I. A. Bunin's Literary Work in the context of the Intercultural Dialogue between the Peoples of Russia and China

Lyu Yuan'yuan' Postgraduate Student, Department of Russian and Foreign Literature, Peoples' Friendship University of Russia (RUDN) 117198, Russia, Moscow, ul. miklukho-Maklaya, 6 yuanliu93@mail.ru

Ivan Bunin as a great Russian writer and his contemporaries. Ivan Alekseevich Bunin is a world–famous Russian writer and poet who played an important role in ensuring the intercultural dialogue between the peoples of Russia and China. Reading his works, the inhabitants of the Celestial Empire were able not only to understand the peculiarities of the character of the Russian person, but also to see the similarity of their fate with the fate of their northern neighbor, to enrich their culture with values important for the development of Chinese society ^[1]. I. A. Bunin opened the East to the Russian man, in fact pointing out that the adoption of the West without taking into account the East could turn into a tragedy for the country. And the tragedy did not take long to wait, moreover, having happened at least twice – at the beginning and at the end of the twentieth century.

Today, figuratively speaking, Russians are turning to China, calling it not only a strategic partner, but also harmonizing internal relations, referring to the culture, traditions and customs of both China and other Eastern countries. The latter is due to the fact that Russia is a buffer country by its position, and any tilt in the direction of the West or East is capable of causing an internal (re) in its bodyvoltage.

I. A. Bunin's active creative activity began in the late 80s of the XIX century in the Russian Chernozem region ^[2]. Western values penetrated into the Russian hinterland with great difficulty, and mainly affected the upper strata of society, which helped the writer-nobleman to form as a truly Russian writer, critical of any artificiality and able to express the deepest and innermost in generally accepted words ^[3]. Working in the Orel newspaper, the young realist writer for the first time realized how negative a role Western civilization can have on Russia: the destruction and desolation of noble estates, the hopelessness of life and the "desiccation" of the Russian peasant, who finally loses the material and moral foundations of life with the development of bourgeois relations ^[4].

I. A. Bunin's desire to understand the causes of what is happening in Russia inevitably led him to turn to the East, and, as the writer grew up professionally, the eastern direction in his works became more and more relevant and decisive. In his works, the writer often exposed the corruption of Western influence, at the same time showing the depth and tranquility of the East, its unity and harmony with Nature.

L. N. Tolstoy and A. P. Chekhov played a huge role in I. A. Bunin's appeal to Eastern themes. The first, L. N. Tolstoy, first of all, with his novel "War and Peace", about which the writer had heard as a child ^[5], as well as reverence for Buddhism, to the postulates of which I. A. Bunin often turned in his works, combining them with universal values ^[6]; the second, A. P. Chekhov first of all, with his stories written after the "Asian circumnavigation" of 1890. Communication with A. P. Chekhov in the Yalta house prompted I. A. Bunin to visit Ceylon in 1911, which led to the appearance of real Buddhist themes in his work.

Both L. N. Tolstoy and A. P. Chekhov were closely connected with China and sought to build a cultural tunnel between the Chinese and Russian peoples. It is well known that L. N. Tolstoy, who studied and disseminated the basics of Buddhism in Russia, sincerely worried about the fate of the Chinese who were subjected to violence by Europeans, as he wrote in "Letter to the Chinese" ^[7]; and the works of A. P. Chekhov in spirit and meaning resembled the works of the great Chinese writer Lu Xin ^[8].

On the problem of understanding the term "soft power" in Chinese political Discourse. In the modern world, it is not customary to talk about the connection between "beautiful" (literature) and "dirty" (politics), which often leads to a distorted understanding of reality, contributes to the construction of unnecessary barriers to interaction between people living in different countries, leads to a false perception of some countries as "closed" (to such countries are often referred to as China), and other countries as "open" (Western countries).

The Chinese state, like any other, has always formed an internal and external agenda, promoted an image strategy aimed at ensuring its stable position and gaining advantages in the process of communication with the rest of the world. Moreover, the image strategy of the Chinese state has historically been associated with the so-called "soft power" strategy, which ensured a positive attitude towards the Chinese of the population of other countries, allowing them (the Chinese) to use their potential to create the necessary tangible and intangible values abroad, as well as contribute to strengthening peace ^[9].

