Reflection of the ideological struggle in the literary process during the second world war

Ðàçìåùåíî íà http://www.allbest.ru/

Reflection of the ideological struggle in the literary process during the second world war

Asadullayeva Nurana Firudin gizi PhD in philology, National Museum of Azerbaijan Literature named after Nizami Ganjavi, Baku, Azerbaijan

Abstract

The aim of the article is to examine the ideological pressure on literary thought in the literary process during the Second World War. It is shown that in this period, the forms of ideological struggle, which began in the 1920s and ended with the repression of the 1930s, began to change. Although there was no mass repression during and after the war, pressure on literature continued.

Methodologies and methods. The author in his research widely used such methods as contextual description, comparative method and other general scientific methods.

The novelty in the article is primarily the ideological approach of literary criticism to the works created in Azerbaijani literature during the Second World War. On the basis of the works of Samad Vurgun and Sabit Rahman, the suppression and redirection of ideology on literature and literary thought, and the ideological line that pays more attention than the artistic value of written works are studied.

Results and conclusions. At the end, all the ideas raised in the study are summarized and it is noted that the beginning of the war also directed the country's moral and literary strength here. This direction was derived from both the situation of the country and the decisions and resolutions regarding its defense capability. However, it only took a few years; Deportation of individual peoples during the war, exile of those who were captured after the war, etc. changed the form of repression. Pressures continued in the field of literature either. They sharply criticized S. Vurgun for his dramatic poem “Hormuz and Ahriman” and the drama play “Man”, as well as S. Rahman for the comedy “Acquaintances”. Thus, attempts to turn literature into a part of ideology continued most acutely in the 1940s and 1950s. second world war literature

Key words: Second World War, literature, ideology, Samad Vurgun, Sabit Rahman.

Àñàäóëëàºâà Íóðàíà Ô³ðóä³í êèçè äîêòîð ô³ëîñîô³¿ ç ô³ëîëî㳿, Íàö³îíàëüíèé Ìóçåé Àçåðáàéäæàíñüêî¿ Ë³òåðàòóðè ³ìåí³ Í³çàì³ Ãÿíäæåâ³, Áàêó, Àçåðáàéäæàí

²ÄÎÁÐÀÆÅÍÍß ²ÄÅÎËÎò×Íί ÁÎÐÎÒÜÁÈ Â Ë²ÒÅÐÀÒÓÐÍÎÌÓ ÏÐÎÖÅѲ  ÐÎÊÈ ÂÒÎÐί Ñ²ÒÎÂί ²ÉÍÈ

Àíîòàö³ÿ. Ìåòà ñòàòò³ - ðîçãëÿíóòè ³äåîëîã³÷íèé òèñê íà ë³òåðàòóðíó äóìêó ó ë³òåðàòóðíîìó ïðîöåñ³ ó ðîêè Äðóãî¿ ñâ³òîâî¿ â³éíè. Ïîêàçàíî, ùî â öåé ïåð³îä ñòàëè çì³íþâàòèñÿ ôîðìè ³äåîëîã³÷íî¿ áîðîòüáè, ÿêà ïî÷àëàñÿ ó 1920-õ ðîêàõ. ³ ðåïðåñ³ÿìè 1930-õ ðð., ùî çàê³í÷èëàñÿ. Õî÷à ìàñîâèõ ðåïðåñ³é ï³ä ÷àñ òà ï³ñëÿ â³éíè íå áóëî, òèñê íà ë³òåðàòóðó ïðîäîâæóâàâñÿ.

Ìåòîäîëî㳿 òà ìåòîäè. Àâòîð ó ñâîºìó äîñë³äæåíí³ øèðîêî âèêîðèñòîâóâàâ òàê³ ìåòîäè, ÿê êîíòåêñòóàëüíèé îïèñ, ïîð³âíÿëüíèé ìåòîä òà ³íø³ çàãàëüíîíàóêîâ³ ìåòîäè.

