Dmitry Likhachev thoughts about life memories. Pedagogical ideas of D.S. Likhachev and the formation of value orientations of adolescents. Letter nine. When to be offended

- an outstanding defender of Russian culture. His moral image and life path is an example of the struggle for high ideals. A philologist and researcher of ancient Russian literature, Likhachev also addressed a children's audience. Today we are publishing excerpts from Likhachev's "Letters about the Good and the Beautiful" - a wonderful book for all generations and ages.

Letters to Young Readers

For my conversations with the reader, I have chosen the form of letters. This is, of course, a conditional form. In the readers of my letters, I imagine friends. Letters to friends allow me to write simply.

Why did I arrange my letters this way? First, in my letters I write about the purpose and meaning of life, about the beauty of behavior, and then I turn to the beauty of the world around us, to the beauty that opens up to us in works of art. I do this because in order to perceive the beauty of the environment, a person himself must be spiritually beautiful, deep, stand on the right positions in life. Try to hold the binoculars in trembling hands - you will not see anything.

First letter. Big in small

In the material world, the big cannot fit in the small. But in the sphere of spiritual values, it is not so: much more can fit in the small, and if you try to fit the small in the big, then the big simply ceases to exist.

If a person has a great goal, then it should manifest itself in everything - in the most seemingly insignificant. You must be honest in the imperceptible and accidental: then only will you be honest in the fulfillment of your great duty. A great goal encompasses the whole person, is reflected in his every action, and one cannot think that a good goal can be achieved by bad means.

The saying "The end justifies the means" is destructive and immoral. Dostoevsky showed this well in Crime and Punishment. The main character of this work, Rodion Raskolnikov, thought that by killing the disgusting old usurer, he would get money, with which he could then achieve great goals and benefit humanity, but suffers an internal collapse. The goal is distant and unrealizable, but the crime is real; it is terrible and cannot be justified by anything. It is impossible to strive for a high goal with low means. We must be equally honest in both big and small things.

The general rule - to observe the big in the small - is necessary, in particular, in science. Scientific truth is the most precious thing, and it must be followed in all details of scientific research and in the life of a scientist. If, however, one strives in science for “small” goals – for proof by “strength”, contrary to facts, for the “interestingness” of conclusions, for their effectiveness, or for any form of self-promotion, then the scientist will inevitably fail. Maybe not right away, but eventually! When the results of research are exaggerated or even minor juggling of facts and scientific truth is pushed into the background, science ceases to exist, and the scientist himself sooner or later ceases to be a scientist.

It is necessary to observe the great in everything resolutely. Then everything is easy and simple.

Second letter. Youth is all life

Therefore, take care of youth until old age. Appreciate all the good things that you acquired in your youth, do not squander the wealth of youth. Nothing acquired in youth goes unnoticed. Habits developed in youth last a lifetime. Work habits, too. Get used to work - and work will always bring joy. And how important it is for human happiness! There is nothing more unhappy than a lazy person who always avoids labor and effort...

Both in youth and in old age. Good habits of youth will make life easier, bad habits will complicate it and make it more difficult. And further. There is a Russian proverb: "Take care of honor from a young age." All the deeds committed in youth remain in the memory. The good ones will please, the bad ones will not let you sleep!

Third letter. The biggest

What is the biggest purpose of life? I think to increase the good in the environment around us. And goodness is above all the happiness of all people. It is made up of many things, and every time life sets a task for a person, which is important to be able to solve. You can do good to a person in small things, you can think about big things, but small things and big things cannot be separated. Much, as I have already said, begins with trifles, is born in childhood and in loved ones.

A child loves his mother and his father, brothers and sisters, his family, his home. Gradually expanding, his affections extend to the school, village, city, all of his country. And this is already a very big and deep feeling, although one cannot stop there and one must love a person in a person.

You have to be a patriot, not a nationalist. You don't have to hate every other family because you love your own. There is no need to hate other nations because you are a patriot. There is a profound difference between patriotism and nationalism. In the first - love for one's country, in the second - hatred for all others.

“The great goal of kindness begins with a small one - with the desire for good for your loved ones, but, expanding, it captures an ever wider range of issues. It's like circles on the water. But the circles on the water, expanding, are becoming weaker. Love and friendship, growing and spreading to many things, gain new strength, become higher and higher, and the person, their center, is wiser.

Love should not be unaccountable, it should be smart. This means that it must be combined with the ability to notice shortcomings, to deal with shortcomings - both in a loved one and in those around you. It must be combined with wisdom, with the ability to separate the necessary from the empty and false. She shouldn't be blind. Blind delight (you can’t even call it love) can lead to terrible consequences. A mother who admires everything and encourages her child in everything can bring up a moral monster. Blind admiration for Germany ("Germany is above all" - the words of a chauvinistic German song) led to Nazism, blind admiration for Italy - to fascism.