At the moment, there is no unambiguous understanding of "soft power" in the scientific community, however, there is an understanding that the total power of the state consists of material and immaterial elements, the latter of which, according to Liu Zaiqi, represent "soft power" ^[10]. At the same time, until today, the concept of "soft power" is interpreted differently in different countries, which is associated with the peculiarities of the historical development of territorial societies. For example, the British interpret "soft power" through the context of force, which is characteristic of English expansionism; Russian researchers emphasize the dynamism of the concept, which is associated with the turbulence of Russian political life, frequent state and social crises; in Chinese science, "soft power" is understood depending on the circumstances, a specific situation. Thus, the concept of "ruan shili" ("?"") means "soft real / real power"; the concept of "ruan lilyan" ("?"") is more often understood as the physical power of the subject; and the concept of "ruan quanli" ("?"") - "soft power", "soft authority / right", etc., which reflects rather the legal nature of "soft power" and testifies to the right of each subject to use it. Interestingly, the concept of "quanli" ("") in traditional Chinese means scales, which means that one of the functions of "soft power" is to balance the system, giving it stability when using force. The latter testifies to the thoughtfulness and pragmatism of the Chinese understanding of "soft power", the connection of the term in question with strategy or tactics. Moreover, in the official statements of the Chinese state, the concept of "ruan shili" is mainly used, as a rule, in conjunction with the adjective "wenhua" () — culture or cultural, which actually dictates its orientation.

An analysis of Russian and other foreign sources and literature devoted to the study of the term "soft power" allows us to conclude that most foreign researchers believe that the Chinese began using "soft power" only with the arrival of the Chairman of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Hu Jintao, which is not true, and most likely, it is connected with the "closeness" of China from the Europeans.

The strategy of "soft power" goes back to ancient times, to Sun Tzu's statements about defeating the enemy without a fight; as well as to the category of "the way of the sovereign", used by the ancient Chinese philosopher Meng Tzu. By this category, Meng-tzu meant humane rule, and contrasted it with another category - "the way of the hegemon" ()), which meant "hard power" ^[11]. Only some Russian researchers pay attention to the ancient history of the "soft power" strategy. Thus, MSU professor V. M. Kapitsyn believes that the image of "soft power" originates from Eastern teachings, including Taoism ^[12]; V. V. Radnaeva believes that the idea of "soft power" is embedded in Confucianism. In particular, V. V. Radnaeva, emphasizing the systemic nature of the use of "soft power" by the Chinese throughout the development of the Celestial Empire, writes: "The idea of ruling by virtue together with related doctrines and the system of promoting officials based on their skills and abilities is a form of "soft power" that was used by the rulers of China throughout the history of imperial China", supporters of Confucianism "advocated the use of humane management methods, criticized military actions, disapproved of the desire for excessive territorial seizures of the Qin rulers"; "Confucius' "soft power" also had a strong influence on the management of the foreign policy of the Chinese Empire. In China, since ancient times, an "unobtrusive" policy has been practiced in relations with foreign countries and preference has been given to ethics and morality. The main instrument of foreign policy was "soft power" and active influence through cultural values" ^[13].

The well-known Russian orientalist, researcher of philosophy and spiritual culture of China M. L. Titarenko also noted that the approach to "soft power", which is based on culture, "corresponds to the spirit of the Chinese tradition, in which the creative civilizational principle of "wen" (?) stood above the destructive militancy of "wu" (?) ^[14].

"Soft power" as the basis of the image of the Chinese state. For Chinese state elites, the formation of an image has always been an important task, since they claimed not only a leading role in the Asia-Pacific region, but also in the world, pointing out, for example, that the concept of "Celestial Empire" means not only China, but the whole world, and Chinese sovereigns, in the views of Chinese inhabitants, we have always been responsible for the planet.

