Plan
Introduction
The problem of the new man in Griboyedov's comedy Woe from Wit
The theme of a strong man in the works of N.A. Nekrasova
The problem of a lonely and superfluous person in a secular society in the poetry and prose of M.Yu. Lermontov
The problem of a poor man in the novel by F.M. Dostoevsky Crime and Punishment
Subject folk character in the tragedy of A.N. Ostrovsky Thunderstorm
The theme of the people in the novel by L.N. Tolstoy's War and Peace
The theme of society in the work of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin Lord Golovlevs
Problem little man in the stories and plays of A.P. Chekhov
Conclusion
List of used literature
Introduction
people society Russian literature
Russian literature of the 19th century brought the whole world the works of such brilliant writers and poets as A.S. Griboyedov, A.S. Pushkin, M.Yu. Lermontov, N.V. Gogol, I.A. Goncharov, A.N. Ostrovsky, I.S. Turgenev, N.A. Nekrasov, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, F.M. Dostoevsky, L.N. Tolstoy, A.P. Chekhov and others.
In many works of these and other Russian authors of the 19th century, themes of man, personality, and people developed; personality was opposed to society (Woe from Wit by A.S. Griboyedov), the problem of an extra (lonely) person was demonstrated (Eugene Onegin by A.S. Pushkin, Hero of Our Time by M.Yu. Lermontov), a poor person (Crime and Punishment by F.M. . Dostoevsky), problems of the people (War and Peace by L.N. Tolstoy) and others. In most of the works, within the framework of the development of the theme of man and society, the authors demonstrated the tragedy of the individual.
The purpose of this essay is to consider the works of Russian authors of the 19th century, to study their understanding of the problems of man and society, and the peculiarities of their perception of these problems. The study used critical literature, as well as the works of writers and poets of the Silver Age.
The problem of the new man in Griboyedov's comedy Woe from Wit
Consider, for example, the comedy by A.S. Griboyedova Woe from Wit, which played an outstanding role in the socio-political and moral education of several generations of Russian people. She armed them to fight violence and tyranny, meanness and ignorance in the name of freedom and reason, in the name of the triumph of advanced ideas and true culture. In the image of the main character of Chatsky's comedy, Griboyedov, for the first time in Russian literature, showed a new person, inspired by sublime ideas, rebelling against a reactionary society in defense of freedom, humanity, intelligence and culture, cultivating a new morality, developing a new view of the world and human relations.
The image of Chatsky - a new, smart, developed person - is contrasted with Famus society. In Gora Out of Mind, all of Famusov’s guests simply copy the customs, habits and outfits of French milliners and rootless visiting crooks who made a living on Russian bread. They all speak a mixture of French and Nizhny Novgorod and are speechless with delight at the sight of any visiting Frenchman from Bordeaux. Through the lips of Chatsky, Griboedov with the greatest passion exposed this unworthy servility to others and contempt for one’s own:
So that the unclean Lord destroys this spirit
Empty, slavish, blind imitation;
So that he would plant a spark in someone with a soul.
Who could, by word and example
Hold us like a strong rein,
From pathetic nausea, on the stranger's side.
Chatsky loves his people very much, but not the Famus society of landowners and officials, but the Russian people, hardworking, wise, powerful. The distinctive feature of Chatsky as a strong man, in contrast to the prim Famus society, is the fullness of his feelings. In everything he shows true passion, he is always ardent in soul. He is hot, witty, eloquent, full of life, impatient. At the same time, Chatsky is the only openly positive hero in Griboyedov’s comedy. But one cannot call him exceptional and lonely. He is young, romantic, ardent, he has like-minded people: for example, professors of the Pedagogical Institute, who, according to Princess Tugoukhovskaya, practice schisms and lack of faith, these are crazy people inclined to study, this is the princess’s nephew Prince Fyodor, a chemist and botanist. Chatsky defends human rights to freely choose his own activities: travel, live in the countryside, focus his mind on science or devote himself to creative, high and beautiful arts.
Chatsky defends folk society and makes fun of Famus society, its life and behavior in his monologue:
Aren't these rich in robbery?
They found protection from the court in friends, in kinship.
Magnificent building chambers,
Where they spill out in feasts and extravagance.
We can conclude that Chatsky in the comedy represents the young, thinking generation of Russian society, its best part. A. I. Herzen wrote about Chatsky: The image of Chatsky, sad, restless in his irony, trembling with indignation, devoted to a dreamy ideal, appears at the last moment of the reign of Alexander I, on the eve of the uprising on St. Isaac's Square. This is a Decembrist, this is a man who ends the era of Peter the Great and is trying to discern, at least on the horizon, the promised land...
The theme of a strong man in the works of N.A. Nekrasova
CENTURIESDevelopment of Russian
literature and
culture
in the second
half of the 19th century At the beginning of the 19th century the process was completed
Russian national education
literature and the creation of Russian
literary language.
Played a huge role in this process
A. S. Pushkin, he was the founder
new direction in Russian literature
- realistic.
Further development of literature
led to the emergence of a critical
realism.
Its origin is associated with the name
N.V. Gogol, and flourished in
second half of the 19th century. The 60s of the 19th century entered into
Russian history as a period
greatest upsurge
social thought and
social struggle.
Defeat of Russia in Crimea
war, the rise of peasant revolts
forced the emperor
Alexander II to admit that “it is better
release from above than wait,
until they are overthrown from below.”
Abolition of serfdom and
the formation of capitalism ‒
major socio-economic events
the time in question.
The social upsurge of the post-reform period was the source of the incredible flowering of Russian science and art.
POST-REFORM SOCIAL RISETHE PERIOD WAS A SOURCE OF INCREDIBLE
THE FLOWERING OF RUSSIAN SCIENCE AND ART.
IN chronological table this period you will see
constellation of talents:
artists - G. G. Myasoedov, I. N. Kramskoy, N. N. Ge,
V. G. Perov, V. M. Vasnetsov, I. I. Levitan, I. E.
Repin, V. A. Serov and others;
composers - M. A. Balakirev, A. P. Borodin, Ts. A.
Cui, M. P. Mussorgsky, N. A. Rimsky-Korsakov and
etc.;
writers and poets - A. N. Ostrovsky, I. S. Turgenev,
N. A. Nekrasov, A. A. Fet, F. I. Tyutchev, L. N. Tolstoy,
F. M. Dostoevsky, N. S. Leskov, A. V. Druzhinin,
P. V. Annenkov, M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin and others.
"New people" in Russian literature
"NEW PEOPLE" IN RUSSIAN LITERATURECharacterizing the 60–70s
XIX century, L. N. Tolstoy
emphasized:
"All
This
turned over
And
only
fits."
IN
post-reform era
arena of social struggle
came out
"new
People"
‒
raznochinskaya
intelligentsia,
nihilists.
according to the dictionary of S. I. Ozhegov:
ACCORDING TO S. I. OZHEGOV’S DICTIONARY:Nihilist ‒ “free-thinking”
man, intellectual commoner,
sharp
negative
related
To
bourgeois-noble
traditions
And
customs, to serfdom
ideology."
Raznochinets ‒ “in the 19th century”
Russia:
intellectual,
Not
belonged to the nobility
comes from other classes,
estates." So, the “new people” were
come from poor families,
were well educated and
were engaged
intellectual
hard work, but the main thing is that they
related,
‒
rejection
existing
V
Russia
order.
They believed in the power of reason
looked at natural sciences
as the basis of all knowledge.
This type of hero is depicted in
novel by N. G. Chernyshevsky “What
do?" and in the novel by I.S.
Turgenev "Fathers and Sons".
When first meeting the main character of the novel “Fathers and Sons” Bazarov, I. S. Turgenev draws a portrait of a commoner.
AT YOUR FIRST MEETING THE MAIN CHARACTER OF THE NOVELI. S. TURGENEV DRAWS “FATHERS AND CHILDREN” WITH BAZAROV
PORTRAIT OF A GENERAL MAN.
Bazarov is a typical representative
"new
people",
which
to
simplified behavior to a minimum,
everyday
life,
care
for
appearance.
By
words
contemporary,
commoner
"...must
was
dress as simply as possible, have
simple environment, the most
dirty
work
do
By
opportunities for yourself - one
in a word,
break
with
everyone
ruinous
habits,
vaccinated
rich
bureaucracy and lordship." In the second half of the 19th century they were replaced
various
professional
associations of commoners; meeting at
editors of magazines and newspapers; at theater
figures; various student clubs
interests, as well as circles of specialists in
specific field of science.
In circles, groups, at parties they argued about
future fate of Russia, demanded
respect for the individual, his humanity
dignity, defended freedom of speech.
10.
A new hero of literature since the 1860s.became an active hero.
Unlike “superfluous people” (such as Onegin and
Pechorin: smart, talented, but not found
place in life) heroes of N. G. Chernyshevsky,
I. S. Turgeneva, I. A. Goncharova (Stolz)
hardworking, they care not so much about personal
how many social problems.
However, these heroes never found answers to
questions of concern to contemporaries. Russian
literature has not created an image of man
active,
energetic
And
busy
specific useful thing.
11. Problems of works of art
PROBLEMS OF FICTIONWORKS
During these same years there was a sharp struggle between:
Slavophiles,
who didn't think it was possible
imitate the West, as Russia
has its own history, culture, ideals
Westerners
(supporters use
European experience)
And
V. G. Belinsky,
A. I. Herzen,
I. S. Turgenev
A. I. Khomyakov,
K. S. Aksakov
A. N. Ostrovsky,
F. I. Tyutchev,
N. S. Leskov
12.
Democratizationliterature
brought
To
aggravation of the peasant theme that arose in
works by N. A. Nekrasov, I. S. Turgenev
etc.
The literature of the 1860s also raised women's
topic, and the position of the Russian woman
was considered from different aspects - in the family, in
public life.
Writers were interested in the life of peasant women
(N.A. Nekrasov), and deeds of sale (A.N. Ostrovsky, N.S.
Leskov), and noblewomen (L.N. Tolstoy, I.S.
Turgenev), etc.
13.
Russian literature of the 1860stried hard to find an answer to
the question “what to do?”
First on him in the same name
the novel tried to answer N.G.
Chernyshevsky.
Work
received
subtitle “From stories about
new people”, in which the author
stated his main theme.
Chernyshevsky covered the main
problems
public,
political
And
moral
life of Russia.
14. Novel in Russian literature
NOVEL IN RUSSIAN LITERATURENovel - literary
genre
epic
works
big
shapes,
V
which
narration
focused on destinies
individuals in their
respect
To
to the surrounding world, to
formation, development
characters
And
self-awareness.
15.
If we talk about the genre specificity of literaturesecond half of the 19th century centuries, they were presented and
monumental novels:
social,
psychological,
philosophical (I. S. Turgeneva, I. A. Goncharova, L. N.
Tolstoy, F. M. Dostoevsky),
Stories,
stories (by N. S. Leskova and A. P. Chekhov),
dramatic works (A. N. Ostrovsky and
A.P. Chekhov).
However, first of all, this is the heyday
"Russian novel".
The best examples were created in the 1860s–1970s
this genre.
16.
I. S. Turgenev ‒ “Rudin” (1855), “The Noble Nest”(1859), “On the Eve” (1860), “Fathers and Sons” (1862),
“Smoke” (1867), “Nove” (1877);
I. A. Goncharov - “Oblomov” (1859), “Cliff” (1869);
F. M. Dostoevsky ‒ “Humiliated and Insulted”
(1861), "Crime and Punishment" (1866), "The Idiot"
(1869), "The Demons" (1871), "The Teenager" (1875), "Brothers"
Karamazov" (1880);
N. S. Leskov - “Nowhere” (1864), “Soborians” (1872);
L. N. Tolstoy ‒ “War and Peace” (1869), “Anna
Karenina" (1877).
17.
The novels of I. S. Turgenev reflect the spiritualmood of the time. He's one of the first
portrayed a new hero - a commoner democrat, a nihilist, and in his works
the ideal of an active fighter appeared.
Turgenev created a whole gallery of images
Russian women - progressive views,
deeply moral high impulses,
ready for heroism.
18.
Discovery in world artistic culturebecame
image
L.
N.
Tolstoy
psychological portrait in motion and
contradictions.
Tolstoy using psychological analysis
for the first time in Russian literature showed that
personality is changeable, just like life is changeable.
Human
smart, educated, capable
spill the beans; kind can
show cruelty and heartlessness.
The work of L.N. Tolstoy is an attempt to capture
“fluid substance” of the mental life of the heroes.
19.
Huge contribution to the development of newRussian novel contributed by F.M.
Dostoevsky.
Studying
character
"private"
a person who lives in a narrow
little world,
Fedor
Mikhailovich
depicted how titanic
struggle
is happening
V
soul
person making a choice
between good and evil.
Dostoevsky's heroes are looking for the Truth, for
its comprehension pays off
suffering.
20. Development of dramaturgy
DEVELOPMENT OF DRAMATURGYThe development of Russian drama in the second half of the 19th century is associated with
first of all with the name of A. N. Ostrovsky.
Continuing the traditions of D.I. Fonvizin, A.S.
Griboyedov, N.V. Gogol, A.N. Ostrovsky
created a national dramaturgy, opened
new heroes and new conflicts that
reflect the events of Russian reality
of that time.
He wrote comedies (“Not everything goes to the cat
Maslenitsa", "Truth is good, but happiness
better"), psychological dramas ("The Last
sacrifice",
"Dowry"),
social dramas (“Poverty is not a vice”,
“The Thunderstorm”), satirical comedies (“Forest”,
"Wolves and Sheep"), historical dramas
(“Kozma Zakharyich Minin-Sukhoruk”, “Dream on
Volga"), fairy tale ("Snow Maiden").
21.
Invaluable contribution to the development of Russian dramacontributed by A.P. Chekhov (late 19th - early 20th century).
Chekhov set himself the main goal of bringing closer
dramaturgy to reality.
There are no villains and righteous people in life, there
people's characters are smaller, but more complex, that's why
there is no such obvious division.
That is why it is enough to unravel the hero
difficult.
It does not manifest itself in actions (it simply does not
major actions), there is no action as such,
there is no goal towards which the hero is moving, what does he
wants to achieve.
Speech
heroes
practically
Not
individualized.
There are no individuals here, everything is here
smoothed out, blurry, like in reality.
Chekhov said that in life everything is simpler in appearance,
but much more complicated internally
22. Disputes about art
CONTROVERSIES ABOUT ARTIn the second half of the 19th century, there was a struggle in Russian literature
Pushkin and Gogol directions.
Writers - heirs of Pushkin demanded independence
literature from the authorities and the people, the creator was represented as a god. This
the movement of writers of the second half of the 19th century was called
pure art.
Writers of this trend considered it programmatic for themselves
A. S. Pushkin’s poem “The Poet and the Crowd”, especially
its final lines:
Not for everyday worries,
Not for gain, not for battles,
We were born to inspire
For sweet sounds and prayers.
The ideologists of “pure art” were V.V. Druzhinin, P.V.
Annenkov, V.V. Botkin; poets A. N. Maikov, A. K. Tolstoy, A. A.
Pleshcheev and others.
23.
The oppositepoint
vision
Gogol's followers expressed.
In the poem " Dead Souls"(beginning of the first
volumes) N.V. Gogol compared two types
writers: creators of art for art's sake
and the whistle-blowing writer, regarding himself as
second type.
His ideas were supported by V. G. Belinsky,
who believed that “to take away from art
right to serve the public interest
- does not mean to elevate, but to humiliate him,
because it means depriving him of himself
living force, i.e. thoughts, to do it
subject
some
sybaristic
(sybarite - idle, spoiled
luxury
Human)
pleasures,
a toy for idle sloths..."
24. Journalism
JOURNALISMIn the second half of the 19th century in Russia
Journalism began to actively develop.
Magazines
"Contemporary",
"Bell",
"Russian
word",
"Spark",
"Russian
Vestnik", "Bulletin of Europe" and others
played a huge role in the development of Russian
literature and art.
"Contemporary"
under
management
N. A. Nekrasov became a printed organ
revolutionary democrats.
Political and critical departments in
this
magazine
led
N. G. Chernyshevsky, he acted as a critic
and publicist.
25.
In 1856, N. G. Chernyshevsky introducededitors
"Contemporary"
N.A. Dobrolyubova.
Articles
Chernyshevsky and Dobrolyubov made
Sovremennik magazine popular in
environment advanced people Russia.
IN
articles
Dobrolyubova
were developed
And
many
theoretical issues of aesthetics and
literary studies.
In 1866 the magazine was banned
censorship.
Ideas of “Contemporary” N. A. Nekrasov
continued in the magazine “Domestic
notes" (1868).
26.
Oppositional tothese magazines were the magazines “Russian
Vestnik”, “Russian Word”, etc.
Gain
roles
literature
V
social life entailed
is a development of criticism.
Literary criticism of the second half
XIX century was represented by names
N.
G.
Chernyshevsky,
N.
A.
Dobrolyubova, A. A. Grigorieva, A. V.
Druzhinina, N.N. Strakhova, D.I.
Pisarev, I. A. Antonovich, etc. and
had a huge impact on the development
literature.
27. Poetry of the second half of the 19th century
POETRY OF THE SECOND HALF OF THE 19TH CENTURYFrom the contradictions between “Gogol” and
"Pushkin" directions in Russian
literature of the second half of the 19th century
there was a confrontation between two poetic
camps:
“pure art” and civil literature.
28.
Under the conventional definition of “pure art” or"art for art's sake" can be combined
the work of a number of original Russian poets.
It is believed that at the head of this trend in Russian
poetry stood F.I. Tyutchev and A.A. Fet, to the representatives
“pure art” includes Ya. P. Polonsky, A. N.
Apukhtin, A. N. Maykov, L. A. Meya, N. F. Shcherbina.
