Meaning of the word intelligentsia. What is intelligence: definition, examples. Educated, cultured and intelligent person
We would all like to communicate with cultured, enlightened, educated people who respect the boundaries of personal space. Intelligent people are just such ideal interlocutors.
Translated from Latin, intelligence means cognitive strength, skill, and ability to understand. Those who have intelligence - intellectuals, are usually involved in mental work and are distinguished high culture. The signs of an intelligent person are:
- High level of education.
- Activities associated with creativity.
- Involvement in the process of dissemination, preservation and rethinking of culture and values.
Not everyone agrees that the intelligentsia includes a highly educated stratum of the population engaged in mental work. The opposition point of view understands intelligence primarily as the presence of a high moral culture.
Terminology
Based on the Oxford Dictionary definition, intelligentsia is a group that strives to think for itself. New hero culture - an individualist, one who can deny social norms and rules, in contrast to the old hero, who serves as precisely the embodiment of these norms and rules. The intellectual is thus a nonconformist, a rebel.
Gasparov traces the history of the term “intelligentsia”: at first it meant “people with intelligence”, then – “people with conscience”, later – “ good people" The researcher also gives Yarho’s original explanation of what “intelligent” means: this is a person who does not know much, but has a need, a thirst to know.
Who is an intelligent person and how does he differ from an intellectual? If an intellectual is a person who has a certain special spiritual and moral portrait, then intellectuals are professionals in their field, “people with intelligence.”
A high level of culture, tact, and good manners are the descendants of secularism, courtliness, philanthropy and grace. Good manners are not about “not sticking your fingers in your nose,” but the ability to behave in society and be reasonable - conscious care for yourself and others.
Gasparov emphasizes that currently, such an understanding of intelligence is relevant, which is associated with relationships between people. It's about not just about interpersonal interaction, but about one that has the special property of not seeing in another social role, but human, to treat another as a human being, equal and worthy of respect.
According to Gasparov, in the past the intelligentsia performed a function that wedged itself into the relationship between the higher and the lower. This is something more than just intelligence, education, and professionalism. The intelligentsia was required to revise the fundamental principles of society. Performing the function of self-awareness of society, intellectuals create an ideal, which is an attempt to experience reality from within the system.
This is in contrast to intellectuals, who, in response to the question of society’s self-awareness, create sociology - objective knowledge, a view “from the outside.” Intellectuals deal with schemes, clear and immutable, and the intelligentsia deal with feeling, image, standard.
Educating yourself
How to become an intelligent person? If intelligence is understood as a respectful attitude towards the individual, then the answer is simple: respect the boundaries of someone else’s psychological space, “don’t burden yourself.”
The strength of spirit of an intellectual, according to Lotman, allows him not to give in to difficulties. Intellectuals will do everything that is necessary, that cannot be avoided at a critical moment. Intelligence is a high spiritual flight, and people who are capable of this flight accomplish real feats, because they are able to stand where others give up, because they have nothing to rely on.
An intellectual is a fighter; he cannot tolerate evil and tries to eradicate it. The following qualities, according to Lotman and intelligence researcher Tepikin, are inherent in intellectuals (the most characteristic, coinciding between the two researchers):
- Kindness and tolerance.
- Integrity and willingness to pay for it.
- Resilience and fortitude.
- The ability to go to war for her ideals (an intelligent girl, just like a man, will defend what she considers worthy and honest).
- Independence of thinking.
- Fighting injustice.
The Russian philologist Likhachev noted the ease of communication of an intellectual, the complete absence of an intellectual. He identified the following qualities that are closely related to intelligence:
- Self-esteem.
- The ability to think.
- A proper degree of modesty, understanding the limitations of one’s knowledge.
- Openness, the ability to hear others.
- Be careful, you cannot be quick to judge.
- Delicacy.
- Prudence regarding the affairs of others.
- Persistence in defending a just cause (an intelligent man does not knock on the table).
You should be wary of becoming a semi-intellectual, like anyone who imagines that he knows everything. These people make unforgivable mistakes - they don’t ask, don’t consult, don’t listen. They are deaf, for them there are no questions, everything is clear and simple. Such imaginations are intolerable and cause rejection.
1. Put yourself in the other person's shoes.
2. Feel the connectedness of all people, their commonality, fundamental similarity.
3. Clearly distinguish between your own and someone else’s territory. This means not loading others with information that is only interesting to yourself, not raising your voice above the average sound level in the room, and not getting too close.
4. Try to understand your interlocutor, respect him, perhaps practice proving other people’s points of view, but not condescendingly, but truly.
5. Be able to deny yourself, develop, deliberately creating a little discomfort and overcoming it gradually (carry candy in your pocket, but not eat it; exercise physical activity at the same time every day).