Sinocentrism was also manifested in the Chinese ideas about the hierarchy of the world, which have been preserved to this day in the field of international relations ^[15], moral and ethical maximalism and even cosmologism - it was on him, according to legend, that heavenly grace descended, or the moral power of Te, manifested in the early Zhou tradition in two different forms: in the form of internal self–improvement (in this case, it is close to the later Confucian tradition) and in the form of a kind attitude towards people, concern for the welfare of society and the state. It is obvious that the refusal to recognize the influence of the Chinese state on the destinies of neighboring peoples, including at the present time ^[16], does not contribute to an objective assessment of China's role in the world and leads to a distorted understanding of the past, present and future.

Realizing that the implementation of the "soft power" strategy has been actively carried out by the Chinese state elite at all times, including the end of the XIX – beginning of the XX century, it is necessary to take into account that the Chinese have always sought dialogue, interaction, mutual enrichment of cultures through cooperation and good neighborliness. If in the economy this strategy was reflected in trade and exchange of goods, then in politics – in the active promotion of Chinese values and world views to other communities, unfortunately, often encountering difficulties, but, one way or another, contributing to the development of good-neighborly relations ^[17].

Since there was a "gap" in the form of a language barrier between the Chinese and the population of other countries, the organization of civilizational dialogue by the Chinese state was carried out in the process of active interaction with representatives of cultural elites of other countries, primarily with the intelligentsia - carriers of cosmopolitan consciousness and critical thinking, owners of a relatively free view of the world.

The Russian intelligentsia was close to the Chinese with its cosmopolitan views and the desire to harmoniously combine Western and Eastern values, to achieve a correction of the Eurocentrism that swept the western part of Russia in the direction of the "East". To a certain extent, cooperation with the East was also of interest to part of the Russian state elite, which by the end of the XIX century contributed to the formation of a new direction in philosophy as "Russian cosmism". According to the Candidate of Political Sciences, Associate Professor E. A. Trofimov, "the formation of Russian cosmism as a philosophical trend could not take place without the decision of the tsarist government: in conditions of the most severe censorship and control over the population, only state authorization could lead to the emergence and development of institutions and institutions in Russia, otherwise, even if the latter had appeared "against all odds", they would not have received there would be no significant attention from even progressive-minded representatives of their time." From personal correspondence with a political scientist.

"Russian cosmism" and Chinese "soft power". The founder of "Russian cosmism" was a provincial teacher of history and geography N. F. Fedorov, whose philosophical teaching combined russiacentrism - Russia as the center of world-peasant civilization, Russia's connection with the East as a geopolitical ally opposing the West, autocratic rule based on Orthodoxy ^[18]. Thanks to a well-built geopolitical doctrine, N. F. Fedorov managed to unite around himself a part of the Russian intelligentsia, who saw in him an "amazing philosopher" ^[19], "teacher and spiritual father" ^[20]. Moreover, some representatives of the cultural elite of Russia, under the influence of N. F. Fedorov, abandoned their revolutionary views and began to emphasize the important religious significance of autocracy (for example, N. P. Peterson), and some personally N. F. Fedorov declared unpatriotic and stopped maintaining relations with them. Among the "unreliable", there was also L. N. Tolstoy, who accused the tsarist administration of the catastrophic situation of the peasantry.

Interestingly, in the process of the development of "Russian cosmism", one of the splits between its representatives occurred along the line of "attitude to Buddhism". If the founder of "Russian cosmism" N. F. Fedorov was a supporter of Orthodoxy, evaluated Buddhism mostly negatively ^[21], then, for example, V. S. Solovyov, although he believed that China without the West has no prospects for development, nevertheless, associated Buddhism with the first world-historical awakening of the human soul, and he believed that he was opening a fundamentally new stage in the history of mankind - the all-human stage, which is replacing generic and national-state particularism ^[22]; H. P. Blavatsky expressed her conviction in the unity of the ethics of theosophy and the ethics of Buddhism, and concluded that the Buddha "was the first to include this sublime ethics in his public and made it the basis and the very essence of his public system" ^[23]; E. I. Roerich attempted to philosophize and scientize Buddhism, developed the doctrine of Shambhala, calling for the revival of the principles of early Buddhist monastic discipline ^[24]; V. I. Vernadsky attached great importance to Buddhism in the field of the doctrine of the world, noting that the theory of the eternity of the universe, arising from the Redi principle, contradicts the Western spiritual tradition, which is based on the position of the beginning and the end of our existence, created by God, and the time of the beginning of the decline of the creative thought of India was determined by the period of displacement from the "earthly Paradise" of Buddhism ^[25]; ... etc. Buddhism was also positively evaluated by I. A. Bunin, who saw in the Eastern teaching an ancient wisdom aimed at creating a unified humanity. In other words, in the process of development, "Russian cosmism" was transformed, in a certain sense reorienting itself to the philosophical thought of the East.