Íîâèçíîþ ñòàòò³ º íàñàìïåðåä ³äåîëîã³÷íèé ï³äõ³ä ë³òåðàòóðîçíàâöÿ äî òâîð³â, ñòâîðåíèõ â àçåðáàéäæàíñüê³é ë³òåðàòóð³ ó ðîêè Äðóãî¿ ñâ³òîâî¿ â³éíè. Íà îñíîâ³ òâîð³â Ñàìåäà Âóðãóíà òà Ñàá³òà Ðàõìàíà äîñë³äæóºòüñÿ ïðèäóøåííÿ òà ïåðåíàïðàâëåííÿ ³äåîëî㳿 íà ë³òåðàòóðó òà ë³òåðàòóðíó äóìêó, à òàêîæ ³äåîëîã³÷íà ë³í³ÿ, ÿêà ïðèä³ëÿº á³ëüøå óâàãè õóäîæí³é ö³ííîñò³ ïèñåìíèõ òâîð³â.

Ðåçóëüòàòè òà âèñíîâêè. Íàïðèê³íö³ óçàãàëüíþþòüñÿ âñ³ ³äå¿, ï³äíÿò³ ó äîñë³äæåíí³, ³ çàçíà÷àºòüñÿ, ùî ïî÷àòîê â³éíè òàêîæ íàïðàâèâ ó öþ ãàëóçü ìîðàëüí³ òà ë³òåðàòóðí³ ñèëè êðà¿íè. Öåé íàïðÿìîê âèïëèâàëî ÿê ç ñòàíîâèùà êðà¿íè, ³ ç ð³øåíü ³ ïîñòàíîâ, ùî ñòîñóþòüñÿ ¿¿ îáîðîíîçäàòíîñò³. Îäíàê öå çàéíÿëî ëèøå ê³ëüêà ðîê³â; Äåïîðòàö³ÿ îêðåìèõ íàðîä³â ï³ä ÷àñ â³éíè, âèñèëêà ïîëîíåíèõ ï³ñëÿ â³éíè ³ ò. ä. çì³íèëè ôîðìó ðåïðåñ³é. Òèñê ïðîäîâæóâàâñÿ ³ â ãàëóç³ ë³òåðàòóðè. Äåÿê³ ³äåîëîãè ð³çêî êðèòèêóâàëè Ñ. Âóðãóíà çà éîãî äðàìàòè÷íó ïîåìó «Îðìóçä òà Àõð³ìàí» òà äðàìàòè÷íó ï'ºñó «Ëþäèíà», à òàêîæ Ñ. Ðàõìàíà çà êîìåä³þ «Çíàêîì³». Òàêèì ÷èíîì, ñïðîáè ïåðåòâîðèòè ë³òåðàòóðó íà ÷àñòèíó ³äåîëî㳿 íàéá³ëüø ãîñòðî ïðîäîâæóâàëèñÿ â 1940- 1950-ò³ ðð.

Êëþ÷îâ³ ñëîâà: Äðóãà ñâ³òîâà â³éíà, ë³òåðàòóðà, ³äåîëîã³ÿ, Ñàìåä Âóðãóí, Ñàá³ò Ðàõìàí.

Introduction

The forms of ideological struggle that arose from the 1920s and resulted in the repression of the 30s began to change with the beginning of the Second World War. The beginning of the war in 1939 shows that it was the year when repression subsided, so to speak, ended. Of course, we are talking about mass repression, and in general, repression only changed its form from year to year, from decade to decade, and new forms of repression appeared. Since 1940, the country's attention was focused on defense, and writers were encouraged to write in this direction. In the main article of “Literary newspaper” entitled “Defense and Literature”, it was stated that Azerbaijani writers had a task to create defense literature, and this literature should” ...mobilize our people in the field of defense and explode like a bomb on the head of the enemy...” (Literary newspaper, 1940), the future path was determined.

The aim of the article is to examine the ideological pressure on literary thought in the literary process during the Second World War. It is shown that in this period, the forms of ideological struggle, which began in the 1920s and ended with the repression of the 1930s, began to change. Although there was no mass repression during and after the war, pressure on literature continued.

The novelty in the article is primarily the ideological approach of literary criticism to the works created in Azerbaijani literature during the Second World War. On the basis of the works of Samad Vurgun and Sabit Rahman, the suppression and redirection of ideology on literature and literary thought, and the ideological line that pays more attention than the artistic value of written works are studied.

