General characteristics of the work: the story of one city. Analysis of the work “The History of a City” by Saltykov-Shchedrin M.E.

“The History of a City” Saltykov-Shchedrin

"The Story of a City" analysis of the work - theme, idea, genre, plot, composition, characters, issues and other issues are discussed in this article.

“The History of a City” is one of the central works of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. It was published in the journal Otechestvennye zapiski in 1869-1870 and caused a wide public outcry. The main means of satirical exposure of reality in the work are grotesque and hyperbole. In terms of genre, it is stylized as a historical chronicle. The image of the author-narrator is called in it “the last archivist-chronicler.”

After the title there is a note: “According to original documents, published by M.E. Saltykov /Shchedrin/.” It is intended to create the illusion of authenticity.

M.E. writes with subtle irony. Saltykov-Shchedrin about how the faces of these mayors change with the change of one or another historical era: “So, for example, the mayors of Biron’s time are distinguished by their recklessness, the mayors of Potemkin’s times by their stewardship, and the mayors of Razumovsky’s time by unknown origins and knightly courage. All of them flog the townsfolk, but the first flog the townsfolk absolutely, the latter explain the reasons for their management by the requirements of civilization, the third want the townsfolk to rely on their courage in everything.” Thus, from the very beginning, a hierarchy is built and emphasized: higher spheres - local government - ordinary people. On their destinies in a mirror image shows what is happening in areas of power: “in the first case, the inhabitants trembled unconsciously, in the second they trembled with the consciousness of their own benefit, in the third they rose to awe filled with trust.”

The author emphasizes that the chronicler’s appearance is very real, which does not allow one to doubt his authenticity for a minute. M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin clearly indicates the boundaries of the period under consideration: from 1931 to 1825. The work includes “Address to the reader from the last archivist-chronicler.” To give a documentary character to this fragment of the narrative, the author places a footnote after the title stating that the address is conveyed exactly in the words of the chronicler himself. The publisher allowed himself only spelling corrections of the text in order to edit certain liberties in the spelling of words. The appeal begins with a conversation with the reader about whether there will be worthy rulers and leaders in the history of our country: “Is it really possible that in every country there will be both glorious Nero and Caligula, shining with valor, and only in our own country will we not find such?” The omniscient publisher supplements this quote with a reference to a poem by G.R. Derzhavina: “Caligula! Your horse in the Senate Could not shine, shining in gold: Good deeds shine!” This addition aims to emphasize the value scale: it is not gold that shines, but good deeds. Gold in in this case acts as a symbol of acquisitiveness, and good deeds are proclaimed true value peace.

Further in the work there is a discussion about man in general. The chronicler encourages the reader to look at his own person and decide what is more important in him: the head or the belly. And then judge those in power. Analyzing the people's memory of city leaders and benefactors, the chronicler notes with subtle irony: “You don’t know what to glorify more: the power that dares in moderation, or these grapes that give thanks in moderation?”

At the end of the address, Foolov is compared to Rome, this again emphasizes that we are not talking about a specific city, but about a model of society in general. Thus, the city of Foolov is a grotesque image not only of all of Russia, but also of all power structures on a global scale, for Rome has been associated with the imperial city since ancient times, the same function is embodied by the mention of the Roman emperors Nero (37-68) and Caligula (12-68). 41) in the text of the work. For the same purpose, to expand the information field of the narrative, the names Kostomarov, Pypin and Solovyov are mentioned in the work. Contemporaries had an idea of ​​what views and positions were being discussed. N.I. Kostomarov is a famous Russian historian, researcher of socio-political and economic history Russia and Ukraine, Ukrainian poet and fiction writer. A.N. Pypin (1833-1904) - Russian literary critic, ethnographer, academician of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, cousin of N.G. Chernyshevsky. B.C. Solovyov (1853-1900) - Russian philosopher, poet, publicist, literary critic late XIX- beginning of the 20th century.

Further, the chronicler dates the action of the story to the era of tribal feuds. At the same time, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin uses his favorite compositional technique: the fairy-tale context is combined with the pages of real Russian history. All this creates a system of witty subtle hints that are understandable to a sophisticated reader.

Having come up with funny names for the fairy-tale tribes, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin immediately reveals to the reader their allegorical meaning when representatives of the tribe of blockheads begin to call each other by name (Ivashka, Peter). It becomes clear that we are talking specifically about Russian history.

