the wake of flirting with the French Republicans, Empress Catherine II encouraged bold statements among her subjects. It is for this reason that she reacted quite favorably to Derzhavin’s poem, which contains quite bold and harsh statements addressed to those in power.
The poet calls those who decide human destinies gods on earth and models a situation when they themselves will appear before the highest, divine court. Derzhavin does not consider himself a higher being, but he dares to speak on behalf of the Almighty, pointing out to his compatriots the inadmissibility of the actions that he commits. “How long, rivers, how long will you have mercy on the unjust and evil?” asks the poet.
In the first part of the poem, the author talks about what exactly is the duty of those in power. These people, according to Derzhavin, should “preserve the laws,” help widows and orphans, “save the innocent from harm,” and protect the weak over the strong. In addition, the poet voices the idea that it is necessary to “extricate the poor from their shackles,” that is, in essence, to abolish serfdom. Such a statement, even during the reign of Catherine II, was considered a manifestation of freethinking, but the empress, who favored Derzhavin, turned a blind eye to such insolence.
The second part of the poem is accusatory in nature. The author notes that people do not heed the arguments of reason and have long been living not according to God’s commandments, but according to worldly laws. “Atrocities shake the earth, untruths shake the heavens,” the poet states bitterly. Addressing the Russian tsars, Derzhavin admits that he considered them God's governors on earth. However, the author is convinced that “you too will fall like a withered leaf falling from a tree!” And you will die just like your last slave will die! In the finale, the poet calls on the Almighty to descend to the sinful earth to pronounce judgment on people. “Come, judge, punish the evil ones, and be one king of the earth!” Derzhavin exclaims, rightly believing that without the intervention of higher powers, it is not possible for even the wisest and fairest ruler among mere mortals to restore order in Rus'.
CHAPTER IV
Service and literary activities under Catherine
In Derzhavin’s life, the most important moments of his literary activity and career are always in some connection. Less than a month after the publication of the book "Interlocutor" with the ode "God" Derzhavin was appointed ruler of the Olonets governorship. “Felitsa” contributed to Derzhavin’s rise, but besides the fact that Catherine did not want to directly show this, Prince Vyazemsky delayed the report on the dismissal of our poet from the Senate service. The appointment, therefore, took place only in 1784.
Derzhavin had long dreamed of becoming a governor, especially in his homeland, but he did not succeed either now or later. The Olonets governorship so far existed only on paper. From the very moment she ascended the throne, Catherine was preoccupied with the transformation of provincial government. At her accession there were 16 provinces - a number that did not correspond to the vastness of the state. She issued an “institution on provinces”, according to the plan of which each was supposed to have from 300 to 400 thousand souls, as a result of which the number of provinces increased to forty. Crimea constituted a special region. In each province there had to be a sovereign viceroy, or governor-general, and a subordinate governor, or governor, who was entrusted with all responsibility for governance. This plan of organization found a kind of “poetic” image in Derzhavin’s poems:
Her throne is in the Scandinavian ones,
Kamchatka and Golden Mountains,
From the Taimur to Kuban countries
Place it on forty-two pillars.
At the same time, an attempt was made to bring light into the labyrinth of old voivodeship and other institutions (“It is only fitting for you, princess, to create light out of darkness”), especially by separating the judicial power from the administrative power. The disadvantage of the new organization was, among other things, the inaccuracy of the limits of the power of the new ranks. The governors-general, invested with the full confidence of the empress, could be guided by arbitrariness alone and be a law unto themselves. They enjoyed almost royal honors, troops were subordinate to them; when traveling, they were accompanied by a detachment of light cavalry, adjutants and young nobles, from whom, under their leadership, “should have formed useful servants of the state.”
“Tinsel kings sit on magnificent thrones of cards,” says Derzhavin in the ode “For Happiness,” meaning the governors, who, although they depended on the empress’s beckoning, were extremely foolish, sitting magnificently on the thrones, when they allowed people’s deputies and elected judges...
Derzhavin's appointment took place on May 22, 1784, and by decree of the same day Petrozavodsk was made a provincial city. There were already government offices there, transferred from Olonets, which were, apparently, in a deplorable state, because Derzhavin, upon his arrival there, even furnished them “at his own expense.” Petrozavodsk was inhabited by merchants, townspeople and commoners; all its inhabitants were estimated to be about three thousand. The Olonets province, in terms of its then population (206 thousand inhabitants), accounted for only two-thirds of the measure determined for the province, but the vast space of 136 thousand square miles gave it the right to a separate existence.
Arriving in the city, Derzhavin occupied a small one-story house at the end of Angliyskaya Street, so named because craftsmen contracted from England for the famous cannon foundry lived there. The “opening of the province” lasted a whole week and was accompanied by speeches by Governor General Tutolmin and feasts at his place, cannon fire and refreshments for the people in the square.
At first, the governor and the governor lived amicably among themselves and spent evenings with each other, but this agreement did not last long. Soon Tutolmin already calls Derzhavin in a letter to St. Petersburg “a fair poet, but a bad governor.” The latter was hardly true. Derzhavin could undoubtedly be an excellent performer of “drawings,” possessing, first of all, remarkable intelligence and energy. The reason for the disagreement was the quarrelsome nature of his character, his tendency to overstep the limits of his power, and his desire to put himself and his merits in the foreground. Derzhavin, for his part, not without reason, accused Tutolmin of autocracy, of wanting to give his proposals the force of decrees and to depersonalize the court and chambers. Derzhavin’s letter to Lvov testifies to what trifles and personal accounts the displeasure between the two dignitaries reached. Tutolmin began to show Derzhavin his superiority and demand subordination. Derzhavin writes that when inspecting the official places, he met and received the boss, as should be the case with the board, and, despite previous disagreements and nagging, did not show any displeasure and was then escorted to a conscientious court [Provincial court in Russia in 1775-1862.].
“Here he innocently caused me a lot of grief by using obscene language against the judges (?), but even after that I followed him into the hallway and wanted to accompany him to the courts; but he put on his hat with discourtesy and irritation, went into the carriage and did not invite me ; and since I didn’t have a carriage, I returned to the Board, considering it indecent to run after him on foot, and even more so to be a witness to his curses to the judges concerning me. Despite this, in the evening Katerina Yakovlevna and I went to see him ..."
Obviously irritated by many previous things, Tutolmin did not spare Derzhavin in his house. It is difficult to judge how right anyone was. As far as one can judge from the words of Derzhavin himself, it is imperceptible that he showed special independence and dignity in purely personal relations with Tutolmin. The next morning after the audit, Tutolmin left for St. Petersburg, and after him with a special executor of the provincial government N.F. Emin, devoted to the governor, the latter sent a “report” to the empress, enclosed in a letter addressed to Bezborodko, with a special request for intercession. It is not known exactly what was in the “report”. There were rumors that Tutolmin was specially called to the palace on this occasion and asked for mercy on his knees in the empress’s office. On the other hand, they said that Catherine commented on the unfoundedness of the report and noted that she did not find anything in this paper except poetry. Tutolmin was even credited with petitioning to award Derzhavin an order. Derzhavin’s report was the result of an audit that he carried out immediately after Tutolmin’s departure in public places that were under the exclusive jurisdiction of the governor. The measure was desperate. Derzhavin found “great disorder in affairs, and all kinds of deviations from the laws.” Derzhavin sent the audit documents to Tutolmin in a report in which he did not hide from him that at the same time he had reported everything to the Empress. It all ended to everyone's satisfaction. Catherine found it convenient to believe Tutolmin’s explanations and at the same time leave Derzhavin in place as a watchful eye.
By remaining in service after a quarrel with the all-powerful governor, Derzhavin could only gain in his influence and position. The fight, however, was unequal. The bickering grew. Derzhavin's enemies easily took advantage of his weaknesses. A rumor spread that Derzhavin had beaten one advisor to the board. One can hardly be sure that this did not happen. The Kazan governor, according to Derzhavin, did not have time to worry about the order, because he “treated the postmaster with slaps in the face”; Why couldn’t Olonetsky also get angry?