Wisdom is intelligence combined with kindness. Intelligence without kindness is cunning. Cunning, however, gradually languishes and sooner or later turns against the cunning one himself. Therefore, the trick is forced to hide. Wisdom is open and reliable. She does not deceive others, and above all the wisest person. Wisdom brings a sage a good name and lasting happiness, brings reliable, long-term happiness and that calm conscience, which is most valuable in old age.

How to express what is common between my three positions: “Big in small”, “Youth is always” and “The biggest”? It can be expressed in one word, which can become a motto: "Loyalty". Loyalty to those great principles that a person should be guided by in big and small things, loyalty to his impeccable youth, his homeland in the broad and narrow sense of this concept, loyalty to family, friends, city, country, people. Ultimately, fidelity is fidelity to truth—truth-truth and truth-justice.

Letter five. What is a sense of life

You can define the purpose of your existence in different ways, but there must be a purpose - otherwise it will not be life, but vegetation.

You have to have principles in life. It’s good to even state them in a diary, but in order for the diary to be “real”, you can’t show it to anyone - write only for yourself.

Every person should have one rule in life, in his goal of life, in his principles of life, in his behavior: one must live life with dignity, so that one is not ashamed to remember.
Dignity requires kindness, generosity, the ability not to be a narrow egoist, to be truthful, a good friend, to find joy in helping others.

For the sake of the dignity of life, one must be able to refuse small pleasures and considerable ones too ... To be able to apologize, admit a mistake to others is better than play up and lie.
When deceiving, a person first of all deceives himself, because he thinks that he has successfully lied, but people understood and, out of delicacy, kept silent.

Letter eight. Be funny but not funny

It is said that the content determines the form. This is true, but the opposite is also true, that the content depends on the form. The well-known American psychologist of the beginning of this century, D. James, wrote: “We cry because we are sad, but we are also sad because we cry.” Therefore, let's talk about the form of our behavior, about what should become our habit and what should also become our inner content.

It was once considered indecent to show with all your appearance that a misfortune happened to you, that you were in grief. A person should not have imposed his depressed state on others. It was necessary to maintain dignity even in grief, to be equal with everyone, not to plunge into oneself and remain as friendly and even cheerful as possible. The ability to maintain dignity, not to impose one's grief on others, not to spoil the mood of others, to always be even in dealing with people, to be always friendly and cheerful - this is a great and real art that helps to live in society and society itself.

But how fun should you be? Noisy and obsessive fun is tiring for others. The young man who is always “pouring” witticisms ceases to be perceived as worthy of behaving. He becomes a joke. And this is the worst thing that can happen to a person in society, and it means ultimately the loss of humor.

Don't be funny.
Not being funny is not only the ability to behave, but also a sign of intelligence.

You can be funny in everything, even in the manner of dressing. If a man carefully matches a tie to a shirt, a shirt to a suit, he is ridiculous. Excessive concern for one's appearance is immediately visible. Care must be taken to dress decently, but this care in men should not go beyond certain limits. A man who cares too much about his appearance is unpleasant. A woman is another matter. Men should only have a hint of fashion in their clothes. A perfectly clean shirt, clean shoes and a fresh but not very bright tie are enough. The suit can be old, it doesn't have to be just unkempt.
In a conversation with others, know how to listen, know how to be silent, know how to joke, but rarely and in time. Take up as little space as possible. Therefore, at dinner, do not put your elbows on the table, embarrassing your neighbor, but also do not try too hard to be the "soul of society." Observe the measure in everything, do not be intrusive even with your friendly feelings.

Do not suffer from your shortcomings, if you have them. If you stutter, don't think it's too bad. Stutterers are excellent speakers, considering every word they say. The best lecturer of Moscow University, famous for its eloquent professors, historian V.O. Klyuchevsky stuttered. A slight strabismus can give significance to the face, lameness - to movements. But if you are shy, don't be afraid of it either. Don't be ashamed of your shyness: shyness is very sweet and not at all funny. It only becomes funny if you try too hard to overcome it and feel embarrassed about it. Be simple and indulgent to your shortcomings. Don't suffer from them. There is nothing worse when an “inferiority complex” develops in a person, and with it anger, hostility towards other people, envy. A person loses what is best in him - kindness.

There is no better music than silence, silence in the mountains, silence in the forest. There is no better “music in a person” than modesty and the ability to remain silent, not to come forward in the first place. There is nothing more unpleasant and stupid in the appearance and behavior of a person than dignity or noisy; there is nothing more ridiculous in a man than excessive concern for his suit and hair, calculated movements and a “fountain of witticisms” and jokes, especially if they are repeated.

In behavior, be afraid to be funny and try to be modest, quiet.
Never loosen up, always be equal with people, respect the people who surround you.

Here are some tips about what seems to be secondary - about your behavior, about your appearance, but also about your inner world: do not be afraid of your physical shortcomings. Treat them with dignity and you will be elegant.

