1. Introduction

The global processes of integration of the postcolonial world constantly stimulate the study of various aspects of a multicultural society. Over the past decades, issues of peaceful coexistence of representatives of different nationalities within the same geographical territory have become the subject of ideological, religious, and cultural discussion. This is due to the fact that the concept of multiculturalism includes the image of an ideal multicultural state that is capable of ensuring the interests of all subjects of social and cultural relations. Fiction as a dynamic projection of the processes of intercultural exchanges is the most important material for studying the applicability of multiculturalist ideas in countries linked by a common postcolonial destiny. In addition to the need to study the processes of cultural exchange between Russia and Kazakhstan, the relevance of addressing this topic is also caused by the trend of modern literary criticism to combine the cultural and literary aspects of research (Novossyolova, 2020).

In comparison with other post-Soviet states, it may be said that currently in Kazakhstan there is an organic system of interethnic and interfaith relations, harmoniously combining elements of the traditional Kazakh mentality and national identity of other people inhabiting Kazakhstan. The authors who retained Russian as the main language of their work became simultaneously involved in another ethnocultural space, which could not but affect the transformation of their mentality into a crosscultural one. The unique phenomenon of the Russian-language literature of the Pavlodar Irtysh land, geographically located in the northeastern part of Kazakhstan, is the subject of this study. The study of the works of the poets from this region from the standpoint of a culturological (cultural-contextual) approach made it possible to apply research strategies not only in linear, concrete, historical parameters but also in the “big time of art” (Bakhtin, 1986), taking into account the peculiarities of the literary text. They make it possible to consider different periods of the development of literature as an internal spiritual value and as a way to comprehend the world and the person reflected in the word.

The concept of multiculturalism, as applied to the material of the study, presupposes cultural pluralism, protection of the rights of national minorities, and the establishment of the concept of national identity (Gutmann, 2003; Sahraee & Khayatan, 2019; Zhu, 2016). The study of multiculturalism in the literary space of Kazakhstan is important since it contributes to multidimensional comprehension and, as a result, the institutionalization of the dialogical space between the eastern and western types of cultural communities. Russian and Russianspeaking (ethnically non-Russian, but using Russian for literary expression) authors of Kazakhstan, brought up in the traditions of two traditional systems and combining them in their works, contribute to the convergence of cultures.

The purpose of this article was to study the processes of cultural transfer, integration, and mutual influence that affected Russian and Kazakh literature and to reflect multiculturalism in the works of the Pavlodar Irtysh poets Zhanatalap Nurkenov, Viktor Semeryanov, and Bakhytzhan Kanapyanov.

2. Theoretical Framework

Multiculturalism is a broad concept that exists in many spheres of social activity (sociopolitical, economic, cultural, and educational), covering issues that require mandatory consideration (Kozlik, 2009). The term was first used in 1957 to characterize the policy of Switzerland and eventually came into circulation in Canada in 1971, equating the status of English and French, which fit into the principle of “one nation, two languages, many peoples”. All this took place in order to settle the consequences of mass emigration of nonEuropeans to European countries (Italy, Greece, Portugal, Spain, Ireland, and France). The main principle of multiculturalism is the recognition of equality between cultures that make up a single organism of society, the cultural assimilation of migrants in the vastness of European states.

The main theorists of this doctrine are Kymlicka (1989, 1995a, 1995b, 1999, 2001, 2007; Kymlicka & Patten, 2003; Kymlicka & Banting, 2006) who linked liberalism with the theory of equal rights and opportunities, considering multiculturalism as a policy that contributed to the legitimization of foreign cultural ethnic traditions, customs, music, and the glorification of ethnic diversity within society. There were also Kukathas (2003), who considered five variants of the state reaction to cultural pluralism: isolationism, assimilation, soft multiculturalism, hard multiculturalism, and apartheid, Hirsch, Kett, and Trefil (2002), who put forward the theory of cultural literacy, which is necessary for understanding the identity of various ethnocultural groups, Gudykunst and Kim (1997) and Parekh (2000), who studied the ideas of anthropological multiculturalism as cultural interaction, and Benhabib (2002), who founded the theory of polyphony of cultural narratives. In Soviet science, it is necessary to note the systemic ideas of Bakhtin (1986), about the dialogism of literature, polyphonism, and hesitation, and Lotman (1992) on the semiotic aspect of cultural interaction.