Main matters

Immediately after the start of the war, Azerbaijani writers had to mobilize their pens. Samad Vurgun's poem “Guardian of the Motherland” which the poet read in front of the soldiers going to the battlefield just one day after the start of the war became a manifesto of the literature of this period:

Let the Motherland hear, let the motherland know,

I am an armed soldier from today.

The whole world has stared at my flag now,

My pen is a bayonet in my hand today (Vurgun, 1941).

If early ideological propaganda was based on searching for the “enemy of the people” and writers glorifying the existing system, in that period its direction had changed and was directed at the foreign enemy. In the first years of the war, the positive side of this was that the enemy was not sought from within, and writers and poets mobilized their energy against the external enemy, not the “internal enemy”. After that, the poems and journalistic

articles of writers and poets defending the motherland were often found on newspaper pages. Such writers, as Mir Jalal, Hamid Arasli, Suleyman Valiyev and Mikayil Rzaguluzade saw themselves in the ranks of the army and considered themselves a part of it in the letter “To the ranks of the heroic army”, which they jointly signed (Mir J., H. Arasli, S. Valiyev, M. Rzaguluzade, 1941). Azerbaijani poets and writers not only wrote works, but also took part in the war, coming into contact with soldiers and officers, created works in the spirit of patriotism. Samad Vurgun, Rasul Rza, Abulhasan, Suleyman Rustam, Mirza Ibrahimov, Boyukaga Gasimzade, Gulam Mammadli and others had been in different parts of the frontline and created new poems and novels. New images of the war heroes had been glorified in the literature in a very short time. In his article “The Patriotic War and Our Heroes” Samad Vurgun pointed to the heroes of the new era and said, “The era we live in creates new people, as well as new works” (Vurgun, 1943).

In both Russian and Azerbaijani literature, new works were written about the heroes of the new era. Among these works, there were works that expressed journalistic ideas, reflected the struggle determination of the state and the people, or became a mouthpiece of the system, as well as works with artistic value. New events and new heroes were described in Konstantin Simonov's “The Living and the Dead”, “No one is born a soldier”, Mikhail Sholokhov's “The Fate of Man”, Alexander Fadeyev's “The Young Guard”, Viktor Kozhevnikov's “Sword and Shield”, Boris Polevoy's “The Story of a Real Man”, Vasili Ajayev's “Far from Moscow”, Grigory Baklanov's “An inch of land”, Emmanuel Kazakevich's “Spring in the Oder” and others during the war and post - war period. In Azerbaijani literature, there were literary examples that did not lose their artistic value both during the war and post - war period. The realities of war and its heroes were described and glorified in S. Vurgun's “That's what they told me”, “Ukrainian partisans”, M. Rahim's “In Leningrad skies”, Abulhasan's “War”, “Crimean stories”, S. Rustam's “Gafur's heart”, A. Valiyev's “Half a year on the Crimean front” and etc. If the events that happened during the war were mainly for the purpose of praise, the events of the post-war period began to include features of analysis. Some topics that writers could not touch upon during the war, were analyzed in the novels and short stories, as well as I. Huseynov's “Saz”, “Pipe Sound”, I. Gasimov and H. Seyidbeyli's “In the Far Shores”, H. Abbaszade's “General”, A. Aylisli's “My musical Aunt”, S. Valiyev's “Controversial City”, etc. In such works as “1418” by R. Rza, “Graves of Martyrs” by B. Vahabzade, “My voice remained in Germany” by J. Novruz, “That picture, that name” by N. Khazri, “The thirteenth” by I. Safarli, the analysis and glorification were presented in parallel. In addition to the realities of the war, the heroism of the people, the horror of the flames of war, the fact that the commanders were more Russian, and the idea of false friendship between nations were also reflected in these works.

If in the poems, stories and journalistic articles written during the war, there was a belief that fascism would be destroyed, but in post-war period the intonation changed a little. Writers and poets who looked at the events from a more realistic position began to take a different attitude in relation to the Germans than during the war. In the works written in different republics, the question of the participation of their people in the war was also described from different viewpoints. Despite there were ideological directives from the center, many realities of the war were emerging. Among these realities, there were also accusations of poor treatment of non-Russian nationalities, sending them against the German tanks unarmed. The realities of people captured in the war, being exiled or imprisoned again after their return, and treated as spies, were increasingly included in the artistic thinking. All this was manifested in different ways in post-war literature, despite censorship in newspapers and magazines, it was reflected in artistic thought in one way or another. In this case, the ideological system of the existing establishment started to work. This very system considering any idea in the works as “wrong”, at first made accusations about it, and then made decisions. In the 40s, such accusations were made against Samad Vurgun, Sabit Rahman, Heydar Huseynov and others.