These
poets
united
general
traditional
the idea of poetry, which is higher than ordinary life,
immediate problems, social and political
questions. However, it would be wrong to assume that poetry
“pure art” was far from life. Her sphere is
the spiritual world of man, the world of feelings, philosophical and
aesthetic quests, search for answers to eternal questions
being.
29.
Representatives of “pure art” saw themselves inthe role of defenders of genuine creativity,
independent of fashion, momentary ideas and
political passions, they argued that poetry
cannot help but possess spiritual beauty and
moral perfection, because she
divine in nature, and the poet carries
responsibility before the Almighty himself.
30.
Representatives of “pure art” triedcomprehend serious philosophical aspects
being; created wonderful poems about
love; contributed to the development of Russian
lyrics.
Wonderful, highly patriotic lines about
Russia F.I. Tyutchev to this day are
a striking characteristic of the Russian original
character:
You can't understand Russia with your mind,
The general arshin cannot be measured;
She has a special personality -
You can only believe in Russia.
31.
Supporters of the camp of revolutionary democratsdeclared themselves resolute opponents
called "pure art".
Civil poetry in Russian literature second
half of the 19th century is represented primarily
creativity of N. A. Nekrasov, as well as V. S. Kurochkin,
D. D. Minaeva, N. P. Ogareva, A. N. Pleshcheeva, A. M.
Zhemchuzhnikov, who were
conscious
exponents of contemporary political and
social sentiments.
Just like prose writers, representatives of the “natural
schools", they used material in poetry
modern reality.
32.
In the field of poetry, Nekrasov accomplished the same thing that Gogol did inprose, ‒ expanded the national specifics
works, brought literature closer to the people, made
Russian peasants as heroes of their poetry.
Democratization of Nekrasov's lyrics
influenced
on
style,
language,
its metrorhythmic features
poetry.
The poet created varieties of genres:
elegy on social issues,
parody romance and ode; entered into
literature
highly social
poetic story and lyrical
poem, review poem, peasant
epic. His works often
combines several traditional
genres.
33.
A special place in the debate betweenrepresentatives of “pure art” and
civil
poetry
belongs
A.A. Grigoriev, who believed that
existence and struggle of these two
directions - a natural process
development of post-Pushkin literature
period.
“The true poets, anyway, said
whether they: “I am not a poet - I am a citizen,” or:
“We were born for inspiration, for
sweet sounds and prayers,” they served and
serve one thing: the ideal, differing only in
forms of expression of one's service.
34. Summary
RESULTRussian poetry of the second half of the 19th century
all the variety of topics, ideas, trends
became a manifestation of the spirit of the Russian people.
Thus, the development of literature in
the second half of the 19th century went differently
directions, and put forward a whole galaxy
greatest Russian poets and writers, whose
names gained worldwide fame.
During the transitional period, the manifestation of the heroic in the “ordinary” for writers who wanted to preserve the traditions of Chernyshevsky and not lose the “track” had quite stable forms. The organization of free schools and especially Sunday schools for adults, the establishment of labor associations and partnerships, propaganda activities among workers and artisans, “going to the people” as a paramedic or a rural teacher - these are the few options for socially useful activities that were offered by literature at that time .
Of course, a little time will pass and some of these “small things” will cease to be the ideal of public life. Historically promising will be the participation of “new people” in organizational and propaganda work with factory workers (G. Uspensky, “Devastation”; I. Omulevsky, “Step by Step”; K. Stanyukovich, “No Exodus”; V. Bervi- Flerovsky, “For Life and Death”, etc.).
The undoubted merit of democratic fiction was the exposure of the political betrayal of bourgeois-liberal figures, the logical consequence of which was the advent of the era of “white terror” (N. Blagoveshchensky, “Before the Dawn”; I. Kushchevsky, “Nikolai Negorev, or the Prosperous Russian”, etc.) . At the turn of the 60-70s. some writers were alarmed by the adventurist actions of the Bakuninists - “flash-starters”, not supported by painstaking menial activities among the peasantry (N. Bazhin, “Calling”).
In the conditions of the most complex literary and social situation that developed at the turn of the 60s and 70s, the work of N. G. Chernyshevsky, exiled to Siberia, on the novel “Prologue” was timely and relevant.
The new work of the revolutionary writer took into account the changing socio-political situation in the country and abroad, the danger of Bakunin’s secret calls to arouse unprepared peasant uprisings and focused attention younger generation fighters on the political aspects of the fight against tsarism.
The plot-compositional structure of the novel consists of two parts, of which the second part, pushed “outward from its frame, from the first part,” is “directly addressed to the present” of the 70s. (from A. V. Karyakina’s observations on the composition of “Prologue”).
However, it is not only Levitsky’s Diary that directs the reader to search for “chances of the future.” In general, the entire novel, which retrospectively comprehends the experience of the collapse of hopes for social change in Russia during the first revolutionary situation, was programmatic for the coming decade.
This circumstance determines both the genre structure of the “Prologue” and new conflict situations in its plot, both different from “What to do?” typological solutions to the image of a revolutionary, providing for other accents in the artistic interpretation of the “special” and “ordinary”.
The writer’s different creative ideas, conditioned by the historical circumstances of the activities of Russian revolutionaries, led to the creation of two novels that are not similar in genre. In the conditions of the maturing revolutionary situation of the early 60s.
Chernyshevsky turns to the genre of the socio-philosophical novel (“What is to be done?”), and during the period of the collapse of the revolutionary situation, when there were no longer opportunities for carrying out a social revolution, when, despite this, among the populist youth the course for an immediate peasant revolution continued to be pursued (“rebellion”), he deliberately rearranges the ideological and artistic accents, creating a novel of a slightly different genre - a historical and political novel.
Using historical experience ten years ago, the writer this time - in the novel "Prologue" - brings to the fore the events of the political struggle, abandoning the artistic development of socio-economic conflicts and the idea of immediate social revolution.
This explains the fundamental differences between the underground revolutionary Rakhmetov, who is preparing a revolution in illegal conditions (under which meetings and ideological clashes with “enlightened men” are excluded), and the public figure Volgin, who is waging an open political struggle against high-ranking opponents in legal conditions.
All this ultimately determined the ideological and artistic originality of Rakhmetov and Volgin, the external dissimilarity between the “exceptionalism” of a “special person” and the “ordinariness” of a family-man journalist endowed with “simple human qualities.”
Volgin's path of political activity, which turned out to be most suitable at a time when there is no open revolutionary action of the masses, however, cannot be canonized as the only and mandatory one in all the rapidly changing circumstances of the liberation struggle.
Chernyshevsky in the “Prologue” does not lose sight of Rakhmetov’s version. He foresees the arrival of a new revolutionary situation, when the need for professional underground revolutionaries like Rakhmetov will be acute again.
A correct understanding of Volgin's views on the prospects of a social movement sheds additional light on the somewhat mysterious figure of Levitsky, a Rakhmetov-type revolutionary who apparently failed in his attempt to lead a spontaneous peasant revolt (which proved Volgin's foresight in their disputes). The relationship between Volgin and Levitsky is developing in the direction of implementing the revolutionary program of the first of them, which provides for the unity of political and social actions.
Volgin's skepticism regarding the prospects of the revolutionary movement in Russia is temporary and local in nature. It goes back directly only to the next, and not the final, stage of the political struggle on the peasant question.
The nobility and liberals have so far managed to postpone the threat of the peasant revolution for some time, until the people are convinced that they are being deceived. Hence, political struggle, aimed at exposing the predatory essence of the tsarist reform, acquires primary importance. The new “disappointment of society” is one of the “chances of the future.”
When determining the objective historical patterns of the new revolutionary upsurge in Russia, Volgin, in addition to taking into account the political situation in Russian society, also has in mind the revolutionary events in Western Europe. Strengthening revolutionary ties with Europe is the second “chance of the future.”
This program of the relationship between advanced Russia and the Western European revolutionary movement, put forward at the turn of the 60s and 70s, introduces a qualitatively new moment in the evolution of the image of the revolutionary from Rakhmetov to Volgin. It was historically justified by the rise of the proletarian movement in Western Europe (in particular, in France), the activities of the First International and the interest in all these events that Chernyshevsky’s students from the Russian Section of the International showed.
Considering it taking into account the new tasks that faced the “new people” at the turn of the 60s and 70s, we will see in this evolution not an expression of the crisis of Chernyshevsky’s revolutionary-democratic ideology, but, on the contrary, the desire of the author of “Prologue” to raise it to a new level, to outline the prospects for social upsurge in the country.
Chernyshevsky’s focus on strengthening and expanding the political forms of struggle against tsarism and strengthening ties with the revolutionary West was precisely the creative development of the revolutionary-democratic ideology of the sixties at the turn of the 60s and 70s.
The evolution of the image of a revolutionary from Rakhmetov to Volgin is relative. It does not mean a rejection of the ideological and artistic achievements of the novel “What is to be done?” Ideally, a new type of revolutionary should combine Rakhmetov’s and Volgin’s principles.
However, in Russian revolutionary movement social and political action long time were carried out in isolation from each other, and this did not provide vital prerequisites for creating such a synthetic image. And yet, the trends in the artistic embodiment of the heroic, “exceptional” in the “ordinary” (with different combinations of “Rakhmetov” and “Volgin” typological varieties) in the democratic literature of the 70-80s. were quite noticeable.
The search for a hero of modern times during the heyday of revolutionary populism took place in difficult social and literary conditions. After the failures caused by “going to the people” (1873-1875), advanced democratic fiction had to overcome two trends that were far from Chernyshevsky’s artistic traditions: on the one hand, the idealization of communal village orders and the elevation of people with “hearts of gold” to the rank of real heroes, empty-headed romantic dreamers; on the other hand, the revival of the Turgenev type of intellectual with Rudinsky eloquence and Hamletian duality.
Democratic writers in their works reflected the collapse of illusions inspired by the Lavrists and Bakuninists (P. Zasodimsky, “Chronicle of the Village of Smurin”; A. Osipovich-Novodvorsky, “An Episode from the Life of Neither a Peahen nor a Crow”; V. Bervi-Flerovsky, “On life and death" - the third part of the book). Dialectical understanding of “historical illusions” allowed new heroes to free themselves from confusion and despondency, states characteristic of people of the “neither peahen nor crow” type, and to look for effective ways of struggle.
In this process of overcoming the crisis caused by the failure of “going to the people,” Chernyshevsky’s artistic method turned out to be salutary. The ideal of a person of the Rakhmetov type inspires Vera Neladova to struggle and hardship (V.L., “According to different roads”, 1880) and the “bride” of the revolutionary Zhenichka (A. Osipovich-Novodvorsky, “Auntie”, 1880). The heroes of A. Osipovich-Novodvorsky, Iv. go to the revolutionary underground. Ivanovich (Svedentsov), S. Smirnova, O. Shapir, K. Stanyukovich, P. Zasodimsky.
Rakhmetov continued to be a literary and artistic reference point for many “seventies” writers during the second revolutionary situation. And this corresponded to the revolutionary practice of the “landers” and “People’s Volunteers”, among whom stood out the organizers of the Rakhmetov warehouse - Dmitry Lizogub, Alexander Mikhailov, Stepan Khalturin, Sofya Perovskaya, Andrei Zhelyabov - artistically captured by S. Stepnyak-Kravchinsky in “Underground Russia” precisely in Rakhmetov's version.
"In a novel that claims to be modern meaning“, a positive hero must be heroic, or rather, he will certainly be like that,” states the revolutionary Aleksey Ivanovich in A. Osipovich-Novodvorsky.
At the same time, in embodiment heroic character democratic (populist) fiction at the turn of the 70s-80s. strengthened the “feeling of sacrifice, doom and loneliness.”30 The heroic was combined with the tragic, the romantic principle intensified in conveying the unequal duel of lone heroes with the autocracy (“Andrei Kozhukhov” by S. Stepnyak-Kravchinsky).
The aesthetic revaluation of the concept of the heroic is socially and psychologically justified by the revolutionary practice of the “People's Will”, divorced from the mass popular movement.
History of Russian literature: in 4 volumes / Edited by N.I. Prutskov and others - L., 1980-1983.
There has always been a special attitude towards women in Russian literature, and until a certain time the main place in it was occupied by a man - a hero, with whom the problems posed by the authors were associated. Karamzin was one of the first to draw attention to the fate of poor Liza, who, as it turned out, also knew how to love selflessly. And Pushkin portrayed Tatyana Larina, who knows how not only to love deeply, but also to give up her feelings when the fate of a loved one depends on it.
The situation changed radically in the second half of the nineteenth century, when, due to the growth of the revolutionary movement, many traditional views on the place of women in society changed. Writers of different views saw the role of women in life differently.
One can speak about the peculiar polemics of Chernyshevsky and Tolstoy using the example of the novels “What is to be done?” and “War and Peace”.
Chernyshevsky, being a democratic revolutionary, advocated the equality of men and women, valued intelligence in a woman, saw and respected a person in her. Vera Pavlovna is free in her right to love the one she chooses. She works equally with men and does not depend financially on her husband. Her workshop is proof of her strength as an organizer and entrepreneur. Vera Pavlovna is in no way inferior to men: neither in the ability to think logically, nor in a sober assessment of the social situation in the country.
This was what a woman should have been like in the minds of Chernyshevsky, and everyone who professed the ideas of revolutionary democracy.
But as many as there were supporters of women's emancipation, there were just as many opponents, one of whom was L.N. Tolstoy.
In the novel “Anna Karenina” the author also raised the problem of free love. But if Vera Pavlovna did not have children, then Tolstoy showed a heroine who should think not only about her happiness, but also about the well-being of her children. Anna's love for Vronsky negatively affected the fate of Seryozha and the newborn girl, who was legally considered Karenina, but was Vronsky's daughter. The mother’s action left a dark mark on the children’s lives.
Tolstoy showed his ideal in the image of Natasha Rostova. For him, she was the true woman.
Throughout the novel, we follow how a little playful girl becomes a real mother, a loving wife, and a homemaker.
From the very beginning, Tolstoy emphasizes that there is not an ounce of falsehood in Natasha; she senses unnaturalness and lies more acutely than anyone else. With her appearance at the name day in a living room full of official ladies, she disrupts this atmosphere of pretense. All her actions are subordinated to feelings, not reason. She even sees people in her own way: Boris is gray, narrow, like a mantel clock, and Pierre is rectangular, red-brown. For her, these characteristics are enough to understand who is who.
Natasha is called “living life” in the novel. With her energy, she inspires those around her to a new life. With support and understanding, the heroine practically saves her mother after the death of Petrusha. Prince Andrei, who managed to say goodbye to all the joys of life, seeing Natasha, felt that all was not lost for him. And after the engagement, the whole world for Andrei was divided into two parts: one - she, where everything is light, the other - everything else, where there is darkness. “Why should I care what the sovereign says in the Council? Will this make me any happier? - says Bolkonsky.
Natasha can be forgiven for her passion for Kuragin. This was the only time her intuition failed her. All her actions are subject to momentary impulses, which cannot always be explained. She did not understand Andrei’s desire to postpone the wedding for a year. Natasha tried to live every second, and a year for her was equal to eternity.
Tolstoy endows his heroine with all the best qualities, moreover, she rarely evaluates her actions, more often relying on her inner moral sense.
Like all his favorite heroes, the author sees Natasha Rostova as part of the people. He emphasizes this in the scene at his uncle’s, when “the countess, raised by a French emigrant,” danced no worse than Agafya. This feeling of unity with the people, as well as true patriotism they push Natasha to give carts to the wounded when leaving Moscow, leaving almost all her things in the city.
Even the highly spiritual Princess Marya, who at first did not love the pagan Natasha, understood her and accepted her for who she is.
Natasha Rostova was not very smart, and that was not important for Tolstoy. “Now, when he (Pierre) told all this to Natasha, he experienced that rare pleasure that women give when listening to a man - not smart women who, while listening, try to remember what they are told in order to enrich their minds and if necessary, retell the same; but the pleasure that real women give, gifted with the ability to select and absorb into themselves all the best that exists in the manifestations of a man.”
Natasha realized herself as a mother and wife. Tolstoy emphasizes that she herself raised all her children (an impossible thing for a noblewoman), but for the author this is absolutely natural.
Despite the diversity of female characters in Russian literature, they are united by the fact that around themselves they try to create harmony of feelings and peace for their loved ones.
Rereading Pushkin, Turgenev, Tolstoy, we experience it again and again together with Tatyana Larina, Natalya Lasunskaya, Natasha Rostova. They show an example of pure love, devotion, fidelity, self-sacrifice. These images live in us, sometimes answering many of our questions, helping us not to make mistakes, to take the only right step. These images contain not only external beauty, but also the beauty of the soul, calling us to improve spiritually.
FEMALE IMAGES IN RUSSIAN LITERATURE (II version)
It is impossible to imagine world literature without the image of a woman. Even without being the main character of the work, she brings some special character to the story. Since the beginning of the world, men have admired the representatives of the fair half of humanity, idolized them and worshiped them. Already in the myths of Ancient Greece we meet the gentle beauty Aphrodite, the wise Athena, and the treacherous Hera. These women goddesses were recognized as equal to men, their advice was listened to, they were trusted with the fate of the world, and they were feared.
And at the same time, the woman was always surrounded by mystery, her actions led to confusion and bewilderment. To delve into the psychology of a woman and understand her is the same as solving one of the oldest mysteries of the Universe.
Russian writers have always given women a special place in their works. Everyone, of course, saw her in their own way, but for everyone she was support, hope, and an object of admiration. Turgenev sang the image of a persistent, honest girl, capable of making any sacrifice for the sake of love; Nekrasov admired the image of a peasant woman who “stops a galloping horse and enters a burning hut”; for Pushkin, the main virtue of a woman was her marital fidelity.