The development of the concept of multiculturalism in the 1990s was associated with the names of Taylor (1994) and Blum (1992) and was based on the idea of the need to preserve the Western cultural tradition. Opponents of the concept of Blum (1992, p. 83) viewed it as “a theoretical setting that asserts the equivalence of different cultures, blurring the line between high and low cultures”. Taylor (1994, p. 37) pointed out that “multiculturalism is a form of self-affirmation, not just a struggle for self-acceptance, but a demand for recognition of originality, uniqueness, equivalence”. Cesareo noted that “a multicultural society does not imply multi-ethnicity, since culture is the prerogative of both an ethnos and religion, ideology, and social classes. Multiethnicity includes multicultural aspects, as ethnic groups have their own culture, which is different from others” (Pavan et al., 2013, p. 55). Ford, Harris, and Howard noted that knowledge of other cultural groups lays the foundation for the development of cultural pluralism, which is explained by the situation in which many cultures emphasize intergroup harmony, coexisting within the same society (Boles, 2006).

The development of the problematics of multiculturalism in the 1980s-1990s was associated with postcolonial research, which identified “new cross-cultural criticism, and the discourse in which this criticism took place” (Ashcroft, 2002, p. 103). The founders of postcolonialism – Palestinian Said (2003) and Indian Bhabha (2004) – hail from the former British colonies. The position of the postcolonial authors was initially built on the demonstration of tolerance for everything “foreign”, the naturalness of the opposition “friend or foe” and the acceptance of different value systems. Post-colonial studies are aimed at studying the historical manifestations of colonialism and overcoming their consequences in the modern world as an interdisciplinary project (Bromley, 2000; Kozlik, 2009; Said, 2003). At the beginning of the 21st century, Malahov (2007) has come up with an encyclopedic definition of multiculturalism.

Multiculturalism is a concept that denotes the fact of the cultural diversity of a country, due to the ethnic, linguistic, and religious heterogeneity of its population; the practice of social and political organization of the community in the context of cultural diversity; an ideology aimed at promoting cultural diversity. (p. 1383)

Malahov questioned the discourse of multiculturalism as a reasonable expression of cultural pluralism: “… the ideology of multiculturalism is more an obstacle to the establishment of a multicultural society than a means of its creation” (Malahov, 2007, p. 1384). Bigler (2005) identified the main cultural groups as African American, Latin American, Asian American, Jewish, Far Eastern, Indian, and others.

Multiculturalism has practically turned all countries of the world, as the representatives of various cultural traditions, to face each other, erasing national boundaries. Pavan, Trampus, and Busi (2013, pp. 57–58) give the following definition of multiculturalism: “multiculturalism is the idea that people in a particular society can coexist without fear that their cultural identity will not be accepted by the specified cultural climate of a given society”. Living in a multicultural society implies a high level of openness, which, first of all, is expressed in the fact that the dominant culture accepts the foreign culture as a legal fact and builds benevolent relations with it. Kodric (2019) defined multiculturalism as a doctrine of coexistence and a normative ideal for achieving equality and respect between cultures. This policy thus encourages diversity rather than homogenization. Parekh (2000) called the goal of introducing a multicultural policy to help an ethnic minority in an effort to support their own culture, language, and religion (Kadyraliyeva & Zholdubaeva, 2015).

As cultural consciousness was transformed into a multicultural one, this concept was criticized by the representatives of social thought, who considered it as a new form of socio-political reaction and obscurantism (Kagarlickij, 2011), “the threat of transformation of multiculturalist ideology into cultural relativism” (Giddens, 2002, p. 438), “the threat of destruction of national identity” (Byukenen, 2007, p. 114), “a form of cultural violence” (Žižek, 2005, p. 21). The understanding of the cultural and national identity of the individual as a developing entity is carried out in the works of Huntington (2004). Gradually, the essence of multiculturalism began to be understood as the ability to perceive, assume and feel one’s own and other cultural and aesthetic codes and meanings, to identify oneself with the traditions and values of other cultures while preserving their own cultural codes and meanings (Tkachuk, 2018).