The history of Derzhavin’s Olonets governorship includes an episode worthy of Gogol’s brush. There lived a tame bear cub in the governor's house. One day, following one of the officials who came there, Molchin, he entered the court. Maybe the latter was playing a prank on purpose. There was no presence that day. Entering the room, Molchin jokingly invited the assessors who were there to go meet the new member Mikhail Ivanovich, and then went out and let the bear cub in. The party hostile to Derzhavin took advantage of this. The appearance of the governor's beast was seen as disrespect for the court, the watchman drove him out with a stick, and Derzhavin's followers, in turn, saw in this disrespect for the governor himself. The matter was inflated to the point that it went back to the Senate, which finally left Tutolmin's complaint about Derzhavin's improper actions regarding this matter without consequences. Prince Vyazemsky, however, spoke at the general meeting of the Senate: “Here, my dears, is how our clever poet works; he makes bears chairmen.”
The “Nakaz” made it obligatory for governors to travel around the province and draw up a description of it. In the Olonets province, this kind of travel was associated with many hardships and obstacles. Nevertheless, on the instructions of Tutolmin, Derzhavin made a detour by water, visited the city of Pudozh, recently “discovered” by the governor himself, and in turn “discovered” the city of Kem. It goes without saying that this establishment of cities was exclusively a matter of paper production, with the exception of the blessing of waters, pies and speeches. There were no public places, no premises for them, no people anywhere to be found. However, Derzhavin’s reports and descriptions were in many ways worthy of attention, revealing diligence, observation and common sense. Of course, Derzhavin did not miss an opportunity to criticize the actions of the governor, and although such criticism was based on personal displeasure, his comments were often thorough. Thus, he refutes Tutolmin’s opinion about “the reprehensible properties of the inhabitants of the country, the tendency to resentment, deception and treachery.”
Derzhavin very aptly notes that if they were like that, “then they would not work forever for their creditors for debt, having laws on their side, they would not practice trades that often require stability and loyalty to the agreement, they would not be obedient and patient in in the event of oppression and robbery inflicted on them by the elders and other authorities and courts, in this remote and remote side, they had previously fearlessly acted upon all sorts of insolence. Their morals were not quarrelsome and rather peaceful, which became clear to me from the fact that, on occasion, the director’s economy ordered the seizure of arable land, Although they grumbled and were indignant, they were quite peaceful under such circumstances, under which in other provinces things would not have happened without murders and great evil,” etc.
Tutolmin reported that in general in all districts there were incomparably more wealthy than poor villagers. Derzhavin, objecting, says that prosperity is the reason that there are so many poor.
“They, having acquired wealth by contract or in some other way, distribute it at an ungodly percentage, enslave poor borrowers into almost eternal work for themselves with debts, and through this they become stronger and richer than anywhere else in Russia, for, with a lack of bread and other things necessary for food, things, there is no one to resort to but a rich man living in a nearby village. This abuse seems to need to be stopped."
This is how the poet-citizen depicts the primordial misfortune of the Russian people in all its nakedness. One cannot help but marvel at how he could, having looked at this picture enough, then treat almost contemptuously the aspirations of the idealists of that time in the person of Radishchev, and then the liberation ideas of Alexander I and his associates.
Upon returning to Petrozavodsk, discord flared up with renewed vigor. Finally, Derzhavin, under the pretext of surveying two more districts, left again and went to St. Petersburg, where, thanks to the petition of friends, the patronage of nobles and Catherine’s attention to the author of “Felitsa,” he soon obtained a decree transferring him as governor to Tambov.
Among the intercessors for Derzhavin, in addition to his former patrons, we meet Ermolov, the empress’s temporary favorite, who, however, did not have time to undermine Potemkin’s prestige. In his Notes, Derzhavin says that he promised to buy Ermolov a trotting horse in the Tambov province and subsequently fulfilled this promise, but did not manage to send the horse before Ermolov’s fall. In the same way, Gavrila Romanovich’s notification that, at the request of the favorite, a village near Tambov had been found for him to buy was also “late.”
It took a whole month to move to Tambov, with stops and hospitable receptions in Moscow and Ryazan, where Governor Gudovich himself was based.
Tambov, although three times larger in number of inhabitants, of course, differed little in terms of amenities from Petrozavodsk. The government buildings looked like ruins. The public places, according to Derzhavin, “are not only the poorest and most cramped huts, but also very dilapidated. There was no passage through the streets in rainy times, in some places there were livestock, and people drowned in the mud.”
Derzhavin soon got used to his new position. The mere fact that the governor did not live in Tambov was beneficial for the governor. Here the pomp and arrogance of Tutolmin did not bother his eyes, and Derzhavin was the first person in the city. The limits of power were also more clearly defined; every step was not controlled. “Now he is a perfect governor, not a sexton,” wrote Katerina Yakovlevna to the Kapnist family. Derzhavin himself said that he was resurrected in body and soul. Besides everything, the house here was better, and the farming was cheaper and richer.
Soon Gudovich visited Tambov and spent a week there. He was greeted “with unfeigned joy from everyone,” Derzhavin wrote to Count Vorontsov. The viceroy and the governor charmed each other with their courtesy. It so happened that Gudovich’s arrival coincided with the holiday of his accession to the throne. Derzhavin prepared a theatrical play specially written by him in honor of the guest - the representative of the throne.
Gudovich, of course, was extremely pleased with all this and, for his part, when leaving, gave Derzhavin all kinds of authority in the service. The new governor first of all dealt with the city and the reconstruction of buildings. He especially wanted to set up a house of public meetings, a club, or, as it was then called, a “redoubt,” and thereby influence the development of public life and interests in the spirit of Catherine’s educational ideas. In anticipation of the club, Derzhavin organized evening meetings, dancing and music in his house. At home, he opened a school for the children of local nobles, where they taught literacy, arithmetic and dancing. The latter art was considered at that time perhaps the most useful and, perhaps, actually had considerable educational value, replacing the rougher, often wild entertainment of the undersized.
Derzhavin was also of considerable concern about the establishment of a theater in the city. Gudovich gave him a thousand rubles in banknotes for the installation and the same amount annually for maintenance. He gave amateur performances in his house and staged “The Minor.”
The new governor lived in grand style and made his home the center of the local nobility. Lvov, in letters to the poet-governor, was surprised at his extravagance and inquired about the source of expenses, knowing Derzhavin’s “small” funds.
A vast field of activity opened up. Courts, provincial prisons, roads, government fees - everything was in a primitive state, or, like schools and many other institutions introduced by decrees, they were listed only on paper. The terrible state of the prisons forced Derzhavin to immediately take some measures. The description of the places of detention in his note is not without picturesqueness that causes horror. Derzhavin's comments about measures to speed up the production of cases and about the nature of justice would deserve the attention of his contemporaries. Presenting a report on the unfair decision of one case, Derzhavin says, among other things: “I notice that small ranks are always accused here, and large ones, as you can see from these cases, are acquitted.”
From the very beginning, finding clerks, secretaries and copyists was a significant concern for the governor. The common vice of all these small fry, which could only be obtained in Moscow, was drunkenness and, of course, bribery. But they willingly put up with the latter.
It was difficult to find those who carried out the law, but in fact it turned out that it was even more difficult to find the laws themselves in printed form. Derzhavin asked a Moscow friend and relative to send them in vain. The latter could only send the Admiralty regulations and the colonel's instructions, explaining that no other laws were found for sale, and since they were no longer printed, it was not expected that his wish would be fulfilled in the future.
One of the measures taken by Derzhavin to reduce business production was the establishment of a printing house in Tambov.
If it was difficult to find decent clerical workers, then it was no less difficult to find typesetters. Derzhavin turned to the printing company for assistance and thus entered into correspondence with Novikov. The latter, of course, willingly took part in his favorite business and helped Derzhavin acquire everything he needed. The items were sent to Tambov in the winter, and at the beginning of 1788 the printing house opened its operations. Senate decrees, publications, information on bread prices, and so on began to be printed in the printing house. A special table was established for collecting materials. Articles that were subject to publication were published on Saturdays and Sundays, sent to the mayor and the lower zemstvo court for general information, and then nailed to the walls of churches, bazaars and fairs. Thus, something like the future provincial gazettes was established, officially established during the reign of Nicholas. In addition to official papers, the Tambov printing house also began printing “literary works” of Tambov ladies - translations of novels.
The idea of a printing house belonged to Derzhavin personally; the opening of public schools was the fulfillment of Catherine’s “inscriptions”. It is known that she talked a lot about measures to educate the people, corresponded about this with encyclopedists and German scientists, talked with the Austrian Emperor and signed up knowledgeable foreigners for meetings and development of a plan.
