How the Nobel Committee refused to award the prize to Leo Tolstoy. Five Famous Nobel Prize Rejections Leo Tolstoy won the Nobel Prize for what

Leo Tolstoy (1902–1906)

The history of the Nobel Prize in Literature began in 1901 - and immediately with a scandal. Its first laureate was the French poet Sully-Prudhomme. Forty-two Swedish critics and writers - including the future Nobel laureates Selma Lagerlöf and Werner von Heydenstam - were dumbfounded: in their opinion, the main author in the world was Leo Tolstoy. August Strindberg burst into a long-winded article, calling academicians unscrupulous artisans and dilettantes in literature. Tolstoy himself received, the authors of which called him "the most revered patriarch of modern literature" and justified themselves: the choice of the committee, they say, does not reflect the opinion of either critics or readers. Replying to Oscar Levertin, one of the forty-two authors, Tolstoy said: “I was very pleased that the Nobel Prize was not awarded to me.<…>this saved me from a great difficulty - to dispose of this money, which, like any money, in my opinion, can only bring evil.

A piquant detail: among the twenty-three contenders for the first prize, there was no Tolstoy at all. But now - mainly through the efforts of French academicians - the count was nominated every year. However, he never received the prize - not least because of the unflattering characterization that Alfred Jensen, an expert on Slavic literatures, compiled for the committee. Jensen's philosophy of the late Tolstoy is destructive and contrary to the idealistic nature of the prize. In the future, however, the researcher spoke of Tolstoy more flattering - but he still did not take offense. In 1906, the writer even of his Swedish colleagues "try to make sure that I am not awarded this prize," because, "if this happened, it would be very unpleasant for me to refuse." The committee listened and, with relief, stopped listing him.

Dmitry Merezhkovsky (1914, 1915, 1930–1937)

After Tolstoy's death, the most famous Russian novelist in Europe became Dmitry Merezhkovsky, whose candidacy was proposed in 1914 by the first director of the Pushkin House, Nestor Kotlyarevsky. The Committee again turned to Alfred Jensen for a review: the philologist noted the relationship of his work with the works of Nadson, Pushkin and Baudelaire and generally praised the candidate "for the artistic mastery of the image, the universal content and the idealistic direction." However, history intervened: the First World War broke out - and they decided not to award the prize.

The following year, Merezhkovsky was nominated by a Swedish writer, at the suggestion of which Selma Lagerlöf had already received the award. In his new review, Jensen was merciless towards Merezhkovsky, calling him "a collector of details, quotations and simply written off pages" and pointing out that he was far from real masters like Leo Tolstoy; a striking judgment, considering that he had previously criticized Tolstoy. However, when the author of “At the Bottom” and “Mother” first appeared among the nominees, Jensen again changed his position, lamenting that “Maxim Gorky was included in the 1918 list of Russian writers, while Merezhkovsky’s name does not appear,” and that the legacy of Merezhkovsky "will forever retain his name, regardless of the Nobel Prize."

Low competition could play into the hands of Merezhkovsky: warring Europe had no time for literature. But in February, the committee added to the eleven applicants thirteen more names left over from last year. The laureate then became Romain Rolland, who later himself three Russian authors - Maxim Gorky, Ivan Bunin and Konstantin Balmont.

Merezhkovsky again began to claim the prize only fifteen years later. The poet and translator Sigurd Agrel put forward him for seven years in a row - either alone, or in company with Bunin and Gorky. Many considered Merezhkovsky the favorite (feuilletonist Alexander Amfiteatrov even hastened to congratulate him on receiving the Nobel Prize), but the writer himself did not overestimate his chances. Vera Bunina, as Merezhkovsky businesslikely suggested that Bunin share the prize: if one of them wins, he will give the second 200,000 francs. Bunin refused with contempt, and in 1933 he received it - solo. Merezhkovsky, however, did not stop trying - he made connections, wrote letters, became friends with Gustav Nobel, Alfred's nephew - but in vain: he never got the award.

Maxim Gorky (1918, 1923, 1928, 1933)

Maxim Gorky was nominated for the Nobel Prize not as often as some - only four times. But he received nominations with mathematical precision: once every five years and always in the year of his next anniversary.