Scientists of Kazakhstan are also ambiguous regarding the concept of multiculturalism. On the one hand, such positive consequences as mutual enrichment of cultures, respect for confessional freedom and status, recognition of multiculturalism as the basis of statehood (Bajtenova, 2002; Kadyraliyeva, 2015; Tolkachev, 2013) are very positively evaluated; on the other hand, attempts are made to substantiate the influence of multiculturalism on inter-ethnic tensions (Laumulin, 2006; Nysanbaev, 2013; Shalabaeva, 2001). There are also ideas on the legitimation of the concept of the dominant culture in the public discourse (Kadyrzhanov, 2014; Kukusheva, 2016). In the author’s opinion, the policy of multiculturalism in the Republic of Kazakhstan delivered more positive results than negative ones. Interethnic tensions decreased, the number of interfaith conflicts decreased, and friendly ties between people became even stronger (Ananeva, 2019; Iost, 2019; Iost & Vasilev, 2016).

3. Methodology

In the process of preparing this paper, the following hypotheses were put forward: Russian-language literature of Kazakhstan is multicultural in origin since it is created by representatives of different nationalities living on its territory; the problematics and thematic specificity of the Russian-language literature of Northern Kazakhstan testify to the fact that the Russian-Kazakh intercultural dialogue in the Soviet and post-Soviet periods is gradually taking shape in a rich multicultural field, overcoming the postcolonial syndrome without any particular difficulties; the poetics of the Russian-language literature of the Pavlodar Irtysh land is such a dense series of multicultural inclusions that it becomes difficult to determine the nationality of the authors. This indicates that deep intercultural synthesis is a key feature of the RussianKazakh cultural buffer zone (Babich & Rodionova, 2009; Mamonova, 2007).

To test the hypotheses, the following tasks were set: 1. to analyze the literature on the concept of multiculturalism, in relation to the conditions of the Russian-Kazakh intercultural dialogue in the postcolonial period; 2. to identify the main specific features of the concept of the world and man in the Russian-language literature of Pavlodar Irtysh land; 3. to study the multicultural originality of the Russianlanguage literature of the Pavlodar Irtysh land; and 4. to study the reflection of ethnographic problems, historical events, linguistic and stylistic interference in the Russian-language literature. The hypotheses put forward correlate with the following research schemes: identification of the authors, whose work falls under the definition of postcolonial multicultural literature, using the method of continuous sampling; literary analysis of texts in order to identify the worldview of the poets; finding patterns common to representatives of different cultures.

In the process of organizing this research, the analysis of theoretical material on the stated topic was carried out. The phenomena of multiculturalism in a multinational republic were considered. The formation of Russian literature in Kazakhstan was analyzed in the diachronic section and at the present stage. An analysis of works of art was conducted. Poetic creativity of representatives of Russianlanguage literature of Pavlodar Irtysh land (geographically located in the north of Kazakhstan) was chosen as the object of the paper; the criteria for selecting the creativity of specific representatives of the Russian and Russian-language literature of the region are substantiated. In order to implement the principle of accuracy of the results obtained and methods of its interpretation, the following methods were used:

1. empirical methods: analysis and synthesis. The choice of these methods is motivated by the need to synthesize the manifestations of multiculturalism in the works of the declared authors and allows to consider the worldview of the artists;
2. theoretical methods: axiomatic, hypothetical, abstraction. These methods are necessary to clarify the theoretical component of the problem, build a hypothesis and generalize with the aim of using them as components of analysis;
3. the biographical method as a way of perceiving and evaluating fiction, in which the biography and personality of the writer become the defining moment of creativity. The application of this method allows studying the work of poets in connection with life circumstances.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. History of Multiculturalism in Kazakh Society and Russian-Language Literature of Kazakhstan

Located in the center of the Eurasian continent, Kazakhstan is of interest from various perspectives: geographic, economic, and social. From the moment of gaining independence from the USSR on December 16, 1991, representatives of 130 nationalities live there. In such conditions, according to Kurganskaya and Dunaev, multiculturalism as an ideology and policy of interethnic and intercultural solidarity has the right to life (Lynch, 2000; Shepel, 2002). According to the OSCE (2009) report, according to Pavan et al. (2013, pp. 58), Kazakhstan “has a long tradition of respecting values and history, elevating its traditional tolerance to the level of a fundamental national principle”. The multicultural society of Kazakhstan does not suppress the personal identity of an individual citizen.