The intelligentsia as the conscience of the nation is gradually disappearing due to the emergence of a layer of professionals in power. Intellectuals will replace intellectuals in this field. But nothing can replace intelligence at work, among acquaintances and friends, on the street and in public institutions. A person must be intelligent in the sense of the ability to feel equals in his interlocutors, to show respect, because this is the only worthy form in communication between people. Author: Ekaterina Volkova
The content of the article
INTELLIGENTSIA(intelligentsia). There are two different approaches to the definition of the intelligentsia. Sociologists understand the intelligentsia as social group of people professionally engaged in mental work, development and spread of culture, usually having higher education. But there is another approach, the most popular in Russian social philosophy, according to which the intelligentsia includes those who can be considered moral standard of society. The second interpretation is narrower than the first.
The concept comes from the word of Latin origin intelligens, which meant “understanding, thinking, reasonable.” As is commonly believed, the word “intelligentsia” was introduced by the ancient Roman thinker Cicero.
Intelligentsia and intellectuals in foreign countries.
In modern developed countries, the concept of “intelligentsia” is used quite rarely. In the West, the term “intellectuals” is more popular, which denotes people who are professionally engaged in intellectual (mental) activities, without, as a rule, claiming to be the bearers of “highest ideals.” The basis for identifying such a group is the division of labor between mental and physical workers.
People professionally engaged in intellectual activities (teachers, artists, doctors, etc.) already existed in antiquity and the Middle Ages. But they became a large social group only in the modern era, when the number of people engaged in mental work increased sharply. Only from this time can we talk about a sociocultural community, whose representatives, through their professional intellectual activities (science, education, art, law, etc.) generate, reproduce and develop cultural values, contributing to the education and progress of society.
Because the creative activity necessarily presupposes a critical attitude towards prevailing opinions; intellectual workers always act as bearers of “critical potential.” It was the intellectuals who created new ideological doctrines (republicanism, nationalism, socialism) and propagated them, thereby ensuring constant update systems of public values.
Since in the era of scientific and technological revolution the value of knowledge and creative thinking sharply increases, in the modern world both the number of people involved in mental work and their importance in the life of society are growing. In a post-industrial society, intellectuals will become, according to some sociologists, the “new ruling class.”
In countries that are lagging behind in their development, the social group of intellectuals acquires special features. Understanding the backwardness of their country better than others, intellectuals become the main preachers of the values of modernization. As a result, they develop a sense of their own exclusivity, a claim to “higher knowledge” that everyone else is deprived of. Such messianic traits are characteristic of intellectuals in all countries of catching-up development, but they received the most powerful development in Russia. Exactly this one special kind intellectuals are called intelligentsia.
Russian intelligentsia.
Peter I can be considered the “father” of the Russian intelligentsia, who created the conditions for the penetration of Western enlightenment ideas into Russia. Initially, the production of spiritual values was mainly carried out by people from the nobility. D.S. Likhachev calls the freethinking nobles of the late 18th century, such as Radishchev and Novikov, “the first typically Russian intellectuals.” In the 19th century, the bulk of this social group began to consist of people from non-noble strata of society (“raznochintsy”).
The widespread use of the concept of “intelligentsia” in Russian culture began in the 1860s, when journalist P.D. Boborykin began to use it in the mass press. Boborykin himself announced that he borrowed this term from German culture, where it was used to designate that layer of society whose representatives are engaged in intellectual activity. Declaring yourself " godfather” new concept, Boborykin insisted on the special meaning he put into this term: he defined the intelligentsia as persons of “high mental and ethical culture,” and not as “knowledge workers.” In his opinion, the intelligentsia in Russia is a purely Russian moral and ethical phenomenon. In this understanding, the intelligentsia includes people of different professional groups, belonging to different political movements, but having a common spiritual and moral basis. It was with this special meaning that the word “intelligentsia” then returned to the West, where it began to be considered specifically Russian (intelligentsia).
In Russian pre-revolutionary culture, in the interpretation of the concept of “intelligentsia,” the criterion of engaging in mental labor faded into the background. The main features of the Russian intellectual began to be the features of social messianism: concern for the fate of one’s fatherland (civic responsibility); desire for social criticism, to fight what interferes national development(the role of a bearer of public conscience); the ability to morally empathize with the “humiliated and offended” (a sense of moral involvement). Thanks to a group of Russian philosophers " silver age", authors of the acclaimed collection Milestones. Collection of articles about the Russian intelligentsia(1909), the intelligentsia began to be defined primarily through opposition to the official state power. At the same time, the concepts of “educated class” and “intelligentsia” were partially separated - not just any educated person could be classified as an intelligentsia, but only one who criticized the “backward” government. A critical attitude towards the tsarist government predetermined the sympathy of the Russian intelligentsia for liberal and socialist ideas.