The bunglers decided to find themselves a prince, and since the people themselves are stupid, they are looking for an unwise ruler. Finally, one (the third in a row, as is customary in Russian folk tales) "princely lordship" agreed to own these people. But with a condition. “And you will pay me many tributes,” the prince continued, “whoever brings a bright sheep, sign the sheep to me, and keep the bright one for yourself; Whoever happens to have a penny, break it in four: give one part to me, the other to me, the third to me again, and keep the fourth for yourself. When I go to war, you go too! And you don’t care about anything else!” Even unreasonable blockheads hung their heads from such speeches.

In this scene M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin convincingly shows that any power is based on the obedience of the people and brings them more troubles and problems than real help and support. It is no coincidence that the prince gives the bunglers a new name: “And since you did not know how to live on your own, and you, stupid ones, wished for bondage for yourself, then from now on you will be called not bunglers, but Foolovites.”

The experiences of deceived bunglers are expressed in folklore. It is symbolic that on the way home one of them sings the song “Don’t make noise, mother green oak tree!”

The prince sends his thieving governors one after another. A satirical inventory of city governors gives them an eloquent description, testifying to their business qualities.

Clementius received due rank for his skillful preparation of pasta. Lamvrokanis traded in Greek soap, sponges and nuts. The Marquis de Sanglot loved to sing obscene songs. One can list for a long time the so-called exploits of mayors. They did not stay in power for long and did nothing worthwhile for the city.

The publisher considered it necessary to present detailed biographies of the most prominent leaders. Here M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin resorts to N.V., already known from “Dead Souls.” Gogol to the classical technique. Just as Gogol portrayed landowners, he presents to the readers a whole gallery of typical images of city governors.

The first of them is depicted in the work of Dementy Varlamovich Brudasty, nicknamed Organchik. In parallel with the story about any specific mayor M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin constantly paints a general picture of the actions of city authorities and the perception of these actions by the people.

So, for example, he mentions that the Foolovites for a long time remembered those bosses who flogged and collected arrears, but at the same time they always said something kind.

The organ struck everyone with the most severe severity. His favorite word was the cry: “I won’t stand it!” Next M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin says that master Baibakov secretly came to the mayor of organ affairs at night. The secret is revealed suddenly at one of the receptions, when the best representatives of the “Gluiovsky intelligentsia” come to see Brudasty (this very phrase contains an oxymoron, which gives the story an ironic connotation). There the mayor breaks down the organ he was using instead of his head. Only Brudasty allowed himself to portray an uncharacteristic friendly smile for him, when “... suddenly something inside him hissed and buzzed, and the longer his mysterious hissing lasted, the more and more his eyes spun and sparkled.” No less interesting is the reaction of the city secular society to this incident. M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin emphasizes that our ancestors were not carried away by revolutionary ideas and anarchist sentiments. Therefore, they only sympathized with the city mayor.

In this fragment of the work, another grotesque move is used: the head, which is being taken to the mayor after repairs, suddenly begins to bite around the city and utters the word: “I’ll ruin it!” A special satirical effect is achieved in the final scene of the chapter, when two different mayors are brought to the rebellious Foolovites almost simultaneously. But the people have become accustomed to not being greatly surprised by anything: “The impostors met and measured each other with their eyes. The crowd dispersed slowly and in silence.”

After this, anarchy begins in the city, as a result of which women seized power. These are the childless widow Iraida Lukinishna Paleologova, the adventurer Clementine de Bourbon, the Revel native Amalia Karlovna Shtokfish, Anelya Aloizievna Lyadokhovskaya, Dunka the fat-fifted, Matryonka the nostril.

In the characteristics of these mayors one can discern subtle hints about the personalities of the reigning persons in Russian history: Catherine II, Anna Ioannovna and other empresses. This is the most stylistically reduced chapter. M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin generously rewards mayors with offensive nicknames and insulting definitions (“fat-meat,” “fat-footed,” etc.). Their entire reign boils down to chaos. The last two rulers generally resemble witches more than real people: “Both Dunka and Matryonka committed unspeakable acts. They went out into the street and knocked the heads of passers-by with their fists, went alone to taverns and smashed them, caught young guys and hid them underground, ate babies, and cut out women’s breasts and ate them too.”