Studies show that Kazakhs identify themselves as citizens of the Republic of Kazakhstan, but belonging to certain ethnic communities. Multiculturalism in Kazakhstan is primarily conditioned by the geographical location of the country and historical circumstances (Pavan et al., 2013). At different historical periods, the Kazakh elite actively interacted with the Russian intellectuals in exile, having received the opportunity to get closer to the world community. The period of the late 19th – early 20th century is characterized by the awareness of Kazakhstan from the perspective of new socio-political conditions. The names of the Kazakhs became known outside their country (Chokaev, Bukejhanov, and Dosmuhamedov). Kazakhstan embarked on the path of preserving and developing literature, education in its native language, not excluding links with Russians and other cultures (Kadyraliyeva et al., 2013). The revolution that followed in 1917 destroyed traditional social relations and institutions. Despite the tangible ideological pressure, the Kazakh people managed to maintain respect for other cultures without consigning their own rich cultural identity to oblivion.

Subsequent events of modern history (famine of 1931-1933, the victims of which, according to various sources, were from 1 to 2 million people (Kadyraliyeva & Zholdubaeva, 2015), deportation of small peoples in the steppe of Kazakhstan, collectivization, development of virgin, and fallow lands) led to a noticeable reduction in the percentage of representatives of the Kazakh nationality in the total population of Kazakhstan against the background of an increase in the number of Russians, Germans, Greeks, Poles, Tatars, Ukrainians, and other ethnic groups. Undoubtedly, this period was controversial and, in many ways, dramatic. “On the one hand, much has been achieved in the public sphere of life (general literacy, science, and culture); on the other hand, the state has worked towards leveling the national idea” (Kadyraliyeva et al., 2013, p. 1693).

With the adoption of the Declaration of Independence in 1991, numerous ethnic groups peacefully coexisting in the country have transformed Kazakhstan into a multicultural community. This was highlighted in the Doctrine of National Unity, through the organization and effective functioning of the Assembly of the People of Kazakhstan (established in 1995), the work of numerous ethnocultural centers. The purpose of the Assembly is to promote ideas of tolerance, stability, and harmony among the various ethnic groups of the country (Kamzieva, 2013). Olcott (2002), an expert on the modern development of Kazakhstan, points to the main factor of the tolerant attitude of representatives of the Kazakh diaspora towards the Russian, based on socio-economic, political, and cultural relations in the present and the future. This fact is also emphasized by Kazakhstani researchers (Kadyraliyeva et al., 2013; Kukusheva, 2016; Tuksaitova, 2016). The practice of multiculturalism in Kazakhstan is based on the foundation of civil society, the existence of which is impossible without a tolerant attitude between individuals and ethnic groups. Kazakhstan is a multi-ethnic, multicultural state which promotes loyalty to each ethnic group, its culture, traditions, and art. The country combines the achievements of other civilizations and uses its own experience to create a unique national history. The culture of Kazakhstan is an alloy of a huge number of national cultures, which characterizes a conscious connection, respect for history, traditions, and culture of the peoples of the republic.

Unlike other post-Soviet republics, Kazakhstan was able to become a true second home for many generations of people. It is important to note the shift of the cultural epicenter from the capital to the regions (Neupokoeva, 2006). When studying multiculturalism in the literature of the Pavlodar Irtysh land, geographically located in the north-eastern part of the country, it should be noted the special role of the Russian language and literature (Kadyraliyeva & Zholdubaeva, 2015), as well as the peaceful coexistence of Christianity and Islam (Akiner, 1995). Russian-language literature in many aspects influenced the literature of Kazakhstan, being inextricably linked with the history and culture of the tribes and peoples inhabiting the Kazakh steppes. Bieger pointed out that “literature, in general, is capable of changing and improving a person’s perception of the world” (Salas et al., 2002, p. 7), and multicultural literature offers rich, complex opportunities for thinking about different cultures. Kaskabasov (2011) noted the same pattern.

The existence of the concept of “Russianlanguage literature” is directed “against the widespread stereotype that Russian literature is only about Russians and created only by Russian writers” (Shafranskaya, 2008, p. 28). Ananeva (2019) emphasizes multicultural interaction at different levels of the state structure of the Republic of Kazakhstan (social structure, politics, and literature). Speaking about the modern literary process in Kazakhstan, she singles out both literature created in the national languages (Kazakh, Uyghur, Tatar, Korean, Belarusian, Chechen, and Uzbek), and in Russian. Juanyshbekov (2010, p. 142) introduces as an additional term “integrated literature” – “works written at the intersection of cultures of different peoples, by writers of one ethnic group in the language of another ethnic group”.