Lev Nikolaevich Tolstoy in the epic “War and Peace” created unforgettable images of Natasha Rostova, Princess Marya, Helen, Sonya. They are all different in their characters, outlook on life, and attitude towards their loved ones.
Natasha Rostova... This is a fragile, gentle girl, but she has strong character. It feels that closeness to the people, nature, and origins that the author so valued. He admired Natasha’s ability to feel someone else’s grief and pain.
Loving, Natasha gives all of herself, her loved one replaces her - family and friends. Natasha is natural, with her charm and charm she returns to Prince Andrei the desire to live.
A difficult test for her was the meeting with Anatoly Kuragin. All her hopes are lost, her dreams are broken, Prince Andrei will never forgive the betrayal, although she is simply confused in her feelings.
Some time after the death of Prince Andrei, Natasha realizes that she loves Pierre, and she is ashamed. She believes that she is betraying the memory of her lover. But Natasha’s feelings often prevail over her mind, and this is also her charm.
Another female character that caught my attention in the novel is Princess Marya. This heroine is so beautiful inside that her appearance doesn't matter. Her eyes emitted such light that her face lost its ugliness.
Princess Marya sincerely believes in God, she believes that only He has the right to forgive and have mercy. She scolds herself for unkind thoughts, for disobedience to her father, and tries to see only the good in others. She is proud and noble, like her brother, but her pride does not offend her, because kindness - an integral part of her nature - softens this feeling that is sometimes unpleasant to others.
In my opinion, the image of Maria Volkonskaya is the image of a guardian angel. She protects everyone for whom she feels even the slightest responsibility. Tolstoy believes that a person like Princess Marya deserves much more than an alliance with Anatoly Kuragin, who never understood what treasure he had lost; however, he had completely different moral values.
In the work “War and Peace,” the author, admiring the courage and resilience of the Russian people, also extols Russian women. Princess Marya, who feels offended at the mere thought that the French will be on her estate; Natasha, who was ready to leave home in whatever she was wearing, but give up all the carts for the wounded.
But the author not only admires the woman. Helen Bezukhova in the work is the personification of vice. She is beautiful, but her beauty is not attractive because inside she is simply ugly. She has no soul, she does not understand the suffering of another person. Having a child with her husband is something terrible for her. She pays dearly for Boris choosing her.
Helen evokes only contempt and pity.
Tolstoy's attitude towards women is ambiguous. In the novel, he emphasizes that external beauty is not the main thing in a person. The spiritual world and inner beauty mean much more.
Kuprin also believes that appearances can be deceiving and a woman is able to use her attractiveness to achieve the goals she needs.
Shurochka Nikolaeva from the story “The Duel” is a complex nature. She does not love her husband, but she lives with him and forces him to study, because only he is able, by entering the academy, to get her out of the outback in which they live. She leaves her loved one only because he is weaker than her, unable to give her what she wants. Without any regret, she stifles in herself the feeling that people wait for all their lives. But she evokes neither respect for her strong will nor admiration.
Shurochka uses Yuri Romashov because she knows about his love for her. She is so immoral that she is able to persuade Romashov not to shoot, knowing full well that he will die tomorrow. And all for himself, because he loves himself more than anyone. Her main goal is to create for herself best conditions life, the methods do not matter at all. She steps over people and doesn't feel guilty.
The image of Shurochka is not attractive, although she is beautiful, her business qualities are repulsive: there is no true femininity in her, which, in my opinion, implies warmth, sincerity, sacrifice.
Both Tolstoy and Kuprin are unanimous in their opinion that a woman should remain a woman. Many writers transferred the character traits of their loved ones to the images of the main heroines of their works. I think this is why the image of a woman in Russian literature is so striking in its brightness, originality, and strength of emotional experiences.
Beloved women have always served as a source of inspiration for men. Everyone has their own ideal of women, but at all times, representatives of the stronger sex have admired women’s devotion, ability to sacrifice, and patience.
A true woman will forever remain inextricably linked with her family, children, and home.
And men will never cease to be surprised by women’s whims, seek explanations for women’s actions, and fight for women’s love.
FEMALE IMAGES IN RUSSIAN LITERATURE (III version)
For the first time, a bright female image in the center of the work appeared in Karamzin’s “Poor Liza.” Before this, female images, of course, were present in the works, but their inner world was not given enough attention. And it is natural that the female image was first clearly manifested in sentimentalism, because sentimentalism is an image of feelings, and a woman is always full of emotions and is characterized by the manifestation of feelings.
The female image and its depiction changed with the development of literature. IN different directions literature, it was different, but as literature developed and psychologism deepened, the psychologically female image, like all images, became more complex and the inner world became more significant. If in medieval novels the ideal of a female image is a noble, virtuous beauty and that’s it, then in realism the ideal becomes more complicated, and the woman’s inner world plays a significant role.
The female image is most clearly manifested in love, jealousy, passion; and, in order to more clearly express the ideal of the female image, the author often puts the woman in conditions where she fully expresses her feelings, but, of course, not only to depict the ideal, although this also plays a role.
A woman’s feelings determine her inner world, and often, if a woman’s inner world is ideal for the author, he uses the woman as an indicator, i.e. her attitude towards this or that hero corresponds to the attitude of the author.
Often, through the ideal of a woman in a novel, a person is “purified” and “born again,” as, for example, in F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “Crime and Punishment.”
The development of the ideal of the female image in Russian literature can be traced through the works of the 19th century.
In my essay, I want to consider the ideal of the female image of the 1st half of the 19th century, in Pushkin’s novel “Eugene Onegin” - Tatyana Larina and the ideal of the 2nd half of the 19th century, in L. N. Tolstoy’s novel “War and Peace” - Natasha Rostova .
What exactly is Pushkin’s ideal? Of course it's harmony human soul and just harmony. At the beginning of his work, Pushkin wrote the poem “The Beauty Who Sniffed Tobacco,” which humorously depicts the problem that Pushkin faced in the future - the lack of harmony.
Of course, the ideal of a female image for Pushkin is, first of all, a harmonious woman, calm and close to nature. In the novel “Eugene Onegin” this is, of course, Tatyana Larina.
The ideal of L.N. Tolstoy is a natural life and a person who lives a natural life. Natural life is life in all its manifestations, with all the natural feelings inherent in man - love, hatred, friendship. And of course, the ideal female image in the novel “War and Peace” is Natasha Rostova. She is natural, and this naturalness is contained in her from birth.
If you look at the appearance of Natasha and Tatyana, they seem completely different.
Pushkin describes Tatyana like this.
So, she was called Tatyana.
Not your sister's beauty.
Nor the freshness of her rosy complexion.
She wouldn't attract anyone's attention.
Dick, sad, silent.
Like a forest deer is timid,
She is in her own family.
The girl seemed like a stranger.
She didn't know how to caress
To your father, nor to your mother;
Child herself, in a crowd of children
I didn’t want to play or jump.
And often alone all day
She sat silently by the window.
The complete opposite of Tatyana is the lively, cheerful Natasha: “Black-eyed, with a big mouth, an ugly, but lively girl...” And Natasha’s relationship with her relatives is completely different: “Turning away from her father, she (Natasha) ran up to her mother and, without paying any attention, attention to her stern remark, hid her flushed face in the lace of her mother’s mantilla and laughed (...), she fell on her mother and laughed so loudly and loudly that everyone, even the prim guest, laughed against their will.” Different families, characters, relationships, appearance... What could Tatyana and Natasha have in common?
But the most important thing is that Tatyana and Natasha are both Russian at heart. Tatyana spoke and wrote Russian poorly, read foreign literature, but still:
Tatiana (Russian soul),
Without knowing why,
With her cold beauty
I loved Russian winter.
About Natasha, Tolstoy writes: “Where, how, when did this countess, raised by a French emigrant, suck into herself from that Russian air that she breathed, this spirit, where did she get these techniques that education should have long ago supplanted? But these spirits and techniques were the same, inimitable, unstudied, Russian ones that her uncle expected from her.” This Russian spirit is embedded in Natasha and Tatiana, and therefore they are harmonious.
Both Natasha and Tatyana are yearning for love. And when Prince Andrei began to go to the Rostovs after the ball, it seemed to Natasha “that even when she first saw Prince Andrei in Otradnoye, she fell in love with him. She seemed to be frightened by this strange, unexpected happiness, that the one whom she had chosen back then (she was firmly convinced of this), that the same one had met her again, and, it seemed, was not indifferent to her.” Tatiana has:
Tatyana listened with annoyance
Such gossip, but secretly
With inexplicable joy
I couldn't help but think about this:
And a thought arose in the heart;
The time has come, she fell in love. (...)
(...) Long-time heartache
Her young breasts were tight;
The soul was waiting... for someone.
And she waited... The eyes opened;
She said: it's him!
Natasha wanted to be noticed, to be chosen to dance at the ball; and when Prince Andrei “chooses” her, Natasha decides that she herself chose him and fell in love at first sight. Natasha really wants this to be true love.
Tatyana also chooses Onegin purely intuitively: she saw him only once before she decided that she was in love.
Although both Natasha and Tatyana were waiting for “someone,” still, in my opinion, Natasha wanted to love and be loved, and Tatyana only wanted to love. And Natasha decides that she loves the one by whom she is already loved; and Tatyana, completely unaware of Onegin, unaware of his feelings, fell in love with him.
Natasha and Tatyana wanted to be happy, and, of course, they want to know what awaits them in the future. Both girls are telling fortunes for Christmas; but neither Tatyana nor Natasha saw anything in the mirror when they were telling fortunes, and both were afraid to tell fortunes in the bathhouse. Natasha is very surprised that she doesn’t see anything in the mirror, but believes that she is to blame. Tatyana tries all the fortune-telling: one after another, but not a single one bodes well for her happiness. Natasha’s fortune telling also did not bode well. Of course, what Sonya invented while looking in the mirror seemed possible and true to Natasha. When a person loves, he naturally tries to find out what will happen, whether he will be happy; so are Natasha and Tatyana.
It is characteristic that when both heroines find themselves in almost the same situation, they behave differently. After Onegin, having rejected Tatiana’s love, leaves, Tatiana cannot live as before:
And in cruel loneliness
Her passion burns more intensely,
And about distant Onegin
Her heart speaks louder.
As for Natasha, at the time when Prince Andrei leaves for his father, and Natasha decides that he abandoned her, then: “The next day after this conversation, Natasha put on that old dress, which she was especially famous for the clothes he delivered in the morning cheerfulness, and in the morning she began her old way of life, from which she fell behind after the ball.” Of course, Natasha was worried and waited for Prince Andrei, but this state is not typical for the always so lively and cheerful Natasha.
What is characteristic of both girls is that they love not an ideal at all, but a real person. Tatyana, when she, having spent many hours in Onegin’s “cell,” realized what he really was like, she did not stop loving him. Natasha knew Pierre for quite a long time and quite well, but still she loved him, and not some kind of ideal.
It is interesting that Natasha, being married, does not occupy any place in secular society. And Tatyana, who could only stay in the village, becomes a real society lady. And although they both remain harmonious in their souls, Natasha also lives happily. And Tatyana:
How Tatyana has changed!
How firmly she stepped into her role!
Like an oppressive rank
Accepted appointments soon!
Who would dare to look for a tender girl
In this majestic, in this careless
Legislator's hall?
Natasha also changed, but became a woman completely opposite to Tatyana. Natasha disappeared into her family, and she simply did not have time for social events. It is possible that if Tatyana had found her happiness in her family, she would not have been so famous in society either.
In my opinion, the heroines are most clearly characterized by the situation when they realize that they love one person, but are connected with another. This is how Tatyana, being married, meets Onegin; and when Onegin confesses his love to her, she says:
I love you (why lie?),
But I was given to another;
And I will be faithful to him forever.
As for Natasha, after her engagement to Prince Andrei, she meets Anatoly Kuragin and decides that she is in love and succumbs to his persuasion to run away with him. Since Natasha is natural from birth, she cannot love one person and be the bride of another. For her it is so natural that a person can love and fall out of love.
For Tatyana, it is impossible to destroy the marriage, because this would destroy her spiritual harmony.
How are Natasha and Tatyana similar?
They are both harmonious, close to nature and love nature, they have a Russian soul, and they both wanted to love, and, of course, they are natural in their own way.
Tatyana cannot be as natural as Natasha; she has her own moral principles, the violation of which will lead to a violation of the harmony in her soul.
For Natasha, what is right is when she is happy, if she loves, she should be with this person, and this is natural.
As a result, the ideals of the female image between Tolstoy and Pushkin are different, although they overlap.
For Tolstoy’s ideal, finding one’s place in life and living a natural life is very important, but for all this, the harmony of the human soul is also needed.
For Pushkin, the ideal should be harmonious; harmony of the soul is the main thing, and you can live a natural life without harmony of the soul (for example, Tatyana Larina’s parents).
The ideal of the female image... How many of them have already been and will still be. But ideals in works of genius are not repeated, they only intersect or are completely opposite.
FEMALE IMAGES IN THE WORKS OF A. S. PUSHKIN AND L. N. TOLSTOY
Russian women... When you hear these words, extraordinary images from the novels of A. S. Pushkin, I. S. Turgenev, L. N. Tolstoy arise. And it is not at all necessary that they perform feats. The heroines of Pushkin, Turgenev, Tolstoy are unusually sweet and attractive. All of them are strong and remarkable for their spiritual qualities. They know how to love and hate in full force, without omissions. They are strong, integral individuals.
The image of Tatyana Larina, as the main character of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin’s novel “Eugene Onegin,” is the most perfect among the other female characters in the novel.
Tatyana and the formation of her character were greatly influenced by the impressions of her native nature and her closeness to nanny Filipyevna. Parents and the society of local nobles that surrounded the Larin family in the village did not have a significant influence on it. Special attention Pushkin pays attention to Tatyana’s participation in Christmas fortune telling, which were part of Russian folk life of that time:
Tatyana believed the legends
Common folk antiquity.
And dreams, and card fortune-telling,
And the predictions of the moon.
Tatyana not only understands Russian folk speech well, but also uses elements of vernacular language in her speech: “I’m sick,” “What do I need?”
One should not deny the influences of a foreign nature that were common at that time and in that environment (French language, Western novels). But they also enrich Tatyana’s personality, find echoes in her heart, and the French language gives her the opportunity to most strongly convey her feelings, which, as it seems to me, corresponds to Pushkin’s attitude towards foreign culture as a culture that contributes to the enrichment of Russian. But it does not drown out the national basis, but reveals and gives the opportunity to reveal the primordially Russian. Perhaps this is why Pushkin emphasizes the national basis of the heroine’s character, the “Russian soul.” This is the basis of his love for her, which runs through the entire narrative and does not allow for a drop of irony on the part of the author.
In relation to Onegin, the main personality traits of Tatyana are revealed most fully. She writes and sends a letter - a declaration of love. This is a bold step, completely unacceptable from a moral point of view. But Tatyana is “an exceptional creature.” Having fallen in love with Onegin, she obeys only her feelings. She speaks about her love right away, without any tricks or embellishments. It is impossible to find another beginning of a letter that would express with such immediacy what these words say:
I am writing to you - what more?
What more can I say?
In this letter, she reveals her entire “trusting soul” to Onegin.
Unrequited love for Onegin, the duel and death of Lensky, Onegin's departure - Tatyana deeply worries about all these events. A dreamy, enthusiastic girl turns into a woman seriously thinking about life.
IN last chapter In the novel, Tatyana is a secular woman, but inside she remains the same. And she rejects Onegin not because she doesn’t love him, but because she doesn’t want to betray herself, her views, her high understanding of the word “loyalty.”
But along with such female images, there are others. To highlight them, the authors show other women who are much inferior to them in moral and spiritual qualities.
The complete opposite of Tatyana is her sister Olga. Despite the same upbringing and the environment surrounding the Larin sisters, they grew up very different. Olga is careless and flighty. And Onegin, an expert on the female soul, gives her the following characteristics:
Olga has no life in her features.
Exactly like Vandice's Madonna...
She doesn’t seem to notice Lensky’s feelings. And even in the last hours before the duel he dreams of Olga’s loyalty. But he is greatly mistaken in the sincerity of her feelings for him. She quickly forgets him after meeting a young lancer, whom she marries.
There are many more heroines in Leo Nikolaevich Tolstoy’s novel “War and Peace”. And for Tolstoy, internal and external beauty is important in them.
Like Tatyana Larina, Natasha Rostova is a whole person. She is very far from intellectual life, lives only by feelings, sometimes she makes mistakes, sometimes logic refuses her. She is naive, wants everyone to be happy, everyone has a good time.
We don't even know if she's smart or not. But that doesn't matter. Tolstoy shows that her dignity does not lie in her mind, but in something else. Tolstoy pits her against Andrei Bolkonsky and Pierre Bezukhov (his favorite heroes), and both fall in love with her. And this is no coincidence.
Natasha is Tolstoy's ideal woman, she is a reflection of Pushkin's Tatyana. At the end of the novel she becomes what Tolstoy wants her to be. And “female” is a praise for her, since it is a symbol of a caring mother. It went down - good. After all, according to Tolstoy, a woman’s calling is family, children. Examples of the opposite are Anna Karenina, Helen Kuragina.
Helen is a secular beauty who grew up in society, unlike Tatiana, Natasha, and Princess Marya. But it was the light that corrupted her, made her soulless. Tolstoy calls her entire family that way - “a soulless breed.” There is nothing behind her attractive appearance. She gets married only because her husband has a lot of money. She is not interested in spiritual values, she does not admire the beauty of nature. Helen is an immoral and selfish woman.