It is known that S. Vurgun announced his war-time platform from the first day of the war, and after that he wrote many poems and articles showing the determination of the people to defend themselves. Two ideas always appeared in these poems: first - the victory of the Soviet people, and second - the bravery of the Azerbaijani people. The poet talked about the heroism of the brave sons and daughters of Azerbaijan in almost every poem. In the poem “A Mother's Send-off” the poet created the image of Mother, sending her son off to protect homeland with admonition. In the poem “Nurse”, the poet appealed to the women of the motherland and called them to the front, talking about the sons of Azerbaijan, instilling them to fight like Babek against the invaders. In the poem “That's what they tell me...” the protagonist of the poem was a son of nation. In the poem, the soldier wounded at the front asked the poet to read a part of the poem “Azerbaijan” in his last breath, which shows the cause of his death. Although the hero of the poet fought and died far away from his homeland, he knew that he was fighting for Azerbaijan. The heroes of the poet went to war with his patriotic poems and preferred to die for the cause of the country. S. Vurgun gave a great value to the death of his heroes for the cause of “Everyone knows you are mine...”

Poet Bakhtiyar Vahabzade wrote about it: “The poet (S. Vurgun - N.A.) gives a deep meaning to the death of hundreds and thousands of sons of the Motherland who were martyred for the sake of the Motherland and freedom. It is as if he wants to tell them that your shed blood has not been wasted and will not be wasted. Our mornings that will open after the war are due to your blood. The redness on the crack of dawn will be caused by your blood” (Vahabzade, 1968).

S. Vurgun, besides writing poetry to individual heroes who took part in the war, also saw the disasters and tried to investigate their causes. In separate poems and articles, he went into the depths of history and stated that war is against humanity. Towards the end of the war, this issue began to preoccupy the poet's thoughts. Literary critic Adilkhan Bayramov writes about this passage in the poet's work: “S. Vurgun was not confined to the praise of heroism, friendship and unity in his works written during the war years. The poet also expressed his philosophical views on the war that brought disaster and tears to humanity” (Bayramov, 2006). S. Vurgun developed this idea in the poem “Dead Love”, the dramas “Hormuz and Ahriman” and “Man”. The work “Hormuz and Ahriman” was written in 1943, but not completed. It was published in the “Literary newspaper” on June 28 of the same year. The theme of the dramatic poem, was taken from the “Avesta” and reflected the idea of the eternal struggle between Good and Evil. However, the main issue was the mention of Azerbaijan in ancient legend and its constant representation of Good as the oldest nation. It seems that as the war was coming to an end, the truths were revealed, so the poet thought deeply about this issue.

The main reason why this dramatic poem of S. Vurgun had been met with criticism was that he addressed the history of Azerbaijan during the war. Sometimes it was described as abstraction and connected it with the philosophical attitude of the lines such as “Today is mourning, tomorrow is a holiday and the world had been like this since the beginning of time”. Although this poem of S. Vurgun heralded the arrival of a new trend, they did not want to accept this innovation in his work, despite the reputation of the poet in the literary environment that has not yet completely broken away from the ideological system. S. Vurgun's brother Mehdikhan Vakilov noted that the poet was thinking to write works glorifying high human ideas, human purity and spiritual sanctity. He wrote about the attacks on the work “Hormuz and Ahriman”: “Unfortunately, as soon as the first part of the work, which would be written with philosophical depth like “Hormuz and Ahriman”, was published, it was attacked by critics - the “literary toadies” of the careerists who followed Samad Vurgun, who were devoid of philosophical and romantic thinking, who could not felt the spirit of our history, past, even “Avesta”” (Vakilov, 1986).