The integration of different cultures is achieved through the synthesis of national poetic traditions, mentality, and attitude. Abisheva (2014) singles out the Russian literature of Kazakhstan as simultaneously existing in two dimensions (Russian culture and the culture of Kazakhstan), which allows speaking of its multiculturalism. Ananeva and Krivoshchapova (2014) give the following definition of the concept of Russian-language literature”: it refers to writers who write in Russian, but who are representatives of other, non-Russian, ethnic groups, and, accordingly, demonstrate in their work a national world view that is different from the Russian one. Comprehension of its national originality “in the context of contact ties with foreign civilizations makes it possible to recreate the literary space of a given nation in its entirety” (Akiner, 1995, p. 117).

The relationship between nations brings together and enriches the literature of the people of Kazakhstan, in this case, there is an example of mutual influence. The Russianlanguage literature of Kazakhstan is becoming an integral part of the multinational Kazakh literature and the world literary heritage. The main topics of interest of the authors are the image of the spiritual world of a person, the awareness of the continuity of generations, the image of historical figures and real people in specific circumstances, the peace and friendship of people of different nationalities living in the same territory, the need to preserve the national language and culture, the image of nature, and the awareness of time and space (Chemyakin, 1999). The hypotheses that the Russian-language literature of Kazakhstan is multicultural in its origin and that, overcoming the postcolonial syndrome, the Russian-Kazakh intercultural dialogue in the Soviet and postSoviet periods is gradually taking shape in a rich multicultural field were confirmed.

4.2. Analysis of Literary Works

For the analysis, the works of three writers were selected, whose life and work are somehow connected with the Pavlodar Irtysh land and in which multiculturalism is clearly manifested. In the course of the research, the work of Viktor Semeryanov, Zhanatalap Nurkenov, and Bakhytzhan Kanapyanov, who lived and worked in Kazakhstan at different times, was considered, which made it possible to objectively assess the functioning of multicultural literature in different historical periods. It is necessary to make some remarks about these poets. Viktor Semeryanov’s work is multicultural by definition. Being Russian by nationality, along with creating his own poems in Russian, he is engaged in the translation of Kazakh and Polish authors. The work of the Pavlodar poet Semeryanov (born in 1937), known to both Kazakh and foreign readers, is of particular interest in terms of studying the multicultural context of the Russian-language literature of Kazakhstan (Pominov, 2008). The poet’s image of the place is personified, closely correlated with the personality of the hero: “this land of mine is called Kazakhstan”; “Kazakhstan, you are my holiday and my everyday life”; “Here flows my Irtysh, here are beautiful people” (Semeryanov, 2012, pp. 60–61).

The poet’s multiculturalism is expressed, first of all, in respect and understanding of the country’s cultural space and the traditional Kazakh mentality without prejudice to his own national identity. Being involved in a different ethnocultural space, the Semeryanov mental world becomes cross-cultural. The combination of the principles of Russian-language verification with the reflection of the mentality of another culture in the writings of Semeryanov leads to the creation of a kind of hybrid text. According to Bahtin (1986), such a text is dialogue replicas; it is a dispute of languages, a dispute of language styles. Brejninger (2012), Kukulin (2014), Rindinsbaher (2006), Tlostanova (2000, 2004), and Shafranskaya (2008) come under this concept, including post-Soviet Russian-language and Russian literature, were created at the intersection of two or more cultures.

The poet perceives the world through the spacetime of his small homeland and the wider space of his native language and culture. One of the ways to create a foreign-language world picture is the introduction of a special hero, characterized by timelessness and out-ofaccessibility. This circumstance seems to be extremely important in defining the work of poets who have realized their potential far from their homeland (nostalgia for the lost, the search for oneself, and self-identification) (Ananeva & Krivoshchapova, 2014). Losing your homeland is dangerous, it is criminal to forget the homeland (Semeryanov, 2012). Since Kazakh and Russian recent history had much in common, the persona of Semeryanov has a clear awareness of himself as a direct participant and a forced witness to the catastrophic events that happened in the country.

The universal values and philosophical views of the great figure of the Kazakh steppe about the meaning of life, the heritage of ancestors, the highest values, about the inadmissibility of the impoverishment of the human soul acquire a special meaning, since the author and the character of his work have different nationalities, but realizing the most important concepts of the world order: “That we are not on the earth by chance, / We will not fade into obscurity. Dispelling the darkness for centuries, / Getting lost in ethereal beauty, / We will dissolve in our descendants, / This means that we are immortal”. The Russian poet’s respect for Kazakh history is conveyed in the context of a true and impartial attitude to historical events, witnessed by Mashhur Zhusup (the overthrow of the tsar in the Russian Empire and the subsequent repressions that affected the Great Steppe: Goloshchekin’s reforms, disruption of the usual way of life of Kazakhs, and collectivization).