The Russian intelligentsia, understood as a set of intellectuals opposed to the authorities, found itself in pre-revolutionary Russia a rather isolated social group. Intellectuals were viewed with suspicion not only by the official authorities, but also by the “ordinary people,” who did not distinguish intellectuals from “gentlemen.” The contrast between the claim to messianism and isolation from the people led to the cultivation of constant repentance and self-flagellation among Russian intellectuals.
A special topic of discussion at the beginning of the 20th century was the place of the intelligentsia in social structure society. Some insisted on a non-class approach: the intelligentsia did not represent any special social group and did not belong to any class; being the elite of society, it rises above class interests and expresses universal ideals (N.A. Berdyaev, M.I. Tugan-Baranovsky, R.V. Ivanov-Razumnik). Others (N.I. Bukharin, A.S. Izgoev, etc.) considered the intelligentsia within the framework of the class approach, but disagreed on the question of which class/classes to classify it in. Some believed that the intelligentsia included people from different classes, but at the same time they do not constitute a single social group, and we must talk not about the intelligentsia in general, but about various types intelligentsia (for example, bourgeois, proletarian, peasant). Others attributed the intelligentsia to a very specific class. The most common variants were the assertion that the intelligentsia was part of the bourgeois class or the proletarian class. Finally, others generally singled out the intelligentsia as a special class.
Beginning in the 1920s, the composition of the Russian intelligentsia began to change dramatically. The core of this social group were young workers and peasants who gained access to education. New power consciously pursued a policy that made it easier for people from “working” backgrounds to obtain education and made it more difficult for people of “non-labor” origin. As a result, with a sharp increase in the number of people with high education (if in Russian Empire mental workers accounted for approximately 2–3%, then by the 1980s they made up more than a quarter of all workers in the USSR) there was a decline in the quality of both their education and their general culture. The ethical component in the definition of the intelligentsia faded into the background; the “intelligentsia” began to be understood as all “knowledge workers” - the social “stratum”.
During the Soviet period, significant changes also occurred in the relationship between the intelligentsia and the authorities. The activities of the intelligentsia were brought under strict control. Soviet intellectuals were obliged to propagate the “only true” communist ideology (or, at a minimum, demonstrate loyalty to it).
Under conditions of ideological coercion characteristic feature the lives of many Soviet intellectuals became alienated from political life, the desire to engage only in narrowly professional activities. Along with the officially recognized intelligentsia in the USSR, there remained a very small group of intellectuals who sought to defend the right to their independence and creative freedom from the ruling regime. They sought to destroy this oppositional part of the intelligentsia “as a class”: many were subjected to repression under far-fetched pretexts (one can recall the life of A. Akhmatova or I. Brodsky), all dissenters experienced pressure from censorship and restrictions on professional activity. In the 1960s, a dissident movement arose among Soviet intellectuals, which remained the only organized form of opposition in the USSR until the end of the 1980s.
Modern Russian intelligentsia.
Opposition sentiments, widespread among Soviet intellectuals, found a way out in the late 1980s and early 1990s, when it was the intelligentsia that led the total criticism of the Soviet system, predetermining its moral condemnation and death. In Russia in the 1990s, the intelligentsia gained freedom of expression, but many intellectuals faced a sharp decline in their standard of living, which caused them to become disillusioned liberal reforms and increased critical sentiment. On the other hand, many prominent intellectuals were able to make careers and continued to support liberal ideology and liberal politicians. Thus, the post-Soviet intelligentsia was split into groups with different, largely polar positions.
In this regard, there is a point of view according to which the intelligentsia in the proper sense in modern Russia not anymore. Supporters of this position identify three periods in the evolution of the domestic intelligentsia. At the first stage (from Peter’s reforms to the reform of 1861), the intelligentsia was just being formed, claiming the role of a scientific adviser to the official authorities. The second period (1860s - 1920s) is the time of the real existence of the intelligentsia. It was during this period that the confrontation “power – intelligentsia – people” arose and the main characteristics of the intelligentsia were formed (service to the people, criticism of the existing government). After this period, the “phantom” existence of the intelligentsia follows and continues to this day: any moral unity among educated people no longer exists, but some Russian intellectuals still strive to fulfill the mission of educating the authorities.
In modern Russia, both approaches to defining the concept of “intelligentsia” are popular - both moral and ethical (in philosophical and cultural studies) and socio-professional (in sociology). The difficulty of using the concept of “intelligentsia” in its ethical interpretation is associated with the uncertainty of the criteria by which one can judge whether people belong to this group. social group. Many former criteria—for example, opposition to the government—have become somewhat meaningless, and ethical characteristics are too abstract to be used for empirical research. More and more frequent use The concept of “intelligentsia” in the meaning of “persons of mental labor” shows that there is a rapprochement between the Russian intelligentsia and Western intellectuals.