Despite the lack of evidence about the influence of the Chinese on the transformation of "Russian cosmism", it would be logical to assume that it took place, and occurred not only as a result of the conflict between the Russian Empire and Germany and other Western countries, but also as a result of the use of "soft power" by the Chinese Empire, at least, this is evidenced by The orientation of the Russian intelligentsia is not "inside" Russia, but to the East. Moreover, there is an opinion in the scientific community that the Chinese once had an important influence on the transformation of Buddhism ^[26], in fact contributing to the development of the Mahayana school - the "Great Chariot" in India, which was later used to bring the two peoples closer.

At the same time, Buddhism occupies an important place in the socio-political strategy of the Communist Party of China ^[27], as it corresponds to its ideological basis ("Yi Renweibeng,") and promotes comprehensive, coordinated and long-term development for a person and based on a person ^[28].

Ivan Bunin's creativity in China: from wariness to recognition. The work of I. A. Bunin entered the literary life of China in the 1920s with great difficulties. In March 1916, I. A. Bunin first published the story "Easy Breathing" in the newspaper Russian Word. The story was noticed by some Chinese translators, and was translated into Chinese before other works of the writer. The first translator of I. A. Bunin's short story "Easy Breathing" into Chinese was Wei Tsong, who, for political reasons, was forced to distort the author's idea of the writer in the introduction, pointing out that the story is a narrative about the revolutionary activities of women during the Russian Empire ^[29]. But, despite the mimicry of a revolutionary work, Wei Tsong's translation was not received kindly by either the editors of popular Chinese publications or their employees. As Lu Xin wrote in his diaries and letters, the translation was twice offered for publication to the commercial press and the Man-yuan magazine, but the editors refused to publish it.

Nevertheless, the initiatives of the founder of modern Chinese literature Lu Xin, related to the need to publish the story "Easy Breathing", attracted the attention of the Chinese state to the Russian writer. In September 1921, the Shanghai commercial publishing house "Shang Wu" published an emergency issue of the monthly art magazine "Xiaosho Yuebao" - "The Study of Russian Literature", in which I. A. Bunin's story "The Gentleman from San Francisco" was published, which more closely corresponded to the mood of Chinese society and the political tasks facing it. In addition, the magazine published an article by the editor of Xiaosho Yuebao, writer and publicist Mao Dong "Brief biographies of thirty-eight Russian writers", which included the biography of I. A. Bunin ^[30]. In his article, Mao Dun was the first in China to speak about the originality of I. A. Bunin's work, along with a positive assessment, making a number of critical remarks that were largely subjective in nature ^[30]. Thus, even if he focused attention on the uselessness of the revolutionary movement of the works of I. A. Bunin, Mao Dun officially introduced the Russian writer to the Chinese reader, among whom his admirers had already appeared by this time, for example, Lu Xin, who translated the works of A. P. Chekhov, who was close to I. A. Bunin.

A huge influence on the publication of I. A. Bunin's works in China was not only the writer's class affiliation, but also his attitude to the revolution, which divided his work into "before" and "after" ^[31], and in January 1920 forced the writer to emigrate from Russia. I. A. Bunin's emigration allowed a number of Chinese writers and critics to see him as a traitor to his homeland, a traitor, transferring this assessment to his work. In the eyes of some Chinese, he moved down the social pyramid, which should not have allowed him to continue his literary work ^[35]. These assessments were also subjective and unfair, since in the period from 1917 to 1920, I. A. Bunin wrote a number of works, including the novel "Cursed Days", published in many countries of the world and having no analogues in Russian literature ^[36].