I have a friend who is a little chubby. Honestly, I do not get tired of admiring her grace on those rare occasions when I meet her in museums on opening days (everyone meets there - that's why they are cultural holidays).

And one more thing, and perhaps the most important: be truthful. He who seeks to deceive others is first of all deceived himself. He naively thinks that they believed him, and those around him were actually just polite. But the lie always betrays itself, the lie is always “felt”, and you not only become disgusting, worse - you are ridiculous.

Don't be ridiculous! Truthfulness is beautiful, even if you admit that you have deceived before on any occasion, and explain why you did it. This will fix the situation. You will be respected and you will show your intelligence.

Simplicity and "silence" in a person, truthfulness, lack of pretensions in clothing and behavior - this is the most attractive "form" in a person, which also becomes his most elegant "content".

Letter nine. When should you be offended?

You should be offended only when they want to offend you. If they don’t want to, and the reason for resentment is an accident, then why be offended?
Without getting angry, clear up the misunderstanding - and that's it.
Well, what if they want to offend? Before responding to an insult with an insult, it is worth considering: should one stoop to an insult? After all, resentment usually lies somewhere low and you should bend down to it in order to pick it up.

If you still decide to be offended, then first perform some mathematical action - subtraction, division, etc. Let's say you were insulted for something in which you are only partly to blame. Subtract from your feelings of resentment everything that does not apply to you. Suppose that you were offended by noble motives - divide your feelings into noble motives that caused an insulting remark, etc. Having performed some necessary mathematical operation in your mind, you will be able to respond to an insult with great dignity, which will be the nobler than you attach less importance to resentment. To certain limits, of course.

In general, excessive touchiness is a sign of a lack of intelligence or some kind of complexes. Be smart.

There is a good English rule: to be offended only when they want to offend you, they intentionally offend you. There is no need to be offended by simple inattention, forgetfulness (sometimes characteristic of a given person due to age, due to some psychological shortcomings). On the contrary, show special attention to such a “forgetful” person - it will be beautiful and noble.

This is if they “offend” you, but what if you yourself can offend another? In relation to touchy people, one must be especially careful. Resentment is a very painful character trait.

Letter fifteen. About envy

If a heavyweight sets a new world record in weightlifting, do you envy him? How about a gymnast? And if the champion in diving from a tower into the water?

Start listing everything that you know and that you can envy: you will notice that the closer to your work, specialty, life, the stronger the proximity of envy. It's like in a game - cold, warm, even warmer, hot, burned!

On the last one, you found a thing hidden by other players while blindfolded. It's the same with envy. The closer the achievement of the other is to your specialty, to your interests, the more the burning danger of envy increases.

A terrible feeling, from which the one who envies suffers first of all.
Now you will understand how to get rid of the extremely painful feeling of envy: develop your own individual inclinations, your own uniqueness in the world around you, be yourself, and you will never be envious. Envy develops primarily where you are a stranger to yourself. Envy develops primarily where you do not distinguish yourself from others. Envy means you haven't found yourself.

Letter twenty-two. Love to read!

Each person is obliged (I emphasize - obliged) to take care of their intellectual development. This is his duty to the society in which he lives and to himself.

The main (but, of course, not the only) way of one's intellectual development is reading.

Reading should not be random. This is a huge waste of time, and time is the greatest value that cannot be wasted on trifles. You should read according to the program, of course, without strictly following it, moving away from it where there are additional interests for the reader. However, with all the deviations from the original program, it is necessary to draw up a new one for yourself, taking into account the new interests that have appeared.

Reading, in order to be effective, must interest the reader. Interest in reading in general or in certain branches of culture must be developed in oneself. Interest can be largely the result of self-education.

It is not so easy to compose reading programs for yourself, and this must be done with the advice of knowledgeable people, with the existing reference books of various types.
The danger of reading is the development (conscious or unconscious) in oneself of a tendency to "diagonal" viewing of texts or to various types of high-speed reading methods.

"Speed ​​reading" creates the appearance of knowledge. It can be allowed only in certain types of professions, being careful not to create in oneself the habit of speed reading, it leads to a disease of attention.

Have you noticed what a great impression those works of literature that are read in a calm, unhurried and unhurried environment, for example, on vacation or in case of some not very complicated and not distracting illness, make?

"Disinterested" but interesting reading is what makes one love literature and broadens one's horizons.

"Disinterested" reading was taught to me at school by my literature teacher. I studied during the years when teachers were often forced to be absent from classes - either they dug trenches near Leningrad, or they had to help some factory, or they simply got sick. Leonid Vladimirovich (that was the name of my literature teacher) often came to class when the other teacher was absent, sat down at the teacher's table at ease and, taking books out of his portfolio, offered us something to read. We already knew how he knew how to read, how he knew how to explain what he read, to laugh with us, to admire something, to be surprised at the art of the writer and to rejoice in the future. So we listened to many places from War and Peace, The Captain's Daughter, several stories by Maupassant, an epic about Nightingale Budimirovich, another epic about Dobrynya Nikitich, a story about Woe-Misfortune, Krylov's fables, Derzhavin's odes and much, much more. I still love what I listened to when I was a kid. And at home, father and mother loved to read in the evenings. They read for themselves, and read some of their favorite passages for us. They read Leskov, Mamin-Sibiryak, historical novels - everything that they liked and that we gradually began to like.