At the end of the 1990s in Russian science“Intellectual studies” arose as a special direction of interscientific humanities research. Based on Ivanovsky state university There is a Center for Intellectual Studies that studies the intelligentsia as a phenomenon of Russian culture.
Natalia Latova
(intelligentsia). There are two different approaches to defining the intelligentsia. Sociologists understand the intelligentsia as social group of people professionally engaged in mental work, development and spread of culture, usually with higher education. But there is another approach, the most popular in Russian social philosophy, according to which the intelligentsia includes those who can be considered moral standard of society. The second interpretation is narrower than the first.
The concept comes from the word of Latin origin intelligens, which meant “understanding, thinking, reasonable.” As is commonly believed, the word “intelligentsia” was introduced by the ancient Roman thinker Cicero.
Milestones. From the depth. M.: Pravda Publishing House, 1991
Intelligentsia. Power. The People: An Anthology. M.: Nauka, 1993
Intelligentsia in Soviet society. Kemerovo, 1993
Intelligentsia in history: an educated person in ideas and social reality. M., 2001
Elbakyan E.S. Between a rock and a hard place (Russian intelligentsia in the past century) // Bulletin of Moscow University. Sociology and political science. 2003. No. 2
First you need to determine the history and etymology of this term. So, the intelligentsia (Latin intelligentia - understanding, cognitive power, knowledge) is a social stratum of people professionally engaged in mental, mainly complex, creative work, development and dissemination of culture. The very word “intelligentsia” was introduced into use by the writer P. D. Boborykin, who in 1866 thus defined the “highest educated layer of society” The phenomenon of the Russian intelligentsia // http://www.pravoslavie.ru/jurnal/030904105723.. From Russian the concept migrated to other languages. The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines the intelligentsia as “that part of the people (especially the Russian people) which strives for independent thinking.” This term in its modern understanding exists only in Russian. In the West there is parallel definition“intellectual”, which in the Russian sense has a completely different meaning.
In many ways, the intelligentsia arose during the time of Peter I, when the country began to Europeanize. At this time, Freemasonry began to actively penetrate Russia, and the very emergence of the intelligentsia as a social stratum is often associated with it. This position is shared by such authors as I. Solonevich, B. Bashilov, A. Selyaninov, N. Markov, V. F. Ivanov.
The Russian intelligentsia saw its purpose in influencing the authorities by all available means, be it critical journalism, artistic and scientific speech, or numerous actions of public disobedience. She considered the main goal to completely destroy or modernize the monarchy, depriving it of its moral and spiritual meaning.
According to P. D. Pavlenko (this is a modern view), the intelligentsia is a social group of people professionally engaged in qualified mental work that requires high vocational education(higher or secondary specialized) Pavlenok P. D. Sociology. - M., 2002. - P. 191.. In the literature there is also a broad interpretation of the intelligentsia, including all mental workers, both specialist intellectuals and non-specialist employees engaged in unskilled, simple mental work that does not require high education ( accountants, bookkeepers, cashiers, secretaries-typists, savings bank controllers, etc.).
The role, place and structure of the intelligentsia in society is determined by its performance of the following basic functions: scientific, technical and economic support material production; professional management of production, society as a whole and its individual substructures; development of spiritual culture; education of people; ensuring the mental and physical health of the country. The intelligentsia is divided into scientific, industrial, pedagogical, cultural and artistic, medical, managerial and military. The intelligentsia is also divided into layers according to qualifications, place of residence, relationship to the means of production, as well as socio-demographic characteristics.
The Russian intelligentsia, understood as a set of intellectuals opposed to the authorities, turned out to be a rather isolated social group in pre-revolutionary Russia. Intellectuals were viewed with suspicion not only by the official authorities, but also by the “common people”, who did not distinguish intellectuals from “gentlemen” Latova N. Intelligentsia
// http://www.krugosvet.ru/enc/gumanitarnye_nauki/sociologiya/INTELLIGENTSIYA.html.. The contrast between the claim to messianism and isolation from the people led to the cultivation of constant repentance and self-flagellation among Russian intellectuals.
A special topic of discussion at the beginning of the 20th century was the place of the intelligentsia in the social structure of society. Some insisted on a non-class approach: the intelligentsia did not represent any special social group and did not belong to any class; being the elite of society, it rises above class interests and expresses universal ideals (M.I. Tugan-Baranovsky, R.V. Ivanov-Razumnik). Others (N.I. Bukharin, A.S. Izgoev, etc.) considered the intelligentsia within the framework of the class approach, but disagreed on the question of which class/classes to classify it in. Some believed that the intelligentsia included people from different classes, but at the same time they did not form a single social group, and we should not talk about the intelligentsia in general, but about different types of intelligentsia (for example, bourgeois, proletarian, peasant). Others attributed the intelligentsia to a very specific class. The most common variants were the assertion that the intelligentsia was part of the bourgeois class or the proletarian class. Finally, others generally singled out the intelligentsia as a special class.