After the publication of the story "The Gentleman from San Francisco" in September 1921 in the magazine "Xiaosho Yuebao", in 1926 the story "Chekhov" was published in the same magazine, and the portrait of I. A. Bunin appeared on the title of the magazine for the first time, which actually meant that the Chinese readers and the Chinese state accepted the Russian writer. Since that time, the works of the Russian writer began to be published in China with a certain regularity, and I. A. Bunin was called "a rare master of literature", whose "works are full of the charm of memory and sadness for the lost charm of the past", a writer "boundlessly attached to the spirit of Slavic antiquity" ^[35]. But even after such a literary "breakthrough", I. A. Bunin remained in China "a writer on the periphery", not going into comparison with I. S. Turgenev, N. V. Gogol, L. N. Tolstoy, A. P. Chekhov, etc. by Russian writers whose works were translated and published in large editions in the Middle Kingdom during this period.

The small attention of the Chinese to the works of I. A. Bunin was largely determined by the peculiarities of the historical period and the tasks set for the Chinese to build a socialist democracy. The lyrics and nostalgia of Bunin's works seemed superfluous and even unacceptable at this time ^[37].

In 1933, I. A. Bunin received the Nobel Prize. The news of this quickly spread around the world, causing a response in China. Reviews of this literary event were different. Thus, Mao Dun, in the articles "The Nobel Prize in Literature" and "Bunin and the Nobel Prize in Literature", expressed both contempt for the winner of the "bourgeois Prize" and surprise at such a high assessment by the international jury of the merits of the Russian writer ^[38]. Other Chinese writers were divided in opinion and reacted positively to the awarding of the Nobel Prize to I. A. Bunin, for example, noting that the writer occupies a rather important place in the history of Russian literature ^[39].

In 1934, the editorial board of the Weekly Bulletin of Tsinghua University published an article by Zheng Linquan "About Ivan Bunin" in the first issue. This was the first work about the work of I. A. Bunin, in which the works of the Russian writer were considered not from the perspective of politics, but from the perspective of their literary and aesthetic value. "Although Bunin's creative handwriting was greatly influenced by Turgenev, Aksakov, Chekhov and, to a certain extent, Tolstoy, although at the beginning of the twentieth century Bunin was associated with a group of realists led by Gorky, he still goes his own special way, and in the first 25 years of the twentieth century retains his primacy as a master of words", - Zheng Linquan wrote, and further - "in comparison with the above-mentioned writers, Bunin is not only a talented poet, but also an outstanding prose writer", continuing in poetry the best traditions of Pushkin and, at the same time, modernism. "As a novelist, Bunin rightfully stands on a par with Turgenev, Chekhov and Bely" ^[40].

Following Zheng Linquan's article "About Ivan Bunin", a special issue of the World Literature magazine was published in 1935 with the subtitle "Pirandello and Bunin", in which Bunin's stories "Sunstroke", "Unknown Friend" and memoirs "About Meeting Tolstoy" were published.

Russian Russian readers and Chinese statesmen's acquaintance with the works of I. A. Bunin, their assessment of the works of the Russian writer and poet, as well as the assessment of the writer's works by the world community, showed the complexity of Chinese perception of the work of the Russian writer, as well as the inextricable link between literature and politics, in which the former, unfortunately, is hopelessly subordinated to the second ^[41].

Having survived a short period of noisy Nobel fame, I. A. Bunin soon found himself "on the periphery" again, since during the Second World War, anti-fascist literature began to be in demand among Chinese readers, and not romantic sentimentalism and lyrics of the Russian writer. In addition, the changes in Soviet foreign policy that occurred after the assassination of I. V. Stalin noticeably cooled relations between the PRC and the USSR, causing serious criticism of Russian literature in China, especially during the Cultural Revolution. The 10 years of the "cultural reform" turned out to be the least productive period in the history of Chinese-Russian literary relations. The crisis in the intercultural interaction between the PRC and the USSR, provoked by the polemical inadequacy in the issues of communist construction ^[42], actually lasted until the end of the Cultural Revolution.