Gorky presented a problem for the Nobel Committee. On the one hand, a talent of this magnitude could not be ignored - on the other, the Swedes were embarrassed by his political views. All the same Jensen in 1918, when the fifty-year-old Gorky was nominated for the first time, praised the early works of the writer and later: Gorky's "anarchist and often completely raw creations" "in no way fit into the framework of the Nobel Prize." However, at that time the award was not presented again.
Five years later, Jensen's successor Anton Karlgren added new accusations: in Gorky's work after 1905, in his opinion, there is "not the slightest echo of ardent love for the motherland", and in general his books are a solid "sterile desert". The committee agreed with him, preferring Gorky (and along with Bunin) to the Irishman William Butler Yeats.

In 1928, two Swedish writers, Werner von Heydenstam and Thor Hedberg, immediately vouched for the "petrel of the revolution". The Nobel Committee was impressed by the persistence of the Russian author's admirers, and Gorky was even considered a favorite, but the Norwegian novelist Sigrid Unset won the prize.

Finally, in 1933, Gorky's candidacy was introduced by Sigurd Agrel. According to him, the prize should either be given to Bunin, or divided between him and Merezhkovsky (the latter would have liked this option), or divided between Bunin and Gorky. The committee gave preference to the author of The Life of Arseniev. Gorky died in 1936, without waiting for another nomination.

Vladimir Nabokov (1963–…)

Back in the 1930s, when Bunin, Gorky and Merezhkovsky fought for the prize, Vera Bunina wrote in her diary: “I read Sirina. What lightness he has and how modern he is. Here's who will soon be a candidate for the Nobel Prize." The prediction almost came true: Nabokov received his first nomination only in 1963. By this point, he had already ranked among the best novelists of the century, but one of his books still embarrassed the academy: “The author of the immoral and successful novel Lolita cannot under any circumstances be considered a candidate for the prize,” wrote a permanent member of the Swedish Anders Esterling Academy.

For at least three consecutive years, Nabokov was among the nominees, but lost. In 1964, the prize was awarded to Sartre (the French refused it), in 1965 - to Nabokov's former compatriot Sholokhov. Most likely, Nabokov was also nominated later (we will know about this when the archives are opened). In May 1969, in a review of the novel Inferno, The New York Times critic John Leonard: "If he does not win the Nobel Prize, it is only because it is unworthy of him."

In 1970 Alexander Solzhenitsyn became the laureate. From the author of "The Gulag Archipelago" - as well as from Brodsky - Nabokov was not enthusiastic, but he never criticized them in the press and spoke with restrained respect. He replied that Nabokov left his native language, but recognized in it "a dazzling literary talent, exactly what we call genius," and publicly asked the Nobel Committee to finally pay tribute to the Russian-American writer.
When in February 1974 Solzhenitsyn was deprived of his citizenship and expelled from the USSR, Nabokov immediately wrote to him, thanked him for his support and offered to see him. In the fall, Solzhenitsyn arrived in the Swiss city of Montreux, where Nabokov and his wife lived, and he received a note with a proposal to meet. Without answering, Nabokov immediately ordered a separate office in the restaurant and went there to wait for Solzhenitsyn. The same one was in the dark and all morning on October 6 he called into the empty Nabokov room, not daring to go into a restaurant. According to the culturologist Boris Paramonov, Nabokov deliberately "avoided meeting Solzhenitsyn", but, apparently, the failure to meet was the result of an absurd accident. Nabokov himself believed that it was Solzhenitsyn who changed his mind about getting to know him. “Probably, I seem to him too verbal, carelessly apolitical,” he complained to Bella Akhmadulina. The two main Russian émigré writers never crossed paths. The first couple were Miguel Angel Asturias and Jorge Louis Borges: Asturias became a laureate in 1967, while the Argentine prose writer inopportunely made friends with Pinochet and thereby deprived himself of a chance for a Nobel Prize. Shmuel Yosef Agnon and Nelly Zaks shared the prize for the following year. Well, the third option was the parallel awarding of Mikhail Sholokhov and Anna Akhmatova. The chairman of the committee, Anders Esterling, however, considered such a move too compromise and insisted that the prize go into one hand. It was received by Sholokhov, who was nominated for the seventh time. A year later, Akhmatova died, and this nomination remained the only one for her.