The main reason why this work of S. Vurgun was met with criticism in the literary environment was ideological pressure. Such pressures, as in the 30 s, still hung over the head of the literary environment like a “Sword of Damocles”. That was why this work of the poet was not finished and remained incomplete. Again, the poet's brother M. Vakilov mentioned that S. Vurgun later regretted that this work was left unfinished: “...I was wrongly influenced and left the work unfinished, I should have finished writing it, after all, future generations will be smarter than us” (Vakilov, 1986).

Ideological pressures on the poet's work became more systematic and continuous after the writing of the drama “Man”. In the work “Hormuz and Ahriman”, the poet addressed history, while the drama “Man” reflected the war- time and the post-war period. The dramatist showed the disasters of war and human destinies. He was looking for a hopeful way to the future in this work. But it was most important that, there was a name of Azerbaijani people in the future dominated by consciousness and understanding. S. Vurgun completed this work near the end of the war and it was staged after the war. At this time, it can be said that the fate of the war was decided. The Soviet Army defeated German fascism, and Germany was divided into two parts. However, S.Vurgun's work focused on the question: “Will intellect win in the world?” This could be considered as questioning the results of the war. In fact, the events that took place around the work stemmed from this question and the philosophical approaches.

In S. Vurgun's drama “Man”, the events took place thirty years after the war in a symbolic city located on the Black Sea coast. In the work, episodes of the war are revived in the memories of the characters. S. Vurgun emphasizes the Human factor here from every point of view. The play was staged four months after the war. At that time, the war was already over, and the influence of the Soviets in the international world had increased significantly. The first positive review about the play was published in “Literary newspaper”. This reflected the attitude of the literary environment to the work. However, “Communist” newspaper was not satisfied with this article and responded to it with the article that “Literary newspaper” had to meet the demands of the day”. This article written in “Communist” newspaper in response to “Literary newspaper” shows that the idea of criticizing the work came from the upper circles and had an ideological purpose. Like the previous work, critics pointed out that the poet had tended to abstraction. Aziz Sharif took S. Vurgun's question “Will intellect win in the world?” as the main leitmotif of the drama, as the author's main idea, and

compared it to Don Quixote, who started fighting with windmill” (Sharif, 1946). Mehdi Huseyn, Mammad Arif, Mammad Jafar, Orujali Hasanov and others criticized the drama “Man” in their articles. M. Huseyn pointed that in his search for “philosophical poetry”, S. Vurgun, moved away from the truth of life. He saw the reason for the appearance of drama play “Man” in the fact that the poet had not been criticized at the time: “However, the author reached that point as a result of an extremely logical development. If you want to know that this is exactly the case, compare the philosophical motifs in the poem “Philosophy of Life” and “Man”. At that time, you will see that the abstract ideas expressed aphoristically in the poem are deepened in the play and appeared with all their vitality” (Mehdi, 1948). Critics focused more on the famous question and abstractionism of the author, mainly expressed by philosopher Shahbaz. In the 60s, M. Huseyn, who used to approach and appreciate the work ideologically, looked through the drama “Man” again and remembered that some people approached the drama “Man” from a dogmatic point of view and wrote one-sided, wrong criticism: “... we had a very one-sided wrong criticism and we accused the author of abstract romanticism. But to what extent is this a fair thing?... No, we must return to the play “Man” and restore justice, especially because today we see more clearly how right S. Vurgun was” (Mehdi, 1989). Academician M. Arif also admitted that S. Vurgun's drama “Man” was approached from an ideological point of view and that the drama was wrongly evaluated: “It must be admitted that it was not so easy to give an objective assessment of this relatively complex work of S. Vurgun in a period when cult of personality prevailed. Therefore, in the written articles, there were initiatives to interpret the poet's romanticism in different ways, to approach the work from different positions” (Arif, 1964). All this came from ideological and vulgar- sociological approaches to the work. Of course, the work was appreciated, albeit late, and was later staged by the director Mehdi Mammadov. At that time, the prominent director wrote in response to those who branded the work abstract: “We see in this play not abstraction, but a great generalization, a tendency to artistic exaggeration that sometimes reaches the level of symbols” (Mammadov, 1974).