Why is TV now partially replacing the book? Yes, because the TV makes you slowly watch some kind of program, sit back comfortably so that nothing bothers you, it distracts you from worries, it dictates to you how to watch and what to watch. But try to choose a book to your liking, take a break from everything in the world for a while, sit comfortably with a book, and you will understand that there are many books that you cannot live without, which are more important and interesting than many programs. I'm not saying stop watching TV. But I say: look with a choice. Spend your time on something that is worthy of this waste. Read more and read with the greatest choice. Decide for yourself your choice, in accordance with the role that your chosen book has acquired in the history of human culture in order to become a classic. This means that there is something significant in it. Or maybe this essential for the culture of mankind will be essential for you?

A classic is one that has stood the test of time. You won't waste your time with it. But the classics cannot answer all the questions of today. Therefore, it is necessary to read modern literature. Don't just jump on every trendy book. Don't be fussy. Worldliness makes a person recklessly spend the largest and most precious capital that he possesses - his time.

Letter forty. About memory

Memory is one of the most important properties of being, of any being: material, spiritual, human…
Paper. Squeeze it and straighten it. Wrinkles will remain on it, and if you compress it a second time, some of the folds will fall along the previous folds: paper “has memory” ...

Memory is possessed by individual plants, stone, on which traces of its origin and movement during the Ice Age remain, glass, water, etc.
The memory of wood is the basis of the most accurate special archaeological discipline that has recently revolutionized archaeological research - where wood is found - dendrochronology ("dendros" in Greek "tree"; dendrochronology - the science of determining the time of a tree).

Birds have the most complex forms of tribal memory, allowing new generations of birds to fly in the right direction to the right place. In explaining these flights, it is not enough to study only the "navigational techniques and methods" used by birds. Most importantly, the memory that makes them look for winter quarters and summer quarters is always the same.

And what can we say about "genetic memory" - a memory laid down for centuries, a memory that passes from one generation of living beings to the next.
However, memory is not mechanical at all. This is the most important creative process: it is the process and it is creative. What is needed is remembered; through memory, good experience is accumulated, a tradition is formed, everyday skills, family skills, work skills, social institutions are created ...

It is customary to primitively divide time into the past, present and future. But thanks to memory, the past enters into the present, and the future is, as it were, foreseen by the present, united with the past.

Memory - overcoming time, overcoming death.
This is the greatest moral significance of memory. “Forgetful” is, first of all, an ungrateful, irresponsible person, and therefore incapable of good, disinterested deeds.

Irresponsibility is born from the lack of consciousness that nothing passes without leaving a trace. A person who commits an unkind deed thinks that this deed will not be preserved in his personal memory and in the memory of those around him. He himself, obviously, is not used to cherishing the memory of the past, feeling gratitude to his ancestors, to their work, their concerns, and therefore thinks that everything will be forgotten about him.

Conscience is basically memory, to which is added a moral assessment of what has been done. But if the perfect is not stored in memory, then there can be no evaluation. Without memory there is no conscience.

That is why it is so important to be brought up in a moral climate of memory: family memory, national memory, cultural memory. Family photos are one of the most important "visual aids" for the moral education of children, and adults as well. Respect for the work of our ancestors, for their labor traditions, for their tools, for their customs, for their songs and entertainment. All this is precious to us. And just respect for the graves of ancestors. Remember Pushkin:

Two feelings are wonderfully close to us -
In them the heart finds food -
Love for native land
Love for father's coffins.
Living shrine!
The earth would be dead without them..

Pushkin's poetry is wise. Every word in his poems requires reflection. Our consciousness cannot immediately get used to the idea that the earth would be dead without love for the coffins of the fathers, without love for the native ashes. Two symbols of death and suddenly - a "life-giving shrine"! Too often we remain indifferent or even almost hostile to the disappearing cemeteries and ashes - the two sources of our not too wise gloomy thoughts and superficially heavy moods. Just as the personal memory of a person forms his conscience, his conscientious attitude towards his personal ancestors and relatives - relatives and friends, old friends, that is, the most faithful, with whom he is connected by common memories - so the historical memory of the people forms a moral climate in which people live. Perhaps one could think about building morality on something else: completely ignoring the past with its sometimes mistakes and painful memories and focusing entirely on the future, building this future on “reasonable grounds” in themselves, forgetting about the past with its dark and light sides.

This is not only unnecessary, but also impossible. The memory of the past is primarily "bright" (Pushkin's expression), poetic. She educates aesthetically.
Human culture as a whole not only has memory, but it is memory par excellence. The culture of mankind is the active memory of mankind, actively introduced into modernity.