When referring to more than a century of history of this award, from the very beginning, the tendentiousness of the members of the Swedish Academy, who decided the question of who will be the Nobel laureate, becomes clear and undeniable. So, during the period of awarding the first prizes, he was undoubtedly the greatest representative of world literature. Lev Tolstoy. However, the most influential secretary of the Swedish Academy, Karl Virsen, acknowledging that Tolstoy had created immortal creations, nevertheless categorically opposed his candidacy, because this writer, as he formulated, “condemned all forms of civilization and insisted in return for them to adopt a primitive way of life, divorced from all institutions. high culture... Anyone who encounters such inert cruelty (-) in relation to any form of civilization will be overcome by doubt. No one will agree with such views ... "

Already after the first dubious award, public opinion in Sweden and other countries was shocked by the decision of the Nobel Academy. A month after the scandalous award, in January 1902, Leo Tolstoy received a protest address from a group of Swedish writers and artists:

"In view of the awarding of the Nobel Prize for the first time, we, the undersigned writers, artists and critics of Sweden, want to express our admiration to you. We see in you not only the deeply revered patriarch of modern literature, but also one of those powerful soulful poets, which in this case should be to remember first of all, although you, in your personal judgment, never aspired to this kind of award.We feel the more keenly the need to address you with this greeting, which, in our opinion, the institution that was entrusted with the award of a literary prize does not represent in in its present composition, neither the opinions of writers-artists, nor public opinion. Let them know abroad that even in our remote country, the main and most powerful art is considered to be that which rests on freedom of thought and creativity. " This letter was signed by more than forty prominent figures in Swedish literature and art.

On January 24, 1902, an article by the writer August Strindberg appeared in the Swedish newspaper "Svenska Dagbladet", arguing in it that the majority of the members of the Academy are "unscrupulous artisans and dilettantes in literature, who for some reason are called to administer justice, but these gentlemen's ideas about art are so childishly naive that they call poetry only what is written in verse, preferably rhymed.And if, for example, Tolstoy forever became famous as a depicter of human destinies, if he is the creator of historical frescoes, then they do not consider him a poet on the grounds that he does not wrote poetry!

Another judgment on this matter belongs to the famous Danish literary critic Georg Brandes: "Leo Tolstoy occupies the first place among modern writers. No one inspires such a sense of reverence as he does! We can say: no one but him inspires a sense of reverence."

Numerous appeals and demands for the restoration of desecrated justice forced Tolstoy himself to speak: “Dear and respected brothers! I was very pleased that the Nobel Prize was not awarded to me. and any money, in my opinion, can only bring evil, and secondly, it gave me the honor and great pleasure to receive expressions of sympathy from so many people, although unknown to me, but still deeply respected by me. Accept, dear brethren, expression of my sincere gratitude and best feelings. Leo Tolstoy".

Many "defenders" of the Nobel experts refer to Tolstoy's refusal to accept the prize if he is awarded it. This statement of the writer really took place, but later, by the end of 1906. In 1905, Tolstoy's new work, The Great Sin, was published. In this work, Tolstoy, in the most categorical form, argued and extremely convincingly, spoke out against private ownership of land. The Russian Academy of Sciences had a quite understandable idea to nominate Leo Tolstoy for the Nobel Prize. In a note compiled for this purpose by outstanding Russian scientists, academicians A.F. Koni, K.K. Arseniev and N.P. Kondakov gave the highest rating to "War and Peace", "Resurrection". And in conclusion, on behalf of the Russian Imperial Academy of Sciences, a wish was expressed to award Tolstoy the Nobel Prize.

This note was also approved by the category of belles-lettres of the Academy of Sciences. On January 19, 1906, together with a copy of Tolstoy's The Great Sin, the note was sent to Sweden.