Since the 1920s. The composition of the Russian intelligentsia begins to change dramatically. The core of this social group were young workers and peasants who gained access to education. The new government deliberately pursued a policy that made it easier for people from “working” backgrounds to obtain an education and made it more difficult for people of “non-labor” origin. As a result, with a sharp increase in the number of people with high education (if in the Russian Empire people with mental labor accounted for approximately 2-3%, then by the 1980s they made up more than a quarter of all workers in the USSR), there was a decrease in the quality of both their education and their general culture . The ethical component in the definition of the intelligentsia faded into the background; the “intelligentsia” began to be understood as all “knowledge workers” - the social “stratum” Latova N. Intelligentsia
// http://www.krugosvet.ru/enc/humanitarnye_nauki/sociologiya/INTELLIGENTSIYA.html..
During the Soviet period, significant changes also occurred in the relationship between the intelligentsia and the authorities. The activities of the intelligentsia were brought under strict control. Soviet intellectuals were obliged to propagate the “only true” communist ideology (or, at a minimum, demonstrate loyalty to it).
Under conditions of ideological coercion, a characteristic feature of the lives of many Soviet intellectuals was alienation from political life and the desire to engage only in narrowly professional activities. Along with the officially recognized intelligentsia in the USSR, there remained a very small group of intellectuals who sought to defend the right to their independence and creative freedom from the ruling regime. They sought to destroy this oppositional part of the intelligentsia “as a class”: many were subjected to repression under far-fetched pretexts (one can recall the life of A. Akhmatova or I. Brodsky), all dissidents experienced censorship pressure and restrictions on professional activities. In the 1960s, a dissident movement arose among Soviet intellectuals, which remained the only organized form of opposition in the USSR until the end of the 1980s.
Opposition sentiments, widespread among Soviet intellectuals, found a way out in the late 1980s and early 1990s, when it was the intelligentsia that led the total criticism of the Soviet system, predetermining its moral condemnation and death. In Russia in the 1990s, the intelligentsia received freedom of expression, but many intellectuals faced a sharp decline in their standard of living, which caused their disappointment in liberal reforms and increased critical sentiment. On the other hand, many prominent intellectuals were able to make careers and continued to support liberal ideology and liberal politicians. Thus, the post-Soviet intelligentsia was split into groups with different, largely polar positions.
In this regard, there is a point of view according to which there is no longer any intelligentsia in the proper sense in modern Russia. Supporters of this position identify three periods in the evolution of the domestic intelligentsia. At the first stage (from Peter’s reforms to the reform of 1861), the intelligentsia was just being formed, claiming the role of a scientific adviser to the official authorities. The second period (1860s - 1920s) is the time of the real existence of the intelligentsia. It was during this period that the confrontation “power - intelligentsia - people” arose and the main characteristics of the intelligentsia were formed (service to the people, criticism of the existing government). After this period, the “phantom” existence of the intelligentsia followed and continues to this day: there is no longer any moral unity among educated people, but some Russian intellectuals still strive to fulfill the mission of enlightening the authorities.
In modern Russia, both approaches to defining the concept of “intelligentsia” are popular - both moral and ethical (in philosophical and cultural studies) and socio-professional (in sociology). The difficulty of using the concept of “intelligentsia” in its ethical interpretation is associated with the uncertainty of the criteria by which one can judge whether people belong to this social group. Many previous criteria - for example, opposition to the government - have partially lost their meaning, and ethical characteristics are too abstract to be used for empirical research. The increasingly frequent use of the concept of “intelligentsia” in the meaning of “persons of mental labor” shows that there is a rapprochement between the Russian intelligentsia and Western intellectuals.
Tretyakov Vitaly
The white ribbon protest reminded us of the existence of the intelligentsia
Recently, in capital circles there has been renewed talk of oppression of the intelligentsia. The reasons are purely speculative: someone was allegedly banned, someone seemed to be threatened, someone was actually (and this is already significant) deprived of funding... Maybe they were banned. Maybe they were deprived... But what does the intelligentsia have to do with it? Alas, there are no more intelligentsia in Russia. Yes, it was - for two whole centuries. It was there and floated away... And now one can only talk and argue about it in retrospect.
.
When did the Russian intelligentsia appear?
The time of the appearance of the intelligentsia in Russia can be determined quite scientifically and with great accuracy.
Of course, the intelligentsia cannot exist where there is no established system of higher education, that is, universities. The first university in Russia - Moscow - arose in 1755. There were few students there at that time - 30 people in the first intake. And therefore it is clear that it accumulated the number of its graduates necessary for the emergence of the intelligentsia as a special social stratum just by the end of the 18th century.