In history, every cultural upsurge was in one way or another associated with an appeal to the past. How many times has mankind, for example, turned to Antiquity? There were at least four major, epochal conversions: under Charlemagne, under the Palaiologos dynasty in Byzantium, during the Renaissance, and again at the end of the 18th and beginning of the 19th centuries. And how many “small” conversions of culture to Antiquity were in the same Middle Ages, which for a long time were considered “dark” (the British still talk about the Middle Ages - dark age). Each appeal to the past was "revolutionary", that is, it enriched the present, and each appeal understood this past in its own way, took from the past what it needed to move forward. I am talking about turning to Antiquity, but what gave each nation a turn to its own national past? If it was not dictated by nationalism, a narrow desire to isolate itself from other peoples and their cultural experience, it was fruitful, for it enriched, diversified, expanded the culture of the people, its aesthetic susceptibility. After all, every appeal to the old in the new conditions was always new.

The Carolingian Renaissance in the 6th-7th centuries was not like the Renaissance of the 15th century, the Italian Renaissance is not like the North European. The conversion of the late 18th - early 19th century, which arose under the influence of the discoveries in Pompeii and the works of Winckelmann, differs from our understanding of Antiquity, etc.

She knew several appeals to Ancient Rus' and post-Petrine Russia. There were different sides to this appeal. The discovery of Russian architecture and icons at the beginning of the 20th century was largely devoid of narrow nationalism and very fruitful for the new art.

I would like to demonstrate the aesthetic and moral role of memory on the example of Pushkin's poetry.
In Pushkin, memory plays a huge role in poetry. The poetic role of memories can be traced from Pushkin's childhood and youthful poems, of which the most important is "Memories in Tsarskoye Selo", but in the future the role of memories is very great not only in Pushkin's lyrics, but even in the poem "Eugene Onegin".

When Pushkin needs to introduce a lyrical element, he often resorts to reminiscences. As you know, Pushkin was not in St. Petersburg during the flood of 1824, but nevertheless, in The Bronze Horseman, the flood is colored by a memory:

“It was a terrible time, the memory of it is fresh ...”

Pushkin also colors his historical works with a share of personal, ancestral memory. Remember: in "Boris Godunov" his ancestor Pushkin acts, in "Moor of Peter the Great" - also an ancestor, Hannibal.

Memory is the basis of conscience and morality, memory is the basis of culture, the "accumulations" of culture, memory is one of the foundations of poetry - an aesthetic understanding of cultural values. Preserving memory, preserving memory is our moral duty to ourselves and to our descendants. Memory is our wealth.

Letter forty-six. Ways of Kindness

Here is the last letter. There could be more letters, but it's time to sum up. I'm sorry to stop writing. The reader noticed how the topics of the letters gradually became more complicated. We walked with the reader, climbing the stairs. It could not have been otherwise: why then write, if you remain at the same level, without gradually ascending the steps of experience - moral and aesthetic experience. Life requires complications.

Perhaps the reader has an idea of ​​the letter writer as an arrogant person who tries to teach everyone and everything. This is not entirely true. In letters, I not only "taught", but also studied. I was able to teach precisely because I was learning at the same time: I was learning from my experience, which I was trying to generalize. Much came to my mind as I wrote. I not only stated my experience - I also comprehended my experience. My letters are instructive, but in instructing I myself have been instructed. The reader and I have climbed the steps of experience together, not just my experience, but the experience of many people. Readers themselves helped me write letters - they talked to me inaudibly.

“In life, you must have your own service – service to some cause. Let this thing be small, it will become big if you are faithful to it.

What is the most important thing in life? The main thing can be in shades, each has its own, unique. But still, the main thing should be for every person. Life should not crumble into trifles, dissolve in everyday worries.
And yet, the most important thing: the main thing, no matter how individual it may be for each person, should be kind and significant.

A person should be able not only to rise, but to rise above himself, above his personal daily worries and think about the meaning of his life - look back at the past and look into the future.

If you live only for yourself, with your petty concerns about your own well-being, then there will be no trace of what you have lived. If you live for others, then others will save what they served, what they gave their strength to.

Has the reader noticed that everything bad and petty in life is quickly forgotten. Still people are vexed at a bad and selfish person, at the bad things he has done, but the person himself is no longer remembered, he has been erased from memory. People who do not care about anyone seem to fall out of memory.

People who served others, who served intelligently, who had a good and significant goal in life, are remembered for a long time. They remember their words, deeds, their appearance, their jokes, and sometimes eccentricities. They are told about them. Much less often and, of course, with an unkind feeling, they talk about evil people.

In life, kindness is most valuable, and at the same time, kindness is smart, purposeful. Clever kindness is the most valuable thing in a person, the most conducive to him, and the most ultimately true on the path to personal happiness.