Semeryanov (2012) in his works carries the idea of important foundations capable of preserving spiritual community, maintaining a peaceful balance between people of different nationalities and religions inhabiting Kazakhstan: observance of customs and traditions, respect for history, the duty to labor, and venerate sacred canons: The child`s fetters have been untied – / what a joy, good luck, batyr! / The groom and bride will walk down the aisle, / with mothers and fathers behind their backs – / it is a joy, no place for sadness, / oh, such wonderful children! / This is joy – / I will greet a veteran, / our old war-horse is alive and well. Foreignlanguage inclusions from the Kazakh language, as can be seen, organically enter the Russian text, emphasizing the charm of the verbal image. The poet highly appreciates the contribution of every famous person who glorified the region and went beyond it. These are the heroes of the Great Patriotic War (Kanash Kamzin), prominent cultural figures – writers and poets (Pavel Vasiliev, Sabit Mukanov, and Zhanatalap Nurkenov), artists, journalists, and ethnographers (Dmitry Bagaev, Sergey Shevchenko).

In a troubled world, shaken by conflicts, a person strives for stability, the acquisition of which is possible by turning to spiritual foundations and mutual respect for national origins: Above the city, I see a Mashhur star. / Respectfully I go to church, / With the same respect, I go to mosque (Semeryanov, 2012). The poet urges not to rewrite the pages of history, since this memory is sacred. True culture and true art do not know borders and interethnic boundaries. So, for example, Semeryanov (2012, p. 12) writes about the house-museum of Vasiliev: “There is a Russian spirit here, / but it smells more of / the Kazakh steppe feather grass”. Thus, the multicultural poetry of Semeryanov (2012) is an example of a dialogue between two cultures, in which ethnic groups, cultures, and languages intersect. The international pathos of Semeryanov’s works is manifested in the appeal to depicting the life of different countries and peoples, different times, and cultural eras (Juanyshbekov, 2010).

One of the brightest representatives of the Russian-language literature of the Pavlodar Irtysh land is the poet Zhanatalap Nurkenov (1940-1997). He came to poetry in the late 1950s-1960s, when it experienced a huge creative upsurge not only in the metropolitan cities but also on the outskirts. Shafer (2014) writes about the poet’s work in the following way: In the history of the Pavlodar Irtysh land, he is one of the very first Russian-speaking Kazakh poets. His poems show a bright palette of life. There is a fusion of Kazakh folklore and the traditions of Russian versification before us. Nurkenov was born in Pavlodar, so it is not surprising that this city was more reflected in his writings than other historical sites of Kazakhstan. The difficult time in which the poet was born, the early death of his father, a difficult post-war childhood, the search for himself and his own path in a peculiar way intertwined in his work with the life-affirming motives of love, sincere friendship, and glorification of his native land.

On the pages of Nurkenov’s poems, elements of two cultures are used: folklore characters of Russian fairy tales and Kazakh epic literature (Charodeyka-Zima, Snegurochka – Kozy Korpesh, Bayan-Sulu). The verbal images used are inspired by both Russian and Kazakh realities: There are haystacks like Easter cakes/ Covered by winter storm – Above the floodplain, the shore is curved like a bow, / And the sky is like a blue yurt. A Kazakh legend is woven into the poem “In Bayanaul”: And so I see: / The Rock of splits, / Black braids / Shaking off on a boulder, / Comes out to me / Bayan-Sulu (Nurkenov, 2000). Referring to the legend of the lovers Bayan and Korpesh, the poet associates himself with the batyr-defender of the land. Steppe and rocks, legends from the stones – these are silent witnesses of the tragedies that took place many years ago. According to the poet, the Russian and Kazakh peoples have much in common in the historical diachrony (Nurkenov, 2000).

The author mainly uses geographic spaces, which represent the transition of ethnicity. The space is often used to introduce historical images of the Kazakh people in the Russian text. Zh. Nurkenov can name this space directly (Irtysh, Lebyazhye), or indicate certain geographical features (Irtysh, which is a symbolic image and represents the center of his poetic world; the Bayanaul nature reserve, used by the author to introduce a cultural and historical background of the Kazakh people; steppe, which is a measure of infinity and timelessness). Nurkenov (2000, p. 83) glorifies the immense free steppe, which has become an integral part of his worldview, the same free and wide: “I love the steppe. I have come to believe, / That there is no music without the Sun!”. Two boundless spaces – the steppe and the sky close the ontological picture of the poet’s worldview.