An advanced person who takes his responsibilities seriously is named in the work of S.K. Dvoekurov. In the author’s understanding, he correlates with Peter the Great: “One thing is that he introduced mead making and brewing and made the use of mustard and bay leaves mandatory” and was “the founder of those brave innovators who, three quarters of a century later, waged wars in the name of potatoes.” Dvoekurov's main achievement was his attempt to establish an academy in Foolov. True, he did not achieve results in this field, but the desire to implement this plan in itself was already a progressive step compared to the activities of other mayors.

The next ruler, Pyotr Petrovich Ferdyshchenko, was simple and even liked to equip his speech with the affectionate word “brother-sudarik.” However, in the seventh year of his reign, he fell in love with the suburban beauty Alena Osipovna. All nature has ceased to be favorable to the Foolovites: “From the very spring of St. Nicholas, from the time the water began to enter low water, and until Ilyin’s day, not a drop of rain fell. The old-timers could not remember anything like this, and not without reason attributed this phenomenon to the brigadier’s fall from grace.”

When the pestilence spread throughout the city, the truth-loving Yevseich was found in it, who decided to talk to the foreman. However, he ordered that the old man be put on a prisoner's uniform, and so Yevseich disappeared, as if he had not existed in the world, disappeared without a trace, as only the “miners” of the Russian land can disappear.

Light on the real plight of the population Russian Empire pours out a petition from the inhabitants of the most unfortunate city of Foolov, in which they write that they are dying out, that they see the authorities around them as unskillful.

The savagery and cruelty of the crowd is striking in the scene when the residents of Foolov throw the unfortunate Alenka from the bell tower, accusing her of all mortal sins. The story with Alenka had barely time to be forgotten when the foreman found himself a different hobby.

- shooter Domashka. All these episodes, in essence, show women's powerlessness and defenselessness in front of the voluptuous foreman.

The next disaster that befell the city is a fire on the eve of the feast of the Kazan Mother of God: two settlements burned down. The people perceived all this as another punishment for the sins of their foreman. The death of this mayor is symbolic. He drank too much and ate too much of the people's treat: “After the second break (there was a pig in sour cream) he felt sick; however, he overcame himself and ate another goose with cabbage. After that, his mouth twisted. You could see how some administrative vein on his face trembled, trembled and trembled, and suddenly froze... The Foolovites jumped up from their seats in confusion and fear. It's over..."

The next city ruler turned out to be efficient and meticulous. Vasilisk Semyonovich Wartkin flashed around the city like a fly, loved to shout and take everyone by surprise. It is symbolic that he slept with one with an open eye(a kind of allusion to “ all-seeing eye"autocracy). However, Wartkin's indefatigable energy is spent for other purposes: he builds castles in the sand. The Foolovites aptly call his way of life the energy of inaction. Wartkin wages wars for enlightenment, the reasons for which are ridiculous (for example, the Foolovites’ refusal to plant Persian chamomile). Under his leadership tin soldiers Having entered the settlement, they begin to destroy the huts. It is noteworthy that the Foolovites always learned about the subject of the campaign only after its completion.

When Mikoladze, a champion of graceful manners, comes to power, the Foolovites grow fur and begin to suck their paws. On the contrary, wars for education make them dumber. Meanwhile, when education and legislative activity ceased, the Foolovites stopped sucking their paws, their fur faded without a trace, and soon they began to dance in circles. The laws spell out great poverty, and the inhabitants become obese. The “Charter of Respectable Baking” convincingly shows how much stupidity is concentrated in legislative acts. It states, for example, that it is prohibited to make pies from mud, clay and building materials. As if a person of sound mind and good memory is capable of baking pies from this. In fact, this charter symbolically shows how deeply the state apparatus can intervene in the everyday life of every Russian. They are already giving him instructions on how to bake pies. Moreover special recommendations given regarding the position of the filling. The phrase “Let everyone use the filling according to their condition” indicates a clearly defined social hierarchy in society. However, the passion for legislation also did not take root on Russian soil. Mayor Benevolensky was suspected of having connections with Napoleon, accused of treason and sent “to that region where Makar did not drive calves.” So, using the figurative expression of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin writes allegorically about exile. Controversies in art world works by M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, which is a caustic parody of the author’s contemporary reality, awaits the reader at every turn. So, during the reign of Lieutenant Colonel Pyshch, the people in Foolov were completely spoiled because he preached liberalism in the reign.