Happiness is achieved by those who strive to make others happy and are able to forget about their interests, about themselves, at least for a while. This is the "unchangeable ruble".
Knowing this, remembering this at all times, and following the path of kindness is very, very important. Believe me!

Children's literature, Moscow, 1989

Documentary film "The era of Dmitry Likhachev, told by himself"

Documentary film "One in the field warrior. Academician Likhachev"

Russia, 2006
Director: Oleg Morofeev

Documentary film “Private Chronicles. D. Likhachev»

Russia, 2006
Director: Maxim Emk (Katushkin)

A cycle of documentaries "Dmitry Likhachev's Steep Roads"

Russia, 2006
Director: Bella Kurkova
Movie 1st. "Seven centuries of antiquities"

Film 2nd. "Disgraced Academician"

Movie 3rd. "Casket for great-grandchildren"

“And create for them, O Lord, an eternal memory…”

The name of Academician Dmitry Sergeevich Likhachev, one of the greatest scientists in the humanities, has long been a symbol of scientific and spiritual enlightenment, wisdom and decency. This name is known on all continents; many universities around the world awarded Likhachev an honorary doctorate. The Prince of Wales, Charles, recalling his meetings with the famous academician, wrote that he largely learned his love for Russia from conversations with Likhachev, a Russian intellectual, whom he is more accustomed to calling a "spiritual aristocrat."

“Style is the person. Likhachev's style is similar to himself. He writes easily, gracefully, accessible. In his books there is a happy harmony of external and internal. And it's the same in his appearance.<…>He does not look like a hero, but for some reason this definition suggests itself. The hero of the spirit, a fine example of a man who managed to fulfill himself. His life spanned the entire length of our 20th century.”

D. Granin

With the birth of man, his time will also be born. In childhood, it is young and flows in a youthful way - it seems fast at short distances and long at long distances. In old age, time definitely stops. It is sluggish. The past in old age is very close, especially childhood. In general, of all three periods of human life (childhood and youth, mature years, old age), old age is the longest period and the most tedious.

Memories open a window to the past. They not only give us information about the past, but also give us the points of view of contemporaries of events, a living feeling of contemporaries. Of course, it also happens that memory betrays memoirists (memoirs without individual errors are extremely rare) or the past is covered too subjectively. But on the other hand, in a very large number of cases, memoirists tell what was not and could not be reflected in any other type of historical sources.

The main shortcoming of many memoirs is the complacency of the memoirist. And it is very difficult to avoid this complacency: it is read between the lines. If the memoirist is very striving for "objectivity" and begins to exaggerate his shortcomings, then this is also unpleasant. Consider Jean-Jacques Rousseau's Confessions. This is hard reading.

Therefore, is it worth writing memoirs? It is worth it - so that the events, the atmosphere of previous years are not forgotten, and most importantly, so that there is a trace of people whom, perhaps, no one will ever remember again, about whom the documents lie.

I do not consider my own development, the development of my views and attitude, to be so important. What is important here is not me in my own person, but, as it were, some characteristic phenomenon.

Attitude to the world is formed by small things and large phenomena. Their impact on a person is known, there is no doubt, and the most important thing is the “little things” that make up the worker, his worldview, attitude. These trifles and accidents of life will be discussed in the future. Every detail must be taken into account when we think about the fate of our own children and our youth in general. Naturally, in my kind of "autobiography" now being presented to the reader's attention, positive influences dominate, because the negative ones are more often forgotten. A person keeps a grateful memory better than an evil memory.

Human interests are formed mainly in his childhood. L. N. Tolstoy writes in My Life: “When did I begin? When did you start living?<…>Didn’t I live then, those first years, when I learned to look, listen, understand, speak… Wasn’t it then that I acquired everything that I now live by, and acquired so much, so quickly, that in the rest of my life I didn’t acquire and 1/100 of that?"

Therefore, in these memoirs, I will pay the main attention to childhood and youth. Observations of one's childhood and adolescence have some general significance. Although the following years, connected mainly with work in the Pushkin House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, are also important.

According to archival data (RGIA. Fond 1343. Op. 39. Case 2777), the founder of the St. Petersburg family of the Likhachevs, Pavel Petrovich Likhachev, from the “children of the Soligalichsky merchants” was admitted in 1794 to the second guild of St. Petersburg merchants. He arrived in St. Petersburg, of course, earlier and was quite rich, because he soon acquired a large plot on Nevsky Prospekt, where he opened a gold-embroidery workshop for two machines and a store - directly opposite the Great Gostiny Dvor. In the Commercial Index of the city of St. Petersburg for 1831, the house number 52 is indicated, obviously erroneously. House number 52 was behind Sadovaya Street, and directly opposite Gostiny Dvor was house number 42. The house number is correctly indicated in the List of Manufacturers and Breeders of the Russian Empire (1832. Part II. St. Petersburg, 1833. S. 666–667). There is also a list of products: all sorts of uniforms for officers, silver and appliqué, braids, fringes, brocades, gimp, gas, brushes, etc. Three spinning machines are indicated. The well-known panorama of Nevsky Prospekt by V. S. Sadovnikov depicts a store with a sign "Likhachev" (such signs indicating only one name were adopted for the most famous stores). Crossed sabers and various kinds of gold-embroidered and braided items are exhibited in six windows along the façade. According to other documents, it is known that Likhachev's gold embroidery workshops were located right there in the yard.