Another thing is Princess Marya Volkonskaya. She is very ugly, her gait is heavy, but Tolstoy immediately draws our attention to her beautiful radiant eyes. And the eyes are the “mirror of the soul.” And Princess Marya’s soul is deep, originally Russian, capable of sincere feelings. And this is precisely what unites her with Natasha Rostova, with Tatyana Larina. Naturalness is important in them.
Tolstoy continues the traditions of Pushkin in revealing human character in all its complexity, inconsistency and diversity.
In the images of his heroines, Tolstoy pays great attention to their portrait. He usually emphasizes some detail or feature in them, persistently repeating it. And thanks to this, this face is etched in the memory and is no longer forgotten.
It is also interesting that Helen almost always speaks only French, and Natasha and Marya resort to it only when they find themselves in the atmosphere of high society salons.
Smiles, glances, gestures and facial expressions perfectly convey the complex emotional experiences of Marya and Natasha, and Helen’s empty conversations.
As we see, the beloved heroines of the works of A. S. Pushkin and L. N. Tolstoy are sincerely feeling, “deep, loving, passionate natures.” One cannot help but admire such women, one cannot help but love them as sincerely as they love people, life, and the Fatherland.
TWO KATERINA (Katerina Izmailova and Katerina Kabanova)
Terrible morals in our city, sir.
A. N. Ostrovsky
The history of numerous interpretations of “Lady Macbeth...” by Leskov tends to constantly bring together the images of Katerina Izmailova and Katerina Kabanova from Ostrovsky’s drama “The Thunderstorm”. Moreover, this rapprochement occurs not on literary grounds, but in the context of Dobrolyubov’s interpretation of the image of Katerina in his famous article “A Ray of Light in a Dark Kingdom.” However, reading these works today, it is difficult to notice the similarities between these heroines. Of course they exist, but they are hardly significant. The following are listed:
Firstly: their habitat. The sad life of a merchant in the Russian hinterland;
Secondly: the heroines have the same names. They are both Katerinas;
Thirdly: each cheats on her merchant husband;
Fourth: suicide of heroines;
Fifthly: the geography of their death is the greatest and most Russian of rivers - the Volga River.
And this is where not only the formal, but also the substantive similarity of both the heroines and the works as a whole ends. As for the portrait resemblance, here Ostrovsky says nothing about the appearance of his Katerina, allowing the reader and viewer to imagine the image themselves. All we know is that she is very beautiful. The portrait of Izmailova was drawn by Leskov in sufficient detail. He keeps large number infernal signs. There is black hair, dark eyes, and unusual, superhuman strength, with an elegant and fragile physique. Both of them do not love their husbands. But betrayal for Katerina from “The Thunderstorm” is a moral crime, a deep personal drama. Izmailova cheats on her husband out of boredom. I was bored for five years, but on the sixth I decided to have some fun. Ostrovsky lacks the main component of adultery - carnal, physiological passion. Katerina says to Boris: “If I had my own will, I would not have gone to you.” Varvara understands this too. No wonder she coldly whispers after her: “I got the job done!”
For Katerina Izmailova, unreasonable, Asian passion is the main content of the world. Katerina in “The Thunderstorm” personifies the humility of a person, his involvement in the fatal movements of fate.
Izmailova herself draws the lines of life. And what a simple Russian person can do in his freedom, Leskov knows very well: “He (this man) unleashes all his bestial simplicity, begins to act stupidly, mocks himself, people, and feelings. Not particularly gentle anyway, he becomes extremely angry.” Katerina Kabanova cannot imagine offending a living being. Her image is a bird flying away to the Volga region. She awaits punishment and retribution for imaginary and real sins. Watching the thunderstorm, she says to her husband: “Tisha, I know who he will kill.” The image of imminent, inevitable death is always with her, and she always talks and thinks about it. She is a truly tragic figure in the drama.
Leskov Izmailov cannot even think about repentance. Her passion swept away any moral ideas and religious imperatives from her soul. Going to set a samovar and kill a person are identical actions, but a mortal sin is an ordinary job. Ostrovsky's Katerina suffers. Her painful life seems to be burdened by a primordial, primordial fall. And before her betrayal, she tests herself with deep metaphysical doubts. Here she shares her thoughts about death with Varvara. She is not afraid to die, she is afraid “that death will find you with all your sins, with all your evil thoughts.”
And her suicide is not a crime. She, like a bird from a New Testament parable, flew away to the beautiful, heavenly distances of the Volga region. “Good for you, Katya!” - says Tikhon over his wife’s corpse. We will not find anything like this in the image of Izmailova. Where there is no depth of thought, depth of feeling is impossible. After three atrocities, Katerina kills herself, but not out of repentance, but for another murder. Nothing Christian, nothing evangelical - no humility, no forgiveness.
And yet now, a century later, when the social layer described by the authors has slipped into historical oblivion, the images of these women seem to be reflected in each other’s rays. And the abyss hidden behind them does not seem so fatal, attracting the gaze of the modern reader and viewer.
THE THEME OF LOVE IN THE WORKS OF I. S. TURGENEV AND F. M. DOSTOEVSKY
The theme of love in novels of the second half of the 19th century is one of the leading ones: almost all authors touch on it in one way or another, but each has their own approach to this problem. The difference in ideas can be explained by the fact that each author, being primarily a person, encountered different manifestations of this feeling throughout his life. Here we can assume that F. M. Dostoevsky (the first author whose work we will consider), being a tragic personality, considers love from the position of suffering: love for him is almost always associated with torment.
Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky, as a great master psychologist, described people, their thoughts and experiences in a “vortex” flow; his characters are constantly in dynamic development. He chose the most tragic, most significant moments. Hence the universal, universal problem of love, which his heroes are trying to solve. Rodion Raskolnikov, having committed murder, “cut himself off from people like scissors.” Violation of one commandment (thou shalt not kill) entailed ignoring all the others, therefore, he could not “love his neighbor as himself,” since he is special, he is a ruler.
According to Sonechka, this holy and righteous sinner, it is the lack of love for one’s neighbor (Raskolnikov calls humanity an “anthill”, a “trembling creature”) that is its fundamental cause of sin. This is the difference between them: his sin is a confirmation of his “exclusivity”, his greatness, his power over every louse (be it his mother, Dunya, Sonya), her sin is a sacrifice in the name of love for her relatives: her father - to the drunkard, to the consumptive stepmother, to her children, whom Sonya loves more than her pride, more than her pride, more life, finally. His sin is the destruction of life, hers is the salvation of life.
At first, Raskolnikov hates Sonya, because he sees that this little downtrodden creature loves him, the Lord and “God”, in spite of everything, loves and pities (things are interrelated) - this fact deals a strong blow to his fictitious theory. Moreover, his mother’s love for him, her son, also, in spite of everything, “torments him,” Pulcheria Alexandrovna constantly makes sacrifices for the sake of “beloved Rodenka.”
Dunya’s sacrifice is painful for him, her love for her brother is another step towards a refutation, towards the collapse of his theory.
What is the attitude of other heroes of “Crime and Punishment” to the problem of “love for one’s neighbor.” P.P. Luzhin, as Raskolnikov’s double, completely agrees with the provisions of the “man-god” theory. His opinion is clearly expressed in the following words: “Science says: love yourself first of all, for everything in the world is based on personal interest.”
Another double is Svidrigailov, this “voluptuous spider”, before last moment I firmly believed in the absence of love at all. But the moment has come: sudden love for Dunya leads this personality devastated by voluptuousness to complete ruin; the result is death. This is the relationship between Svidrigailov and Luzhin with the theme of love in the novel.
What is Raskolnikov's final position? Much later, in hard labor, Rodion Romanovich will be freed from hatred of Sonya, he will appreciate her mercy towards him, he will be able to understand all the sacrifices that were made for him and for the sake of all of them; he will love Sonya. He will perceive the pride that has filled many hearts as a terrible infection, he will rediscover God, and through him and through his sacrifice - love for everyone.
A truly universal, universal perception of love is a distinctive feature of Dostoevsky and his heroes.
Thus, when talking about the difference between the perception of love by Dostoevsky and Turgenev, first of all you need to keep in mind the scale.
In the image of Bazarov we can see the same pride as in the image of Raskolnikov. But his views do not have such an absolute relationship with current events. He influences those around him, but his views do not lead to a concrete disregard for moral and ethical laws. All action is not outside of him: he commits crimes within himself. Hence his tragedy is not universal, but purely personal. This is where the differences practically end (the differences are fundamental on this issue). The similarities remain: what are they?
Bazarov, like the hero of “Crime and Punishment,” had “a kind of theory,” nihilistic views that were fashionable at that time. Like Raskolnikov, Evgeniy became proud, inventing the absence of any norms, any principles, sacredly believing that he was right.
But, according to Turgenev, this is only a purely personal delusion: in other words, his views do not lead to any serious consequences for others.
He lives practically without violating the basic commandments. However, when a meeting with Odintsova forces E.V. Bazarov to believe in the existence of love, thereby admitting the incorrectness of his beliefs, Bazarov, according to the author, must die.
Here we can talk about one more difference between the two classics - this time the differences are that Dostoevsky, with his “dirt” and torment, gives vent to his hero; at the same time, Turgenev, this poet, does not forgive his “beloved hero” for the elementary delusion of his youth and denies him the right to life. Hence Bazarov’s love for Anna Sergeevna is only a step towards devastation and death.
In the tragedy of the ending, Bazarov is somewhat similar to Svidrigailov: they both initially perceived love as voluptuousness. But there is also a huge difference between them: having realized the incorrectness of his ideas, one dies, and this is explained by all the terrible evil that he committed, while the other is an absolutely normal person, and love could show him a new right path. But, according to Turgenev, the most natural outcome is to bury his hero in a grave, with all his experiences, with a newly born storm of thoughts and doubts.
From all of the above, we can conclude: the main similarity in views on love is its depiction as a kind of means by which the author shows the delusions of the heroes. The difference lies in the positions in which the heroes are given: the moral quest of the murderer in “Crime and Punishment” and the moral quest of absolutely normal person in "Fathers and Sons".
MOTIF OF UNHAPPY LOVE IN RUSSIAN LITERATURE OF THE 19TH CENTURY
One of the most important topics Many 19th century novels have a theme of love. As a rule, it is the core of the entire work, around which all events take place. Love causes various conflicts to arise and the development of the storyline. It is feelings that rule events, life, the world; because of them, a person performs this or that action, and it doesn’t matter whether it’s love for himself or another person. It happens that a hero commits a crime or commits some immoral act, motivating his actions with passionate love and jealousy, but, as a rule, such feelings are false and destructive.
Between different heroes there is different love; one cannot say that it is one and the same, but one can determine its main directions, which will be common.
Doomed love, tragic. This is the love of “extremes”. She grabs or strong people or fallen. For example, Bazarov. He never thought about true love, but when he met Anna Sergeevna Odintsova, he realized what it was. Having fallen in love with her, he saw the world from a different perspective: everything that seemed insignificant turns out to be important and significant; life becomes something mysterious; nature attracts and is a part of man himself, lives inside him. From the very beginning it is clear that the love of Bazarov and Odintsova is doomed. These two passionate and strong natures cannot love each other and cannot create a family. Anna Sergeevna Odintsova understands this and partly because of this she refuses Bazarov, although she loves him no less than he loves her. Odintsova proves this by coming to his village when Bazarov is dying. If she doesn't love him, why do this? And if so, it means that the news of his illness stirred the soul, and Anna Sergeevna is not indifferent to Bazarov. This love ends in nothing: Bazarov dies, and Anna Sergeevna Odintsova remains to live as they lived before, but this is fatal love, because partly it destroys Bazarov. Another example tragic love- this is the love of Sonya and Nikolai (“War and Peace”). Sonya was madly in love with Nikolai, but he constantly hesitated: sometimes he thought he loved her, sometimes he didn’t. This love was incomplete and could not be different, since Sonya is a fallen woman, she is one of those people who are not capable of starting a family and are doomed to live “on the edge of someone else’s nest” (and so it happened). In fact, Nikolai never loved Sonya, he only wanted to love her, it was a deception. When real feelings awakened in him, he immediately understood it. Only after seeing Marya did Nikolai fall in love. He felt like he had never felt before with Sonya or anyone else. That's where true love was. Of course, Nikolai had some feelings for Sonya, but these were only pity and memories of earlier days. He knew that Sonya loved him and truly loved him and, understanding her, he could not strike such a strong blow - to reject their friendship. Nikolai did everything to soften her misfortune, but nevertheless Sonya was unhappy. This love (Nikolai and Sonya) caused unbearable pain to Sonya, ending differently than she expected; and opened Nikolai’s eyes, making it clear what false and what real feelings are, and helped him understand himself.
The most tragic is the love of Katerina and Boris (“The Thunderstorm”). She was doomed from the start. Katerina is a young girl, kind, naive, but with an unusually strong character. She didn't have time to find out true love, how she was married to the rude, boring Tikhon. Katerina sought to understand the world, she was interested in absolutely everything, so it is not surprising that she was immediately drawn to Boris. He was young and handsome. This was a man from another world, with other interests, new ideas. Boris and Katerina immediately noticed each other, as both stood out from the gray homogeneous mass of people in the city of Kalinov. The inhabitants of the city were boring, monotonous, they lived by old values, the laws of “Domostroy”, false faith and debauchery. Katerina was so eager to know true love and, just touching it, she died; this love ended before it even began.
WHAT IS LOVE? (Based on works of Russian literature of the 19th century)
In the second half of the 19th century, many works of a wide variety of genres were written in Russia: novels, stories, and plays. In many (especially classical) works, love conflict plays an important role, “It was just the time,” we might think. But no, this is not so - in fact, love and happiness are, one might say, “eternal” themes that worried people in ancient times, passed through the centuries and excite writers to this day. To the question “what is love?” It is impossible to answer unequivocally: everyone understands it in their own way. There are many points of view on this matter, and their amazing diversity can be traced through the example of only two works, for example, “Crime and Punishment” by Dostoevsky and “Fathers and Sons” by Turgenev.
In “Crime and Punishment” one of the minor characters is Svidrigailov - a scoundrel, a sharper, a vicious person who has committed many atrocities. He is the embodiment of voluptuousness. The night before committing suicide, pictures of the past appear to him. One of the memories is the corpse of a fourteen-year-old drowned girl: “she was only fourteen years old, but it was already a broken heart, and it destroyed itself, offended by the insult, horrifying and surprising this young child’s consciousness... tearing out the last cry of despair, unheard, and brazenly scolded on a dark night, in darkness, in cold, in a damp thaw, when the wind howled.” Voluptuousness and lust are the feelings that overwhelmed Svidrigailov during the commission of violence. Can these feelings be called love? From the author's point of view, no. He believes that love is self-sacrifice, embodied in the image of Sonya, Dunya, mother - after all, it is important for the author to show not only the love of a woman and a man, but also the love of a mother for her son, brother for sister (sister for brother).
Dunya agrees to marry Luzhin for the sake of her brother, and the mother understands perfectly well that she is sacrificing her daughter for the sake of her first-born. Dunya hesitated for a long time before making a decision, but in the end she finally decided: “... before deciding, Dunya did not sleep all night, and, believing that I was already asleep, got out of bed and walked back and forth all night and forward across the room, finally knelt down and prayed long and fervently in front of the image, and the next morning she announced to me that she had made up her mind.”
Sonya immediately, without hesitation, agrees to give all of herself, all her love to Raskolnikov, to sacrifice herself for the well-being of her lover: “Come to me, I will put a cross on you, let’s pray and let’s go.” Sonya happily agrees to follow Raskolnikov anywhere, accompany him everywhere. “He met her restless and painfully caring gaze...” - here is Sonin’s love, all her dedication.
Another love that cannot be ignored is the love of God, the echo of which runs through the entire work. We cannot imagine Sonya without her love for God, without religion. “What would I be without God?” - Sonya is perplexed. Indeed, religion is the only consolation for the “humiliated and insulted” in their poverty, which is why moral purity is so important for them...
As for another understanding of love, in order to see it, we will have to analyze another work - for example, “Fathers and Sons” by I. S. Turgenev. In this novel, the conflict between “fathers” and “children” covers all aspects of life, views, beliefs. A person’s worldview subconsciously guides his actions and feelings, and if for Arkady, due to his principles, family happiness, a prosperous, calm life is possible, then for Bazarov it is not.
It is worth remembering Turgenev’s own views on love and happiness. He believes that happiness is harmony, and other feelings, experiences, violent emotions, jealousy are disharmony, which means that where love is passion, there cannot be happiness.
Bazarov himself perfectly understands the dissimilarity of their natures with Arkady. He says to the young man: “You were not created for our bitter, tart, bean life...” His comparison of Arkady with a jackdaw is very appropriate: “Here you go! - study! The jackdaw is the most respectable, family bird. An example for you!”
Although Arkady is a “son” by age, his worldview is clearly his father’s, and Bazarov’s nihilism is alien to him, feigned. The ideal of his love is the same as that of Nikolai Petrovich - harmonious relationships, calm and long love until old age.
Bazarov is a completely different person. He comes from a different social environment, he has a completely different system of views from Arkady, and his experiences are much deeper. His beliefs include that love is “nonsense, unforgivable nonsense, and chivalrous feelings are ugliness, a disease,” but he himself experiences an “animal” passion for Anna Odintsova, but she turns out to be a cold woman, and a painful period begins in Bazarov’s life: his postulates like “knock out fire with fire” (this applies to women) turn out to be powerless, and he loses power over himself. His love - “a passion similar to anger and, perhaps, akin to it” - results in a real tragedy for Bazarov.
All these characters: Arkady, Bazarov, and Sonya - differ from each other in their worldview, outlook on life, and their love is also different.