In the “Institution on the Provinces,” promulgated on November 7, 1775, “care for the establishment and solid foundation of public schools” was entrusted to the newly formed orders of public charity. They were obliged to establish schools, first in all cities, and then in populous villages for everyone who voluntarily wished to study.
But with a complete lack of teachers and teaching aids, successful activity could not be expected from these orders at first.
In Tambov, as throughout all of Rus', there were no educational institutions, except for a miserable garrison school and a theological seminary. According to Catherine’s decree, given in Tsarskoe Selo in the name of Gudovich, the opening of schools in the governorship of Ryazan and Tambov was to take place, as in other provinces, on September 22, the day of the empress’s coronation. Gudovich hastened, of course, to convey the order to Derzhavin, instructing him to prepare a school house and write about the same to the mayors of the cities of Kozlov and Lebedyan.
The well-known Kozodavlev in St. Petersburg was given the title of director of all schools in advance. He sent two teachers to Derzhavin with letters. “The presenters of this,” he wrote, “are the people who, under the leadership of your Excellency, spread education in the Tambov province”; further Kozodavlev seriously outlines the plan and organization of the proposed schools. In Tambov, at least, everything took place as planned. True, the school house was a worthless ruin, generously ceded by the local wealthy tax farmer, merchant Jonah Borodin, for 300 rubles a year. There were also no materials to repair the house, but the treasury chamber helped the governor by loaning out boards, bricks and lime. In three weeks everything was ready. There were only teachers and students missing. The latter were also taken “on loan” - from the garrison school.
The opening took place solemnly, with cannon fire.
In honor of the opening of the school, the governor hosted a theatrical performance. The comedy “It’s As It Should” by Verevkin, directed against clerks, was chosen for a moralizing purpose. It was preceded by a prologue written by Derzhavin, of allegorical content. The dense forest meant the poorly educated nobility; enlightenment appeared in the form of Genius; Thalia and Melpomene personified the theater. The genius invites them to help the cause of Peter and Catherine.
Small schools were then more or less solemnly opened in other cities of the province: in Kozlov, Shatsk, Morshansk. Their existence was not guaranteed by anything. Local society did not want to support them and was downright hostile to the cause. Despite Derzhavin’s strict and eloquent suggestions to the caretakers and mayors “to make every possible effort to develop institutions based on the city situation,” teachers did not receive salaries, and merchants and townspeople did not give up their children. Little by little, some schools were closed, others somehow disappeared by themselves, and the entire brilliant extravaganza was drowned in the thick darkness of a far from allegorical forest; Derzhavin's energy, however, received reward. Count A.R. Vorontsov and Senator A.B. Naryshkin was assigned to audit the provinces, including Tambov. Here they were satisfied with everything and wrote in a report to Catherine that the care and diligence of the governor of the province Derzhavin did him honor. “I was vividly and heartily glad,” my St. Petersburg friend Vasiliev writes to Derzhavin, “that you brought down the senators so successfully.” However, Count Vorontsov wrote to Derzhavin from the capital about the audit, promising from Ryazan to accurately notify him of the time of arrival in Tambov and offering to prepare public places for the examination.
Meanwhile, shadows began to creep over Derzhavin’s peaceful relationship with Gudovich. Disagreements arose. At the same time, rumors began to circulate in St. Petersburg about Derzhavin’s “steep” measures in certain cases, partiality and arbitrariness.
The case of Captain Satin especially damaged him. At the request of some interested parties, Derzhavin began to “repair” the search, exceeding his authority, and decided to take the estate of Satin’s wife into custody on the basis not even of eyewitness testimony about Satin, but only their restraint, finding that “silence expresses more than all conversations.” .
With all his affection for Derzhavin, even Count Vorontsov could not approve of his orders, and this time he responded to the request to take his side with a letter reminiscent of the instructions given to the once restless poet by Count Panin. Vorontsov, to put it very mildly, notes that Derzhavin’s measures involuntarily make one suspect him of partiality towards one side, not to mention the fact that they are completely outside the competence of the governor, and “if the internal economy and the details of the cohabitation of a husband and wife are thus bosses interfere, then arbitrary inquisitions will result, which are not at all similar to the empress’s way of thinking.” Further, her manifesto has been misinterpreted: the silence of witnesses can serve as an acquittal rather than an accusation. Finally, Derzhavin’s behavior violates everyone’s personal safety and tranquility. Count Vorontsov friendly expresses his pleasure in the fact that Gudovich stopped Derzhavin’s decision, since he himself, if the matter had come to St. Petersburg, would have had to intercede against Derzhavin, of course, not personally for Satin, but “in order to forestall, so that henceforth, boards, governors and governors-general did not appropriate to themselves what was not given to them.”
This case was joined by other troubles of the same kind and Derzhavin’s personal scores with people close to Gudovich. Finally, hoping for the patronage of the all-powerful Potemkin, Derzhavin ordered the release of a significant amount from the treasury chamber to his commissioner for the purchase of provisions for the army, without asking the consent of Gudovich, and in response to the refusal of the chamber (for lack of funds) he carried out an audit, again exceeding his power and invading area of jurisdiction of one governor. This measure caused the surprise and indignation of Gudovich himself. Reconciliation became impossible.
Both sides turned to the Senate: Derzhavin - with a report on the disorders and omissions he found; chamber - with a complaint of harassment by the governor.
Meanwhile, Gudovich privately wrote to Vorontsov, asking him to rid him of his zealous colleague, who, he writes, “entered the Senate with a report past me, corresponded with other provinces and entered my position as if I were not there.”
It is curious that the Senate, even before receiving Gudovich’s explanations, found that Derzhavin had autocratically disposed of such income that it was forbidden to spend without the permission of the Prosecutor General, and the decree of the Senate determined to reprimand Derzhavin, which was then reported to the governor. The Senate ignored Derzhavin’s rather strange explanation, who considered his actions to be necessary to save Potemkin’s army and, consequently, the fatherland from destruction. Even Derzhavin's friends did not approve of his behavior. Vasiliev wrote to him: “the treasury chamber did not issue money, it would have responded,” etc. It was all the more inopportune to have an audit without obvious reasons for suspicion, “and when there is none, then how can it be to dishonor an entire chamber?”
To top off Derzhavin’s misfortunes, his wife quarreled with the wife of the chairman of the chamber, pushed her as if with a fan, and the matter was inflated as much as possible by local gossip. A party hostile to the governor took advantage of this. A whole meeting was held, and a written complaint was submitted to the empress herself. They began to blame Derzhavin for extortion.
For his part, he asked permission to appear in St. Petersburg for personal justification and sent letters to Potemkin, Vorontsov, Bezborodko and all his friends and patrons. Meanwhile, during Gudovich’s stay in Tambov, Derzhavin, in return for previous courtesies, showed such passion and irritation that Gudovich, in his report to the Senate, complained about the governor’s violation of peace and quiet. In response to the Senate demanding an explanation from him, Derzhavin, without announcing this decree to the board, ordered the secretaries to prepare certificates about all these circumstances, as if for another need. The certificates were presented, and Derzhavin presented them to the Senate, but Gudovich, having learned about everything, reported to the Senate and asked to immediately remove the governor from office for such illegal actions. Derzhavin's friends came to despair, seeing that he was harming himself and making it impossible to keep his side. The Senate actually presented the empress with an opinion on removing Derzhavin from office and putting him on trial.
From that moment on, Gudovich, while in Tambov, ignored Derzhavin, without, however, giving him reasons for a quarrel, like Tutolmin. Finally, by a personal decree, Derzhavin was put on trial, and it was ordered that he be required to sign a written undertaking not to leave Moscow until the end of the case.
Derzhavin appeared in Moscow without losing his presence of mind. His main concern now was to achieve a personal audience with the Empress. He finally succeeded, probably thanks to Potemkin. Apparently, Derzhavin also owes the leniency of the Senate to the influence of the latter. All conclusions were favorable to him. True, the Senate recognized Derzhavin’s behavior as offensive to Gudovich, but since, according to the latter’s request, the governor had already been removed from office, Gudovich could be satisfied with this. Apart from personal accounts, in the opinion of the Senate, Derzhavin’s actions did not harm either private individuals or government interests, and therefore the Senate betrays the entire matter to the most merciful benevolence of the Empress. Derzhavin’s ability to use people and circumstances prevailed over everyone, and his arrogance was so great that he complained about this decision of the Senate, which nevertheless recognized him as an insult to Gudovich.