Now house number 42 corresponds to the old one that belonged to Likhachev, but a new house was built on this site by architect L. Benois.

As is clear from the "Petersburg Necropolis" by V. I. Saitov (St. Petersburg, 1912–1913. T. II. S. 676–677), Pavel Petrovich Likhachev, who arrived from Soligalich, was born on January 15, 1764, was buried at the Volkovo Orthodox cemetery in 1841

At the age of seventy, Pavel Petrovich and his family received the title of hereditary honorary citizens of St. Petersburg. The title of hereditary honorary citizens was established by the manifesto of 1832 by Emperor Nicholas I in order to strengthen the class of merchants and artisans. Although this title was “hereditary”, my ancestors confirmed the right to it in each new reign by receiving the Order of Stanislav and the corresponding letter. "Stanislav" was the only order that non-nobles could receive. Such certificates for "Stanislav" were issued to my ancestors by Alexander II and Alexander III. The last charter issued to my grandfather Mikhail Mikhailovich lists all his children, including my father Sergei. But my father no longer had to confirm his right to honorary citizenship with Nicholas II, because thanks to his higher education, rank and orders (among which were “Vladimir” and “Anna” - I don’t remember what degrees) he left the merchant class and belonged to to "personal nobility", that is, the father became a nobleman, however, without the right to transfer his nobility to his children.

My great-great-grandfather Pavel Petrovich received hereditary honorary citizenship not only because he was in the public eye among the St. Petersburg merchants, but also because of his constant charitable activities. In particular, in 1829, Pavel Petrovich donated three thousand infantry officers' sabers of the Second Army, which fought in Bulgaria. I heard about this donation as a child, but in the family it was believed that the sabers were donated in 1812 during the war with Napoleon.

All the Likhachevs had many children. My paternal grandfather Mikhail Mikhailovich had his own house on Razyezzhaya Street (No. 24), next to the courtyard of the Alexander Svirsky Monastery, which explains that one of the Likhachevs donated a large sum to build the Alexander Svirsky chapel in St. Petersburg.

Mikhail Mikhailovich Likhachev, a hereditary honorary citizen of St. Petersburg and a member of the Craft Council, was the headman of the Vladimir Cathedral and in my childhood already lived in a house on Vladimirskaya Square with windows on the cathedral. Dostoevsky looked at the same cathedral from the corner office of his last apartment. But in the year of Dostoevsky's death, Mikhail Mikhailovich was not yet a church warden. The warden was his future father-in-law, Ivan Stepanovich Semyonov. The fact is that the first wife of my grandfather and the mother of my father, Praskovya Alekseevna, died when my father was five years old, and was buried at the expensive Novodevichy cemetery, where Dostoevsky could not be buried. My father was born in 1876. Mikhail Mikhailovich (or, as he was called in our family, Mikhal Mikhalych) remarried the daughter of the church elder Ivan Stepanovich Semenov, Alexandra Ivanovna. Ivan Stepanovich took part in the funeral of Dostoevsky. The priests from the Vladimir Cathedral performed the burial service, and everything necessary for the funeral service was done at home. One document has been preserved that is curious for us - the descendants of Mikhail Mikhailovich Likhachev. This document is cited by Igor Volgin in the manuscript of the book The Last Year of Dostoevsky.

I want to talk about this book in a quiet voice. It is written in a quiet, penetrating voice. But, to which you listen with bated breath, trying not to disturb dear memories, which, like the decayed pages of an old book, open the once living time...
Dmitry Sergeevich Likhachev (November 28, 1906, St. Petersburg, Russian Empire - September 30, 1999, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation) - Soviet and Russian philologist, culturologist, art historian, Doctor of Philology (1947), professor. Chairman of the Board of the Russian (Soviet until 1991) Cultural Fund (1986-1993).
Academician of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Author of fundamental works on the history of Russian literature (mainly Old Russian) and Russian culture. Author of works (including more than forty books) on a wide range of problems in the theory and history of ancient Russian literature, many of which have been translated into different languages. Author of about 500 scientific and 600 journalistic works. He made a significant contribution to the study of ancient Russian literature and art. The circle of scientific interests of Likhachev is very extensive: from the study of icon painting to the analysis of the prison life of prisoners. Throughout all the years of his activity he was an active defender of culture, a propagandist of morality and spirituality.
Dmitry Likhachev's book is not just a memoir, but an eyewitness account. Because in his memoirs and stories about his life, as in a magnifying glass, an entire era was reflected. Moreover, it was the “deafening” of this reflection that was created not with the help of any artistic techniques, with the help of any analyzes or “interpretations” ... It is not easy to read the book - the narrative is quite dense, there is a lot of information about people, about events, about the further fate of the people mentioned . In part, it was even somehow unusual to read about such dramatic years, destinies, but at the same time, the author, Dmitry Likhachev, does not give free rein to emotions. He describes it in a very documentary way, sparingly with all sorts of picturesque details, but at the same time, perception only becomes sharper. Because you perfectly understand that this is all reality, and not an adventure novel. It felt like a documentary to me, with no commentary. Likhachev's language itself depicts what viewers could see, but not feel - after all, it is impossible for us, modern "spectators" to perceive a lot - it is too incredible what his generation experienced.