The love-passion of Bazarov and the love-happiness of Katya and Arkady, the love-self-sacrifice of Sonya, Dunya, mother - how many shades of meaning the authors put into one single word - love! What different feelings can sometimes be expressed in one word! Each character has his own perception of the world, his own ideals, which means that, based on the subconscious, different people have different feelings. Probably, just as there have never been two identical people in the world, love has never been repeated. A different writers, putting different meanings into this concept and depicting love in different types, are gradually approaching the solution to one of the philosophical, “eternal” questions - stumbling blocks: “what is love? ”
THE THEME OF LOVE IN THE RUSSIAN NOVEL OF THE II HALF OF THE 19TH CENTURY (Based on the novels by I. A. Goncharov “Oblomov”, I. S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons”, L. N. Tolstoy “War and Peace”) (I version)
I loved you....
The theme of love is traditional for world literature, in particular for Russian literature, it is one of the “eternal” ethical problems of our world. They always say that it is impossible to answer questions about concepts that cannot be defined: about life and death, love and hate, envy, indifference, etc. But, probably, unsolvable questions and tasks have a strange charm: they are like a magnet, attract people and their thoughts; therefore, many artists tried in their work to express what is difficult to convey in words, music, paint on canvas, what every person vaguely feels, and love occupies a significant place in people’s lives, in their world, and therefore in their creations .
In L.N. Tolstoy’s novel “War and Peace,” the author creates several storylines related to the theme of love. But the most striking among them is the storyline of the love of Prince Andrei Bolkonsky and Natasha Rostova. There are many opinions about their relationship: someone says that Natasha did not love Prince Andrei, proving this by the fact that she cheated on him with Anatoly Kuragin; someone says that Prince Andrei did not love Natasha, since he could not forgive her, and someone says that few examples of such high love can be found in literature. And it seems to me that this was probably the strangest love that I read about in Russian literature of the late 19th century. I am sure that they were made for each other: how Natasha felt the night in Otradnoye (“After all, such a lovely night has never, never happened... So she would squat down, grab herself under the knees... and fly. ..”), this is how Prince Andrei saw the sky above Austerlitz (“...Everything is empty, everything is deception, except this endless sky... there is nothing but silence, calm...”); just as Natasha was waiting for Prince Andrei to arrive, he wanted to return to her... But on the other hand, what could have happened if they had gotten married? At the end of the novel, Natasha becomes a “female” - a woman who cares only about her family; Before the war, Prince Andrei wanted to become a good owner in his village Bogucharovo; so maybe it would be a great match. But then they would have lost the main thing that, in my opinion, was in them: their restless desire for something distant and strange, the search for spiritual happiness. For some, the ideal life of Pierre and Natasha after the wedding, the life of Olga Ilyinskaya and Andrei Stolts, etc. - everything is very calm and measured, rare misunderstandings do not spoil the relationship; But wouldn’t such a life become the second version of Oblomovism? Here Oblomov is lying on the sofa. His friend Stolz comes to him and introduces him to a charming girl, Olga Ilyinskaya, who sings so well that Oblomov cries with happiness. Time passes, and Oblomov realizes that he is in love. What is he dreaming about? To rebuild an estate, sit under the trees in the garden, listen to the birds and see Olga, surrounded by children, leaving the house and heading towards it... In my opinion, this is very similar to what Andrei Stolts and Olga Ilyinskaya, Pierre, come to Bezukhov and Natasha Rostova, Nikolai Rostov and Princess Marya, Arkady and Katya in the novel “Fathers and Sons” by I. S. Turgenev. It seems that this is some kind of strange irony: Natasha, madly in love with Prince Andrei, Princess Marya, excited by romantic dreams before meeting Anatoly Kuragin, Nikolai Rostov, who committed a noble deed modeled on the medieval knights (the princess’s departure from the estate) - all these strong and Unusual personalities end up with the same thing - a happy family life on a remote estate. There is a similar storyline in I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” - Arkady’s love for Katya Odintsova. The meeting, Arkady's hobbies with Anna Sergeevna, Katya's wonderful singing, the wedding and... life on Arkady's estate. One could say that everything is returning to normal. But in the novel “Fathers and Sons” there is another storyline - this is Bazarov’s love for Anna Sergeevna Odintsova, which, it seems to me, is even more beautiful than the love of Prince Andrei and Natasha Rostova. At the beginning of the novel, Bazarov believes that “Raphael is not worth a penny,” denies art and poetry, thinks that “in this atom, in this mathematical point [he himself], blood circulates, thought works, wants something too ...What a disgrace! What nonsense!” - Bazarov is a person who calmly denies everything. But he falls in love with Odintsova and tells her: “I love you stupidly, madly,” - Turgenev shows how “the passion in him beat strong and heavy - a passion similar to anger, and, perhaps, akin to it...” However, their fate did not work out, perhaps because they met too late, when Odintsova had already come to the conviction that “calmness is still best.” The idea of a quiet life is present to varying degrees in many novels of Russian literature and in different storylines. This is not only Oblomov, who does not want to get up from his sofa, but also the Bergs and the Rostov family, where they do not like to deviate from traditions, and the Bolkonsky family, where life moves according to the once established order. Because of his love for peace and reluctance to quarrel with his son, Nikolai Petrovich did not immediately marry Fenechka (one of the minor plot lines of the novel “Fathers and Sons”).
However, it would be wrong to associate the theme of love only with relationships between men and women. The old Countess Rostova and Prince Nikolai Bolkonsky love their children, and children love their parents (Arkady, Bazarov, Natasha, Princess Marya, etc.). There is also love for the homeland (Prince Andrei, Kutuzov), for nature (Natasha, Arkady, Nikolai Petrovich), etc. Probably, it is impossible to firmly say that someone loves someone, since only the author knew this for sure, Moreover, in the complex characters of the heroes, various feelings struggle, and therefore one can only conditionally say that this or that expression (word) is true in relation to any hero. In any case, I think that as long as people live, they will feel: love, be happy, be sad, be indifferent - and they will always try to understand what is happening to them and try to explain it in words, so the theme of feelings and love will always be present in art.
THE THEME OF LOVE IN THE RUSSIAN NOVEL OF THE II HALF OF THE 19TH CENTURY (Based on the novels by I. A. Goncharov “Oblomov”, I. S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons”, L. N. Tolstoy “War and Peace”) (II version)
From ancient times to the present day, nothing excites the minds of writers and poets more than the theme of love. It is one of the key ones in all world fiction. However, despite the fact that in most books there is a love affair, each time the author finds some new twist on this topic, because until now love is one of those concepts that a person cannot describe with a standard phrase or definition. Just as in a landscape, the lighting or season changes and perception changes, so in the theme of love: a new writer appears, and with him other characters, and the problem appears before him in a different guise.
In many works, the theme of love is closely connected with the basis of the plot and conflict, and serves as a means of revealing the character of the main characters.
In the novels of Russian classics of the second half of the 19th century, love is not the main theme, but at the same time it plays one of the important roles in the works. As one of the famous English writers A. Christie said already in the 20th century, “he who has never loved anyone has never lived,” and Russian prose writers, not yet knowing this phrase, but certainly understanding that in the life of every person there is love something that helps to most fully reveal his inner world and basic character traits, of course, could not help but address this topic.
In the works of the 19th century, echoes of the previous era of “romantic” love can be heard: Oblomov can be called a romantic: the symbol of his love with Olga becomes a lilac branch, which a girl once picked while walking in the garden. Throughout their relationship, Oblomov mentally returns to this flower more than once in conversation, and often he compares moments of love that go away and never return to faded lilacs. The feelings of another couple - Arkady and Katya from “Fathers and Sons” cannot be called anything other than romantic. There is no suffering or torment here, only pure, bright, serene love, which in the future will turn into an equally pleasant and calm family life, with a bunch of children, common dinners and big holidays with friends and loved ones. They can be called an ideal family: the spouses live in mutual understanding and boundless love, something like the life the hero of another work, Oblomov, dreams of. His idealistic thoughts echo Nikolai Rostov’s thoughts about his wife and marriage: “... a white hood, a wife at the samovar, his wife’s carriage, children...” - these ideas about the future gave him pleasure. However, such pictures are not destined to come true (at least for those heroes who dream about it), they have no place in real world. But the fact that there is no idyll, as Nikolai and Oblomov imagine it, does not mean that there is no happy family life in the world: each of these writers in their works paints pictures of an ideal married couple: Pierre Bezukhov and Natasha Rostova, Marya Volkonskaya and Nikolai Rostov , Stolz and Olga Ilyinskaya, Arkady and Katya. Harmony and mutual understanding based on love and devotion reign in these families.
But, of course, when reading these works, one cannot talk only about the happy side of love: there is suffering, torment, heavy passion, and unrequited love.
The theme of love suffering is most closely associated with the main character of “Fathers and Sons” Evgeny Bazarov. His feeling is a heavy, all-consuming passion for a woman who is not capable of loving him, the thought of her does not leave Bazarov until his death, and love remains in him until the last minutes. He resists the feeling, because this is what Bazarov considers romance and nonsense, but he is unable to fight it.
Suffering is brought not only by unrequited love, but also by the understanding that happiness with the person you love and is loved yourself is impossible. Sonechka put her whole life on the line with her love for Nikolai, but she is a “barren flower”, and she is not destined to start a family, the girl is poor, her happiness with Rostov is initially prevented by the countess, and later Nikolai meets a creature who was taller than Sonya and even himself - Marya Volkonskaya, falls in love with her and, realizing that we love her, marries. Sonya, of course, is very worried, her heart will always belong only to Nikolai Rostov, but she is unable to do anything.
But Natasha Rostova experiences grief that is incomparably greater in depth and significance: first, when, because of her infatuation with Kuragin, she broke up with Prince Andrei, the man whom she loved for the first time in her life, then, when she lost him for the second time due to the death of Bolkonsky. The first time, her suffering is intensified by the fact that she realizes that she lost her fiancé only through her own fault; The break with Bolkonsky leads Natasha to a deep mental crisis. Natasha's life is a series of trials, through which she came to her ideal - to a family life, which is based on the same strong connection as her soul and body.
Using the example of Rostova, Tolstoy, one of the few writers, traces the path of the development of love from childhood love and flirting to something solid, fundamental, eternal. Like Tolstoy, Goncharov depicts the various stages of Olga Ilyinskaya’s love, but the difference between these two heroines is that Natasha is capable of really loving more than once (and she has no doubt that this may not be normal), because the essence of her life is love - to Boris, mother, Andrey, brothers, Pierre, while Olga is tormented, thinking that her feeling for Oblomov was genuine, but if this is so, then what does she feel for Stolz?.. If Olga fell in love after Oblomov, then for many other heroes of Russian literature this feeling arises only once in a lifetime: for example, Marya Volkonskaya realized at first sight that Nikolai was the only one for her, and Anna Sergeevna Odintsova remains forever in Bazarov’s memory.
What is also important in revealing the theme of love is how people change under its influence, how they pass the “test of love.” In the psychological novel “Oblomov” by I. A. Goncharov, the influence of feelings on the main character could not be ignored. Olga wants to change her lover, pull him out of “Oblomovism”, not let him sink, she forces him to do what was previously not typical for Oblomov: get up early, take a walk, climb mountains, but he does not pass the test of love, nothing can change him, and Olga gives up, she knows that; there are sprouts of beauty in him, but he is mired in the usual “Oblomov way of life.”
Love is many-sided and multifaceted, beautiful in all its manifestations, but not many Russian writers of the second half of the 19th century were “researchers of love,” with the exception of Goncharov. Basically, the theme of love was presented as material on the basis of which the characters’ characters could be built, although this does not prevent writers from revealing this theme from different angles and admiring the romantic feelings of the heroes and empathizing with their suffering.
MOTIVES OF KNIGHTY SERVICE TO WOMAN IN RUSSIAN LITERATURE (I version)
First I would like to expand on the concept of “chivalry”. A knight is not necessarily a man in armor and with a sword, sitting on a horse and fighting monsters or enemies. A knight is a person who forgets himself in the name of something, a selfless and honest person. When we talk about knightly service to a woman, we mean a man who is ready to sacrifice himself for her, the only one.
The most a shining example This, in my opinion, would be Pavel Petrovich - the hero of I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons”.
He was a hereditary nobleman, brilliantly educated, and, like many representatives of his social circle, had high moral qualities. A brilliant career lay ahead of him, as he had extraordinary abilities. There was no sign of failure. But he met Princess R., as the author called her. At first, she also treated him favorably, but then... Princess R. broke Pavel Petrovich’s heart, but he did not want to offend her or take revenge on her in any word or deed. He, like a real knight, set off in pursuit of his beloved, sacrificing his career. Not every person is capable of this. Therefore, we can safely say that Pavel Petrovich is a representative of a remarkable galaxy of knights in Russian literature.
I would like to mention one more knight. Chatsky, the hero of A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit,” loved Sophia so much that I think he is worthy of this title. He sacrificed his feelings for the happiness of the woman he loved.
With this I would like to finish my essay. You can write a lot about chivalry, but it’s not interesting to read a lot of the same things. The only thing I would like to add is the wish that there would be more knights, because over the centuries they disappear, as we see.
Of course, I don’t want to say that they disappeared completely, but for some reason there are very few of them, although this is strange in connection with the peculiar mentality of the Russian nation. For Russians, it seems to me, chivalry should be in their blood. Russians should be the same knights and dreamers as Lensky, who madly loved Olga and sacrificed his life for her.
MOTIVES OF KNIGHTY SERVICE TO WOMAN IN RUSSIAN LITERATURE (II version)
Russian literature is very diverse. And one of these diversity is the direction in which either a writer or a poet touches on the themes of love and, in particular, the motives of knightly service to a woman.
Women are like flowers on ice. They are the ones who decorate him and the lives of everyone on earth. For example, Pushkin A.S. met many women during his life and loved many, both good and bad. And many of his poems and poems are dedicated to his beloved. And everywhere he speaks of them with warmth and exalts their beauty, both external and internal. All of them are beautiful for him, they give him strength, energy, they, in most cases, are the source of his inspiration. It turns out that love is one of the main motives of knightly service to a woman. Love can change any person, and then he idolizes his chosen one, she will become his ideal, the meaning of life. Will this not entail a violent outburst of emotions, will this not inspire a man to dedicate poetry or novels to his beloved? And no matter what kind of woman she is, love will still prevail over the consciousness of the person whose heart submits to her. The Russian poet M. Yu. Lermontov can serve as such an example. He fell in love many times, but very often his lovers did not reciprocate his feelings. Yes, he was very worried, but still this did not stop him from dedicating his poems to them, written from the bottom of his heart, albeit with pain in his chest. For some, love is destructive, but for others it is the salvation of the soul. Time and time again, all this is confirmed in the works of famous Russian writers and poets.
One of the main motives is nobility. Often it manifests itself only after a person has fallen in love. This is, of course, good, but nobility should be demonstrated in all cases. And you don’t have to love a woman to treat her wisely. Some men cultivate this feeling in themselves from youth, and it remains with them throughout their lives. And others don’t recognize him at all. Let's look at an example. In Pushkin's novel “Eugene Onegin” main character acted nobly with Tatyana. He didn't take advantage of her feelings for him. He did not love Tatyana, but a sense of nobility was in his blood, and he would never disrespect her. But in the case of Olga, he, of course, showed a different side of himself. And Lensky, Olga’s admirer, could not resist, his pride was hurt, and he challenged Onegin to a duel. He acted nobly, trying to defend Olga's honor from such a playboy as Onegin. Pushkin's views are somewhat similar to the views of his heroes. After all, he died only because rumors about his wife were spread. And his nobility did not allow him to remain silent and remain on the sidelines. So nobility is also one of the motives of knightly service to a woman in Russian literature.
Hatred of a woman and at the same time admiration for her beauty is another motive. Let's take, for example, M. Yu. Lermontov. As I already wrote, he was often rejected. And it was natural that a certain amount of hatred would arise in his soul towards them. But, thanks to his admiration for them, he managed to overcome the barrier of anger and dedicated many of his poems precisely to those women whose hatred was mixed with admiration, perhaps for their character, figure, face, soul, mind or something else.
Respect for a woman, as a mother, as a keeper of the home, is also a motive.
Women have been and will always be the most beautiful and revered on earth, and men will always serve them in a knightly manner.
THE THEME OF THE LITTLE MAN IN RUSSIAN LITERATURE OF THE 19TH CENTURY
The theme of the little man is one of the traditional themes in Russian literature of the last two centuries. This topic first appeared in Russian literature precisely in the 19th century (in “Poor Liza” by Karamzin). The reasons for this can probably be said that the image of a small man is characteristic, first of all, of realism, and this artistic method finally took shape only in the 19th century. However, this topic, in my opinion, could be relevant in any historical period, since it, among other things, involves a description of the relationship between man and power, and these relationships have existed since ancient times.
The next (after “Poor Liza”) significant work devoted to this topic can be considered “The Station Agent” by A. S. Pushkin. Although this was hardly a typical theme for Pushkin.
The theme of the little man found one of its maximum manifestations in the works of N.V. Gogol, in particular in his story “The Overcoat”. Akaki Akakievich Bashmachkin (the main character of the story) is one of the most typical little people. This is an official, “not that very wonderful.” He, a titular councilor, is extremely poor; even for a decent overcoat he has to save for a long time, denying himself everything. The overcoat obtained after such labor and torment is soon taken away from him on the street. It would seem that there is a law that will protect him. But it turns out that no one can and does not want to help the robbed official, even those who simply had to do it. Akaki Akakievich is absolutely defenseless, he has no prospects in life - due to his low rank, he is completely dependent on his superiors, he will not be promoted (he is an “eternal titular adviser”).
Gogol calls Bashmachkin “one official,” and Bashmachkin serves in “one department,” and he is the most ordinary person. All this allows us to say that Akaki Akakievich is an ordinary little person; hundreds of other officials are in his position. This position of a servant of power characterizes power itself accordingly. The authorities are heartless and ruthless.