Complete success awaited Derzhavin in St. Petersburg. Catherine approved the Senate's report and ordered the secretary to serve herself the ode "Felitsa." “It was ordered to tell Derzhavin,” Khrapovitsky writes in his diary, “that the report and his request have been read, and that it is difficult for Her Majesty to blame the author of the ode to Felitsa: cela le consolera (this will console him). Reported Derzhavin’s gratitude, - on peut lui trouver une place (you can find a place for him)." A few days later, Derzhavin introduced himself to Catherine in Tsarskoe Selo; she received him graciously, let him kiss his hand and left him for dinner. Derzhavin even claims that she said to those around her: “This is my own author, who was oppressed.” Dissatisfied, however, with the uncertainty of the situation, he wrote her a letter in which he asked for a salary pending his appointment to the service and, in addition, asked for an audience to explain matters of the province. Catherine did both.
Derzhavin took all the correspondence on the case with Gudovich to Tsarskoye, but, fortunately, he guessed to leave it in the next room when entering the office. The Empress, giving him a hand to kiss, asked: “What need does he have for her?” He replied that he wanted to thank her for the justice done to him and explain his innocence.
But don’t you have something obstinate in your character that you don’t get along with anyone? - asked Catherine.
I began my service as a simple soldier and rose to prominence on my own, etc.
But why didn’t you get along with Tutolmin?
He made his own laws, and I am used to following only yours.
Why did you break up with Vyazemsky?
He didn’t like my ode to Felice, he began to ridicule and oppress me.
What is the reason for your quarrel with Gudovich?
He didn't have your best interests at heart; I can provide a whole book as proof.
Okay,” she said, “later.”
According to Khrapovitsky, Catherine later responded to this conversation in the following way: “I told him that he respects the rank of rank. I couldn’t resist in the third place; you have to look for the reasons in yourself. He got excited in front of me too. Let him write poetry. He, it seems, I wasn't very pleased with me." They were ordered to give him a salary, but he had to wait about two and a half years for a place.
Derzhavin's old scores in his career were not yet completely over. A fine of 17 thousand rubles was imposed on him for seizing the estate of the merchant Borodin. Derzhavin tried to assure everyone that the Senate could not be fair to him, and asked the Empress to lift his arrest in addition to the Senate. Without waiting for a decision, he submitted a new request to Catherine: since the case will be reported in the Senate on the basis of a “note unknown to him,” then, in order to see if everything is stated, to allow him to be present in the Senate during the hearing of the case and have a hand in it. The genuine request, reminiscent in its naivety of a fairy tale about a goldfish, is marked: “refused November 2, 1789.” The recovery from Derzhavin, apparently, took its course.
For two and a half years, Derzhavin, as he put it, “wandered around the square, living in St. Petersburg without anything to do.” At this time, he wrote “Waterfall” and several other large and many small poems, obviously not considering literary work to be a “business.” It is clear why his poems bear the stamp of quest and endearment. In one of the first poems of this period (“The Righteous Judge”), the poet sets out his creed as a citizen: avoid bad people and enemies, perform one’s duty honestly, etc. In this and other poems, Derzhavin did not so much follow the lyrical impulses of his soul, but rather sought an opportunity to draw the attention of higher officials to himself and his civic ideals. That is why, probably, having written the ode “Philosophers, Drunk and Sober,” where the ideal of well-being is not wealth, fame and rank, but health, tranquility and moderate contentment, Derzhavin explains that this ode was written without any purpose.
Satirical ridicule of personal enemies most often enlivened his lyre. Drawn from poetry by service and strife, he, while still in Petrozavodsk, however, composed an ode to “He who trusts in his own strength,” where he arms the sky for his defense and destruction of Tutolmin. “The Lord,” he says, “gives protection to the righteous, the power destroys the arrogant and casts the sinners into the pit.” A vignette was subsequently added here; she depicts how thunder breaks the pyramid, and a shepherd, sitting under a tree, calmly looks at this spectacle. In the ode “For Happiness” - “from the divine right hand a horn buzzes to the tone of a fiddle” - a clear allusion to Gudovich, whom Derzhavin calls in “Notes” a man of mediocre intelligence, but exalted by happiness. In this ode, happiness is generally likened to a balloon in that it falls wherever it happens. The comparison suggested itself because just shortly before that the first public experience of aeronautics had been made in Versailles - and now, turning to happiness, the poet says: “but ah! How are you some kind of sphere, or a light balloon of a hot air balloon, shining, flying in the air.” . By happiness he understood chance differently. It is known that the expression to fall into chance remained in force for a whole century, meaning the success of the favorite and his minions. Happiness can “make a slave the ruler of the world.” To explain the humorous tone of the ode, the poet put in the title the words: “written at Shrovetide.” As usual, Derzhavin’s philosophical theme is intertwined with satirical antics and political allusions. By the way, the poet praises Potemkin:
In those days, like walking everywhere
Before the Russians you are fleeing the people
And you tear his laurels in winter (a hint at the capture of Ochakov in winter)
You're ruffling Istanbul's beard,
On the Taurus you go leapfrog, (conquest of Crimea)
Do you want to give Stockholm some pepper?
You're making a mustache for Berlin,
And you dress up the Thames in fags,
You are inflating the crest of Warsaw,
You smoke sausages for the Dutch etc.
Catherine and other persons were quite clear about these hints, and they knew how to appreciate them at that time. Fashions and morals also found a comic depiction here, sometimes as an echo of the writings of Catherine herself. The poet is not entirely satisfied with the fashionable imitation of foreigners, “tastes and morals have become diversified,” he says, “the whole world has become a striped tailcoat.”
The main theme, however, remains happiness, or chance, and the drawing depicts how happiness rides through the air on a soap bubble and waves a magic fly [A cloth, a piece of solid fabric, a veil, a scarf, a scarf (V. Dahl's Dictionary).].
In the second year of Derzhavin’s “idleness,” chance helped him attract attention. The feat of taking Izmail eclipsed even Ochakov. The ode was a huge success. Derzhavin received from the empress a snuffbox studded with diamonds worth two thousand rubles and, according to him, was received even more graciously at court. The Empress, seeing him for the first time after the publication of the work, approached him with a smile and said: “I did not know until now that your trumpet is as loud as your lyre is pleasant.”
The picture subsequently drawn by Olenin for this ode depicted a fire-breathing Vesuvius, against which a Russian grenadier was walking fearlessly with a fixed bayonet, leaving behind the pillars of Hercules that he had knocked down. This picture disappeared in England when Derzhavin was thinking of ordering an engraving there, and the poet suggests that it was destroyed there “out of envy of Russian glory.” It is curious that in the ode, after describing the triumph of victory, a dream of eternal peace and doubt about the possibility of the latter is expressed. In fact, shortly before the appearance of the ode, an essay by Saint-Pierre appeared, proposing a project for general disarmament, and this essay was translated into Russian in Potemkin’s camp before Ochakov. But this idea did little to meet Catherine’s ambitious plans.
Derzhavin's odes created great fame for him, which turned into real fame with the advent of "Waterfall". After the brilliant holiday described by us in 1791, sung by Derzhavin, Potemkin left St. Petersburg, never to return here again. Death awaited him on the banks of the Prut. The news of her inspired Derzhavin to write one of his most original and daring works. Belinsky, calling this ode one of the poet’s most brilliant works, noted, however, that not only fantasy, but also cold reason took part in the formation of its concept. Everyone will find evidence of this in its length and rhetoric.
Many began to seek acquaintance with the poet; among them were Dmitriev, and then Karamzin. The first one says that at first he only looked at him from afar in the palace with a feeling of deep pleasure and respect. Soon he was lucky enough to make an acquaintance through Lvov. The still unrecognized poet, accompanied by Lvov, finally went, at the invitation of Derzhavin himself, whom he wanted and was timid to meet, to his house.