“But as freedom developed, its original enemy arose - analysis. With the increase in material well-being, leisure was acquired, and with the acquisition of leisure came the ability to explore and experience the nature of things. This always happens, but the Foolovites used this “newly discovered ability” not in order to strengthen their well-being, but in order to undermine it,” writes M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin.

Pimple became one of the most desirable rulers for the Foolovites. However, the local leader of the nobility, who was not distinguished by special qualities of mind and heart, but had a special stomach, once, on the basis of gastronomic imagination, mistook his head for stuffed. In describing the scene of Pimple's death, the writer boldly resorts to the grotesque. In the final part of the chapter, the leader in a rage rushes at the mayor with a knife and, cutting off pieces of the head slice by slice, eats it completely.

Against the backdrop of grotesque scenes and ironic notes by M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin reveals to the reader his philosophy of history, in which the flow of life sometimes stops its natural flow and forms a whirlpool.

The most painful impression is made by Gloomy-Burcheev. This is a man with a wooden face that never smiles. His detailed portrait eloquently tells about the character of the hero: “Thick, comb-cut, pitch-black hair covers the conical skull and tightly, like a yarmulke, frames the narrow and sloping forehead. The eyes are gray, sunken, shadowed by somewhat swollen eyelids; the look is clear, without hesitation; the nose is dry, descending from the forehead almost straight down; lips are thin, pale, covered with trimmed mustache stubble; the jaws are developed, but without an outstanding expression of carnivory, but with some inexplicable bouquet of readiness to crush or bite in half. The whole figure is lean with narrow shoulders raised upward, with an artificially protruded chest and long, muscular arms.”

M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, commenting on this portrait, emphasizes that we have before us the purest type of idiot. His style of government could only be compared with the random cutting of trees in a dense forest, when a person waves it right and left and steadily walks wherever his eyes look.

On the day of remembrance of the apostles Peter and Paul, the mayor ordered people to destroy their homes. However, this was only the beginning of Napoleonic plans for Ugryum-Burcheev. He began sorting people into families, taking into account their height and physique. After six or two months, no stone remained from the city. Gloomy-Burcheev tried to create his own sea, but the river refused to obey, tearing down dam after dam. The city of Glupov was renamed Nepreklonsk, and the holidays differed from everyday life only in that instead of labor worries, intensive marching was ordered. Meetings were held even at night. In addition to this, spies were appointed. The end of the hero is also symbolic: he instantly disappeared, as if he had melted into thin air.

The very unhurried, drawn-out style of narration in the work of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin shows undecidability Russian problems, and satirical scenes emphasize their sharpness: rulers are replaced one after another, and the people remain in the same poverty, in the same lack of rights, in the same hopelessness.

Saltykov-Shchedrin’s novel “The History of a City” was written during 1869-1870, but the writer worked not only on it, so the novel was written intermittently. The first chapters were published in the journal Otechestvennye zapiski No. 1, where Saltykov-Shchedrin was the editor-in-chief. But until the end of the year, work on the novel stopped, as Saltykov-Shchedrin took up writing fairy tales, completed several unfinished works and continued to write literary criticism.

The continuation of “The History of a City” was published in 5 issues of “Notes of the Fatherland” for 1870. In the same year, the book was published as a separate edition.

Literary direction and genre

Saltykov-Shchedrin is a writer of a realistic direction. Immediately after the book was published, critics defined the genre variety of the novel as a historical satire, and treated the novel differently.

From an objective point of view, Saltykov-Shchedrin is as great a historian as he is a wonderful satirist. His novel is a parody of chronicle sources, primarily “The Tale of Bygone Years” and “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.”

Saltykov-Shchedrin offers his own version of history, which differs from the versions of Saltykov-Shchedrin’s contemporaries (mentioned by the first chronicler Kostomarov, Solovyov, Pypin).

In the chapter “From the Publisher,” Mr. M. Shchedrin himself notes the fantastic nature of some episodes (the mayor with music, the mayor flying through the air, the mayor’s feet facing backwards). At the same time, he stipulates that “the fantastic nature of the stories does not in the least eliminate their administrative and educational significance.” This satirical phrase means that “The History of a City” cannot be considered as a fantastic text, but as a mythological one that explains the mentality of the people.