As soon as he heard about such a great honor, Tolstoy writes to the Finnish writer Arvid Ernefeld: "If this happened, it would be very unpleasant for me to refuse, and therefore I beg you, if you have - as I think - any connections in Sweden, try not to give me this prize.Perhaps you know any of the members, perhaps you can write to the chairman, asking him not to disclose this, so that they do not.Please do what you can, in addition so that they do not give me bonuses and do not put me in a very unpleasant position - to refuse it.

Which of the great Russian writers and poets was awarded the Nobel Prize? Mikhail Sholokhov, Ivan Bunin, Boris Pasternak and Joseph Brodsky.

Joseph Brodsky, a poet practically unknown in Russia, suddenly became the winner of the most prestigious literary award in the world. Here is an amazing case!

However, why is it amazing? Joseph Brodsky at first, they wanted to bury in the Alexander Nevsky Lavra in St. Petersburg, next to the emperors, and then, according to his will, the ashes were scattered over the canals in Naples. So the reward is quite natural.

Who now remembers the name of the first Nobel Prize winner in literature, who received it in December 1901, the French poet Rene Francois Armand Sully-Prudhomme. They do not know him, and they never really knew him even in his native France.

And there are plenty of such, to put it mildly, dubious laureates in the ranks of the Nobel Prize winners! But at the same time, Mark Twain, Emile Zola, Ibsen, Chekhov, Oscar Wilde and, of course, Leo Tolstoy lived and worked!

When you get acquainted with a long list of writers, noted at various times by the Nobel Committee, you involuntarily catch yourself thinking that you have never heard four names out of every ten. And five of the remaining six are also nothing special. Their "star" works have long been firmly forgotten. By itself, the thought comes to mind: it turns out that the Nobel Prize in Literature was awarded for some other merits? Judging by the life and work of the same Joseph Brodsky, then yes!

“In view of the awarding of the Nobel Prize for the first time, we, the undersigned writers, artists and critics of Sweden, wish to express our admiration to you. We see in you not only a deeply revered patriarch of modern literature, but also one of those mighty penetrating poets, who in this case should be remembered first of all, although you, in your personal judgment, never aspired to such an award. We feel the more keenly the need to address you with this greeting because, in our opinion, the institution that was entrusted with the award of the literary prize, in its present composition, does not represent the opinion of writers-artists, nor public opinion. Let them know abroad that even in our remote country, the main and most powerful art is considered to be that which rests on freedom of thought and creativity. This letter was signed by more than forty prominent figures in Swedish literature and art.

Everyone knew: there is only one writer in the world who deserves to be the first to be awarded the highest award in the world. And this is the writer Leo Tolstoy. In addition, it was at the turn of the century that a new brilliant creation of the writer was published - the novel "Resurrection", which Alexander Blok would later call "the testament of the outgoing century to the new."

On January 24, 1902, an article by the writer August Strindberg appeared in the Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet, arguing in it that most of the members of the Academy are “unscrupulous artisans and dilettantes in literature, who for some reason are called to administer justice, but these gentlemen’s ideas about art are so childishly naive that they call poetry only what is written in verse, preferably rhymed. And if, for example, Tolstoy became forever famous as a depicter of human destinies, if he is the creator of historical frescoes, then he is not considered a poet by them on the grounds that he did not write poetry!

Another judgment on this subject belongs to the famous Danish literary critic Georg Brandes: “Leo Tolstoy holds the first place among modern writers. No one inspires such a sense of reverence as he does! We can say: no one but him inspires a sense of reverence. When, at the first award of the Nobel Prize, it was given to a noble and subtle, but second-rate poet, all the best Swedish authors sent an address for their signatures to Leo Tolstoy, in which they protested against such an award of this distinction. Of course, it was felt that it should have belonged to only one - the great writer of Russia, for whom they unanimously recognized the right to this award.

Numerous appeals and demands for the restoration of desecrated justice forced Tolstoy himself to take up his pen: “Dear and respected brethren! I was very pleased that the Nobel Prize was not awarded to me. Firstly, it saved me from a great difficulty - to dispose of this money, which, like any money, in my opinion, can only bring evil; and secondly, it gave me the honor and great pleasure to receive expressions of sympathy from so many persons, although unknown to me, but nevertheless deeply respected by me. Please accept, dear brethren, the expression of my sincere gratitude and best feelings. Lev Tolstoy".

