Institute of Philology of the Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences
Monuments of Folklore Siberian Journal of Philology Critique and Semiotics
Yazyki i fol’klor korennykh narodov Sibiri Syuzhetologiya i Syuzhetografiya
Institute of Philology of
the Siberian Branch of
Russian Academy of Sciences
По-русски
  
Sibirskii Filologicheskii Zhurnal (Siberian Journal of Philology)
По-русски
Archive
Editorial board
Our ethical principles
Submission Requirements
Process for Submission & Publication
List of Typos
Search:

Author:

and/or Keyword:

Article

Name: Text, context, and subtext of the 1936 speech by A. Tolstoy on L. Dobychin

Authors: Andrey V. Sharavin, Irina L. Startseva, Yaroslav O. Rezakov

Bryansk State Academician I. G. Petrovski University, Bryansk, Russian Federation

In the section Study of literature

Issue 3, 2026Pages 66-79
UDK: 821.161.1+82-5DOI: 10.17223/18137083/96/5

Abstract:

This paper analyzes the specific nature of A. Tolstoy’s speech regarding L. Dobychin, interpreting it as a complex statement built upon diverse and contradictory meanings. On a literal level, Tolstoy’s report advocates for the re-education of aspiring writers who had lost touch with Soviet reality. However, the contextual and subtextual information embedded in his speech reveals a different thesis: the detachment of the “county writer” from Soviet life is rationalized as an adherence to the literary traditions of Marcel Proust and James Joyce, purportedly instilled in the young author by his mentors, primarily Konstantin Fedin. Furthermore, the study examines Tolstoy’s speech as a direct reaction to H. G. Wells’s 1934 visit to the USSR, during which the English writer met with Joseph Stalin, Maxim Gorky, and various literary figures in Moscow and Leningrad. The content and rhetorical form of Tolstoy’s address suggest that its historical and literary context was heavily influenced by Wells’s intention to recruit Soviet cultural figures into the PEN Club. Wells’s recollection that Tolstoy had kindly agreed to this proposal fundamentally predetermined the defensive subtext of Tolstoy’s speech. By accusing Fedin and Dobychin of sympathizing with unreliable foreign authors, Tolstoy employed a manipulative strategy marked by semantic ambiguity. This approach allowed him to distance himself from accusations of orchestrating a reprisal against Dobychin, deflect suspicion regarding his own contacts with questionable foreign figures, and cultivate the public image of a staunch defender of ideological purity within Soviet literature.

Keywords: formalism, European/Soviet literature, PEN Club, L. Dobychin, A. Tolstoy, H. G. Wells

Bibliography:

Bakhtin V. S. Sud’ba pisatelya L. Dobychina [The fate of the writer L. Dobychin]. Zvezda. 1989, no. 9, pp. 177–182.

Kaverin V. A. Epilog [Epilogue]. Moscow, Vagrius, 2006, 571 p.

Meshkov V. A. Pisatel’-zagadka Leonid Dobychin: krymskiye stranitsy [Mystery writer Leonid Dobychin: Crimean pages]. Simferopol, Tavrida, 2015, 224 p.

Mishkevich G. Tri chasa u velikogo fantasta [Three hours with the great science fiction writer]. In Vtorzheniye v Persey [The invasion of Perseus]. Leningrad, Lenizdat, 1968, pp. 435–442.

Nikulin L. Lyudi i stranstviya. Vospominaniya i vstrechi [People and wanderings. Memories and meetings]. Moscow, Sov. pisatel’, 1962, 512 p.

Pisatel’ Leonid Dobychin: vospominaniya, stat’i, pis’ma: sbornik [Writer Leonid Dobychin: memoirs, articles, letters: collection]. St. Petersburg, Zvezda, 1995, 304 p.

Institute of Philology
Nikolaeva st., 8, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russian Federation
+7-383-330-15-18, ifl@philology.nsc.ru
© Institute of Philology