This does not mean that before that there were no educated people in Russia, including those with a university education. But even in their entirety, they were not what would later be called the intelligentsia, but representatives of either the highest aristocracy, or the clergy, or the military and bureaucratic class.
But the word (term) “intelligentsia” really came into use in the middle of the 19th century. It is believed that with light hand writer Boborykin. Although there is evidence that it is found in private letters from Zhukovsky back in 1836. And just in the sense in which we still use it.
Five main qualities of the intelligentsia
♦ So, education(having a higher education) is the first fundamental quality of an intellectual as a representative of a certain social stratum. Quality is necessary, but not sufficient. For four more qualities are certainly needed, the absence of even one of which turns what we know as the Russian intelligentsia into something else. And all these qualities add up to a certain social environment precisely at the turn of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
♦ The second quality of an intellectual is conscientiousness, or presence moral principles that go beyond the norms of class morality. Even the most educated and merciful aristocrat is not an intellectual. And above all, because he does not consider others equal to himself.
♦ The next quality of a Russian intellectual is love for the people. And the desire, upon realizing the shortcomings of ordinary people, to raise them to oneself. First of all, through enlightenment and education. And, of course, through a fair (or at least more fair) distribution of material and cultural goods.
This quality of the intelligentsia received its maximum development in the 60s of the 19th century in the form of the so-called going to the people and the then cultural trade, and in Bolshevism - both before 1917 and after - the cultural revolution according to Lenin, and then Stalinist industrialization, university construction, after the war - universal free secondary education and mass free higher education. The 60s of the twentieth century are the peak of the heyday of the Russian, in its Soviet incarnation, intelligentsia as a powerful, authoritative (including among the people) and influential social layer.
♦ The fourth quality of the Russian intelligentsia is constant reflection on Russia and Europe.
Here, in the final result, despite the resistance of enlightened conservatives and all other Slavophiles, the “line of Peter the Great” won - Russia always lags behind Europe in everything, and it is up to domestic intellectuals to overcome this lag.
The first who, not in the Petrine paradigm, but in a more “advanced” paradigm, thought and wrote about this was Karamzin with his “Letters of a Russian Traveler.” It is he who I would call the first Russian intellectual in the precise sense of the word.
Already by the middle of the nineteenth century. The enlightened Russian class split into Westerners and those who were called Slavophiles. Of course, this was facilitated by the campaign of the Russian army in Europe (1813-1814), which gave rise to the Decembrists, practically standard Westernizers-intellectuals who longed for European political structure and the abolition of serfdom, but, significantly, did not release their own serfs.
The attitude towards “Europe” (and the belittlement or exaltation of Russia, depending on the vector of this attitude) since the beginning of the 19th century has become key in the demarcation of the Russian intelligentsia. But the prevailing opinion still became about the “backwardness of Russia” and, speaking modern language, about “Western leadership.”
Griboyedov sensed the danger of this trend:
The Frenchman from Bordeaux, pushing his chest,
Gathered around him a kind of evening
And he told how he was preparing for the journey
To Russia, to the barbarians, with fear and tears;
I arrived and found that there was no end to the caresses;
Not a Russian sound, not a Russian face...
Written two hundred years ago!
Pushkin was too universal and too Russian to be only a Westernizer, like his Decembrist friends, or only a Slavophile. He is that standard example of a Russian intellectual (and noble origin), which, having all positive qualities intelligentsia, very little and mainly through the environment of his communication “suffered” its shortcomings.
♦ And a whole complex of these shortcomings is associated not only with the fourth, but also with the fifth quality of the Russian intelligentsia - constant opposition to any Russian government, precisely because it is, firstly, power, and secondly, Russian power. Very often this opposition developed into opposition to Russia as a whole and everything Russian, starting with the Russian people (although the struggle with the authorities was always highlighted in the foreground).
This last quality, in my opinion, is undoubtedly connected not so much with some special love of freedom of the Russian intelligentsia or with some special shortcomings of the Russian government, but with the inclusion of the Polish gentry in the Russian nobility.
And before that, naturally, there were people in Russia who did not like the state of affairs in the country. But, firstly, there have never been so many of them, they were not so united ethnically, psychologically and religiously. Secondly, these people did not set themselves the fundamental goal of crushing not so much a specific ruler, but rather the Russian state and everything Russian in general.