It would seem that this question could be exhausted ?! But no! The whole story took an unexpected turn.

Upon learning that the Russian Academy of Sciences had nominated him as a candidate for the Nobel Prize in Literature, on October 7, 1906, Leo Tolstoy, in a letter to his friend, Finnish writer and translator Arvid Jarnefelt, asked that he not be awarded the prize.

"If this happened, it would be very unpleasant for me to refuse," wrote the author of War and Peace. Järnefelt complied with the request and the prize was awarded to the Italian poet Giosue Carducci. As a result, everyone was satisfied: both Carducci and Tolstoy. The latter wrote: "It saved me from great difficulty - to dispose of this money, which, like any money, in my opinion, can only bring evil; and secondly, it gave me the honor and great pleasure to receive expressions of sympathy from so many people , although not familiar to me, but still deeply respected by me.

In 1905, Tolstoy's new work, The Great Sin, was published. This, now almost forgotten, sharply publicistic book told about the hard lot of the Russian peasantry. Now they do not remember about it also because in this work Tolstoy in the most categorical form, argued and extremely convincingly spoke out against private ownership of land.

The Russian Academy of Sciences had a quite understandable idea to nominate Leo Tolstoy for the Nobel Prize. In a note compiled for this purpose by outstanding Russian scientists, academicians A.F. Koni, K.K. Arseniev and N.P. Kondakov gave the highest rating to "War and Peace", "Resurrection". And in conclusion, on behalf of the Russian Imperial Academy of Sciences, a wish was expressed to award Tolstoy the Nobel Prize.

This note was also approved by the category of belles-lettres of the Academy of Sciences - at that time there was such an organizational structure in the Academy. On January 19, 1906, together with a copy of Tolstoy's The Great Sin, the note was sent to Sweden.

As soon as he heard about such a great honor, Tolstoy writes to the Finnish writer Arvid Ernefeld: “If this happened, it would be very unpleasant for me to refuse, and therefore I beg you, if you have - as I think - any connections in Sweden, try to make sure that I don't get this award. Maybe you know some of the members, maybe you can write to the chairman, asking him not to divulge this, so that they don't. I ask you to do what you can so that they do not assign me bonuses and do not put me in a very unpleasant position - to refuse it.

In fact, the Nobel Prize reflects the true merits to humanity of a particular writer, scientist or politician only in part. Nine out of ten Nobel laureates in the field of literature were ordinary artisans from literature and did not leave any noticeable trace in it. And only about one or two of those ten were truly brilliant.

So for what then the rest were given awards, honors?

The presence of a genius among the awarded gave the award to the rest of the very, very dubious company, the illusion of reliability and merit. Apparently, in such a sophisticated way, the Nobel Committee tried and is trying to influence the literary and political preferences of society, the formation of its tastes, affections, and, ultimately, nothing more, nothing less, the worldview of all mankind, its future.

Remember with what enthusiastic aspiration the majority says: "Such and such a Nobel laureate!!!". But the Nobel laureates were not only geniuses who worked for the benefit of people, but also destructive personalities.

So moneybags, through the Nobel banker's prize, are trying to buy the very soul of the World. Apparently, the great Tolstoy understood this before anyone else - he understood, and did not want his name to be used to approve such a terrible idea.

The winner of the 2016 Nobel Prize in Literature will soon be announced. Throughout history, only five Russian writers and poets - Ivan Bunin (1933), Boris Pasternak (1958), Mikhail Sholokhov (1965), Alexander Solzhenitsyn (1970) and Joseph Brodsky (1987) - were awarded this prestigious award. Meanwhile, other prominent representatives of Russian literature also claimed the prize - but they never managed to get the coveted medal. About which of the Russian writers could become the owner of the Nobel, but never received it - in the RT material.

Secret Prize

It is known that the Nobel Prize in Literature has been awarded annually since 1901. A special committee selects candidates, and then with the help of experts, literary critics and laureates of previous years, the winner is selected.

However, thanks to archival finds at the University of Uppsala, it became known that the literature prize could have been awarded in the 19th century. Most likely, it was established by Alfred Nobel's grandfather, Emmanuel Nobel Sr., who at the end of the 18th century, in correspondence with friends, discussed the idea of establishing an international literary prize.