“We found,” he says, “the owner and hostess in the author’s office: in a cap and a blue satin robe, he was writing something on a high hairdress; and she, in a white morning dress, was sitting in an armchair in the middle of the room, and the hairdresser was curling her hair. hair. The kind-hearted appearance and friendliness of both encouraged me from the first words. After talking for a few minutes about literature, about the war, etc., I wanted to bow out with decency, but both of them began to calm me down by dinner. After coffee, I got up again and was asked again "was before tea. Thus, from the first visit I sat with them all day, and two weeks later I became a short acquaintance in the house. And from that time rarely a day passed that I did not see this amiable and unforgettable couple."
The friendship between them was established for life.
Karamzin met Derzhavin after his return from abroad; he went to Moscow with the idea of founding a magazine and rejoiced at the agreement he received from the “singer of the wise Felitsa” to take part in the publication. Derzhavin indeed became one of the most diligent employees of the emerging Moscow Journal. Karamzin failed to publish “Waterfall”. The ode was not completed until 1794. Until then, according to Bolotov, it “was carried around among the people” in handwritten form.
Potemkin's favor could not bring Derzhavin closer to Catherine. By the way, the latter managed to secure the favor of the new favorite Platon Zubov. He talks about this rapprochement “with simplicity, which does honor to his truthfulness.” Several times, he says, the court lackeys did not allow him to see the young lucky man, and he had no other way to overcome obstacles than “resort to his talent.” The remedy turned out to be valid. This was the longest of all his lyrical works - “Image of Felitsa”, the manuscript was presented to Zubov on the day of his coronation. The Empress, having read it, ordered her favorite to “invite the author to dinner with him and always include him in his conversation.” From that time on, Derzhavin often began to visit Zubov, and this proximity alone provided him with weight at court and in the eyes of society. It is not known how interested Zubov was in literature, but his intimate proximity to Catherine obliged him to become addicted to her. Catherine wrote to Grimm: “Do you want to know what we did last summer in our leisure time with Zubov in Tsarskoe Selo, with the thunder of guns? We translated a volume of Plutarch into Russian. This brought us happiness and peace in the midst of the noise; he also read Polybius.” .
Derzhavin, however, was not satisfied with his position at court. He was looking for a direct assignment. The Empress, apparently, could not stop at anything, knowing his quarrelsome character.
A successful thought dawned on Princess Dashkova’s head. She advised Catherine to take Derzhavin “to describe the glorious deeds of her reign.” But since the princess noisily divulged her thoughts, this probably interfered with his determination.
However, Felitsa's singer could not remain without an award. The ode depicted her deeds, wisdom and even selflessness in bright colors. To save people, says our poet, the empress fearlessly takes poison. Derzhavin himself noted that without explanation many would not understand him. Turning to these explanations, we learn that the poet meant here the empress’s brave experience in inoculating smallpox. In fact, Catherine sent a doctor from England who inoculated her and the heir to the throne with smallpox for the first time in Russia. Then “smallpox houses were established in all provinces.” Judging by the success in opening schools, however, it is unlikely that there was much work there. In any case, the initiative was really made by her.
For some time, Zubov, however, paid little attention to Derzhavin, sometimes giving him only individual instructions. By the way, Derzhavin should have once outlined his thoughts on how to increase state revenues without burdening the people (!).
Apparently, the favorite planned to distinguish himself before the monarch with a special state service with the help of a practical poet.
Finally, Derzhavin was given an assignment in which he could see a sign of Catherine’s trust. He had to consider the claims of the Venetian envoy Mocenigo to the court banker Sutherland. At the same time, news of Potemkin’s death arrived, and soon after, on December 13, 1791, a decree to the Senate followed: “We most mercifully command D.S.S. Gabriel Derzhavin to be with us to accept petitions.”
Thus, not only did Derzhavin’s desire to have a strong official position come true, but he became one of the closest people to Catherine, her personal secretary.
“Being a poet by inspiration, I had to tell the truth; a politician or a courtier in my service at court, I was forced to cover up the truth with allegory and allusions, from which it naturally turned out that in some of my works, to this day, many people read what they do not understand,” this is how the venerable poet confessed in his declining years, during the reign of Catherine’s grandson.
Following Catherine's behest, his satire was never castigating. On the other hand, Derzhavin was not a politician until the end of his life and did not adapt to the role of a courtier, despite all his efforts to do so. The hindrance was partly natural, partly acquired character traits: the soldier’s arrogance and crude naivety, albeit in the best sense of the word.
In the two years of the Secretary of State, he managed to get tired of Catherine and quarrel with friends and patrons: with Dashkova, Bezborodko and others. He does not spare them in his “Notes”, at the same time revealing only his wrongness.
It was not the love of truth, but the lack of a sense of tact and proportion that soon caused Catherine to cool off towards him. “He comes at me with all sorts of nonsense,” she complained shortly after his appointment. As in his case with Gudovich, now in every case entrusted to him, he appeared with a pile of documents; “a whole line of guides and lackeys carried great piles of paper behind him into the empress’s office.” Can one be surprised if Catherine sometimes sent him away, losing patience, and once, in bad weather, she ordered him to say: “I’m surprised how such a cold doesn’t take over your larynx.”
“It often happened,” he says, “that she would get angry and drive him away from her, and he would pout, promise himself to be careful, not to say anything to her; but the next day, when he came in, she would immediately notice that he was angry : will begin to ask about his wife, about his home life, if he wants to drink, and other kind and merciful things like that, so that he will forget all his annoyance and become as sincere as before. One day it happened that, unable to bear it, he jumped up from his chair and in a frenzy he said: “My God! who can resist this woman? Empress, - You are not a person. Today I took an oath not to say anything to you; but you, against my will, do to me whatever you want." She laughed and said: "Is this really true?" In various versions, however, contemporaries claim that Derzhavin cursed during reports, and once grabbed the empress by the dress, and she called Popov from the next room and told him: “Stay here, Vasily Stepanovich, otherwise this gentleman gives a lot of free rein to his hands.” He himself does not deny that, despite his temper, Catherine, having quarreled, received him graciously the next day , apologized, saying: “You yourself are hot, you keep arguing with me." This happened when, in the Sutherland bankruptcy case, Derzhavin reported the huge debts of the nobles to the court banker. Potemkin took 800 thousand. Catherine ordered it to be taken into the treasury account, thus excusing him , that “he had many needs in his service and often spent his money” (!) When it came to Grand Duke Pavel Petrovich, whom Catherine, as you know, did not like, and she began to complain, saying: “I don’t know what’s wrong with him.” do?", then Derzhavin, to his credit, if only he correctly conveys the event, remained silent and answered the repeated question that he could not judge the heir with the empress. She flushed and shouted: “Get out!” Derzhavin came out and resorted to Zubov’s defense. The next day, Catherine listened to the report to the end, gave a resolution, and that was the end of the matter.
Cooling, however, was inevitable. Spoiled by worldwide worship, Catherine, of course, expected new poems dedicated to her from her secretary, and Derzhavin’s lyre became stubborn. He says that the Empress herself encouraged him to write in this way; he, on the one hand, devoted himself too ardently to business, and on the other, seeing injustice, had no desire, and if he wrote, it was with an admixture of moral teaching. Several times he nevertheless began to write, locking himself at home, but could not write anything, “without being excited by some patriotic, glorious feat.” The inscription to the portrait of Catherine in 1791 strangely contradicts the latter:
Flying Glory to the Universe,
Orders the question to be resolved by centuries:
"She's second in name,
But who is first in business?"
The answer lies partly in the poet's personal displeasure.
His reports happened less and less often. Cases on unimportant subjects passed through his hands, more serious reports were entrusted to other secretaries, while he thought with his appointment to combine the first role and even lead the Senate.
Finally, indirectly, Derzhavin arranged for the Empress to petition for the award of Vladimir of the second class to him; but to no avail: “He should be pleased with me that I was taken as a secretary from under trial,” answered Catherine, “and an order is not given without merit.” Knowing Derzhavin’s character, it was difficult to expect laudatory works from him after this, especially since Vladimir of the second class was his cherished dream and he considered himself left out by not receiving the desired reward for the governorship in Tambov.
It was finally decided to make Derzhavin a senator and appoint Troshchinsky to his place as secretary. The decree took place during the celebration of the Peace of Jassy, and the long-desired order was also granted to him. After that, he reported to the empress several more times, but only on matters that he did not manage to finish.