F. M. Dostoevsky’s little man is shown just as defenseless in his novel “Crime and Punishment.”
Here, as in Gogol, the official - Marmeladov - is represented by a small man. This man was at the very bottom. He was kicked out of the service for drunkenness, and after that nothing could stop him. He drank everything he could drink, although he perfectly understood what he was bringing his family to. He says about himself: “I have the image of an animal.”
Of course, he is most to blame for his situation, but it is also noteworthy that no one wants to help him, everyone laughs at him, only a few are ready to help him (for example, Raskolnikov, who gives the last money to the Marmeladov family). The little man is surrounded by a soulless crowd. “That’s why I drink, because in this drink I look for compassion and feeling...” says Marmeladov. “Sorry! why feel sorry for me!” - he exclaims and immediately admits: “There’s nothing to feel sorry for me!”
But it’s not his children’s fault that they are poor. And society, which doesn’t care, is probably also to blame. The boss, to whom Katerina Ivanovna’s calls were addressed: “Your Excellency! Protect the orphans!” The entire ruling class is also to blame, because the carriage that crushed Marmeladov “was expected by some significant person,” and therefore this carriage was not detained.
The little people include Sonya, Marmeladov’s daughter, and former student Raskolnikov. But what is important here is that these people retained human qualities - compassion, mercy, self-esteem (despite the downtroddenness of the Hundred, Raskolnikov’s poverty). They are not yet broken, they are still able to fight for life. Dostoevsky and Gogol depict the social position of little people in approximately the same way, but Dostoevsky, unlike Gogol, also shows the inner world of these people.
The theme of the little man is also present in the works; M. E. Saltykova-Shchedrin. Take, for example, his fairy tale “Honey-; after all, in the voivodeship.” All the characters here are presented in a grotesque form, this is one of the features of Saltykov-Shchedrin’s fairy tales. In the fairy tale in question there is a small, but very meaningful, episode concerning the theme of little people. Toptygin “Eat the Siskin.” He ate it just like that, for no reason, without understanding it. And although the entire forest society immediately laughed at him, the very possibility of the boss causing harm to the little man for no reason is important.
Little people are also shown in “The Story of a City,” and they are shown in a very unique way. Here they are typical inhabitants. Time passes, mayors change, but the townsfolk do not change. They remain the same gray mass, they are completely dependent, weak-willed and stupid. The mayors take the city of Foolov by storm and go on campaigns against it. But ordinary people are used to it. They only want city leaders to praise them more often, call them “guys,” and make optimistic speeches. The organ says: “I won’t tolerate it! I’ll ruin you!” But for ordinary people this is normal. Then, the townsfolk understand that the “former scoundrel” Gloomy-Burcheev personifies the “end of everything,” but they silently climb to stop the river when he orders: “Drive! ”
A completely new type of little person is presented to the reader by A.P. Chekhov. Chekhov's little man has “grown larger” and is no longer so defenseless. This shows in his stories. One of these stories is “The Man in the Case.” Teacher Belikov can be considered one of the little people; it’s not in vain that he lives by the principle: “No matter what happens.” He is afraid of his superiors, although, of course, his fear is greatly exaggerated. But this little man “put the case” on the whole city, the whole city was forced to live by the same principle. It follows that a small person can have power over other small people.
This can be seen in two other stories, “Unter Prishibeev” and “Chameleon”. The hero of the first of them - non-commissioned Prishibeev - keeps the entire neighborhood in fear, trying to force everyone not to turn on the lights in the evenings, not to sing songs. It's none of his business, but he can't be stopped. But he is also a small person if he is brought to trial and even sentenced. In “Chameleon,” the little man, the policeman, not only subdues, but also obeys, as a little man should.
Another feature of Chekhov’s little people is the almost complete absence of positive qualities in many of them. In other words, the moral degradation of the individual is shown. Belikov is a boring, empty person, his fear borders on idiocy. Prishibeev is thorny and stubborn. Both of these heroes are socially dangerous because, for all their qualities, they have moral power over people. Bailiff Ochumelov (the hero of “Chameleon”) is a little tyrant who humiliates those who depend on him. But he grovels before his superiors. This hero, unlike the previous two, has not only moral, but official power, and therefore is doubly dangerous.
Considering that all the works reviewed were written in different years XIX century, we can say that the little man still changes over time. For example, the dissimilarity between Bashmachkin and Belikov is obvious. It is also possible that this arises as a result of the authors’ different visions of the problem, different ways of depicting it (for example, Saltykov-Shchedrin’s caustic satire and Gogol’s obvious sympathy).
Thus, in Russian literature of the 19th century, the theme of the little man is revealed by depicting the relationships of little people both with the authorities and with other people. At the same time, through a description of the position of little people, the power over them can also be characterized. A little person can belong to different categories of the population. Not only the social position of little people can be shown, but also their inner world. Little people are often to blame for their own misfortunes because they do not try to fight.
PUSHKIN REMINISTRATIONS IN N. V. GOGOL’S POEM “DEAD SOULS”.
The poem “Dead Souls” is the most significant creation of Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol. Uniquely original and original, it is nevertheless associated with many literary traditions. This applies to both the content and formal aspects of the work, in which everything is organically interconnected. “Dead Souls” was published after Pushkin’s death, but the beginning of work on the book coincided with the time of close rapprochement between the writers. This could not but be reflected in “Dead Souls,” the plot of which, by Gogol’s own admission, was given to him by Pushkin. However, it's not just about personal contacts. B.V. Tomashevsky in his work “The Poetic Heritage of Pushkin” noted the influence of his artistic system, which all subsequent literature experienced “in general, and perhaps prose writers more than poets.” Gogol, due to his talent, was able to find his own path in literature, in many ways different from Pushkin’s. This must be taken into account when analyzing Pushkin’s reminiscences found in Gogol’s poem. The following questions are important here: what is the role of Pushkin’s reminiscences in “Dead Souls”? what meaning do they have in Gogol? what is their meaning? The answers to these questions will help to better understand the peculiarities of Gogol’s poem and note some historical and literary patterns. The most general conclusion that can be drawn on the topic under consideration is the following: Gogol’s reminiscences reflect the influence of Pushkin on him. Our task is to understand the results of this influence. By Pushkin’s reminiscences in “Dead Souls” we will understand everything that suggests comparison with Pushkin’s work, reminds of him, as well as a direct echo of Pushkin’s expressions. In other words, the question of Pushkin’s reminiscences in Gogol is a question of connections between the original creative worlds of two Russian writers who were in a relationship of continuity. In the light of the stated attitudes, let's look carefully at Gogol's work itself.
First of all, we pay attention to the author’s genre definition. We know that it was fundamental for Gogol. He emphasized this in the cover he prepared for the first edition of the book. Why is a work, in form reminiscent of an adventure novel, and even saturated with a large number of satirical sketches, still called a poem? The meaning of this was correctly grasped by V. G. Belinsky, noting the “predominance of subjectivity,” which, “penetrating and animating Gogol’s entire poem, reaches high lyrical pathos and covers the reader’s soul with illuminating waves...”. Before the reader of the poem, pictures of a provincial town and landowners' estates unfold, and behind them stands “all of Rus',” the Russian reality of that time. The emotional coloring of the narrative, manifested in the author’s increased interest in what he depicts, the very subject of the image - the modern way of life in Russian life - lead us to compare the central work of Gogol with the central work of Pushkin. Both Pushkin’s “Eugene Onegin” and Gogol’s “Dead Souls” contain clearly expressed lyrical and epic principles. Both works are unique in terms of genre. Pushkin initially intended to call his novel in verse a poem. (“I’m now writing a new poem,” he wrote in a letter to Delvig in November one thousand eight hundred and twenty-three. A little later he wrote to A.I. Turgenev: “... I’m writing a new poem in my spare time, Eugene Onegin, where I’m choking on bile.”) The final genre definition of “Eugene Onegin” reflected Pushkin’s awareness of his artistic discovery: the transference into poetry of tendencies characteristic of prose. Gogol, on the contrary, transferred an excited lyrical note into prose. The noted thematic and genre overlaps between “Eugene Onegin” and “Dead Souls” are supported by a large number of different kinds of reminiscences, which we begin to review.
One more preliminary note. We will consider the first volume of “Dead Souls” as an independent work, not forgetting its three-part plan, which was only partially realized.
A careful look at the text of “Dead Souls” reveals many analogies with Pushkin’s novel. Here are the most notable ones. In both works, the same scheme is visible: the central character from the city ends up in the countryside, the description of his stay in which is given the main place. The end of the story, the hero, comes in the same place where it begins. The hero returns to the clan, from which he then soon leaves, like Chatsky. Let us remember that Pushkin leaves his hero
In a moment that is evil for him.
The main characters themselves are comparable. Both of them stand out from the society around them. Their characteristics are similar. This is what the author says about Chichikov: “The newcomer somehow knew how to find himself in everything and showed himself to be an experienced socialite. Whatever the conversation was about, he always knew how to support it...” An “experienced socialite” is Onegin, who had a lucky talent
No coercion in conversation
Touch everything lightly
With the learned air of an expert...
It is “with the learned air of an expert” that Chichikov talks about the horse farm, good dogs, judicial tricks, billiards, virtue, making hot wine, customs guards and officials. For this, everyone declares him a “smart”, “learned”, “respectable and amiable” person, and so on. About Onegin
The world has decided.
That he is smart and very nice.
Gogol further reveals the “strange quality of the hero.” In Pushkin, Onegin is a “strange companion,” an eccentric in the eyes of others. Along the way, we can note the non-random correspondence between the names of the authors and their main characters: Pushkin - Onegin, Chichikov - Gogol. In two works, the motive of the protagonist’s journey is important. However, if Onegin travels out of boredom, then Chichikov has no time to be bored. It is the parallelism of situations and images, given by reminiscences, that emphasizes the significant differences. Let's explain this textually. Pushkin's reminiscences are clearly heard in the description of Chichikov's preparations for the governor's party, which “took more than two hours of time.” The main semantic detail here - “such attentiveness to the toilet, which is not even seen everywhere” - goes back to Pushkin’s poems:
He's at least three o'clock
He spent in front of the mirrors
And he came out of the restroom
Like windy Venus...
Let us point out the continuation of the reminiscences: “Thus dressed, he rode in his own carriage along the endlessly wide streets, illuminated by the meager lighting from flickering windows here and there. However, the governor's house was so lit, even if only for a ball; a carriage with lanterns, two gendarmes in front of the entrance, postilions shouting in the distance - in a word, everything is as it should be.” The above quote is an echo of the verses of the XXVII stanza of the first chapter of “Eugene Onegin”:
We better hurry to the ball.
Where to headlong in a Yamsk carriage
My Onegin has already galloped.
In front of the faded houses
Along the sleepy street in rows
Double carriage lights
Cheerful ones pour out light,
Dotted with bowls all around,
A magnificent house sparkles...
And tightness, and shine, and joy,
And I'll give you a thoughtful outfit.
Chichikov, entering the hall, “had to close his eyes for a minute, because the shine from the candles, lamps and ladies’ dresses was terrible.” Before us is as if a retelling of the first chapter of “Onegin”. But what kind of retelling, or rather transposition, is this? If in Pushkin the image of the ball evokes enthusiastic memories, resulting in the inspired lines “I remember the sea before the thunderstorm...”, etc., then Gogol in a similar place in the story gives, as a digression, a long comparison of “black tailcoats” with flies on sugar. A similar ratio can be seen in almost all reminiscences.
Perfume in cut crystal;
Combs, steel files,
Straight scissors, curved
And brushes of thirty kinds
For both nails and teeth
are replaced by the second hero with soap (with which he rubs both cheeks for an extremely long time, “propping them from the inside with his tongue”) and a towel (with which he wipes his face, “starting from behind the ears and first snorting twice into the very face of the tavern servant”). To top it off, he “plucked two hairs from his nose” in front of the mirror. It is already difficult for us to imagine him “like the windy Venus”, “the second Chaadaev”. It's already perfect new hero. Reminiscences show its continuity. If Onegin carries within himself “an illness, the cause of which should have been found long ago,” then Chichikov’s Gogol seems to be trying to reveal this “illness” more deeply in order to then get rid of it. The motif of the hardening of the human heart sounds in “Dead Souls” with increasing force.
The reduction, reaching the point of parody, plays an important semantic role. It is interesting to note that the “reduced” hero Chichikov goes to the evening in his own carriage, and the noble Onegin - in a Yamsk carriage. Maybe Chichikov claims to be a “hero of his time”? It is difficult to say whether Gogol sees evil irony in this. One thing is clear: he grasped the redistribution of positions in Russian life and reflected this redistribution. In another of his works, “Theatrical Tour after the Presentation of a New Comedy,” he speaks about this directly: “It’s worth taking a close look around. Everything changed a long time ago in the world... Don’t people now have more power, money capital, and a profitable marriage than love?” What was a kind of background in Pushkin’s novel - the ordinary environment of the nobility and landowners - came to the fore in Gogol.
The landowners whom Chichikov visits are in many ways reminiscent of the Larins’ neighbors, who gathered for Tatyana’s name day. Instead of the “strange companion” Pushkin, who was even on friendly terms with him (“I became friends with him at that time”), a “scoundrel” hero appears on the stage. The author's element in “Dead Souls” is very reminiscent lyrical digressions"Eugene Onegin". Gogol, just like Pushkin, continuously carries on a conversation with the reader, addressing him, commenting on events, giving characteristics, sharing his thoughts... Let us recall, for example, the beginning of chapter six, where the author writes: “Before, long ago, in the years of my youth, in the years of my irrevocably flashed childhood, it was fun for me to approach an unfamiliar place for the first time... Oh my youth! oh my freshness!” Aren't there echoes of Pushkin's poems in this passage?
In those days when in the gardens of the Lyceum
I blossomed serenely...
In “Dead Souls” one can feel elements of Pushkin’s poetics. Let us point out some literary techniques characteristic of “Eugene Onegin”. First of all, this is irony. Gogol's words have a direct and hidden meaning. Just like Pushkin, Gogol does not hide the conventions of his story. For example, he writes: “It is very doubtful that the readers will like the hero we have chosen.” From Pushkin:
I was already thinking about the form of the plan
And I’ll call him a hero.
There is no long exposition, the action begins immediately (the characters move at the very first moment: Onegin “flies on a post office”, Chichikov drives a chaise through the gates of the hotel). Much about the characters is revealed only later (Onegin’s office in the seventh chapter, Chichikov’s biography in the eleventh). Pushkin's method of special enumeration in descriptions appears in Gogol. “Meanwhile, the britzka turned into more deserted streets... Now the pavement was over, and the barrier, and the city behind... And again, on both sides of the main path, the miles, station guards, wells, carts, gray villages with samovars began to appear again. , women and a lively bearded owner... a song will linger in the distance, pine tops in the fog, the ringing of bells disappearing in the distance, crows like flies, and the endless horizon...” Compare:
That's right along Tverskaya
The cart rushes over potholes.
The booths and women flash past,
Boys, benches, lanterns.
Palaces, gardens, monasteries,
Bukharians, sleighs, vegetable gardens,
Merchants, shacks, men.
Balconies, lions on the gates
And flocks of jackdaws on crosses.
The reminiscences noted above indicate that Gogol assimilated Pushkin’s creative experience.
B.V. Tomashevsky, in the work already mentioned, noted the possibility of the appearance of another kind of reminiscences from Pushkin - related not to the laws of literary specificity, but to the personal perception of impressions from Pushkin’s speech, containing apt and varied characteristics. We would attribute the following textual convergence to this type: “His appearance at the ball produced an extraordinary effect.”
Meanwhile, Onegin's phenomenon
The Larins produced
Everyone is very impressed.
From the point of view of Pushkin's reminiscences, the letter written to Chichikov is interesting. In general, it is perceived as a parody of Tatyana’s letter to Onegin, but the words “leave forever the city where people in stuffy enclosures do not use the air” refer us to the poem “Gypsies”:
When would you imagine
The captivity of stuffy cities!
There are people in heaps behind the fence
They don't breathe the morning cool...
This reminiscence contains more than one Pushkin motif, but, touching upon various elements of Pushkin’s world, it seems to create a generalized representation of it. IN Gogol's situation he seems vulgarized. Gogol, apparently, felt with the artist’s intuition what Belinsky categorically expressed in 1835, declaring him the head of literature. Pushkin's time, it was necessary to understand, has passed. The Gogol period in literature had a completely different flavor. Pushkin's heroes could not be taken seriously in the new situation. Pushkin also did not ignore the problem of a new hero like Chichikov. Even before Gogol’s character in “The Queen of Spades,” Hermann was introduced, for whom the passion for achieving wealth overshadows everything human. “He has the profile of Napoleon, and the soul of Mephistopheles.” In the fourth chapter of Pushkin’s story we read about Hermann: “He sat on the window, arms folded and frowning menacingly. In this position, he surprisingly resembled a portrait of Napoleon.” In “Dead Souls,” at a council of officials, “they found that Chichikov’s face, if he turns and stands sideways, looks very much like a portrait of Napoleon.” This extremely important reminiscence connects the image of Chichikov with the image of Hermann and helps to understand the essence of the first with the help of the second. The analogy between Hermann and Chichikov (who must also have the soul of Mephistopheles) is strengthened by the comparison (through Napoleon) with the Antichrist. Someone said that “Napoleon is the Antichrist and is held on by a stone chain... but later he will break the chain and take possession of the whole world.” Thus, various reminiscences form a synthetic image of a new hero, based on an understanding of Pushkin’s literary tradition. Another component of this tradition was complexly reinterpreted by Gogol in “The Tale of Captain Kopeikin.” Captain Kopeikin is forced to take the path of robbery by the most serious life circumstances. A situation that is in many ways reminiscent of “Dubrovsky”. The story, which had a complex creative history, in the original edition contained in the finale a clear plot reminiscence from “Dubrovsky”; Having saved money, Kopeikin goes abroad, from where he writes a letter to the sovereign asking him to forgive his accomplices. The parallel between Kopeikin (who is correlated with Chichikov) and Dubrovsky is important for understanding the “robber” element in Chichikov. This element is complexly divided into romantic-benign and criminal-villainous sides. “The Tale of Captain Kopeikin” uniquely echoes Pushkin’s poems from “The Bronze Horseman” dedicated to St. Petersburg. “There’s some kind of spitz in the air; the bridges there hang like hell, you can imagine, without any, that is, touching.” What an amazing parody of Pushkin’s magnificent hymn, which contains the following words:
Bridges hung over the waters; and bright
Admiralty needle.