The list of prize winners found at the Swedish University also includes the names of Russian writers - Thaddeus Bulgarin (1837), Vasily Zhukovsky (1839), Alexander Herzen (1867), Ivan Turgenev (1878) and Leo Tolstoy (1894). However, we still know little about the mechanism for selecting winners and other details of the award process. Therefore, let us turn to the official history of the award, which began for Russia in 1902.

Lawyer and Tolstoy

Few people know, but the first to be nominated for the Nobel Prize in Literature was not a writer or a poet, but a lawyer - Anatoly Koni. At the time of his nomination, in 1902, he was an honorary academician of the Academy of Sciences in the category of fine literature, as well as a senator in the general meeting of the First Department of the Senate. It is known that Anton Wulfert, head of the department of criminal law at the Military Law Academy, proposed his candidacy.

The most famous nominee is Leo Tolstoy. From 1902 to 1906, the Nobel Committee persistently proposed his candidacy. By that time, Leo Tolstoy was already well known not only to the Russian, but also to the world community for his novels. According to the expert community, Leo Tolstoy was "the most revered patriarch of modern literature." In a letter that was sent to the writer from the Nobel Committee, academicians called Tolstoy "the greatest and most profound writer." The reason why the author of "War and Peace" never received an award is simple. Alfred Jensen, an expert on Slavonic literature who served as one of the advisors to the nominations committee, criticized Leo Tolstoy's philosophy, describing it as "destructive and contrary to the idealistic nature of the award".

However, the writer was not particularly eager for the award and even wrote about it in a response letter to the committee: “I was very pleased that the Nobel Prize was not awarded to me. This saved me from the great difficulty of managing this money, which, like any money, in my opinion, can only bring evil.

Since 1906, after this letter, Leo Tolstoy was no longer nominated for the prize.

Leo Tolstoy in his office
RIA News

Merezhkovsky's calculation

In 1914, on the eve of the First World War, the poet and writer Dmitry Merezhkovsky was nominated for the Nobel Prize. All the same Alfred Jensen noted "the artistic skill of the image, the universal content and the idealistic direction" of the poet's work. In 1915, Merezhkovsky's candidacy was again proposed, this time by the Swedish writer Karl Melin, but again to no avail. But the First World War was going on, and only 15 years later Dmitry Merezhkovsky was again nominated for the award. His candidacy was put forward from 1930 to 1937, but the poet had to face serious competition: Ivan Bunin and Maxim Gorky were nominated with him in the same period. However, the persistent interest of Sigurd Agrel, who nominated Merezhkovsky for seven years in a row, gave hope to the writer to become one of the owners of the coveted award. Unlike Leo Tolstoy, Dmitry Merezhkovsky wanted to become a Nobel laureate. In 1933 Dmitry Merezhkovsky was closest to success. According to the memoirs of Ivan Bunin's wife, Vera, Dmitry Merezhkovsky offered her husband to share the prize. Moreover, in the event of a victory, Merezhkovsky would have given Bunin as much as 200,000 francs. But that did not happen. Despite the fact that Merezhkovsky persistently wrote to the committee, convincing its members of his superiority over competitors, he never got the award.

Gorky is more needed

Maxim Gorky was nominated for the Nobel Prize in Literature 4 times: in 1918, 1923, 1928 and 1933. The writer's work presented a certain difficulty for the Nobel Committee. Anton Karlgren, who replaced Alfred Jensen as an expert on Slavic studies, noted that in the post-revolutionary work of Gorky (meaning the revolution of 1905. - RT) there is “not the slightest echo of ardent love for the motherland” and that in general his books are a solid “sterile desert”. Earlier, in 1918, Alfred Jensen spoke of Gorky as a "dual cultural and political personality" and "a tired, long-worn out writer." In 1928, Gorky was close to receiving an award. The main struggle unfolded between him and the Norwegian writer Sigrid Unset. Anton Karlgren noted that Gorky's work is like an "extraordinary renaissance" that provided the writer with "a leading place in Russian literature."