The book opened the topic for me in a new way, because I practically did not come across literature about political prisoners, with the exception of several authors. But here the book, in general, is not only devoted to this, but it covers the life of D. Likhachev in the "interior" of his era, which absorbed the beginning of the twentieth century, the years of terror of the 20-30s, the blockade, but the book it has no tone of reproof or judgment. This is just an honest story about the life of a man whose fate fell on such a cruel time. And that's what the man saw, and that's what he remembers.

“The wider the persecution of the church developed and the more often and more numerous the executions became on Gorokhovaya, two, in Petropavlovka, on Krestovsky Island, in Strelna, etc., the sharper and sharper we all felt pity for perishing Russia. Our love to the Motherland was least of all like pride in the Motherland, its victories and conquests. Now it is difficult for many to understand. We didn't sing patriotic songs - we cried and prayed.
And with this feeling of pity and sadness I began to study ancient Russian literature and ancient Russian art at the university in 1923. I wanted to keep Russia in my memory, as the children sitting by her bed want to keep in memory the image of a dying mother, to collect her images, to show them to friends, to tell about the greatness of her martyr's life. My books are, in essence, memorial notes that are served “for repose”: you don’t remember everyone when you write them - you write down the most expensive names, and such were for me precisely in Ancient Rus'.

At first, when Dmitry Likhachev's memories relate to childhood and adolescence, he himself, as the main character, is in a sense noticeable. But then, when his story concerns the time of his imprisonment and his stay in Solovki, his story is practically not about himself, but about the people who surrounded him (A.A. Meyer, Yu.N. Danzas, G.M. Osorgin, N Gorsky, E.K. ), some people found meaning in creativity, study, reflection on various intellectual topics, could not only retain a human “face”, but also remain thinking, kind, merciful, with a feeling and grateful heart.
A lot of things shocked me in Likhachev’s memoirs, but one testimony haunted my heart for a long time - his story about how the children were hastily evacuated from Leningrad and at the same time the children abandoned by the escorts during the breakthrough of the front, were lost and could not even give information about themselves, who they were, whose are they...

In the chapter on "working through" Likhachev talks about what is more terrible than war and famine - this is the spiritual fall of people:

"Study" was a public denunciation, gave freedom to anger and envy. It was a coven of evil, the triumph of all vileness ... It was a kind of massive mental illness that gradually engulfed the whole country .... "Studies" of the 30-60s. were part of a certain system for the destruction of the Good ... They were a kind of reprisal against scientists, writers, artists, restorers, theater workers and other intelligentsia "

And still, despite the honest story about all the paintings of his time, Likhachev dedicated the book not to the era, but to people. This is a book of memory - careful and grateful. Therefore, it contains the least of Likhachev himself, although he talks about his family, about his childhood, but then more and more about the people who surrounded him, and who for the most part "disappeared" in a terrible turning point in history. I thought that Dmitry Sergeevich knew how to love people, and that is why he noticed so many good, interesting, courageous people around him. Therefore, the book in the afterword contains a surprising confession:

“People are the most important thing in my memories. ... How varied and interesting they were! ... And mostly people are good! Meetings in childhood, meetings in school and university years, and then the time I spent on Solovki, gave me great wealth. It was not possible to keep the whole thing in his memory. And that's the biggest failure of my life."

It was very surprising for me to read this, although I understood what role Dmitry Sergeevich attached to all these people in my memory. He wrote in such detail and much about many, many people of his time, but at the same time you notice for yourself the terrible pictures of the entire first half of the twentieth century, and you think that it’s hard to even comprehend it - the soul shrinks. And to live through all this, and at the end of life to be able to see in Solovki something for which the soul is grateful - this is really a special quality of the soul.

Likhachev's sincere grief was also shocking when he described the ruins of Novgorod after its liberation. I understand that not every person is able to understand, apart from personal grief, for example, grief from the loss of historical and cultural heritage ... But perhaps that is why you need to read the book of Dmitry Sergeevich Likhachev in order to touch those people, their memories, who also made up historical and cultural heritage in their own way. cultural “value” for their country, and indeed for people in general, so that they understand what it means to be a Human.