In Pushkin’s St. Petersburg story, a “little” man dies. In Gogol’s insert story, another “little” man finds the strength to endure. Pushkin's plot is more tragic, but he retains, along with artlessness and simplicity, some kind of sublime view of things. Gogol's world is completely different. Reminiscences highlight this difference. However, in the main thing - in thinking about the future of Russia - the two great writers are in tune. “Aren’t you, Rus', like a brisk, unstoppable troika, rushing?.. Eh, horses, horses, what kind of horses!.., together and at once tensed their copper breasts and, almost without touching the ground with their hooves, turned into just elongated lines. .. Rus', where are you going? give me the answer.”
And what fire there is in this horse!
Where are you galloping, proud horse?
And where will you put your hooves?
O mighty lord of Fate!
Aren't you right above the abyss?
Raised Russia on its hind legs?
In conclusion, we note one more Pushkin reminiscence when describing Chichikov’s arrival in Manilovka: “The view was enlivened by two women who... were wandering knee-deep in a pond... Even the weather itself was very helpful: the day was either clear or gloomy... . To complete the picture there was no shortage of a rooster, a harbinger of changeable weather...” Elements of this landscape make us remember “Count Nulin”: ........
The turkeys came out screaming
Following a wet cock;
Three ducks were rinsing themselves in a puddle;
A woman walked through a dirty yard,
The weather was getting worse...
Thus, Pushkin’s reminiscences in Gogol’s “Dead Souls” reflected his creative assimilation of Pushkin’s artistic experience, which gave a huge impetus to the development of Russian literature.
“NEW PEOPLE” IN 19TH CENTURY LITERATURE
In the literature of the 1850-1860s, a whole series of novels emerged, called novels about “new people”.
By what criteria is a person classified as a “new people”? First of all, the emergence of “new people” is determined by the political and historical situation of society. They are representatives of a new era, therefore, they have a new perception of time, space, new tasks, new relationships. Hence the prospect for the development of these people in the future. So, in literature, “new people” “begin” with Turgenev’s novels “Rudin” (1856), “On the Eve” (1859), “Fathers and Sons” (1862).
At the turn of the 30s and 40s, after the defeat of the Decembrists, ferment occurred in Russian society. One part of him was overcome by despair and pessimism, the other by scrupulous activity, expressed in attempts to continue the work of the Decembrists. Soon public thought takes a more formalized direction - a propaganda direction. It was this idea of society that Turgenev expressed in the type of Rudin. At first the novel was called “Nature of Genius.” Under “genius” in in this case it implies insight, a desire for truth (the task of this hero is, indeed, more moral than social), his task is to sow “reasonable, good, eternal,” and he fulfills this with honor, but he lacks nature, does not have enough strength to overcome obstacles.
Turgenev also touches on such a painful issue for Russians as the choice of activity, fruitful and useful activity. Yes, every time has its own heroes and tasks. The society of that time needed Rudina enthusiasts and propagandists. But no matter how harshly the descendants accuse their fathers of “vulgarity and doctrinaire,” the Rudins are people of the moment, of a specific situation, they are rattles. But when a person grows up, there is no need for rattles...
The novel “On the Eve” (1859) is somewhat different, it can even be called “intermediate”. This is the time between Rudin and Bazarov (again a matter of time!). The title of the book speaks for itself. On the eve of... what?.. Elena Stakhova is at the center of the novel. She is waiting for someone... she must love someone... Who? Elena's internal state reflects the situation of the time; it covers the whole of Russia. What does Russia need? Why did neither the Shubins nor the Bersenyevs, seemingly worthy people, attract her attention? And this happened because they lacked active love for the Motherland, complete dedication to it. That is why Elena was attracted to Insarov, who was fighting for the liberation of his land from Turkish oppression. Insarov's example is a classic example, a man for all times. After all, there is nothing new in it (for unfailing service to the Motherland is not new at all!), but it is precisely this well-forgotten old thing that Russian society lacked...
In 1862, Turgenev’s most controversial, most poignant novel, “Fathers and Sons,” was published. Of course, all three novels are political, novels of debate, novels of controversy. But in the novel “Fathers and Sons” this is especially well noticed, for it manifests itself specifically in the “fights” between Bazarov and Kirsanov. “Fights” turn out to be so irreconcilable because they represent the conflict of two eras - the noble and the common.
The acute political nature of the novel is also shown in the specific social conditioning of the “new man” type. Evgeny Bazarov is a nihilist, a collective type. Its prototypes were Dobrolyubov, Preobrazhensky, and Pisarev.
It is also known that nihilism was very fashionable among young people of the 50s and 60s of the 19th century. Of course, denial is the path to self-destruction. But what caused it, this unconditional denial of all living life, Bazarov gives a very good answer to this:
“And then we realized that chatting, just chatting about our ulcers, is not worth the trouble, that it only leads to vulgarity and doctrinaire; We saw that our wise men, the so-called progressive people and accusers, are no good, that we are engaged in nonsense... when it comes to daily bread...” So Bazarov took up the task of obtaining “daily bread.” It is not for nothing that he does not connect his profession with politics, but becomes a doctor and “tinkers with people.” In Rudin there was no efficiency; in Bazarovo this efficiency appeared. That's why he is head and shoulders above everyone else in the novel. Because he found himself, raised himself, and did not live the life of an empty flower, like Pavel Petrovich, and, moreover, he did not “spent day after day,” like Anna Sergeevna.
The question of time and space is posed in a new way. Bazarov says: “Let it (time) depend on me.” Thus, this stern man turns to such a universal idea: “Everything depends on the person!”
The idea of space is shown through the internal liberation of the individual. After all, personal freedom is, first of all, going beyond one’s own “I”, and this can only happen by giving oneself to something. Bazarov devotes himself to the cause, the Motherland (“Russia needs me...”), and feeling.
He feels enormous strength, but he cannot do something the way he wants. That's why he withdraws into himself, becomes bilious, irritated, gloomy.
While working on this work, Turgenev gave great progress to this image and the novel acquired a philosophical meaning.
What was this “iron man” missing? Not only was there not enough general education, Bazarov did not want to come to terms with life, did not want to accept it as it is. He did not recognize human impulses in himself. This is his tragedy. He crashed against people - that’s the tragedy of this image. But it’s not for nothing that the novel has such a reconciling ending, it’s not for nothing that Evgeniy Bazarov’s grave is holy. There was something natural and deeply sincere in his actions. This is what comes to Bazarov. The direction of nihilism has not justified itself in history. It formed the basis of socialism... The novel “What is to be done?” became a continuation novel, a novel-response to Turgenev’s work. N. G. Chernyshevsky.
If Turgenev created collective types generated by social cataclysms and showed their development in this society, then Chernyshevsky not only continued them, but also gave a detailed answer, creating a programmatic work “What is to be done?”.
If Turgenev did not indicate the background of Bazarov, then Chernyshevsky gave a complete story of the life of his heroes.
What distinguishes Chernyshevsky’s “new people”?
Firstly, these are commoner democrats. And they, as you know, represent the period of bourgeois development of society. The emerging class creates its own new, creates a historical foundation, and therefore new relationships, new perceptions. The theory of “reasonable egoism” was an expression of these historical and moral tasks.
Chernyshevsky creates two types of “new people”. These are “special” people (Rakhmetov) and “ordinary” (Vera Pavlovna, Lopukhov, Kirsanov). Thus, the author solves the problem of reorganizing society. Lopukhov, Kirsanov, Rodalskaya reorganize it with creative, constructive, harmonious work, through self-education and self-education. Rakhmetov - “revolutionary”, although this path is shown vaguely. That is why the question of time immediately arises. That is why Rakhmetov is a man of the future, and Lopukhov, Kirsanov, Vera Pavlovna are people of the present. For Chernyshevsky’s “new people,” internal personal freedom comes first. “New people” create their own ethics, solve moral and psychological issues. Self-analysis (unlike Bazarov) is the main thing that distinguishes them. They believe that the power of reason will instill in a person “the good and the eternal.” The author looks at this issue in the formation of the hero from the initial forms of struggle against family despotism to preparation and “change of scenery.”
Chernyshevsky argues that a person must be a harmonious person. So, for example, Vera Pavlovna (the issue of emancipation), being a wife, mother, has the opportunity for social life, the opportunity to study, and most importantly, she has cultivated in herself a desire to work.
Chernyshevsky’s “new people” relate to each other “in a new way,” that is, the author says that these are completely normal relationships, but in the conditions of that time they were considered special and new. The heroes of the novel treat each other with respect, delicately, even if they have to step over themselves. They are above their ego. And the “theory of rational egoism” that they created is only deep introspection. Their selfishness is public, not personal.
Rudin, Bazarov, Lopukhov, Kirsanovs. There were - and there were no. Let each of them have their own shortcomings, their own theories that time has not justified. But these people gave themselves to their Motherland, Russia, they rooted for it, suffered, therefore they are “new people”.
Abstract on literatureThe theme of the “little man” in Russian literatureXIXcentury. ContentsThe theme of the “little man” in Russian literature. A.S. Pushkin “Station Warden”. N.V. Gogol "The Overcoat". F.M. Dostoevsky “Crime and Punishment.” “Little Man” and Time. List of used literature.The term “little man” is a true long-liver in school and university literary studies. A semantic and emotional stereotype has emerged that accompanies this expression.
Forgotten, humiliated people, their lives, small joys and big troubles for a long time seemed insignificant, unworthy of attention. The era gave rise to such people and such an attitude towards them. Cruel times and tsarist injustice forced the “little people” to withdraw into themselves. Suffered, they lived an unnoticed life and also died unnoticed. But it was precisely such people who sometimes, due to the will of circumstances, obeying the cry of the soul, began to murmur against the powers that be and cry out for justice. Petty officials, stationmasters, “little people” who had gone mad, came out of the shadows against their own will.
One of the first writers who discovered the world of “little people” was N.M. Karamzin. The greatest influence on subsequent literature was made by Karamzin’s story “Poor Liza. The author laid the foundation for a huge series of works about “little people”, took the first step into a previously unknown topic by A.S. Pushkin was the next writer whose sphere of creative attention began to include the whole of vast Russia, its open spaces, and the life of villages. For the first time, Russian literature so piercingly and clearly showed the distortion of personality by an environment hostile to it. For the first time, it became possible not only to dramatically depict the contradictory behavior of a person, but also to condemn the evil and inhuman forces of society - Samson Vyrin judges this society. Pushkin's artistic discovery was aimed at the future - it paved the way for Russian literature into the unknown.
This theme reached its greatest apogee in the works of N.V. Gogol. (C) Information published on the site
Gogol reveals to the reader the world of officials in his “Petersburg Tales”.
N.V. Gogol, who in his “Petersburg Tales” and other stories revealed the true side of metropolitan life and the life of officials, clearly and powerfully showed the possibilities of the “natural school” in transforming and changing a person’s view of the world and the destinies of “little people.” Critical realism Gogol revealed and helped develop this topic for writers of the future like no one else. Gogol advocated deep and original criticism, which should be a “faithful representative of the opinions” of his era.
In the St. Petersburg Notes of 1836, Gogol, from a realistic position, puts forward the idea of socially rich art, which notices the common elements of our society that move its springs. He gives a remarkably deep definition of realistic art, following romanticism, embracing with its effective gaze the old and the new. Gogol's realism contains the revelation of the complexity of life, its movement, the birth of something new. The realistic view is affirmed in the works of N.V. Gogol in the second half of the 30s.
"Petersburg Tales", especially "The Overcoat", were of great importance for all subsequent literature, the establishment in it of the social-humanitarian direction and the natural school. Herzen considered “The Overcoat” a colossal work by N.V. Gogol, and F.M. Dostoevsky said: “We all came out of Gogol’s “The Overcoat.” Creativity N.V. Gogol enormously enriched Russian literature.
The development of the “little man” theme has its own logic, which we will try to follow in the future. I settled on the following works of Russian classics: “The Station Agent” by A.S. Pushkin, “The Overcoat” by N.V. Gogol, “Crime and Punishment” by F.M. Dostoevsky.
St. Petersburg and Moscow, in the works of A.S. Pushkin, opened not only from the luxurious entrance, but also through the narrow doors of poor houses. Proof of this was his “Belkin’s Tale”, in the center of Kotogykh - provincial Russia. Here are the “martyr of the fourteenth class,” the collegiate registrar, the caretaker of one of the thousand small postal stations, the poor official Samson Vyrin, and the retired hussar officer Silvio, and the rich nobles, and the impoverished.
The revelation of the social and artistic significance of “The Station Agent” was initiated by F.M. Dostoevsky, he expressed judgments about the realism of Pushkin’s story, about its cognitive value, pointed out the typicality of the image of the poor official Vyrin, the simplicity and clarity of the language of the story, and noted the depth of the depiction of the human hero in it. The tragic fate of the “fourteenth grade martyr” after F.M. Dostoevsky more than once attracted the attention of critics who noted Pushkin’s humanism and democracy and rated “The Station Agent” as one of the most famous, starting from the 18th century, realistic stories about a poor official.
Pushkin's choice of hero - stationmaster was not accidental. In the 20s of the 19th century, as is known, many morally descriptive essays and stories appeared in Russian literature, the heroes of which turned out to be people of the “lower class”. In addition, the travel genre is being revived. In the mid-20s, poems, poems, and essays began to appear more and more often in magazines, in which attention was paid not only to descriptions of the region, but also to meetings and conversations with the stationmaster.
In the story, the narrator's three visits, separated from each other by several years, organize the course of the narrative, and in all three parts, as in the introduction, the narration is narrated by the narrator. But in the second, central part of the story, we hear Vyrin himself. In the words of the narrator: “Let us delve into all this thoroughly, and instead of indignation our hearts will be filled with sincere sympathy,” a generalization is given, it is said about the convict life and the position of the stationmaster of not just one tract, but all of them, at every time of the year, day and nights. Excited lines with rhetorical questions (“who hasn’t cursed...”, “who in a moment of anger?”, etc.), demanding to be fair, to enter into the position of “a real martyr of the fourteenth class” make us understand what Pushkin says sympathetically about the hard work of these people.
The first meeting in 1816 is described by the narrator with obvious sympathy for the father, for his daughter, the beautiful Duna, and for their well-established life. Vyrin is the image of a “fresh, kind man of about fifty, in a long green frock coat with three medals on faded ribbons,” an old soldier who walked faithfully for 30 years during military campaigns, he buried his wife in 1812, and only a few years later he had to to live with his beloved daughter, and a new misfortune befell him. Station guard Samson Vyrin lived poorly, his desires are elementary - through labor, full of insults and humiliations, he earns his livelihood, does not complain about anything and is satisfied with his fate. The trouble that bursts into this private world, then a young hussar who secretly takes his daughter Dunya to St. Petersburg. Grief shook him, but did not break him yet. The story about Vyrin’s fruitless attempts to fight Minsky, after he begged for leave and went to St. Petersburg, is given as sparingly as the story about Vyrin’s hero, but by different means. Four small, but full of life-truth pictures of Vyrin’s parish depict a typical situation in conditions of social and class inequality - the position of the powerless, the weak and the “right” of the strong, those in power. First picture: An old soldier in the role of a supplicant in front of an indifferent, important official.
Second picture: Father in the role of a petitioner, edited by Minsky.
It seemed that a decisive moment had come in a person’s life, when all the accumulated past grievances would raise him to revolt in the name of holy justice. But “...tears welled up in his eyes, and in a trembling voice he only said: Your Honor! ...Do such a divine favor!” Instead of protest, a plea came out, a pitiful request.
Third picture: (two days later). Again, in front of an important footman, who pushed him out of the middle with his chest and slammed the door in his face.
Fourth scene: Again with Minsky: “Get out!” - and, grabbing the old man by the collar with a strong hand, he pushed him onto the stairs.
And finally, after another two days, returning from St. Petersburg to my station, it’s quite understandable too. And Samson Vyrin resigned himself.
The narrator's second visit - he sees that "grief has turned a kind man into a frail old man." And the appearance of the room that did not escape the narrator’s attention (decrepitness, negligence), and Vyrin’s changed appearance (gray hair, deep wrinkles of a long-unshaven face, hunched back), and the surprised exclamation: “It was definitely Samson Vyrin, but how he has aged!” - all this indicates that the narrator sympathizes with the old caretaker. In the narration of the narrator himself, we hear echoes of the feelings and thoughts of Vyrin - a pleading father (“he shook Dunyushkin’s hand; “I saw his poor Dunya”) and Vyrin - a trusting, helpful and powerless person (“he was sorry to part with his kind guest”, “not understood how blindness came upon him,” “decided to appear to him,” “reported to his honor,” that “the old soldier” “thought... returned, but he was no longer there,” “The caretaker did not chase him,” “thought.” , waved his hand and decided to retreat.”) Pushkin A.S. “Novels and Stories”, M., art. Literature, 1960, pp. - 70
The role of Vyrin himself expresses his grief and sheds light on Dunya’s role in his father’s house (“His house held on; what to clean, what to cook, “It used to be that the master, no matter how angry he was, would calm down in front of her and talk graciously to me”).