Although Derzhavin was not entirely satisfied with the new title, he asked Zubov to express his gratitude to the Empress for the appointment. Catherine was not averse to limiting the sphere of jurisdiction of the Senate, allowing herself to decide matters, and for this purpose the title of senator was often given to insignificant persons. Here is the source of Derzhavin’s words in the ode “Nobleman”:
A donkey will remain a donkey
Although shower him with stars:
Where should one act with the mind,
He just flaps his ears.
The poet decided to force himself to be respected in this rank of senator, to force himself to be listened to, and he extended his zeal to the point that on holidays he went to the Senate, read papers, made comments on them, etc., in every possible way showing “love of truth” and restless zeal . Soon, thanks to Zubov, he also received the position of president of the Commerce Board. She, like other colleges, was on the eve of destruction, and the post satisfied not so much ambition as material security. Derzhavin could not stand it here either, assumed the role of a dignitary and soon summoned the Highest command: “not to interfere in the affairs of the St. Petersburg customs.”
Distressed by the failures, the poet decided to submit a request for dismissal for two years, not without the thought, however, of “punishing” the empress with his removal from business. Catherine replied that “it is no wonder to dismiss him, but first let the new tariff end, and his fall is because he began to appropriate to himself power that does not belong to him.”
The poet's displeasure was soon to be silenced.
In January 1793, news arrived from Paris about the execution of Louis XVI. The news made a strong impression. Catherine went to bed, was sick and sad. Derzhavin responded with the ode “Chariot”. France is “a den of murder,” he sees the hand of angry heaven on it. Addressing her, he says:
From the philosophers of enlightenment,
From the sticky royal kindness
You have fallen into chaos of corruption
And into the abyss of eternal shame. (!)
His note to the ode is interesting:
“It would not be surprising if the misfortune of the French came from sophists or superstitious writers, as well as from the actions of an evil sovereign; but when the people were enlightened with true enlightenment and the government was meek (!), then this riddle belongs to the solution of thoughtful politicians.”
On the occasion of the appointment of Rumyantsev as commander-in-chief in actions against Poland, Derzhavin, resorting to one of the usual techniques, reworks one of his old poems into a new one. This is how the ode “Nobleman” appeared. It contains typical features of life and people of Catherine’s century, but Belinsky already noticed that even all of Derzhavin’s works taken together do not express in such completeness and so vividly the Russian 18th century as Pushkin’s excellent poem “To the Nobleman,” this portrait of a nobleman of old times - a marvelous restoration from the ruins of the original appearance of the building.
At the end of Catherine’s reign, the poet almost got into real trouble for the ode “To Rulers and Judges,” which he included in a notebook of poems presented to the empress in 1795. This is an arrangement of a psalm of David. The poem reminds earthly rulers of the truth, but at the same time commands the nations to honor them as God's chosen ones and obey. However, the words: “untruth shakes thrones” and some others allowed Derzhavin’s enemies to convince Catherine, frightened by terror, that the same psalm was rearranged by the Jacobins and sung on the streets of Paris. Catherine began to show coldness towards the poet. They said in a whisper that they had even ordered to interrogate him; at that time the Secret Chancellery was already operating again with its entire arsenal and with Sheshkovsky at its head. Fortunately, Derzhavin found out about everything in time. At a dinner with Count A.I. Musin-Pushkin, one of the guests asked him:
What kind of Jacobin poetry are you writing, brother?
King David, said Derzhavin, was not a Jacobin.
Following this, he wrote a note entitled “Anecdote” and distributed it at court. Here he told the legend of Alexander the Great and his physician, applying it to himself and Catherine. The note reached the empress, had a good effect and saved the poet.
It is curious that the ode was written a long time ago, was redone several times and, initially directed against certain individuals under the influence of personal displeasure, eventually took on a general character. The last stanza undoubtedly contained an echo of Pugachevism: the nobles do not heed... Robbery, treachery, torture and the groans of the poor confuse, shake the kingdoms and plunge the throne into destruction.
Approaching Catherine strengthened the poet's fame. In 1792, a German translation of “The Vision of Murza” by the court scientist and educator Storch was published. None of the poets living at that time had, in his opinion, as many chances for immortality as Derzhavin.
For his part, Derzhavin did not remain indebted to those who distinguished him and, smashing the vices of noble anonymous people, accompanied the end of Catherine’s century, putting on the strings of his lyre the names of Suvorov, Zubov, Naryshkin, Orlov and others.
His lyrical creativity under Catherine ended with the writing of “Monument”. Having skillfully remade Horace's ode, the poet recognized his significance here and successfully defined the features of his poetry. The originality of the form destroys the reproach of imitation:
Everyone will remember this among countless nations,
How from obscurity I became known,
That I was the first to dare in a funny Russian syllable
To proclaim Felitsa’s virtues,
Talk about God in simplicity of heart
And speak the truth to kings with a smile...
Derzhavin’s poetry, says Shevyrev, is Russia itself in the Catherine century, with a sense of its gigantic power, with its triumph and plans in the East, with European innovations and with the remnants of old prejudices and beliefs; this is Russia lush, luxurious, magnificent, decorated with Asian pearls and stones, and also half wild, half barbaric, half literate. Such is Derzhavin's poetry in all its beauties and shortcomings.
Addressing Catherine, the poet himself said about his muse:
Under your name she will be loud,
You are the glory, I will live by your echo.
I will be in the grave, but I will speak...
This prophecy came true. Derzhavin's poetry in its best manifestations is a reflection of Catherine's reign and a monument to it.
Everyone knows Gavrilo Romanovich Derzhavin as a poet; there is a colossal literature about him. But they know and write about him, for obvious reasons, almost exclusively as a great Russian poet, and to a much lesser extent as a statesman. Meanwhile, Derzhavin was one of the first Russian conservatives, with all the inherent advantages and disadvantages of this trend.
The outer outline of Derzhavin’s biography is quite well known. His conservative position developed during the reign of Alexander I. The views and political practice of the mature Derzhavin indicate that he shared a number of basic components of the emerging conservatism (the need for a strong autocratic power limiting the interests of the Westernized and cosmopolitan-minded higher aristocracy, the denial of liberal reforms, the defense of the class division of society and serfdom, the fight against Westernism in the form Gallomania, the search for an original path of development of Russia in the sphere of culture, Russian nationalism, which was especially clearly manifested in its attitude to the Polish and Jewish issues) and consistently pursued them in its state and public activities. Thus, he is one of the “fathers” of Russian conservatism, along with N.M. Karamzin, A.S. Shishkov, F.V. Rostopchin and S.N. Glinka. The biography of Derzhavin the conservative deserves monographic coverage; it is quite extensive, so it is worth dwelling only on the most important episodes of his political and intellectual biography, which clearly characterize him precisely as a representative of the “right camp” of his time.
One of the rather acute problems at the beginning of the reign of Alexander I was the Jewish question, which affected the interests of that part of Jewry that lived in the territories that became part of the Russian Empire after the division of Poland. Derzhavin took an active part in attempts to resolve it, and his position had a conservative-nationalist overtones. Even under Paul I in 1800 he was sent to Belarus in order, on the one hand, to take measures against famine, and on the other, to study the Jewish question on the spot. Based on the results of the trip, Derzhavin compiled a note “Senator Derzhavin’s opinion on the aversion to the shortage of grain in Belarus by curbing the selfish trades of the Jews, on their transformation, etc.” In it, Derzhavin portrayed Jews as the main culprits for the plight of the peasantry and proposed to expel them from the villages and prohibit them from selling grain, distilling alcohol, and leasing landowners' estates. However, he noted that not only Jews, but also Polish landowners, who do not care enough about the welfare of their peasants, are to blame for the difficult economic situation of the peasants. Derzhavin also gave a sharply negative assessment of Jewish culture and customs, the internal communal organization of the Jewish community, the system of religious Jewish education, which, from his point of view, fostered an extremely negative attitude towards Christianity. Derzhavin's main practical conclusion was to completely assimilate Russian Jewry.