The Polish Fronde, or rather the whole complex of Poles’ rejection of everything Russian, determined this quality of the Russian intelligentsia - rejection of everything Russian and the imperial (central) government in particular. By the end of the 19th century, Russian Marxists fully accepted and developed this quality. But they fought with the authorities for the people, for their interests. But those who continue to call themselves intellectuals today are fighting the people themselves and “their power.” For what? It seems that only for their “freedoms” and, more importantly, for them to be “comfortable”. Crimea and Novorossiya - the best for that confirmation. If protecting the interests of the population of these territories prevents today’s “Russian intellectuals” from “living comfortably,” then let Bandera’s people rule the Crimeans and Novorussians.
Ultimately, it was Russian intellectuals of all nationalities and political stripes who intellectually prepared the February coup d'etat, And October Revolution, from which they, according to their ideological heirs, suffered most of all.
After the October Revolution
From late XVIII century and until October 1917, the Russian/Russian intelligentsia followed an interesting, but generally straightforward ideological and psychological path. But after her age-old dream - the overthrow of power and the crushing of the state in Russia - was realized, our intelligentsia began to be tossed from side to side. Gradually she freed herself from the first three its main qualities - in last years even from the need to be educated. Perhaps because the Soviet government was too carried away with the education of the country's population, thereby depriving those who considered themselves intellectuals of one of their trump cards - superiority over the “people” in the level of knowledge and, accordingly, the privilege to think as they please and freely discuss anything whatever.
But, by the way, the Bolsheviks did the most for the Russian intelligentsia. In any case, it was during the Soviet era that the intelligentsia became so numerous that its opinions and attitudes could no longer be ignored.
The emergence of millions of people, who during the Soviet era quite rightly began to be called intellectual workers, apparently finally transformed the intelligentsia itself from a separate social layer into a social sect, structured and united along clan lines: the capital’s intelligentsia, separately the Moscow and separately the Leningrad (St. Petersburg) intelligentsia , national (in the union republics), provincial, rural, creative, scientific and technical, “sixties”, liberal (80s to this day), etc.
Complex processes (but in the direction of primitivization) also took place within each layer-clan of the once glorious and disinterested Russian (Russian, Soviet) intelligentsia.
Creative intelligentsia still in Soviet time gradually degenerated into bohemia and by our time has finally mutated into a TV series-variety crowd. Scientific and technical, the most consistent and purposeful, grumbled in the 70s due to the underestimation of its work and material troubles. And it can be understood. Science and technology became real productive forces. The country's achievements were undoubtedly the result of the talents and efforts of the educated class. And for our intelligentsia it became extremely humiliating both that their standard of living was (or seemed) lower than in Western countries, and that it differed little from the standard of living of the majority of the population of the USSR.
In the 70s, the Moscow intelligentsia began to call the people completely Marxist, but in their mouths with an absolutely contemptuous word “hegemon”. By the way, remember what words of Professor Preobrazhensky from “ Heart of a Dog"became one of the most beloved among the educated public after the release of the corresponding film? Yes, these: “No, I don’t like the proletariat!”
Of course, the Soviet government deceived the Russian intelligentsia. She didn’t build communism in 1980, she didn’t overtake the West in terms of consumption, she didn’t give out cars and dachas to all intellectuals, she didn’t pamper her with salaries like miners, she didn’t allow people to travel abroad freely, but she drove everything around. home country, through not always well-kept provinces, through Komsomol construction sites and rural cultural centers. The Soviet intelligentsia was tired of material troubles and excessive closeness to the people.
Our intelligentsia became completely and completely disillusioned with Marxism-Leninism in the 70s. And what then could she worship? Only the West and literally any ideas coming from there.
But only a few, mainly in the capitals, were carried away by the West as “ political idea" The bourgeois interpretation of our lag has won: it is not necessary to be the first in space if we lag behind in the cleanliness of entrances and in the variety of products, clothing and cars. On the contrary: it is advisable to give up space if it helps to get closer to Western consumer standards. And anyway, why this notorious social justice? Some kind of leveling... Injustice is fairer!
And then came perestroika
You can say anything about her - from praise to blasphemy. But one thing is certain: the Soviet intelligentsia, who for the most part became its mover and enthusiastic participant, was completely destroyed by this perestroika. Secondly, it divided “national intelligentsias” into warring with each other. Well, first of all, by giving her political power(and this is something that should never and under no circumstances be given to the intelligentsia, because the intelligentsia runs the state even worse than the cook), which was immediately taken away from the intelligentsia in best case scenario « business people", and at worst - unprincipled scoundrels or simply criminals. As a result, the intelligentsia fell into poverty and hopelessness in the 90s, where they became completely lumpenized.
Strictly speaking, the real Russian intellectuals in the 70-80s of the twentieth century can only be classified as those who were spiritually, ideologically and organizationally grouped around the so-called village writers, but perestroika and the 90s pushed them to the margins of the political and media ( which has become very important) fields. And the bulk of those who continued to call themselves intellectuals completely surrendered to liberalism, which actually equated the two not entirely identical concepts of “Russian intellectual” and “liberal” (of Western bottling).