Maxim Gorky, 1928
RIA News

The Soviet writer lost because of a devastating review by Heinrich Shuk, who noted in Gorky's work "the evolution from bad May Day rhetoric to direct discrediting of the authorities and agitation against it, and then to the Bolshevik ideology." The late works of the writer, according to Shyuk, deserve "absolutely murderous criticism." This became a weighty argument for conservative Swedish academics in favor of Sigrid Undset. In 1933, Maxim Gorky lost to Ivan Bunin, whose novel The Life of Arseniev left no chance for anyone.

Marina Tsvetaeva subsequently resented that Gorky was not awarded the prize precisely in 1933: “I don’t protest, I just don’t agree, because Bunin is incomparably bigger: more, and more humane, and more original, and more necessary - Gorky. Gorky is an era, and Bunin is the end of an era. But - since this is politics, since the king of Sweden cannot pin an order on the communist Gorky ... ".

"Star" 1965

In 1965, four domestic writers were nominated for the award at once: Vladimir Nabokov, Anna Akhmatova, Konstantin Paustovsky and Mikhail Sholokhov.

Vladimir Nabokov was nominated several times in the 1960s for his acclaimed novel Lolita. A member of the Swedish Academy, Anders Osterling, spoke of him as follows: "The author of the immoral and successful novel Lolita cannot under any circumstances be considered as a candidate for the award."

In 1964 he lost to Sartre, and in 1965 to his former compatriot (Nabokov emigrated from the USSR in 1922. — RT) Mikhail Sholokhov. After the 1965 nomination, the Nobel Committee called the novel Lolita immoral. It is still unknown if Nabokov was nominated after 1965, but we do know that Alexander Solzhenitsyn approached the Swedish committee in 1972 with a request to reconsider the writer's candidacy.

Konstantin Paustovsky was eliminated at the preliminary stage, although Swedish academics spoke well of his Tale of Life. Anna Akhmatova competed with Mikhail Sholokhov in the final. Moreover, the Swedish committee proposed to divide the prize between them, arguing that "they write in the same language." Andreas Esterling, professor, long-term secretary of the Academy, noted that Anna Akhmatova's poetry is full of "genuine inspiration." Despite this, the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1965 was awarded to Mikhail Sholokhov, who was nominated for the seventh time.

King of Sweden Gustav VI Adolf presents Mikhail Sholokhov with an honorary diploma and a Nobel laureate medal
RIA News

Aldanov and company

In addition to the above-mentioned nominees, other no less honored writers and poets were nominated from Russia at different times. For example, in 1923, together with Maxim Gorky and Ivan Bunin, Konstantin Balmont was nominated. However, his candidacy was rejected by the experts unanimously, as obviously unsuitable.

In 1926, Vladimir Frantsev, a Slavist and historian of literature, nominated White General Pyotr Krasnov to receive a prize in literature. Twice, in 1931 and 1932, the writer Ivan Shmelev applied for the prize.

Since 1938, the writer and publicist Mark Aldanov, who has become the record holder in the number of nominations - 12 times, has long claimed the award. The prose writer was popular among the Russian emigration in France and the USA. Over the years, it was nominated by Vladimir Nabokov and Alexander Kerensky. And Ivan Bunin, who became the laureate of the prize in 1933, proposed Aldanov's candidacy 9 times.

The philosopher Nikolai Berdyaev was nominated four times, the writer Leonid Leonov was nominated twice, the writer Boris Zaitsev was nominated once, and the author of the novel The Fall of Titan Igor Gouzenko, a Soviet cipher-defector defector, was nominated once each.

Edward Epstein

Try to remember which of the great Russian writers and poets was awarded the Nobel Prize? Sholokhov, of course, then Bunin, Pasternak, it seems, and this one, like him, whom, at first, they wanted to bury in the Alexander Nevsky Lavra in St. Petersburg, next to the emperors, and then, according to his will, they scattered the ashes over the canals in Naples Well, how is it? .. Joseph Brodsky! What an amazing case! The poet, practically unknown in Russia, not a single line of which was remembered by any of the nearly forty (!) journalists I interviewed, suddenly became the winner of the most prestigious literary award in the world.