The fact that the criticism of the drama “Man” started from the "Communist" newspaper, the organ of the Central Committee, and then constant criticisms in the vulgar-sociological direction shows that the existing ideological system played a major role in the evaluation of the work. This was confirmed by two events that happened in that period. One of them was that after the writer Suleyman Valiyev had been captured in the war and returned, the state authorities tried to push him to confront S. Vurgun and accuse him of nationalism. However, S. Valiyev did not do it. The writer who did not agree to this was disgraced and exiled to Siberia. Later, the writer described this event in his autobiographical work “The bird with a broken wing can also fly” (Valiyev, 1988).

Those, who were looking for abstraction in S. Vurgun's creativity, also attacked Sabit Rahman from an ideological position. In the comedy “Acquaintances”, Sabit Rahman created the image of people who did not go to war, but tried to harm the motherland. It is true, that the conflict here was not as sharp as in the comedy “Wedding”. Collisions had a weakness. However, all this did not include ideological criticism of comedy. Nevertheless, as critics accused S. Vurgun, they tried to give a different meaning to the criticism of “thieves of creed and conscience” in this comedy by S. Rahman. Since the comedy was misunderstood, it was subjected to sharp criticism. After those criticisms, S. Rahman was fired from his job, the issue of whether to remain in the Union of Writers was raised, and the play was removed from the repertoire. A few years later, in his speech at the 12th plenum of the Union of Writers, Jafar Jafarov considered it correct to criticize Sabit Rahman by the party and said: “In his previous comedies, especially in the first version of “The happy” and “Acquaintances”, Sabit Rahman approached the comedy genre with a formalistic understanding, so he tended to meaningless laughter, banal feelings, empty actions and did not pay enough attention to the truths and depth of life in comedy. Therefore, his comedies “The happy” and “Acquaintances” were severely criticized by the party” (Jafarov, 1950).

In fact, the party intervened in the literary process and punished the playwright under the pretext that he “slandered the Soviet people”. S. Rahman's issue was discussed in the Union of Writers, and it was considered acceptable for him to stay in the Union only after the positive opinion of Yuri Libedinsky, a writer from Moscow. As the literary critic B. Ahmadov wrote: “Of course, after such drastic practical measures the author admitted that he was “wrong” and such comedies of the writer as “Clarity” and “The Engaged Maid” appeared, in which the lyrical line suppressed the satirical one” (Ahmadov, 2000). As a result of these criticisms, the conflict in S. Rahman's later comedies (“Clarity”, “The Engaged Maid” and “The Living”, etc.) was weakened. The reason for this was the adoption of a special decision by the ideological apparatus regarding the “Theory of Non-Conflict”.

Results and conclusions

At the end, all the ideas raised in the study are summarized and it is noted that the beginning of the war also directed the country's moral and literary strength here. This direction was derived from both the situation of the country and the decisions and resolutions regarding its defense capability. However, it only took a few years; Deportation of individual peoples during the war, exile of those who were captured after the war, etc. changed the form of repression. Pressures continued in the field of literature either. It can be seen from here that as soon as the writers and poets deviated from the ideological line defined by the party and the principles of social realism, they were immediately warned and ideological and practical measures were taken against them. They sharply criticized S. Vurgun for his dramatic poem “Hormuz and Ahriman” and the drama play “Man”, as well as S. Rahman for the comedy “Acquaintances”. Thus, attempts to turn literature into a part of ideology continued most acutely in the 1940s and 1950s.

˳òåðàòóðà:

1. Arif M. Samad Vurgunun dramaturgiyasi. Baki, Elm, 1964, 238 s.

2. Bayramov A. Samad Vurgun: milli va umumba§ari. Baki, Sada, 2006, 316 s.

3. Cafarov C. Dramaturgiya va teatnmizin yuksali§i ugrunda. “inqilab va madaniyyat” jurnali, 1950, ¹5, s. 148-156

4. 0hmadov B. Azarbaycan satirasinin inki§af problemlari (1920-1980-ci illar). Baki, Elm, 2000, 296 s.