Moreover, hatred of Russia and the people (Russian in the first place), worship of “Europe” flourished in the ranks of the still fluttering on the surface public life intelligentsia in the 90s in full bloom. All this was described earlier and more harshly than others in the 19th century by Dostoevsky. But during the years of perestroika and especially after 1991, this hatred and servility surpassed all conceivable limits and finally buried the Russian intelligentsia as a special and especially noble spiritually social layer of Russia, “as a class.”
All that has been said, of course, does not mean that there are no people left in Russia who individually can be called intelligent people. But the Russian intelligentsia as a whole resignedly and ingloriously left the historical arena.
Some argue that the classical Russian intelligentsia is being reborn today. Personally, I see no reason for such a conclusion. However, just as a tradesman who has been awarded the title of nobility remains a tradesman by nature (Molière), so does the present-day commoner, even from “ high society“, even if he is from the “creative class,” still remains a “philistine among the intelligentsia.”
Language as an indicator of the disappearance of the intelligentsia
I will return to Karamzin, because a link to him will allow me to provide further evidence that the Russian intelligentsia no longer exists. As you know, it was Karamzin who developed the Russian literary language, which, from the beginning of the 19th century, began to be spoken by educated Russian society(when it was not explained - among themselves - in French or English). And it said, despite all the revolutions and reforms, until the early 90s of the twentieth century.
But since the 90s, that social layer, which by this time was still an intelligentsia by origin or social status, began to speak a different language, which I call vulgar Russians.
What language is this? This is a disordered mixture of illiterate Russian speech of both capitals, South Russian (mostly) dialects, Odessa dialect, quasi-Russian language of people from Central Asia and from the Caucasus, Anglicisms, criminal jargon, obscene language and banter. Moreover, all this most often with the complete primitiveness of language constructions, but with a pretense of intellectualism a la the West.
Even before, Russian intellectuals could talk to ordinary people in “their” language, but they did not speak this language among themselves. Now they say. In addition, it used to be possible to distinguish an intellectual from representatives of all other classes and strata of society by language. But now it’s impossible.
How can a special, and even educated, social stratum exist if within itself it communicates in exactly the same language as the most uneducated and declassed elements of society? If he creates his works in this language - literary, theatrical, cinematic? Of course not.
Notes on liberal intellectuals
♦ First the intelligentsia loves the people and themselves, then themselves and the people, then only themselves. And finally, she begins to admire herself and hate the people.
♦ The separation of the bourgeoisie from the intelligentsia is one of the main quests of Russian literature and social thought. This was best reflected in his plays by Chekhov, who approached this division from the side of an already established and quite refined intellectual, and Gorky, who came to analyze the same fork in the road, but from the side of the “tramps,” the people.
In the plays, both succeeded. The “sixties” of the twentieth century in their early prose (all sorts of “I’m going into a storm”, etc.) also succeeded. Here in real life the intelligentsia did not succeed.
♦ Lackeys love to write treatises on how they differ from slaves.
♦ Russian liberals compose their best works in the genre of “ unconditional surrender».
♦ Half of modern Russian intellectuals would like to live in the 19th century, and the other half - even in the 18th century. Apparently, assuming that at the same time they would eat and dance at the imperial court and play music on their own estates. And they would certainly correspond with Catherine the Great or Pushkin. Knowing for sure that they or their parents received both education and intellectual status with and thanks to Soviet power, they squeeze this knowledge out of themselves drop by drop. Thinking it's slavery. And this is disgusting.
♦ An intellectual doubts everything except that he is an intellectual. And he is sure that he has the right to doubt everything else. Moreover, one is obliged to doubt.
♦ An intellectual often does not understand or pretends not to understand something that is quite obvious to any normal or common man.
♦ Figs in your pocket from " creative intelligentsia“now cost the state treasury a hundred times more than in Soviet times. Now these figs are golden. And they were taken out of my pocket a long time ago.
♦ The Russian intelligentsia always denounces the authorities, but is always offended if the authorities do not seat them at the table with them.
♦ Journalists and intellectuals seized the freedom of the press for all, declared in the constitution, only for themselves. That is, they were usurped.
♦ Those who present themselves today as intellectuals, for the most part, and in the historical sense of the word, are not them. But this does not relieve them of guilt.
♦ Think and say about yourself that she “ best part people,” maybe only the worst part of it.
♦ Three intellectuals gathered together are a pleasant company. Ten intellectuals gathered together form a discussion club. One hundred intellectuals gathered together - a congress of intellectuals. Five hundred intellectuals gathered together is a crowd even more destructive than five hundred football fans. Since five hundred football fans are only smashing shop windows, and a crowd of five hundred intellectuals is the state.