The fate of the “little man” in the center of the author’s attention and compassion for him is not only the initial, but also the final element of the author’s attitude towards his heroes. It is expressed both in the introduction and in each of the three episodes, the last two of which are a contrast to the first, while each of the three parts of this lyrical-epic story is painted in different emotional tones. The third part is clearly colored in the tone of lyrical sadness - Samson Vyrin finally resigned himself, drank and died of grief and melancholy.
The question of human behavior in the story “The Station Agent”. Delivered sharply and dramatically. Aspiration, Pushkin shows, humiliates a person, makes life meaningless, erases pride, dignity, independence from the soul, turns a person into a voluntary slave, into a victim submissive to the blow of fate.
For the first time, Russian literature so piercingly and clearly showed the distortion of personality by an environment hostile to it. For the first time, it was possible not only to dramatically depict the contradictory behavior of a person, but also to condemn the evil and inhuman forces of society. Samson Vyrin judged this society.
Pushkin's artistic attitude was directed towards the future - it paved the way into the still unknown.
In the story, written on the topic of a stationmaster, popular in the 20s, it is perfectly explained who the collegiate registrar is, and compassion for him is a decisive element of the author’s attitude towards his hero. The story expresses a broad generalization of reality, revealed in an individual case tragic story an ordinary person, “fourteenth class martyr” Samson Vyrin.
Pushkin emphasizes: “... caretakers in general are peaceful people, naturally helpful, inclined to live together, modest in their claims to honor and not too money-loving.” In the image of the stationmaster, Pushkin notes not only humility, meekness, as if agreement with the fate of the little person, but also the desire for well-being and modest joys.
God gives Samson a beautiful daughter, who is also part of the caretaker’s small household; moreover, Dunya helps her father avoid all the caretaker’s sufferings. (C) Information published on the site
Samson Vyrin subtly uses his daughter’s striking beauty to maintain his well-being. The “little man,” being himself “suppressed by circumstances,” is far from indifferent to power over his neighbors.
It is interesting to note the etymology of the Vyrins’ surname: “vyrit” means to adapt, and also “vyr” is a whirlpool, a dark and disastrous whirlpool. V.I. Dal “Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language”, M., Eksmo-press, 2002, p. - 159.
So, in “The Station Agent” Pushkin shows that being a “little man” is a natural and inevitable destiny; Much is revealed to the “little man”, but little is perceived by him; he strives to alleviate his earthly fate, but only incurs even greater suffering; striving for good, does not avoid sin; leaves this life deeply depressed and awaiting the highest court; Death itself turns out to be more desirable for him than life.
The fate of the stationmaster is a typical fate of a simple person, whose well-being can be destroyed at any moment by the rude interference of the “powers of this world”, the ruling class. Pushkin prefaced his story with Gogol, Dostoevsky, Chekhov and their heroes, saying his word about the “little” man.
After reading the stories by N.V. Gogol, we remember for a long time how an unlucky official in a cap stopped in front of a shop window indeterminate form and in a blue cotton overcoat, with an old collar, to look through the solid windows of the shops, shining with wonderful lights and magnificent gilding. For a long time, with envy, the official gazed at various objects and, having come to his senses, continued on his way with deep melancholy and steadfast firmness. Gogol reveals to the reader the world of “little people”, the world of officials in his “Petersburg Tales”.
The central story in this cycle is “The Overcoat”. "Petersburg Tales" differ in character from previous works Gogol. (C) Information published on the site
Before us is bureaucratic Petersburg, Petersburg - the capital - the main and high society, a huge city - business, commercial and labor, and “universal communication” N.V. Gogol “Petersburg Tales”, Lenizdat, 1979, p. -3. St. Petersburg - the brilliant Nevsky Prospekt, on the sidewalk of which everything that lives in St. Petersburg leaves its traces; “exposes on him the power of strength or the power of weakness” N.V. Gogol “Petersburg Tales”, Lenizdat, 1979, p. -4.
And a motley mixture of clothes and faces flashes before the reader, as in a kaleido, and an eerie picture of the restless, intense life of the capital appears in his imagination. The bureaucracy of the time helped paint this accurate portrait of the capital.
The delays of the bureaucracy, the problem of “higher” and “lower” were so obvious that it was impossible not to write about it, “What a fast phantasmagoria is being carried out on him in one day!” - Gogol exclaims as if in surprise, but even more amazing is the ability of Gogol himself to reveal the essence with such depth social contradictions life of a huge city in brief description only one street - Nevsky Prospekt.
In the story “The Overcoat,” Gogol addresses the hated world of officials, and his satire becomes harsh and merciless: “... he has the gift of sarcasm, which sometimes makes you laugh until you convulse, and sometimes awakens contempt bordering on hatred.” This short story made a huge impression on readers. Gogol, following other writers, came to the defense of the “little man” - an intimidated, powerless, pathetic official. He expressed his most sincere, warmest and sincere sympathy for the destitute person in the beautiful lines of his final discussion about the fate and death of one of the many victims of callousness and tyranny.
A victim of such arbitrariness, a typical representative of a petty official in the story is Akaki Akakievich. Everything about him was ordinary: both his appearance and his inner spiritual humiliation. Gogol truthfully portrayed his hero as a victim of unfair activities. In "The Overcoat" the tragic and the comic complement each other. The author sympathizes with his hero, and at the same time sees his mental limitations and laughs at him. During his entire stay in the department, Akakiy Akakievich did not move up the career ladder at all. Gogol shows how limited and pitiful was the world in which Akaki Akakievich existed, content with poor housing, lunch, a worn uniform and an overcoat that was coming apart from old age. Gogol laughs, but he laughs not specifically at Akaki Akakievich, he laughs at the whole society.
But Akaki Akakievich had his own “poetry of life,” which had the same degraded character as his whole life. While writing papers, he “saw his own diverse and pleasant world” 11 N.V. Gogol “Petersburg Tales”, Lenizdat, 1979, p. - 120
Akaki Akakievich still retained the human element. Those around him did not accept his timidity and humility and mocked him in every possible way, poured pieces of paper on his head, and Akaki Akakievich could only say: “Leave me alone, why are you offending me?” 22 N.V. Gogol “Petersburg Tales”, Lenizdat, 1979, p. - 119. The life story of Akaki Akakievich is a new phase in his life. And a new overcoat is a symbol of new life. The apogee of Akaki Akakievich’s creativity is his first arrival at the department in a new overcoat and attending a party at the head of the department. The difficult work of Akaki Akakievich was crowned with success; he at least somehow proved to people that he has self-conceit. At this seemingly pinnacle of prosperity, disaster befalls him. Two robbers take off his overcoat. Despair causes Akaki Akakievich to protest powerlessly. Seeking a reception from the “most private” and turning to a “significant person,” Akaki Akakievich “once in his life wanted to show his character” 11 N.V. Gogol “Petersburg Tales”, Lenizdat, 1979, p. - 136. Gogol sees the inconsistency of his hero’s capabilities, but he gives him the opportunity to resist. But Akaki is powerless in the face of a soulless bureaucratic machine and in the end dies as unnoticed as he lived. Gogol does not end the story here. He shows us the ending: the dead Akaki Akakievich, who during his life was resigned and humble, now appears as a ghost.
The famous episode in the play “The Overcoat” is the choice of name; here it is not just bad luck with names in the calendar, but a picture of nonsense (since the name is a personality): he could be either Mokkiy (ᴨȇrevod: “mockery”) or Sossie (“big guy” ), and Khozdazat, and Triphilius, and Varakhasiy, and repeated the name of his father: “the father was Akaki, so let the son be Akaki (“doing no evil”), this phrase can be read as a sentence of fate: the father was a “little man” , let the son also be a “little man.” Actually, life, devoid of meaning and joy, is only dying for the “little man”, and out of modesty he is ready to complete his career immediately, as soon as he is born.
Boshmachkin died: “A creature disappeared and hid, not protected by anyone, not dear to anyone, not interesting to anyone...”
But the story about the poor official does not end there. We learn that Akaki Akakievich, dying in a fever, in his delirium, scolded “His Excellency” so much that the old housewife, who was sitting at the patient’s bedside, became afraid. So, just before his death, anger arose in the soul of the downtrodden Bashmachkin against the people who destroyed him.
Gogol tells us at the end of his story that in the world in which Akaki Akakievich lived, the hero as a person, as a person challenging the entire society, can live only after death. “The Overcoat” tells the story of the most ordinary and insignificant person, about the most ordinary events in his life. The story had a great influence on the direction of Russian literature; the theme of the “little man” became one of the most important for many years.
Gogol’s “The Overcoat” is a grotesque and dark nightmare, punching black holes in the vague picture of life 11 Turyanskaya B.I. “Literature in 9th grade”, M., Russian Word, 2002, p. - 34 ... (V.V. Nabokov).
F.M. Dostoevsky is not just a continuer of traditions in Russian literature, but becomes the author of one leading theme - the theme of “poor people”, “humiliated and insulted”. Dostoevsky asserts through his work that every person, no matter who he is, no matter how low he stands, has the right to sympathy and compassion.
Like many outstanding Russian writers, Dostoevsky already in his first novel “Poor People” addresses the theme of the little man.”
The social theme, the theme of “poor people”, “humiliated and insulted”, was continued by the author in “Crime and Punishment”, here it sounded even stronger. One after another, the writer reveals pictures of hopeless poverty in front of us. Dostoevsky chose the dirtiest part of strictly St. Petersburg as the location for the action. Against the backdrop of this landscape, the life of the Marmeladov family unfolds before us.
The fate of this family is closely intertwined with the fate of the main character, Rodion Raskolnikov. The official Marmeladov, who has “nowhere else to go” in life, drinks himself to death out of grief and loses his human appearance. Exhausted by poverty, Marmeladov’s wife, Katerina Ivanovna, dies of consumption. Sonya goes out into the street to sell her body to save her family from starvation.
The fate of Raskolnikov’s family is also difficult. His sister Dunya, wanting to help her brother, is ready to sacrifice herself and marry the rich man Luzhin, whom she feels disgusted with. Other characters in the novel, including those unfortunate people who fleetingly meet Raskolnikov on the streets of St. Petersburg, complement this big picture immeasurable grief. Raskolnikov understands that the cruel force that creates dead ends in life for the poor and a bottomless sea of suffering is money. And in order to get them, he commits a crime under the influence of a far-fetched idea about “extraordinary personalities.”
F.M. Dostoevsky created a vast canvas of immeasurable human torment, suffering and grief, looked closely and insightfully into the soul of the so-called “little man” and discovered in him deposits of enormous spiritual wealth, spiritual generosity and beauty, not broken by the harshest conditions of life. And this was a new word not only in Russian, but also in all world literature.
The desire to be “not small” gives rise to Raskolnikov’s well-known formula: “Am I a trembling creature or do I have the right?”, which presupposes a judgment about the meaning of human destiny by earthly standards. Dostoevsky's hero is led by the devil in the field of mortal sin - murder.
One way or another, in Raskolnikov Dostoevsky depicted the protest of the “little man” taken to the limit.
Dostoevsky knows how to create the image of a real fallen man: Marmelad’s annoying sweetness, clumsy florid speech - the property of a beer tribune and a jester at the same time. Awareness of his baseness (“I am a born beast”) only strengthens his bravado.
Not even poverty, but poverty, in which a person not only literally dies from hunger, but also loses his human appearance and self-esteem - this is the state in which the unfortunate Marmeladov family is immersed. A drunken old man of marmalades, for the sake of a glass of vodka, humiliating himself before the innkeeper; his wife, “proud” Katerina Ivanovna, dying of consumption and sending her seventeen-year-old stepdaughter, the great sufferer Sonya, to sell herself on the street to the Terburg libertines; Marmeladov’s small children dying of hunger are a clear confirmation of this. Material suffering entails a world of moral torment that disfigures the human psyche. Dobrolyubov wrote: “In Dostoevsky’s works we find one common feature, more or less noticeable in everything he wrote: this is pain about a person who recognizes himself as unable or, finally, not even entitled to be a person in himself.”
To understand the extent of a person’s humiliation, you need to delve into the inner world of the titular adviser Marmeladov. The mental state of this petty official is much more complex and subtle than that of his literary predecessors - Pushkin's Samson Vyrin and Gogol's Bashmachkin. They do not have the power of self-analysis that Dostoevsky's hero achieved. Marmeladov not only suffers, but also analyzes his state of mind; as a doctor, he makes a merciless diagnosis of the disease - the degradation of his own personality. This is how he confesses in his first meeting with Raskolnikov: “Dear sir, poverty is not a vice, it is the truth. But...poverty is a vice - p. In poverty you still retain all the nobility of your innate feelings, but in poverty no one ever does... for in poverty I myself am ready to insult myself.” A person not only dies from poverty, but understands how spiritually he is becoming empty: he begins to despise himself, but does not see anything around him to cling to that would keep him from the disintegration of his personality. Marmeladov despises himself. We sympathize with him, are tormented by his torment and keenly hate the social circumstances that gave rise to human tragedy.
Marmeladov’s cry from the soul reaches enormous artistic persuasiveness when he noticed the mockery of the tavern listeners: “Allow me, young man, can you... but no, explain more powerfully and more graphically: can’t you, but will you dare, looking at me at this hour, can I say in the affirmative that I’m not a pig?” By emphasizing these words, the writer sharpens our perception and deepens his thought. Of course, you can call a drunkard who ruins his family swear word, but who will take upon himself the courage to condemn such a Marmeladov, who under the name of the writer became a truly tragic figure!
Marmeladov rebels against the loneliness to which a poor man is doomed in the jungle of a ruthless city.
Marmeladov’s cry - “after all, it is necessary that every person can at least go somewhere” - expresses the last degree of despair of a dehumanized person.
Looking at Marmeladov, Raskolnikov saw “an old, completely tattered tailcoat with remaining buttons. Only one of them held on somehow, and he fastened it on it, apparently wanting to avoid any decency.”
“They have already felt sorry for me more than once,” Marmeladov says to Raskolnikov. The good general Ivan Afanasyevich took pity on him and accepted him into service again. But Marmeladov could not stand the test, started drinking again, drank away his entire salary, drank it all away and in return received a tattered tailcoat with a single button. Marmeladov in his behavior reached the point of losing his last human qualities. He is already so humiliated that he does not feel like a human being, but only dreams of being a human among people.
The meeting with Marmeladov in the tavern, his feverish, delirious confession gave Raskolnikov the final proof of the correctness of the “Napoleonic idea.”
Dostoevsky studied with many. What he learned from Gogol in his early days was especially noticeable in his works - in the choice of theme and hero, in individual elements, in the external details of the description, and even directly in the style. But it was precisely thanks to this circumstance that the development by Gogol’s student of Gogol’s student of the inherent features in his view of man and the environment became clearly distinguishable - according to the principle of contrast.
The most important and new thing, in comparison with other writers who explored this topic, is the ability of the downtrodden man Dostoevsky to look into himself, the ability of introspection and appropriate actions. The writer subjects himself to detailed self-analysis; no other writer, in his essays and stories that sympathetically depicted the life and customs of the urban poor, had such leisurely and concentrated psychological insight and depth of depiction of the character of the characters.
The twentieth century brought the final formation of totalitarianism in Russia. During the period of the most brutal repression, at a time when a person was completely depersonalized and turned into a cog in a huge state machine, writers responded furiously, standing up in defense of the individual.
Blinded by the greatness of goals, deafened by loud slogans, we completely forgot about the individual person who remained a person after forty-five, and after fifty-three, and after sixty-four - a person with his everyday worries, with his desires and hopes that no one can cancel. political regime. The one whom Belinsky at one time called “the little man”, about whom Dostoevsky lamented, whom A.P. tried to raise from his knees. Chekhov, about whom M.A. wrote as a great Master. Burlgakov, lost in the vastness of a huge state, turned into a small remnant for history, perishing in the camps. It took writers great efforts to resurrect him. The traditions of the classics, the titans of Russian literature, were continued by writers of urban prose, those who wrote about the fate of the village during the years of totalitarian oppression, and those who told us about the world of the camps. There were dozens of them. It is enough to name a few of them: A.I. Solzhenitsyn, A.T. Trifonov, A.T. Tvardovsky, V. Vysotsky. To understand what enormous scope literature has reached in the destinies of the “little man” of the twentieth century.
St. Petersburg, Moscow - the city that has worried many Russian writers for so long, has become even more terrible and cruel. He is a symbol of that powerful force that suppresses the weak shoots of humanity, he is the concentration of human grief, a mirror of all Russian reality, the reflection of which we see throughout the country, within the walls of camps and on the outskirts of provincial towns.
The “little man” of our city of the 60s - 70s is not able to get to the surface of life and loudly declare his existence. But he, too, is a man, and not a louse, as Raskolnikov wanted to prove to himself, and he deserves not just attention, but also a better life. The path to achieving this was opened to him by those who in our time strived to “straighten the backs of the hunchbacked.” New writers speak out in defense of truth and conscience, they formed a new man, in this regard, one cannot close the last page in a huge book dedicated to him, the “little man”!
List of used literature:
1. Bulin A.P. " Artistic images F.M. Dostoevsky."
Moscow, Nauka, 1974
2. Volkova L.D. “Roman F.M. Dostoevsky "Crime and Punishment".
Leningrad, Enlightenment, 1977
3. Gogol N.V. "Prose. Articles"
Moscow Contemporary, Russia, 1977
4. Kirpotin V.Ya. "Disappointments and downfalls of R. Raskolnikov."
Moscow, Fiction, 1986
5. Nabokov V.V. "Lectures on Russian literature."
Moscow Nezavisimaya Gazeta, 1998
6. Turyanskaya B.I. “Literature in 9th grade, lesson by lesson.”
Moscow, Russian Word, 2002