The significance of Derzhavin’s “Opinion” in historical literature is assessed differently. For example, Israeli researcher J. Klier calls this document “grandiose” and claims that it served as a source of “information, albeit inaccurate, for reformers of subsequent generations” and “a catalyst for an important attempt at reform under Alexander I ". It was Derzhavin who was the first high-ranking government official to formulate the “Jewish question” in Russia. This view of the Jews “dominated the official approach and public opinion throughout XIX centuries." Klier clearly exaggerated both the role of “Opinion” in government policy and its influence on the formation of the anti-Semitic discourse of the later Black Hundreds. It should be noted that Derzhavin, first of all, proposed measures aimed at no less than changing the worldview, customs and traditions of Jewry, first of all, introducing them to Christian culture, imparting a secular character to the system of Jewish education. It should be emphasized that his assimilation project was based on the projects of “Jewish reform” previously put forward by J. Frank and N. Notkin, who broke with Judaism and converted to Christianity.
Derzhavin sharply negatively assessed such a liberal measure as the publication of the law on free cultivators (1803), since he believed that from the liberation of peasants from serfdom “in the current state of public education, no state benefit will come from that, but on the contrary, the harm that the mob will convert freedom into self-will and will cause a lot of trouble.” He, however, did not so much defend serfdom as an inviolable principle, but rather considered the issue of emancipating the peasants untimely. In one of the versions of his will, which he wrote in retirement, Derzhavin expressed the desire that all his serfs and peasants, on the basis of the decree of 1803, would be converted into free cultivators.
At the beginning of October 1803, Alexander I published a rescript in which, under the pretext of irregularities in the conduct of affairs in the office of the Minister of Justice, Derzhavin was relieved of his post as Minister of Justice and Prosecutor General, while remaining a member of the Senate and the State Council. During a personal meeting with Alexander I, in response to Derzhavin’s question about the reasons for his disfavor, the emperor stated: “You serve too zealously,” after which the enraged Derzhavin refused to be present in the Council and Senate and asked to be completely dismissed from service. On October 7, 1803, a personal decree on his dismissal followed, putting an end to Derzhavin’s career as a statesman.
Derzhavin considered the main reason for his resignation to be the machinations of his enemies. First of all, he considered as such the “young friends” of the emperor (the Secret Committee), whom he called nothing less than a “Jacobin gang”, imbued with the “French and Polish constitutional spirit.”
After his resignation, Derzhavin focused on literary and social activities, and did extremely much for the formation of the Russian conservative “party.” The peak of his activity in the conservative camp occurred in 1807-1812. This was the time when “failures in foreign policy (Austerlitz, Tilsit) caused a huge surge of patriotic sentiment. Russia turned to the search for national landmarks capable of consolidating society around the throne. Their core was seen in the past - from antiquity to Catherine’s time.” In these social quests, one of the main intellectual forces was the Russian Academy, in which A.S. played the role of the main “guardians of national-patriotic ideas”, evoking understanding and respect in society. Shishkov and G.R. Derzhavin. On their initiative, some members of the Academy formed a literary association of Russian conservatives, its core being the so-called “archaist” writers. This is how the “Conversation of Lovers of the Russian Word” appeared. "Conversation" set as its main goal the fight against gallomania - the then dominant form of Russian Westernism, an unprecedented passion for the French language and culture, and on the eve of the great war with Napoleon.
The background of “Conversation” began in January 1807, when Shishkov suggested that Derzhavin organize weekly literary evenings. They began to take place in February of the same year, on Saturdays, alternately at the apartments of G.R. Derzhavina, A.S. Shishkova, I.S. Zakharov and A.S. Khvostova. Derzhavin, along with Shishkov, was the second most important initiator of the creation of “Conversation”. At the “Conversations” meetings, they read their works in addition to Derzhavin, I.A. Krylov, N.I. Gnedich, S.A. Shirinsky-Shikhmatov and others, and the conversations were conducted not only about literature, but also about current politics. Friendly meetings gradually took on organizational forms. The idea to finally transform the readings into public ones and formalize them legally arose in 1810.
The first ceremonial meeting of the Conversations and the first readings followed on March 14, 1811 in the house of Derzhavin, who redecorated a separate room for meetings and donated 3,000 rubles worth of books for the Conversations library. A.S. Shishkov ensured that Emperor Alexander I himself was invited to the first meeting (although he never showed up). For the first meeting of the “Conversation”, composer D.S. Bortnyansky, close to Empress Maria Feodorovna, at Derzhavin’s suggestion, wrote a congratulatory cantata “Orpheus’ Meeting of the Sun,” which was performed according to the planned program by singers from the court chapel. There is an opinion that the Dowager Empress Maria Feodorovna patronized the Shishkov-Derzhavin circle and shared their conservative beliefs. Members of this literary group visited her palace in Pavlovsk and read their works.
In the notes of A.S. Sturdza described in detail the everyday details of the “Conversations” meetings: “The medium-sized hall, furnished with beautiful yellow marble columns, seemed even more elegant in the brilliance of luxurious lighting. For the listeners, rows of well-designed seats rose on ledges around the hall. In the middle of the temple of the muses there was a huge oblong table covered with green thin cloth. The members of the Conversation were sitting near the table, chaired by Derzhavin, at whose wave an entertaining, and often exemplary, reading began and alternated.”
The organization of the society was carefully thought out. The “Conversation” initially consisted of 24 full members and of collaborating members, “whose positions become full members.” To maintain order in the readings, it was divided into four categories. The chairmen of categories 1-4 were appointed accordingly A.S. Shishkov, G.R. Derzhavin, A.S. Khvostov and I.S. Zakharov. In addition to the chairman, each category had five more full members. Trustees were placed above the chairmen at the head of each category: P.V. Zavadovsky, N.S. Mordvinov, A.K. Razumovsky and I.I. Dmitriev (the first is former, and the rest are current ministers). Among the full members of the “Conversation” were I.A. Krylov, S.A. Shirinsky-Shikhmatov, A.N. Olenin, D.I. Khvostov, A.F. Labzin, A.A. Shakhovskaya and others. Among the 33 honorary members were Commander-in-Chief S.K. Vyazmitinov, F.V. Rostopchin, P.I. Golenishchev-Kutuzov, A.N. Golitsyn, M.M. Speransky, V.A. Ozerov, M.L. Magnitsky, S.S. Uvarov, V.V. Kapnist, N.M. Karamzin, A.I. Musin-Pushkin, St. Petersburg Metropolitan Ambrose (Podobedov), Bishop of Vologda Evgeniy Bolkhovitinov. Emperor Alexander I never appeared at the meetings of the society, despite persistent invitations.
This kind of “pluralistic” composition of the “Conversation”, which consisted of individuals belonging to various political and literary groups and trends, which previously were often in hostile relations with each other, suggests that one of the undeclared goals of the “Conversation” was the unification of former ideological opponents in an atmosphere of sharply increasing threat from Napoleonic France.
Literary activity of “Conversations” in XIX-XX centuries often rated very low. Nowadays, the most authoritative researcher of the activities of the Conversation, M. G. Altshuller, described its main composition in a completely different way: “Before us is an association that had first-class literary forces. The “Conversation” was headed by such major personalities and talented writers as Shishkov and Derzhavin. An important role in it was played by I.A., who was regularly present at the meetings. Krylov. Among its members we see such talented writers as Shakhovskoy, Shikhmatov, Kapnist, Gorchakov, Grech, Bunina, Gnedich (who did not formally belong to Beseda), etc. The association included prominent scientists and public figures: Mordvinov, Olenin, Bolkhovitinov , Vostokov and others.” Almost the entire metropolitan intelligentsia was often present at Beseda meetings. She enjoyed the demonstrative support of the Orthodox Church; Thus, in January 1812, the “Conversation” was visited by all members of the Holy Synod. During the war the meetings were interrupted, but continued after the war. The “Conversations” meetings attracted up to several hundred people.
It was thanks to his activities in “Beseda” that Derzhavin’s like-minded friend and friend Shishkov received the post of Secretary of the State Council on the eve of the Patriotic War of 1812. After the war, when Alexander I took a course towards the creation of a pan-Christian state and ecumenism in confessional politics, the importance of the conservative-nationalist “Conversation” was inevitably bound to sharply decrease. In 1816, following the death of G.R. Derzhavin, who died on July 9, 1816 in the village of Zvanka, Novgorod province, “Conversation” ceased to exist.
To this day, the biography of G.R. is unsurpassed in its wealth of factual materials. Derzhavin is a book by Y.K. Grot "The life of Derzhavin according to his writings, letters and historical documents." St. Petersburg, 1880. Among the latest publications, the book by A.A. stands out. Zamostyanov “Gavrila Derzhavin”, published in the “ZhZL” series in 2013.
