Аннотация:An attempt is presented to reconstruct the historiosophical and literary-critical sources of Grigory Potanin’s article “A novel and a story in Siberia.” This article is key to the literary criticism of the “senior” regionalists. Consideration is given to two phenomena: 1) the Russian literature of the 19th century, regarded as “incorrect” as it was forced to evolve rapidly due to the lagging in its development (the consequence of the forced modernization of Russia), and 2) Western European literature, regarded “normal” and supplying the Russian literature with forms seen as models. These two phenomena were reproduced several decades later on a more local scale though less consistently: 1) Russian literature, having become “normative” for the Russian reader by the 1870s, and 2) the literature of Siberia lagging in its development compared to Russian literature. The leaders of Siberian regionalism would speak about the “specialness” of Siberia when comparing it both with Russia and Europe, with this “specialness” requiring a special representation. Considering criticism as an institution that “supervises” literature, Potanin, as his associate and friend Yadrintsev, suggested a radical thesis about the absence of literature in Siberia in his article. At the same time, relying on Karamzin’s article “Why are there few author talents in Russia?” and the first “Philosophical Letter” by Chaadaev, Potanin joins the discourse of the “shortage” of literature generated by several Russian critics of the first third of the 19th century. Potanin’s thought follows the paradigm formed in literary criticism and historiosophical discourse of this period.