However, why is it amazing? And do not rush to complain about the insufficient literary outlook of Volgograd journalists. There is really nothing surprising in this award! All this is quite natural. Who now remembers the name of the first Nobel Prize winner in literature, who received it in December 1901, the French poet Rene Francois Armand Sully-Prudhomme. He is not known, and, I dare say, never was known even in his native France. And there are plenty of such, to put it mildly, dubious laureates in the ranks of the Nobel Prize winners! But at the same time, Mark Twain, Emile Zola, Ibsen, Chekhov, Oscar Wilde and, of course, Leo Tolstoy lived and worked!

Of course, this simple idea was not the first to come to my mind. Already after the first dubious award, public opinion in Sweden and other countries was shocked by the decision of the Nobel Academy. A month after the scandalous award, in January 1902, Leo Tolstoy received a protest address from a group of Swedish writers and artists:

“In view of the awarding of the Nobel Prize for the first time, we, the undersigned writers, artists and critics of Sweden, want to express our admiration to you. We see in you not only a deeply revered patriarch of modern literature, but also one of those mighty penetrating poets, who in this case should be remembered first of all, although you, in your personal judgment, never aspired to such an award. We feel the more keenly the need to address you with this greeting because, in our opinion, the institution that was entrusted with the award of the literary prize, in its present composition, does not represent the opinion of writers-artists, nor public opinion. Let them know abroad that even in our remote country, the main and most powerful art is considered to be that which rests on freedom of thought and creativity. This letter was signed by more than forty prominent figures in Swedish literature and art.

On January 24, 1902, an article by the writer August Strindberg appeared in the Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet, arguing in it that the majority of the members of the Academy are “unscrupulous artisans and amateurs in literature, who for some reason are called to administer justice, but these gentlemen’s ideas about art are so childishly naive that they call poetry only what is written in verse, preferably rhymed. And if, for example, Tolstoy became forever famous as a depicter of human destinies, if he is the creator of historical frescoes, then he is not considered a poet by them on the grounds that he did not write poetry!

It would seem that this question could be exhausted ?! But no! The whole story took an unexpected turn.

In 1905, Tolstoy's new work, The Great Sin, was published. This, now, unfortunately, almost forgotten sharply journalistic book told about the hard lot of the Russian peasantry. Now they do not remember about it also because in this work Tolstoy in the most categorical form, argued and extremely convincingly spoke out against private ownership of land. The Russian Academy of Sciences had a quite understandable idea to nominate Leo Tolstoy for the Nobel Prize. In a note compiled for this purpose by outstanding Russian scientists, academicians A.F. Koni, K.K. Arseniev and N.P. Kondakov gave the highest rating to "War and Peace", "Resurrection". And in conclusion, on behalf of the Russian Imperial Academy of Sciences, a wish was expressed to award Tolstoy the Nobel Prize.

In fact, the Nobel Prize reflects the true merits to humanity of a particular writer, scientist or politician only in part. Remember my statistics: nine out of ten Nobel laureates in literature were ordinary artisans from literature and did not leave any noticeable trace in it. And only about one or two of those ten were truly brilliant. So for what then the rest were given awards, honors? In my opinion, only the presence of a genius gave the award to the entire other very, very dubious company the illusion of reliability and merit.

Apparently, in such a sophisticated way, the Nobel Committee tried and is trying to influence the literary and political preferences of society, the formation of its tastes, affections, and, ultimately, nothing more, nothing less, the worldview of all mankind, its future.

Remember with what enthusiastic aspiration we all say: Such and such a Nobel laureate!!! But the Nobel laureates were not only Zhores Alferov or, say, Pyotr Kapitsa Sr., but also the traitor Gorbachev, Solzhenitsyn, Sakharov - the destroyers and destroyers of our great country. It is for this merit that they became laureates of the Nobel Banker Prize. So moneybags try to buy the very soul of the World. Apparently, the great Tolstoy understood this before all of us - he understood, and did not want his name to be used to approve such a terrible idea.

Why was the Nobel Prize never awarded to Leo Tolstoy? For just one simple reason. He wouldn't accept it. The old man scorned her!

Andrey CHERKASOV

PRAVDA.Ru