Derzhavin G.R. T. VII. St. Petersburg, 1872.
Klier J.D. Russia gathers its Jews. M., 2000. S. 189-190.
Right there. P. 192.
Right there. pp. 192-193.
Fainshtein M.Sh. “And surpass the glory of France in Russia...” Russian Academy (1783-1841) and the development of culture and the humanities. M.-SPb., 2002. P. 43.
Sturdza A.S. Conversation between lovers of the Russian word and Arzamas during the reign of Alexander I and my memories // Moskvityanin. 1851. November. Book 1. No. 21. P. 5.
Khvostov D.I. Notes on literature / Publ. A.V. Zapadova // Literary archive. Issue 1. M.; L., 1938.
Altshuller M.G. Conversation between lovers of the Russian word. At the origins of Russian Slavophilism. M., 2007. P.57-58.
In 1779, readers of the St. Petersburg Bulletin magazine saw poems by an unknown poet in the issue. The poems were printed without a signature, they were called "On the death of Prince Meshchersky", and began like this:
Verb of times! Metal ringing!
Your strange voice confuses me
Calls me, calls your moan,
He calls and brings you closer to the coffin.
I barely saw this light,
Death is already gnashing its teeth,
Like lightning, the scythe shines
And my days are cut down like grain...
Now it is difficult to even imagine what impression these lines could have made in their time. Before that, Russian poets only talked in poetry about death, old age and various moralizing subjects in connection with this. The poem by an unknown poet was written as if he were seeing Death in reality: it sounded a real death knell!
Odes - and this was an ode - were usually dedicated to reigning persons or very important dignitaries. Meshchersky was a prince and a rich man, but not in the highest ranks and few people knew. The odopist was supposed to hide his identity from readers, as if the truth itself was speaking through his lips. The unknown person seemed to be trying on everything he wrote about:
Like a dream, like a sweet dream,
My youth has also disappeared;
Beauty is not very tender,
It’s not so much joy that delights...
The author's name was Gavrila Romanovich Derzhavin. He was already thirty-six years old - a very mature age at that time, and he had seen a lot in life. Derzhavin was originally from poor nobles, did not have a higher education, began his service as a simple soldier (and later became an officer), and lived wildly in his youth. He served zealously: during the suppression of the Pugachev rebellion, he tried to personally catch Pugachev, almost fell into his hands, and became the first messenger about the capture of the rebel. But then began a long series of inexplicable service troubles, ending with a transfer from military service to civilian service with an offensive reference to “inability.”
Then Derzhavin’s affairs began to improve: having settled in St. Petersburg, he married (rarely happily) and got a good position in the Senate. At the same time (in the second half of the 70s) Derzhavin’s poetic talent began to mature, although he had been writing poetry since his youth. His friends at that time and throughout his life were the young poets Vasily Kapnist, Nikolai Lvov and Ivan Khemnitser; acquaintance with them allowed Derzhavin to compensate for the lack of education and correct many of the roughnesses of style and versification. The ode “On the Death of Prince Meshchersky” marked the birth of a new poet.
Real fame, however, came to Derzhavin four years later, in 1783, when Catherine II read his “Ode to the Wise Kirghiz-Kaisat Princess Felitsa” (or simply “Felitsa”). It was in no way reminiscent of the ode to Meshchersky’s Death, but it was even more perfect. Not long before, in a moral tale, Catherine portrayed herself under the name of Princess Felitsa. It is to Princess Felitsa, and not to the Empress, that the poet addresses:
You are the only one who does not offend, You do not offend anyone, You see through foolishness, Only you do not tolerate evil; You rule over misdeeds with leniency, Like a wolf over sheep, you don’t crush people, You know their value directly.
The highest praise is expressed simply, in ordinary conversational language. The author portrays himself as a “lazy murza.” In these mocking stanzas, readers discerned very caustic allusions to the most powerful nobles:
Then, having dreamed that I was a sultan,
I terrify the universe with my gaze,
Then suddenly, seducing you with your gaze,
I'm off to the tailor for a caftan.
This is how Catherine’s almighty favorite, Prince Potemkin, is described. According to the rules of literary (and not only literary) etiquette, all this was unthinkable. Derzhavin himself was afraid of his insolence, but the empress liked the ode. The author immediately became a famous poet and fell into favor at court (having, as usual, made enemies for himself).
From then on, poetic fame accompanied Derzhavin inseparably, the enmity of many strong people, too, and favors and disfavors, awards and resignations alternated in his life. Service was no less important to him than poetry, and Derzhavin’s temperament was, in his own words, “hot and truly the devil”: he even quarreled with the tsars. He finally retired in 1803 from the post of Minister of Justice; sending him into retirement, Emperor Alexander I said: “You serve too zealously.” And this zealous campaigner turned over the entire edifice of the poetry of Russian classicism.
The objects themselves in Derzhavin’s poetry relate to each other in exactly the same way as they did before him. God is behind everything. Derzhavin dared to dedicate an ode to Him, perhaps the most inspired of all his odes. On earth, the highest state is the state, at the head of which should be a wise king, surrounded by nobles - “healthy members of the body” (ode “Nobleman”), creating laws and ensuring their strict observance. For an ordinary person, “moderation” is best, which includes both faithful service to the king and relaxation in innocent entertainment:
Eat, drink and be merry, neighbor!
Fun is only pure,
There is no remorse for which.
However, the poet firmly stood on the fact that it is necessary to serve not the personality of the king, but good laws: to observe them, the royal power itself is needed. This was not completely new, but quite bold, especially for a courtier.
In a word, in Derzhavin’s world, good is good, evil is evil, and if rebels shake the foundations of the world, this is also evil, which states are obliged to fight. Derzhavin hated the revolution. “You have been given the destinies to resolve the dispute between hell and heaven,” he wrote, addressing Suvorov’s soldiers who fought with the revolutionary French. When Suvorov died, the poet lamented: “With whom will we go to war against Hyena?”
Poetry, according to Derzhavin, has a direct purpose.
This gift of the gods is only to honor
And to learn their ways
Should be addressed, not to flattery
And the perishable praise of people, -
Felitsa instructs “Murza the poet.” Derzhavin himself sees his main merit in the fact that he “said the truth to the kings with a smile.”
All values remain unshakable - and only the poet himself felt the ability to choose a point of view, to look at a “high” object not only from a distance and from bottom to top, but close up and on an equal footing, immediately moving with ease to a “low” object, for example:
Let it be on earth and in heaven
The will of the One is the one who acts in everything!
He sees the entire depth of my heart,
And my share is built by Him.
Meanwhile, the peasants' swarm of children
He is not coming to me for any science,
And take a few bagels and pretzels, so that the beeches do not ripen in me.
Without poetry, civic courage would not have found proper expression: it would be impossible to “speak the truth with a smile.” But no matter how important this circumstance is, it is only part of what his poetic freedom gave Derzhavin, which he himself called “a guy.”
It turned out that the world in poetry can be shown visibly and tangibly. “The joy of finding the outside world sounds in his poems,” literary critic G. A. Gukovsky wrote about Derzhavin. The poets of Russian classicism, describing nature, in dozens of poems did not mention a single name of a tree or animal, not a single sound, except for shepherd's pipes. In Derzhavin, any major poem is certainly filled with many names of a wide variety of objects and sounds. Derzhavin’s descriptions of dinners and feasts became famous: “Sheksninsk golden sterlet”, “there is a glorious Westphalian ham, there are links of Astrakhan fish”, “one hundred pitches, amber - caviar, and with a blue feather there is a motley pike - beautiful!” Having read the stanzas dedicated to the Caucasus in the ode "On the Return of Count Zubov from Persia" or to the Alps in the ode "On the Crossing of the Alpine Mountains", you cannot say that the poet has never been to the mountains, and the description of the familiar Kivach waterfall in Karelia is striking in memory immediately:
Diamonds are falling down the mountain
From the heights of four rocks,
Pearls abyss and silver
It boils below, shoots upward with mounds...
Derzhavin knew how to revive and make visible the most “worn out” allegories. In the ode “On the Death of Prince Meshchersky,” Death not only appears with a scythe, as it is usually represented, but “sharpenes the blade of the scythe.” In another poem, the god of the north wind Boreas calls Winter - and at his call “a gray-haired sorceress comes, waving her shaggy sleeve.”