The fantastic nature of the novel is associated with the grotesque, which allows one to depict the typical through extreme exaggeration and deformation of the image.

Some researchers find dystopian features in “The History of a City.”

Topics and problems

The theme of the novel is the hundred-year history of the city of Foolov - an allegory of the Russian state. The history of the city is the biographies of mayors and descriptions of their great deeds: collection of arrears, imposition of tribute, campaigns against ordinary people, construction and destruction of pavements, fast travel on postal roads...

Thus, Saltykov-Shchedrin raises the problem of the essence of history, which is beneficial for the state to consider as the history of power, and not the history of compatriots.

Contemporaries accused the writer of revealing the supposedly false essence of reformism, which led to the deterioration and complication of the people's life.

The democrat Saltykov-Shchedrin was concerned about the problem of the relationship between man and the state. Mayors, for example, Borodavkin, believe that the meaning of life for “ordinary people” living in the state (not on earth!) is in pensions (that is, in state benefits). Saltykov-Shchedrin understands that the state and ordinary people live on their own. The writer knew this first-hand, having himself for some time played the role of “mayor” (he was vice-governor in Ryazan and Tver).

One of the problems that worried the writer was the study of the mentality of his compatriots, their national traits character that influences one’s life position and causes “insecurity in life, arbitrariness, improvidence, and lack of faith in the future.”

Plot and composition

The composition of the novel has been changed by the author himself since its first publication in the magazine, for example, the chapter “On the Root of the Origin of the Foolovites” was placed third, following the introductory chapters, which was consistent with the logic ancient Russian chronicle starting with mythology. And supporting documents ( works of three mayors) moved to the end, as historical documents are often placed in relation to the author’s text.

The last chapter, appendix “Letter to the Editor,” is Shchedrin’s indignant response to a review in which he was accused of “mockery of the people.” In this letter, the author explains the idea of ​​his work, in particular, that his satire is directed against “those features of Russian life that make it not entirely comfortable.”

“Address to the Reader” was written by the last of the four chroniclers, archivist Pavlushka Masloboinikov. Here Saltykov-Shchedrin imitates real chronicles that had several authors.

The chapter “On the Roots of the Origin of the Foolovites” talks about the myths and prehistoric era of the Foolovites. The reader learns about tribes warring among themselves, about the renaming of blockheads into Foolovites, about the search for a ruler and the enslavement of the Foolovites, who found for themselves a prince who was not only stupid, but also cruel, whose principle of rule was embodied in the word “I’ll screw up,” which begins the historical period of Foolov. Historical period, considered in the novel, occupies a whole century, from 1731 to 1825.

“Inventory for mayors” - a brief description of 22 mayors, which emphasizes the absurdity of history by the concentration of the described madmen, of whom the least, “having done nothing,... was removed for ignorance.”

The next 10 chapters are devoted to describing the most prominent mayors in chronological order.

Heroes and images

“The most remarkable mayors” deserved more close attention publisher.

Dementiy Varlamovich Brudasty is “more than strange.” He is silent and gloomy, also cruel (the first thing he did was whip all the coachmen), and is prone to fits of rage. Brudasty has and positive quality– he is managerial, puts in order the arrears left behind by his predecessors. True, he does this in one way - officials catch citizens, flog them and flog them, and seize their property.

The Foolovites are horrified by such rule. They are saved by the breakdown of the mechanism that is located in Brudasty’s head. This is an organ that repeats only two phrases: “I will ruin” and “I will not tolerate.” The appearance of the second Brudasty with a new head relieves the Foolovites from a couple of organs, declared impostors.

Many of the characters are satires on real rulers. For example, the six mayors are empresses of the 18th century. Their internecine warfare lasted 6 days, and on the seventh day Dvoekurov arrived in the city.

Dvoekurov is a “man of the forefront,” an innovator who was engaged in fruitful activities in Glupov: he paved two streets, opened brewing and mead making, forced everyone to use mustard and Bay leaf, and the disobedient ones were flogged, but “with consideration,” that is, for the cause.

Three whole chapters are dedicated to Pyotr Petrovich Ferdyshchenko, the foreman. Ferdyshchenko is Prince Potemkin’s former orderly, a simple man, “good-natured and somewhat lazy.” The Foolovites consider the mayor stupid, a fool, they laugh at his tongue-tiedness, and call him a foolish old man.