Nurkenov (2000) can be called a lyricist, philosopher, and thinker who deeply perceived beauty, peace, nature, and human relations. The nature of Pavlodar Irtysh land is a special sacred world, to which he is very reverent. The Irtysh River basin, native to Nurkenov, becomes a creative code that gives support, the power of faith: “Do not leave me, line, / When the meadows of Irtysh / Cannot find the prior fortune, / And in man-made banks / The river sways in captivity”. The characteristic in this regard is the description of the natural park of Bayanaul, which symbolizes the beginning of life and in the image of which the multicultural component of his poetry can certainly be traced. Asia and Europe are one whole for him: There are no paths to Asia, / This is Bayanaul (Nurkenov, 2000). At the same time, Nurkenov also includes the Russia-specific idea of the vastness of boundless space in the description of the steppe. Zhanatalap Nurkenov feels his connection with his existence, with the past and future of his people, of all mankind. However, he understands that the essence of this connection is ambiguous, that, attaining one thing, a person loses another, perhaps no less important for life. This eternal collision evokes a sorrowful response in the soul of the persona (General characteristics…, 2020).

The steppe is also the keeper of the ancestral traditions of the Kazakhs-steppe dwellers: hospitality, good nature: To be a guest in aul, even though you are a stranger – / The law of the steppe-dwellers, kind-hearted people. Another central image in the works of the Russian-speaking Kazakh poet is the image of a horse. The horse is a symbol of freedom, desire for vast plains: Ah, for what an engraved saddle – / And the eyes like fragments of a May night! / … We rushed into the steppe from the narrow streets, / The wind was ruffling withers … / We were racing wildly and with joy (Nurkenov, 2000). In the poem “Stone images” the pride for the past and the power of the Kazakh people are combined with the inaccessibility of heights invisible to the eye: Oh, the boulders / Standing here for centuries! / What if you could see / The rockets flying into space? (Nurkenov, 2000). The philosophical context of the work is extremely deep: admiration for the capabilities of a person who has learned the fruits of modern civilization, inevitably results in regret about the origins, and to forget them is worse than physical decay. A connoisseur of Kazakh history and culture, a Russian-speaking poet genetically feels his connection with the vast plains of the steppe. In the lines “Horizon will melt at the sunset / And the roads will turn back”, the archetypal Kazakh idea of the road, associated with life, was expressed: it is the road that leads to the well and the camping ground. In the Russian world picture, this expression will be interpreted as a return to the origins, to the beginning. Nurkenov did not distort, but enriched the Russian language with his figurative lines, coloring it with his own Kazakh national charm (Kalieva et al., 2005). Thus, the works of the Russian-speaking poet Nurkenov, who has chosen the Russian language that has become his native language for the purpose of selfexpression, is a vivid example of the mutual influence and enrichment of two cultures.

The legacy of the poet Bakhytzhan Kanapyanov (born in 1951), whose early years were associated with the city of Pavlodar, reveals a bright palette of multicultural interaction of the Kazakh poet. Kanapyanov is a professional poet, cinematographer, and journalist who is the author of more than ten poetic and translated books published by publishing houses in Kazakhstan, Russia, Ukraine, USA, and Canada and is a member of the Union of Writers and the Union of Cinematographers of Kazakhstan and an honorary member of the Russian Pen-Club. The interest in the works of the Kazakh poet is explained by questions about the meaning of life, about responsibility before the present, about the need to honor ancestors and respect different mentalities (Nurkenova & Tokatova, 2013). Concepts that create a foreign-language world picture are interspersed with Kazakh vocabulary, which enhances the perception of the poetic vision and creates a unique charm (koshma, yurt, dombra, asyk). With the help of artistic and stylistic means of the Russian language, Kanapyanov presents the Kazakh way of life for readers of other nationalities. Almost all spheres of human activity are in sight: the performance of prayer – namaz as an indispensable part of the life of faithful Muslims, the veneration of older people, the customs of folklore and songwriting, traditional folk games, rooted in the depths of centuries and having a special sacred meaning. “A language, forgotten since childhood, / The notorious bilingualism, / In which I lose my face / And acquire two-facedness. / I will understand the unknown to me / A departing aborigine, / But when I am in a dream at night / Kneeling in front of my ancestor, / I realize that he does not believe me, / As a stranger in captivity” (Nurkenova & Tokatova, 2013, p. 26).