After the Cultural Revolution, the Chinese state realized the inadequacy of evaluating literature through the prism of politics, and already in July 1978 founded the journal "Foreign Literature and Art", in the first issue of which it published an article "The Nobel Prize in Literature and its laureates". In it, the name of I. A. Bunin, which had not been mentioned for almost 30 years, was returned to Chinese admirers with an indication that the Nobel Prize in Literature was awarded to I. A. Bunin "for the strict artistic talent with which he recreated a typically Russian character in literary prose."

After the IV Conference of the All-China Association of Workers of Literature and Arts (VARLI), held in 1979, and the subsequent statements of the Chinese state on the liberation of literature from politics, the best works created by I. A. Bunin in different periods appeared in many Chinese magazines: "Sunstroke", "Dark Alleys", "The End", "The Raven", "In Paris", "Three Rubles", "The Gentleman from San Francisco" (1979), "Exodus" and "Care" (1980), in 1981 published the "Collection of Bunin's stories", "Selected stories and Bunin's stories", the story "Mitya's love", "Sukhodol"; in 1983, the writer's masterpiece "The Village" was published, a year later the novel "The Life of Arsenyev" was published, for which the writer received the Nobel Prize, a year later the first collection of poems "Summer Night: I. A. Bunin's lyrics" was published.

However, the "new breakthrough" could not completely neutralize the negative assessments of the Russian writer's work by some Chinese literary critics and critics. Remembering the class-class affiliation of I. A. Bunin, his "treason to the Motherland", they saw in his works only boredom and superficiality ^[43]. Such assessments were facilitated not only by the conservatism and confusion of the "priests of the pen" who were "traumatized" during the Cultural Revolution, but also by the long and not entirely effective search by the Chinese state for the correct methodology suitable for an impartial interpretation of literature in the conditions of the new era.

The situation changed dramatically after the 1990s of the twentieth century. During these years, the works of I. A. Bunin began to be republished by many publishers, work continued on translations of his literary masterpieces, the Chinese book market began to be replenished with the works of the writer. After the 90s of the twentieth century, almost all the important and significant works of I. A. Bunin were translated into Chinese.

Thanks to numerous translations of Bunin's works, the range of studies of his work has also expanded, and judgments about the literary value of his legacy have become more objective and fair. In the modern views of the Chinese, I. A. Bunin corresponds to the characteristic given to him by Professor Fei Yului of the Shanghai University of Foreign Languages in the monograph "Crossroads and the Return of Ivan Bunin": he is an exposer of the vices of feudalism; a patriot of his country, looking for support in the essence of man and moral principles; a fighter against violence, dreaming of saving the culture of Russia; a person who sincerely worries for the fate of compatriots; humanist writer ^[44]. To date, scientific centers have been established and operate in China, where the study of the work of the Russian writer is carried out: Heilongjiang University (), Xiamen University (), Pedagogical University of Shaanxi Province of Xi'an, Shaanxi Province, China (), Xi'an Transport University (), Guangdong University of Foreign Languages and Foreign Trade (The Second Beijing University of Foreign Languages (the Second Beijing University of Foreign Languages) ^[45]. Despite the fact that Haidong Cheng's research was limited to the period from 1980 to 2010, these centers remain the most important bunin research centers in China to this day.

Thus, the work of I. A. Bunin has been known in China for more than 90 years, and interest in him has experienced ups and downs. He was considered from the point of view of the social class belonging of the Russian writer, and his attitude to the revolution, and the Chinese's own complexes formed as a result of the "trauma" inflicted by the Cultural Revolution, and, finally, moral and ethical values. Despite the fact that the assessments of the works of the Russian writer differed from sharply negative to enthusiastic, the study of I. A. Bunin's work in China contributed to the formation of friendly neighborly relations between the peoples of the two countries, the interpenetration, mutual influence and mutual enrichment of their cultures. 

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.