During the 6 years of Ferdyshchenko's reign, the Foolovites forgot about the oppression, but in the seventh year Ferdyshchenko went berserk and took away his husband's wife Alyonka, after which a drought began. The Foolovites, in a fit of rage, threw Alyonka from the bell tower, but Ferdyshchenko was inflamed with love for the archer Domashka. For this, the Foolovites suffered a terrible fire.

Ferdyshchenko repented before the people on his knees, but his tears were hypocritical. At the end of his life, Ferdyshchenko traveled around the pasture, where he died of gluttony.

Vasilisk Semyonovich Wartkin (satire on Peter 1) is a brilliant city ruler, under him Foolov experiences a golden age. Wartkin was small in stature and not stately in appearance, but he was loud. He was a writer and a brave utopian, a political dreamer. Before conquering Byzantium, Wartkin conquers the Foolovites with “wars for enlightenment”: he reintroduces mustard, forgotten after Dvoekurov, into use (for which he undertakes an entire military campaign with sacrifices), demands to build houses on a stone foundation, plant Persian chamomile and establish an academy in Foolov. The obstinacy of the Foolovites was defeated along with contentment. French revolution showed that the education instilled by Wartkin is harmful.

Onufriy Ivanovich Negodyaev, a captain and former stoker, began the era of retirement from wars. The mayor tests the Foolovites for their toughness. As a result of the tests, the Foolovites became wild: they grew hair and sucked their paws, because there was no food or clothing.

Ksaviry Georgievich Mikaladze is a descendant of Queen Tamara, who has a seductive appearance. He shook hands with his subordinates, smiled affectionately, and won hearts “solely through graceful manners.” Mikaladze stops education and executions and does not issue laws.

Mikaladze's reign was peaceful, punishments were mild. The mayor's only drawback is his love for women. He doubled the population of Foolov, but died of exhaustion.

Feofilakt Irinarkhovich Benevolinsky - state councilor, assistant to Speransky. This is a satire on Speransky himself. Benevolinsky loved to engage in lawmaking. The laws he came up with are as meaningless as the “Charter on the Respectable Baking of Pies.” The mayor's laws are so stupid that they do not interfere with the prosperity of the Foolovites, so they become fatter than ever. Benevolinsky was exiled for his connection with Napoleon and called a scoundrel.

Ivan Panteleevich Pryshch does not make laws and governs simply, in the spirit of “limitless liberalism.” He rests himself and persuades the Foolovites to do so. Both the townspeople and the mayor are getting richer.

The leader of the nobility finally realizes that Pimple has a stuffed head, and eats it without a trace.

Mayor Nikodim Osipovich Ivanov is also stupid, because his height does not allow him to “accommodate anything extensive,” but this quality of the mayor benefits the Foolovites. Ivanov either died of fright, having received a “too extensive” decree, or was fired due to his brain drying out from their inaction and became the founder of microcephaly.

Erast Andreevich Grustilov is a satire on Alexander 1, a sensitive person. The subtlety of Grustilov's feelings is deceptive. He is voluptuous, in the past he hid government money, he is debauched, “in a hurry to live and enjoy,” so that he inclines the Foolovites towards paganism. Grustilov is arrested and dies of melancholy. During his reign, the Foolovites lost the habit of working.

Gloomy-Burcheev is a satire on Arakcheev. He's a scoundrel horrible man, “the purest type of idiot.” This mayor exhausts, scolds and destroys the Foolovites, for which he is nicknamed Satan. He has a wooden face, his gaze is free from thought and shameless. Gloomy-Burcheev is impassive, limited, but full of determination. He is like the force of nature, going ahead in a straight line, not recognizing reason.

Gloomy-Burcheev destroys the city and builds Nepreklonsk in a new place, but he fails to control the river. It seems that nature itself is ridding the Foolovites of him, carrying him away in a tornado.

The arrival of Gloomy-Burcheev, as well as the phenomenon that follows him, called “it”, is a picture of an apocalypse that ceases the existence of history.

Artistic originality

Saltykov-Shchedrin skillfully changes the speech of different narrators in the novel. The publisher M.E. Saltykov stipulates that he corrected only the “heavy and outdated style” of the Chronicler. In an address to the reader by the last archivist chronicler, whose work was published 45 years after writing, there are outdated words high style: if, this, such. But the publisher allegedly did not correct this particular appeal to readers.

The entire appeal of the last chronicler is written in the best traditions of the oratory art of antiquity, contains a series of rhetorical questions, and is replete with metaphors and comparisons, mainly from the ancient world. At the end of the introduction, the chronicler, following the biblical tradition widespread in Rus', humiliates himself, calling him a “meager vessel,” and compares Foolov with Rome, and Foolov benefits from the comparison.

Novel famous master Saltykov-Shchedrin's satire “The History of a City” consists of many chapters. The chapter entitled “On the Roots of the Origin of the Foolovites” is of key importance. In essence, it is she who is the plot of the plot.

This part of the work is a parody of the old manuscript “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.” This allusion is explained by the author’s idea to pass off his novel as an authentic manuscript he found about the city of Foolov. In an archaic style, a desire is expressed to “tickle” the Foolovites by describing their good deeds and the root that gave them their beginning.

In the chapter on the origin of the inhabitants of Foolov, like any other chapter of the novel, the writer satirizes the autocratic way of life in Tsarist Russia, showing all the unpleasant sides of absolutism and monarchy. The author’s idea is to convince everyone that such a regime is anti-national.

In this part of the work, Saltykov-Shchedrin parodies the debate about the origins of Rus'. The satirist uses this discussion to expose the nature of autocracy. Using Aesopian language, the author replaces many concepts, for example, instead of the word king, he uses prince. The Golovoyap ambassadors negotiate with the Varangian princes, who set anti-national conditions. As a result, the ambassadors lose their will and, discouraged, go home.

By parodying contemporary historical disputes, the author was able to fairly accurately characterize royal power from the moment of its inception.

" " - It's novel, main issue which lies in the relationship between the government and the people. The chapter on the root of the origin of the Foolovites tells how the bunglers, having voluntarily lost their will, became Foolovites. They themselves were looking for bondage for themselves, someone who would rule them, because they were not used to living differently. So satirical device the author shows that in many ways the people themselves are to blame for their humiliating situation. Inability to manage own life, hope in the Tsar-Father is what allows Foolov’s order to exist.

They were unable to choose the main one in their midst, so they went in search of him. An important criterion selection became a condition: the leader must be the stupidest. This task turned out to be not so simple: either the seekers were refused, or the prince was not stupid enough. But over time they were lucky - they found what they wanted. And from now on, the Foolovites lived according to the laws of their leader: they gave away most of the profits and endured all kinds of violence. But there was no turning back.

Returning to their territory, the bunglers built a city in a swamp and called it Foolov, and themselves, accordingly, Foolovites. From that moment on, this branch began to “thrive.”

The chapter on the origin of the inhabitants of Foolov is the beginning of the long-suffering history of the city. Next we will talk about the mayors who ruled only to please themselves, regardless of the opinions of the residents. This chapter symbolically hints at the beginning of autocracy in Tsarist Russia. This means that the chapter is of paramount importance for the consistent development of the plot.

The reader can understand what kind of people the mayors ruled. Knowing the history of the origin of the Foolovites, we are no longer able to simply feel sorry for them. After all, they doomed themselves to bondage. And although the main object of satire is the city bosses, the image of the gray patient mass is also funny. The author did not want to feel sorry for the people, but wanted to spur them on, to force them to seek justice. He believed that one day the people would become like a natural force that would destroy Foolov’s order in society.

The chapter “On the Roots of the Origin of the Foolovites” is symbolic in nature and is key to all events in the novel.

History of creation

The idea of ​​creating “The History of a City” arose from M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin in the late 50s. XIX century. In a number of works of the early 60s. The mythical city of Foolov appears. During the creation of the cycle “Pompadours and Pompadours,” the writer had the idea to write “Essays on the city of Bryukhov,” symbolizing the despotism of administrative power.

All these developments led to the fact that in 1868 Saltykov-Shchedrin began work on “The Foolish Chronicler.” “The History of One City” was published in parts in the journal “Otechestvennye zapiski” during 1869-1870. In a separate edition in 1870, the writer rearranged the chapters and made some changes.