5. Mehdi H. Azarbaycan sovet adabiyyatinrn yaradiciliq problemlari (I maqala). 0dabiyyat qazeti, 1948, 25 iyun.

6. Mehdi H. 0dabiyyat va hayat. Baki, Yaziqi, 1989, 506 s.

7. Mammadov M. insan sahnaya galir (musahiba). “0dabiyyat va incasanat” qazeti, 1974, 2 fevral, s. 4.

8. Mir C., Arasli H., Valiyev S., Rzaquluzada M. Qahraman ordu siralarina. 0dabiyyat qazeti, 1941, 29 iyun, s. 2.

9. Mudafia va adabiyyat (ba§ maqala). 0dabiyyat qazeti, 1940, 23 fevral, s. 1.

10. §arif 0. “insan” haqqinda bazi mulahizalar. “Vatan ugrunda”, 1946, ¹2, s. 94.

11. Vahabzada B. Samad Vurgun. Baki, Azarna§r, 1968, 348 s.

12. Vakilov M. Omur dediklari bir karvan yolu. Baki, Yaziqi, 1986, 192 s.

13. Valiyev S. Qanadi sinmi§ qu§ da uqarmi§. “Azarbaycan” jurnali, 1988, ¹3, s. 65-107.

14. Vurgun S. Vatan muharibasi va qahramanlarimiz. 0dabiyyat qazeti, 1943, 18 iyun, s. 2.

15. Vurgun S. Vatanin ke§iyinda. “Kommunist” qazeti, 1941, 23 iyun, s. 2.

References:

1. Arif, M. (1964), Arif, M. [Samad Vurgun's dramaturgy], Vurgunun dramaturgiyasi. Baki, Elm, 238 s.

2. Bayramov, A. (2006), Bayramov, A. [Samad Vurgun: national and universal], Samad Vurgun: milli va umumba§ari. Baki, Sada, 316 s.

3. Cafarov, C. (1950), Jafarov, J. [For the sake of dramaturgy and the rise of our theater], Dramaturgiya va teatrimizin yuksali§i ugrunda. “inqilab va madaniyyat” jurnali, ¹5, s. 148-156

4. 0hmadov, B. (2000), Ahmadov, B. [Development problems of Azerbaijani satire (1920-1980s)], Azarbaycan satirasinin inki§af problemlari (1920-1980-ci illar). Baki, Elm, 296 s.

5. Mehdi, H. (1948), Mehdi, H. [Creative problems of Azerbaijani Soviet literature (Article I)], Azarbaycan sovet adabiyyatinin yaradiciliq problemlari (I maqala). 0dabiyyat qazeti, 1948, 25 iyun.

6. Mehdi, H. (1989), Mehdi, H. [Literature and life], 0dabiyyat va hayat. Baki, Yaziqi, 506 s.

7. Mammadov, M. (1974), Mammadov, M. [Man comes to the stage (interview)], insan sahnaya galir (musahiba). “0dabiyyat va incasanat” qazeti, 2 fevral, s. 4.

8. Mir, C., Arasli, H., Valiyev, S., Rzaquluzada, M. (1941), Mir J., Arasli, H., Valiyev, S., Rzaguluzade, M. [To the ranks of the heroic army], Qahraman ordu siralarina. 0dabiyyat qazeti, 29 iyun, s. 2.

9. Mudafia va adabiyyat (ba§ maqala) (1940), [Defense and literature (main article)], 0dabiyyat qazeti, 23 fevral, s. 1.

10. §arif, 0. (1946), Sharif, A. [Some considerations about “Man”], “insan” haqqinda bazi mulahizalar. “Vatan ugrunda”, ¹2, s. 94.

11. Vahabzada, B. (1968), Vahabzade, B. [Samad Vurgun], Samad Vurgun. Baki, Azarna§r, 348 s.

12. Vakilov, M. (1986), Vakilov, M. [Life, as a caravan road], Omur dediklari bir karvan yolu. Baki, Yaziqi, 192 s.

13. Valiyev, S. (1988), Valiyev, S. [A bird with a broken wing can also fly], Qanadi sinmi§ qu§ da uqarmi§. “Azarbaycan” jurnali, ¹3, s. 65-107.

14. Vurgun, S. (1943), Vurgun, S. [Patriotic war and our heroes], Vatan muharibasi va qahramanlarimiz. 0dabiyyat qazeti, 18 iyun, s. 2.

15. Vurgun, S. (1941), Vurgun, S. [Guarding the Motherland], Vatanin ke§iyinda. “Kommunist” qazeti, 23 iyun, s. 2.

Ðàçìåùåíî íà Allbest.ru