Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.449019
Title: Personal and literary relations of Maksim Gorky and Leonid Andreyev, 1898-1919, with particular reference to the revolution of 1905
Author: Barratt, Andrew
Awarding Body: Durham University
Current Institution: Durham University
Date of Award: 1976
Availability of Full Text:
Access through EThOS:
Access through Institution:
Abstract:
Maksim Gorky's relations with Leonid Andreyev may be divided chronologically into three periods. The first, 1898-1904, saw close personal contact and literary collaboration. During the second, 1905- 1911, differences over the nature and purpose of literature resulted in conflict and a break in relations The final years to 1919 witnessed an unsuccessful attempt at reconciliation followed by a period of open hostility. Traditionally, Gorky and Andreyev have been viewed by Soviet critics as opposites, the foremost representatives of 'revolutionary’ and 'anti-revolutionary' literature, respectively. The present study is the first in any language to examine this critical convention by detailed reference to the life and works of both writers. The structure of the thesis is chronological The first chapter covers the period to 1904, discussing the nature and extent of Gorky’s influence on Andreyev and educating the common themes in their fiction. Chapters two to five cover the crucial years 1904-1911, dealing in turn with the response of each writer to the 1905 Revolution and the period of reaction which followed The comparative element is contained in the chapters on Andieyev (chapters three and five). Chapter six provides an important postscript on Gorky's relations with the Bolsheviks in 1909-1910 and chapter seven discusses relations between the writers in the years to 1917In the conclusion it is demonstrated that the traditional view of the Gorky-Andreyev relationship derives directly from Gorky's polemical reminiscences of Andreyev and hence stands in need of fundamental revision. By discussing in turn the political, aesthetic and philosophical views of both writers, it can be seen that both shared a similar ideal of Utopian socialism but differed over the way this ideal should be incorporated into works of literature and over the question of the perfectibility of human nature
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.449019  DOI: Not available
Share: