Traditions folk tale. It should be noted that we are talking primarily not about magic, but about social and everyday life, satirical tale: the characters in such a fairy tale are stupid generals, landowners who don’t know and can’t do anything.
However, it is significant that the characteristics of the peasant are not the same as in the folk tale. There he is always smarter, braver, stronger, always fooling powerful of the world this leaves the oppressors in the cold. Saltykov-Shchedrin emphasizes the paradoxical mixture of valuable, vital qualities of a peasant and humility, long-suffering, bordering almost on dementia. A typical antithesis for the writer: a sharp contrast between physical strength, ingenuity (and exaggeration of these qualities) and patience, humility, he allows himself to be oppressed.
The general style is also in many ways fairy-tale (“in a certain kingdom”), but there are no plots directly borrowed from fairy tales. The plots are essentially as allegorical as in the latter, more original fairy tales, and therefore unique. Only externally these tales are associated with folk tales (heroes, style).
One of the main techniques of Saltykov-Shchedrin is grotesque (the generals are wearing nightgowns with orders; the man himself wove a rope “from wild hemp” so that the generals would tie him up).
Fairy tales of the 1880s were written during the years of political reaction, so it is advisable to compare them not only with the works of Gogol, Krylov, but also Chekhov, who had just begun his writing career. The difference is that in Saltykov-Shchedrin’s tales the emphasis is on social issues(the relationship between the people and the authorities, the phenomenon of Russian liberalism and enlightenment, the socio-psychological type of “liberal”, etc.), and in Chekhov - on the “universal”, ethical and existential (vulgarity, philistinism, routine of life, etc. ) .
In accordance with this, the basic pictorial principles also differ: Saltykov-Shchedrin has allegorical generalizations on a national scale, Chekhov has everyday trifles. They are united by their adherence to the only form of free thought allowed in that era - laughter, which both writers combine with allegory. At the same time, Saltykov-Shchedrin’s laughter is distinguished not only by fun, but also by anger; it is satirical in nature. His later tales are gloomy and devoid of optimism. In them, he relies on the traditions of not so much folk tales as fables, where the allegorical nature is set initially, constituting the structure-forming genre type.
The heroes of fairy tales of the 1880s resemble the heroes of fables. Animals often perform in a typical fable function, rather than in a fairy tale. In addition, as happens in a fable, animals sometimes suddenly turn from characters into “themselves”: for example, a fish - actor may be fried at the end of the fairy tale.
Saltykov-Shchedrin uses “ready-made” roles assigned to some animals; traditional symbolism is found in his fairy tales. For example, the eagle is a symbol of autocracy; so the fairy tale where main character- an eagle, is immediately understood by the reader accordingly (reflection on eagles and their essence is undoubtedly perceived in an allegorical sense).
Saltykov-Shchedrin demonstrates his commitment to the fable tradition; in particular, he includes a moral in some fairy tales, a typical fable device (“let this serve as a lesson to us”).
The grotesque, as Saltykov-Shchedrin’s favorite means of satire, is expressed in the very fact that animals act as people in specific situations (most often related to ideological disputes, socio-political issues relevant to Russia in the 1880s). In the depiction of these incredible, fantastic events, the originality of Shchedrin’s realism is revealed, noting the essence of social conflicts and relationships, character traits which are hyperbolized.
Parody also belongs to Shchedrin’s typical techniques; the object of parody can be, for example, Russian historiography, as in “The History of a City,” or the history of education in Russia.
Saltykov-Shchedrin is a world-recognized master of satire. His talent showed itself in difficult times for Russia. The contradictions that were corroding the country from within and the discord in society became apparent. Appearance satirical works was inevitable. But only a few were able to fully reveal their talent. Ruthless censorship did not leave the slightest opportunity to express one’s opinion on the situation in Russia if it contradicted the government’s. For Saltykov-Shchedrin, the problem of censorship was very acute, and conflicts with it became more frequent. After the publication of some early stories, the writer was sent into exile in Vyatka. A seven-year stay in the province brought its benefits: Saltykov-Shchedrin got to know the peasants better, their way of life, and the life of small towns. But from now on he was forced to resort to allegory and use comparisons in order for his works to be published and read.
An example of a bright political satire is, first of all, the story “The History of a City.” It describes the history of the fictional city of Foolov, the relationship between “the inhabitants and the bosses.” Saltykov-Shchedrin set himself the task of showing the typicality of Foolov and his problems, the common details inherent in almost all Russian cities of that time. But all the features are deliberately exaggerated, hyperbolized. The writer exposes the vices of officials with his characteristic skill. Bribery, cruelty, and self-interest flourish in Foolov. The complete inability to manage the city entrusted to them sometimes leads to the most tragic consequences for the residents. Already in the first chapter, the core of the future narrative is clearly outlined: “Raz-dawn! I won’t tolerate it!” Saltykov-Shchedrin shows the brainlessness of the mayors in the most literal sense. Brudasty had “a certain special device” in his head, capable of reproducing two phrases, which turned out to be enough to appoint him to this post. The pimple actually had a stuffed head. Actually to this artistic medium, as a grotesque, the writer resorts quite often. Foolov's pastures are adjacent to Byzantine ones, Benevolensky begins an intrigue with Napoleon. But the grotesque appeared especially later, in fairy tales; it is no coincidence that Saltykov-Shchedrin inserts into the story
“Inventory of mayors.” It shows that it is not people with any state merits who are appointed to positions, but whoever is necessary, which is confirmed by their administrative activities. One became famous for introducing into use Bay leaf, another “placed the streets paved with his predecessors and... set up monuments,” etc. But Saltykov-Shchedrin ridicules not only officials - With all his love for the people, the writer shows them incapable of decisive action, voiceless, accustomed to forever endure and wait best times, obey the most. wild orders. In a mayor, he values, first of all, the ability to speak beautifully, and any active activity only causes fear, fear of being responsible for it. It is the helplessness of ordinary people and their faith in the authorities that support despotism in the city. An example of this is Wartkin’s attempt to introduce mustard. The townsfolk responded by “stubbornly standing on their knees,” it seemed to them that this was the only correct solution, capable of pacifying both sides.
As if to sum it up, at the end of the story the image of Gloomy-Burcheev appears - a kind of parody of Arakcheev (although not entirely obvious). The idiot, who destroys the city in the name of realizing his crazy idea, has thought through the entire structure of the future Nepriklonsk down to the smallest detail. On paper, this plan, which strictly regulated people’s lives, seems quite real (somewhat reminiscent of Arakcheev’s “military settlements”). But discontent is growing, the revolt of the Russian people swept the tyrant off the face of the earth. And what? Political immaturity leads to a period of reaction (“abolition of the sciences”).
“Tales” are rightfully considered the final work of Saltykov-Shchedrin. The scope of the problems covered has become much wider. It is not by chance that satire takes on the appearance of a fairy tale. Satirical stories are based on folk ideas about the character of animals. The fox is always cunning, the wolf is cruel, the hare is cowardly. Playing on these qualities, Saltykov-Shchedrin also uses folk speech. This contributed to greater accessibility and understanding among peasants of the problems raised by the writer.
Conventionally, fairy tales can be divided into several groups: satire on officials and the government, on representatives of the intelligentsia, on city residents and on ordinary people. The image of a bear as a stupid, smug, limited official, quick to kill, appears more than once, personifying merciless tyranny. A classic example of the grotesque is the fairy tale “How one man fed two generals.” The generals are not able to provide for themselves, they are helpless. The action often takes on an absurd character. At the same time, Saltykov-Shchedrin also makes fun of the man who made a rope to be tied to a tree. The common minnow “lived and trembled and died and trembled,” without trying to do anything or change anything. The idealistic crucian carp, who knows nothing about nets or fish ears, is doomed to death. The fairy tale “The Bogatyr” is very significant. Autocracy has outlived its usefulness, only the appearance, the outer shell, remains. The writer does not call for an inevitable struggle. He simply depicts the existing situation, frightening in its accuracy and authenticity. In his works, Saltykov-Shchedrin, with the help of hyperboles, metaphors, sometimes even fantastic elements, and carefully selected epithets, showed age-old contradictions that have not outlived their usefulness even in the writer’s contemporary days. But, denouncing the people's shortcomings, he only wanted to help eliminate them. And everything he wrote was dictated by only one thing - love for his Motherland.
It is no coincidence that Saltykov-Shchedrin’s “Fairy Tales” is called the author’s final work. They raise with all their severity those problems of Russia in the 60-80s. XIX century, which worried the advanced intelligentsia. In the debate about Russia's future paths, many points of view were expressed. It is known that Saltykov-Shchedrin was a supporter of the fight against autocracy. Like many thinking people of that time, he was passionate about the “folk” idea and complained about the passivity of the peasant. Saltykov-Shchedrin wrote that despite the abolition of serfdom, it lives in everything: “in our temperament, in our way of thinking, in our customs, in our actions. Whatever we turn our attention to, everything comes out of it and rests on it.” This political views and the journalistic and journalistic activities of the writer and his literary creativity are subordinated.
The writer constantly sought to make his opponents funny, because laughter is great power. So in “Fairy Tales” Saltykov-Shchedrin ridicules government officials, landowners, and the liberal intelligentsia. Showing the helplessness and worthlessness of officials, the parasitism of landowners and at the same time emphasizing the hard work and dexterity of the Russian peasant, Saltykov-Shchedrin expresses his main idea in fairy tales: the peasant has no rights, is overwhelmed by the ruling classes.
Thus, in “The Tale of How One Man Fed Two Generals” Saltykov-Shchedrin shows the complete helplessness of two generals who found themselves on the desert island. Despite the fact that there was an abundance of game, fish, and fruits all around, they almost died of hunger.
The officials who were “born, raised and grew old” in some kind of registry did not understand anything, and did not know “even any words,” except perhaps the phrase: “Please accept the assurance of my complete respect and devotion,” the generals did nothing They didn’t know how and quite sincerely believed that buns grew on trees. And suddenly a thought strikes them: we need to find a man! After all, he must be there, just “hid somewhere, shirking work.” And the man really was found. He fed the generals and immediately, on their orders, obediently twists a rope, with which they tie him to a tree so that he does not run away.
In this tale, Saltykov-Shchedrin expresses the idea that Russia rests on the labor of the peasant, who, despite his natural intelligence and ingenuity, obediently submits to helpless masters. The same idea is developed by the author in the fairy tale “ Wild landowner" But if the generals from the previous story ended up on a desert island by the will of fate, then the landowner from this fairy tale always dreamed of getting rid of the obnoxious men from whom a bad, servile spirit emanates. Therefore, the pillar nobleman Urus-Kuchum-Kildibaev oppresses the men in every possible way. And so the peasant world disappeared. And what? After some time, “he was all… overgrown with hair… and his claws became iron.” The landowner has gone wild because without a man he is not even able to serve himself.
Saltykov-Shchedrin’s deep faith in hidden forces people is visible in the fairy tale “The Horse”. The tortured peasant nag amazes with its endurance and vitality. Her entire existence consists of endless hard work, and meanwhile the well-fed idle dancers in the warm stall are amazed at her endurance and talk a lot about her wisdom, hard work, and sanity. Most likely, in this tale, Saltykov-Shchedrin meant by idle dancers the intelligentsia, who poured from empty to empty, talking about the destinies of the Russian people. It is obvious that the image of Konyaga reflects a peasant worker.
The heroes of “Fairy Tales” are often animals, birds, and fish. This suggests that they are based on Russian folklore. Addressing it allows Saltykov-Shchedrin to convey the deep content in a laconic form and at the same time satirically sharply convey it. Take, for example, the fairy tale “The Bear in the Voivodeship.” Three Toptygins are three different rulers. In character they are not similar to each other. One is cruel and bloodthirsty, the other is not evil, “but so, a brute,” and the third is lazy and good-natured. And each of them is not able to provide normal life In the woods. And their style of government has nothing to do with it. We see that nothing has changed the general dysfunctional order in the forest slum: kites pluck crows, and wolves skin hares. “Thus, a whole theory of dysfunctional well-being suddenly arose before the mental gaze of the third Toptygin,” the author sneers. Hidden meaning This fairy tale, which parodies the real rulers of Russia, is that without the abolition of autocracy, nothing will change.
Talking about ideological content“Fairy tales” by Saltykov-Shchedrin, it should be noted that many talented writers of the 20th century (Bulgakov, Platonov, Grossman, etc.) showed in their works what happens when a person violates the eternal laws of development of nature and society. We can say that the literature of the 20th century, which experienced the upheavals of social revolutions, polemicizes with the literature of the second half of the 19th century century, including the work of Saltykov-Shchedrin. Events of the early 20th century led thinking intelligentsia to disappointment among the people, while “folk thought” in the 19th century was decisive for many Russian writers. But the richer our literary heritage what's in it different points view on the path of development of society.
(1 option)
In the final period of his work, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin turns to the allegorical form of a fairy tale, where, describing everyday situations in “Aesopian language,” he ridicules vices contemporary writer society.
The satirical form became for M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin with the opportunity to speak freely about pressing problems of society. In the fairy tale “The Tale of How One Man Fed Two Generals” various satirical devices: grotesque, irony, fantasy, allegory, sarcasm - to characterize those depicted
Heroes and descriptions of the situation in which the main characters of the fairy tale found themselves: two generals. The very landing of the generals on a desert island “by pike command, according to my desire." The writer’s assurance is fantastic that “the generals served all their lives in some kind of registry, were born there, raised and grew old, and therefore did not understand anything.” The writer satirically portrayed and appearance heroes: “they are in nightgowns, and an order hangs on their necks.” Saltykov-Shchedrin ridicules the basic inability of the generals to find food for themselves: both thought that “the rolls would be born in the same form as they are served with coffee in the morning.” Depicting the behavior of the characters, the writer uses sarcasm: “they began to slowly crawl towards each other and in the blink of an eye they became frantic. Shreds flew, squeals and groans were heard; the general, who was a teacher of calligraphy, bit off the order from his comrade and immediately swallowed it.” The heroes began to lose their human appearance, turning into hungry animals, and only the appearance real blood sobered them up.
Satirical devices not only characterize artistic images, but also express the author’s attitude towards the depicted. The writer treats with irony the man who, frightened by the powers that be, “first climbed a tree and picked the generals ten of the ripest apples, and took one sour one for himself.” Makes fun of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin attitude of the generals to life: “They began to say that here they live on everything ready, but in St. Petersburg, meanwhile, their pensions keep accumulating and accumulating.”
Thus, using various satirical techniques, the allegorical form of “Aesopian language”, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin expresses own attitude to the relationship between people in power and common people. The writer ridicules both the generals’ inability to cope with life and the peasant’s stupid fulfillment of all the masters’ whims.
(Option 2)
The generals who had spent their entire lives in the registry could not have been sent to a desert island; it was enough to take them into a field or forest, leaving them alone, as in fairy tales, and it could have been canceled serfdom just like in life.
Of course, the fairy tale is a lie, the writer exaggerates, and there were no generals so stupid and unadapted to life, but in any fairy tale there is a hint. The author hints at the weak-willedness and dependence of the peasant, and at the helplessness of the “generals” who would have died of hunger and cold if the peasant had not been nearby. There are a lot of conventions and fantasy in the fairy tale: the unexpected transfer of two generals to a desert island, and very conveniently a man also turned up there. Much is exaggerated, hyperbolized: the complete helplessness of the generals, ignorance of how to navigate relative to parts of the world, etc. The author of the fairy tale also uses the grotesque: the huge size of the man, the eaten medal, soup boiled in the palms of his hands, a woven rope that prevents the man from escaping.
The very fairy-tale elements used by the author are already a satire on the society of that time. Desert Island - real life, which the generals do not know. A man who fulfills all desires is a self-assembled tablecloth and a flying carpet rolled into one. Saltykov-Shchedrin mocks the generals who were born and grew old in the registry, the registry as public institution, which was “abolished as unnecessary” and over a peasant who wove a rope for himself, he himself is happy that “he, a parasite, was favored and did not disdain the peasant’s work!” Both the generals and the man with Podyacheskaya, but how different they are in St. Petersburg and on the island: on a desert island a man is necessary, his importance is enormous, but in St. Petersburg “a man hangs outside the house, in a box on a rope, and smears paint on the wall, or on the roof “walks like a fly”, small, unnoticeable. The generals on the island are as powerless as children, but in St. Petersburg they are omnipotent (at the reception level).
Saltykov-Shchedrin laughed heartily at everyone, at those whom he called “children of a fair age,” since adults sometimes need to be explained anew what is good and what is bad, where is the line between good and evil.