Why Gogol thought up Rudy Pank?
“Evenings on the farm near Dykanka“ were already written, but it was necessary to solve one more problem. Too on style and contents the stories collected under a cover “Evenings looked diverse...“. To remove this contradiction, Pletnyov advises Gogol to think up the certain binding figure capable to take away from itself charges of critics.
Such figure...“ - the bee-keeper Rudy Panko - in a name of which there was a hidden sending to the real author (Panko - a surname of the grandfather Gogol, and Rudy hinted at a reddish hair color of Nikolay Vasilyevich). Panko explains to readers in the preface that he received material for the book from different story-tellers - therefore one of them speaks “in pretentious language yes cunning as in printing books“, and another “such dug out terrifying stories that hair went on the head“.
Three stories (“Evening on the eve of Ivan Kupala“, “The gone diploma“, “The bewitched place“) were assigned to Foma Grigoryevich - the clerk of Dikansky church (the description of his dress Gogol asked to send mother), other story-tellers are impersonal.
Similar reception allowed to unite such different stories in one cycle as realistic “Sorochnuyu a fair“, solved in the comedy spirit with fantastic “horror film“ “Fearful vengeance“ written in style of a pathetic Ukrainian thought. And though all stories are united by a Little Russian subject, many of them are scattered also in time. “Shponka“ and “Fair“ are close to the present, and “Revenge“ belongs to the 17th century when the Ukrainian people struggled with Poles (Poles). It is most precisely possible to specify time of action of the story “Night before Christmas“. That delegation Zaporizhia Kozakov to which the smith Vakula “stuck“ really, came to the queen Ekaterina ²² in December, 1774 with a request to save Zaporizhia Sech from elimination. And they, as well as at Gogol, were accompanied by the queen`s favourite - the prince Potyomkin.
“Night before Christmas“:
“One of Zaporozhetses, priosanyas, acted forward:
- Pardon, mother! why you ruin the right people? than made angry? Unless we held a hand of the nasty Tatar; unless agreed in something with a tourist`s rank; unless changed you business or a thought? For what disgrace? Before we heard that you order to build fortresses from us everywhere; later listened that you want to povorotit in carabineers (it is about replacement of the Zaporizhia army with regular “karabinersky regiments“ - S. K.) ; now we hear new misfortunes. Than the Zaporizhia army is guilty? whether what translated your army through the Recop and helped your enerala to grub up krymets? (it is about the Turkish war and the Crimean campaign of 1768 - 1774 - S. K.) “.
That time Ekaterina promised not to touch Zaporizhia Sech, but the next year the outlaws Kozakov under its order were destroyed.
But we will return to Gogol`s book.
By the end of May, 1831 the first part of “Evenings on the farm near Dykanka“ was finished and set into print.
that the book will be popular Gogol began to guess already during visit... printing houses.
Gogol - to Pushkin, 21. 08. 1831: “My appointment to printing house was most curious than
. Just I was pushed at doors, typesetters, having brought me, let`s everyone sniff and sprinkle to itself in a hand, otvorotivshis to a wall. It surprised me a little. I to a factor, and it after some dexterous evasion at last told that: features which desired to send from Pavlovsk for printing ochenno to a chrezvychaynost are amusing and brought to typesetters a big entertainment. From this I concluded that I the writer absolutely in taste of common people“.
In September, 1831 1 - I part of “Evenings“ came out, and in March, 1832 appeared and 2 - I.
N. Nadezhdin. The preface to the first book “Evenings...“, 1831:
“... In the relation to language, the painting Little Russian pictures ordinary went into two opposite extremes: or smoothed absolutely all local idiocies of the Ukrainian adverb, or kept it absolutely inviolable.... But there, obviously, suffers the accuracy, here clarity. Our Bee-keeper was able to become on the gold middle. At it the national motive of the Ukrainian adverb is transferred, so to speak, to moskalsky notes, without losing the original physiognomy“.
It is valid, Gogol so well managed to interweave Ukrainian in, so-called, great Russian that, thanks to its “Evenings“, many Ukrainian words - “fellings“, “boy“, “divchina“, “dumplings“, “scorching heat“, “hopak“, “oseledets“, “cradle“, “fig“ - will be clear to any “Russian“ and without the “Dictionary“ accompanying the book.
At the most part of the literary public “Evenings...“ caused deserved delight.
“All were delighted to this live description of the tribe singing and dancing, these fresh pictures of the Little Russian nature, this cheerfulness, ingenuous and together crafty. As we were surprised to the Russian book which forced us to laugh, we who were not laughing since the time of Fonvizin! We were so grateful to the young author that willingly forgave him roughness and abnormality of his syllable, incoherence and improbability of some stories...“
However also critics who did not forgive to Gogol “roughness“ and “abnormality“ were. Especially severely reacted for “the Evening...“ N. Poleva, pointed “big abnormalities in language“ to as that “through a pipe - clubs tumbled down a smoke...“ (and it is necessary supposedly “from a pipe“ ), “It is surprising to see the devil let and himself there“, “Shabby crosses crowded in a small group...“, “Your eyes so gloomy approached eyebrows“, “Quietly startled veins“ , etc. But not only it revolted with
Field. It is difficult to believe, but he accuses Gogol and of “high-soaring“ , and of of “poverty of imagination“ and of “inability to carry away the reader details“ .
More efficient remark is done by the reviewer of “Son Otechestva“ reproaching Gogol that he mixed in “May night“ of “both the national tale, and the story of the volost voivode, his son and kind the last - two various a subject coming from two various circumstances“ . It is inclined will agree that a comic story about the voivode badly intertwines with history of the mermaid, both on a plot, and on spirit. It is no wonder that “May night“ was written before other stories “Evenings...“.
The sensible criticism sounds also in A. Storozhenko`s article “Thoughts of the low-Russian after reading of stories of the bee-keeper Rudy Pank...“. He does not scold Gogol as Field, for “attempt to be forged under a malorussizm“. On the contrary - points to the mistakes made by the writer when using the Ukrainian material. Let`s say is perplexed why young Levko plays on a bandura ( “at us play on a bandura or blind people, or the Cossacks learned on this tool for joy idle panychy and sirs“ ) and calls wrong the statement that the sexton goes every day with a purse on church. Also he specifies that Levko sings -
to Sontsa nizenko, vechir not far, Viydi`s
to exchange, mine serdenko!
in summer evening though in this national song it is about winter -
... Oh viyd, viyd, not b_ys to a frost,
Ya tvo ¿ I will enclose n_zhenk in a hat …
However, judging by the text of “May night“, Gogol understood about what he there is a speech in the song, otherwise would not enclose in Levk`s lips of the following words: “Galya! you sleep or do not want to leave to me? You are afraid, truly that who did not see us, or do not want to show, maybe, a white face on cold! Don`t be afraid: there is nobody. Evening is warm.... But if blew softly cold, I will press you closer to heart, I will warm kisses, I will put on the cap your white legs“ .
Subsequently when Gogol`s talent even more gets stronger, he will look down on the early works. So in 1842, letting out “Collected works“ the writer will precede 1 - y volume with “in the Evenings...“ following preface: “... I reconsidered them again: it is a lot of unripe, it is a lot of rash, it is a lot of children`s imperfect! What could be corrected, it is corrected that is impossible, remained uncorrected as was. All first part should be excluded at all: these are the initial student`s experiences unworthy strict attention of the reader; but at them the first sweet minutes of young inspiration were felt, and it grieved me to exclude them, what a pity to extort the first games of irretrievable youth from memory. The indulgent reader can pass all first volume and begin reading with the second“ .
Gogol, of course, the genius, but to this council is better not to listen.