However, people whose vital foundations rushila era Petra was a real and undoubted right to deny it flatly: archers tragedy vividly recreated in the Surikov canvas - a real tragedy. And the tragedy is convincingly argued Hegel, right, both fighting a life-and-death side. Meanwhile, the historical evaluation of the Petrine era given, I think, forever by Pushkin himself, who does not lose sight of the figure of Peter throughout his career. And the current curse at Peter, if it is fair and consistent, must be accompanied by a denial of one of the unshakable foundations of Pushkin's historical thinking, which, incidentally, is the highest sample of objectivity, "approval" and "denial" Peter is brilliantly balanced. This is a genuine awareness of the meaning of the era, rather than the "criticism" in the name of certain "ideals" - moral, political, social, etc. (about the dominance of such "criticism" and historiography, and, so to speak, everyday representations.. more will be discussed) of Russian history. This kind of "criticism" often naturally combined with an equally superficial idealization of other historical phenomena. That is based on the surface, light-weight ratio to one story it is subjected to mindless blasphemy, and the other - as thoughtless praise. For example, the same B. Chichibabin, completely defying deep understanding of Pushkin's figure of Peter, at the same time in 1988, without any reason, "attracted" Pushkin to its lightweight chanting another historical figure:
For The Love Of Juliet
Find and Download book
- Try another server.
- Try to reload page — press F5 on keyboard.
- Clear browser cache.
- Clear browser cookies.
- Try other browser.
- If you still getting an error — please contact us and we will fix this error ASAP.