As can be seen, the poet is characterized by both a deep perception and respect for a foreign culture and an awareness of the impossibility of forgetting the native language and the source of his works. Kazakh poets, who have chosen the Russian language as the language of selfexpression, at a certain point of creative work understand the need to synthesize national poetic traditions, worldview with the linguistic element of Russian poetry, accumulated by Russian and world versification. “As a result, a unique fusion is born, a special harmony of the emotional and expressive nature of the verse, figurative, and metaphorical series, melodic sound, rhythmic pattern, and a reimagined tradition” (Juanyshbekov, 2010, p. 143).

Thus, the Russian-language literature of the Pavlodar Irtysh land, being an integral part of the Russian literature of Kazakhstan, on the one hand, has its characteristic features, which allows talking about the artistic specifics of this phenomenon, on the other hand, the poets demonstrate a commonality with world literature, which elevates their works to a higher level. The study of the writings of Russianspeaking poets made it possible to reveal the common features of poetics including the desire for the rapprochement of cultures and their interest in ontological problems of life, culture, traditions, history of Kazakhs, and drawing parallels between the two peoples. As a result, poets synthesize their own original idea of the world and man, which is an alloy of foreignlanguage cultures, which is characterized by tolerance and internationalism. The hypotheses that the problematics and thematic specificity of the Russian-language literature of Northern Kazakhstan are examples of intercultural dialogue and that the poetics of the Russianlanguage literature of the Pavlodar Irtysh land is such a dense series of multicultural inclusions that it becomes difficult to determine the nationality of the authors were proved.

5. Concluding Remarks

Thus, in the process of studying the issues of multiculturalism in the Russian-language literature of Kazakhstan (on the example of the Pavlodar Irtysh land), the conclusions were made, the results were classified and the following hypotheses were confirmed. The Republic of Kazakhstan is a home for representatives of more than 130 nationalities, it is one of the striking examples of post-Soviet countries that have provided wide horizons for the preservation, development, and transmission of language and traditions. Multinational Kazakhstan is a state in which different cultures peacefully coexist with multidirectional traditions of figurative comprehension of the surrounding world, as well as heterogeneous complexes of aesthetic perception and ideals. In the zone of active Russian-Kazakh cultural exchange (“buffer zone”), which should be considered the territory of the Pavlodar Irtysh land, there is a constant process of rapprochement of peoples and subsequent extensive interaction of works of literature at all stages of its development.

The processes of cultural transfer, integration, and mutual influence, affecting the Russian and Kazakh literature of the buffer zone, lead, as mentioned above, to the search for new forms of expression of the creative thought of poets. As a result, Russian-language literature is enriched with a large layer of foreign-language vocabulary, linguocultural concepts, and images that create a unique polyphonic picture of the world and represent the ideological foundations of the structure of supranational unity. Kazakh poets draw inspiration from their families, their native language, the country’s rich folklore, and mythopoetic past, using the rich potential of the Russian language. Ethnically Russian poets enrich their poetics with a large number of concepts of Kazakh culture, at a certain stage of cultural evolution blurring the line between ours and theirs.

In the works of Russian-speaking poets, the ideas of multicultural originality are vividly transmitted. The priority of spiritual values is becoming common for representatives of different nationalities. The fundamental principles adhered to by poets of different nationalities who write in Russian include respect for the country of the studied people, equality, and recognition of national identity. From this perspective, multiculturalism is understood by distinguishing two equally directed flows: from Russia to Kazakhstan and from Kazakhstan to Russia. It is important to consider the ideas of multiculturalism in different spheres of life: socio-political, cultural, and spiritual. In general, the multicultural strategy of Russian-speaking authors can be defined as integrating into a multicultural space without losing one’s own national identity. The Russian-speaking poets of the Pavlodar Irtysh land strive to find common ground between Kazakh and Russian cultures, respecting any tradition, while preserving their national identity. They show the interconnection of nationalities at a deep ontological level. The Russian-language literature of the Pavlodar Irtysh land, some of the features of which were considered in this paper, is, undoubtedly, a part of the literature of Kazakhstan and the world literary heritage in general. The concept of multiculturalism, in line with which many regional poets create their works, allows them to realize their belonging to a single literary space of East and West.