After the publication of the chapters of “History” began, a hail of criticism fell on Saltykov-Shchedrin. The writer was accused of disrespect for the Russian past and distortion of facts. The work was perceived as a “historical satire.”

Meaning of the name

“The History of One City” is an ironic parallel with “The History of the Russian State” by N. M. Karamzin. In contrast to the fundamental work of the famous historian, the writer in a small symbolic work expresses his view on the fate of the Russian people using the example of a typical city.

main topic

The main theme of the work is the historical formation of the Russian government system, resting on the unlimited power of kings and the obedience of the people.

There are indeed a lot of historical parallels in “History”. The chapter “On the Roots of the Origin of the Foolovites” is the author’s adaptation of the chronicle news about the calling of the Varangians. 22 Foolov’s mayors - the number of Russian tsars from Ivan the Terrible to 1870. “Foolov’s civil strife” at the same time reminds Time of Troubles the beginning of the 17th century and the era of “yard coups”. The dismissal of Negodyaev “for disagreement... regarding constitutions” is an allusion to the overthrow of Paul I. Accompanied by “bloodshed” and violence, “wars for enlightenment” are the radical reforms of Peter I and the liberal reforms of Alexander II. Finally, the ominous Gloomy-Burcheev is a caricature of A. A. Arakcheev.

The fantastic interweaving of these connections with real story only emphasizes the author’s main desire - to give a general picture of Russian life in the 9th-19th centuries.

Critics were especially outraged by the unflattering descriptions of their ancestors. However, the names of the tribes (Bunglers, Rukosui, Lipslaps, etc.) were taken by Salytkov-Shchedrin from Dahl’s dictionary. Their behavior (“they ruined... their lands, “violated their wives and maidens”) fully corresponds to the testimony of real chroniclers. What else, if not stupidity, can explain the fact that the ancient bunglers could not restore order themselves and turned to someone else’s prince for help (a retelling of a fragment from the Tale of Bygone Years).

From the very foundation of the city of Foolov (or Ancient Rus') the townspeople considered the main quality of rulers to be a tendency to violence. The “Inventory of City Governors” lists the actions that made them famous: “I didn’t trust anyone to beat me without myself,” “I killed many police captains to the point of bleeding,” “I burned down thirty-three villages,” etc. The end of the careers of many looks no less “remarkable.” mayors: “beat... with a whip and... exiled to Berezov”, “torn to pieces by dogs”, “found in bed, eaten by bedbugs”, etc.

Following the example of the rulers, the Foolovites themselves become incredibly cruel. Moreover, this cruelty can be directed against anyone. During the “internecine strife”, the first thing they do is throw off “with a roll... Styopka and Ivashka,” who simply turned up at hand. Then “they drowned two more citizens,” etc., etc.

Violence is an integral part of Foolov's life. Without it, the people fall into “freethinking” and “liberalism,” which, in turn, lead to the ruin of their entire economic life. Even “for enlightenment” there are wars going on in Foolov, reminiscent of how Peter I himself chopped off beards and forcibly introduced potatoes.

The main distinguishing quality of the Foolovites is humility even in the face of the most terrible punishments: “cut them into pieces if you want; If you want, eat it with porridge.” Their resistance is based on inaction: “they stubbornly stood on their knees.”

The ending of the fantastic “History” comes closer to reality. The peak of the Foolovites’ suffering is the appearance of Gloomy-Burcheev, personifying horror, “amazing narrow-mindedness” and “inflexibility, almost bordering on idiocy.” His cherished dream is to introduce barracks order everywhere - a clear allusion to Arakcheev’s “military settlements”. Even the obedient Foolovites for centuries could not tolerate this. The appearance of “unreliable elements” and “treason” clearly indicates the Decembrist movement. The lost “leaflets” probably contained information about the uprising of 1825.

It was not for nothing that Gloomy-Burcheev warned: “Someone is coming... who will be more terrible than me.” The last mayor of Interkhvat-Zalikhvatsky, who “burned the gymnasium and abolished the sciences,” was Nicholas I, whose reign became a symbol of conservatism and reaction.

Composition

The work consists of three main parts. The introduction consists of: a preface by the author (“From the Publisher”), the arguments of Foolov’s chroniclers and a brief “Inventory for the mayors.” The main part is the preserved chronicle information about the most significant “rulers” of the city. The final part contains the writings of the mayors themselves (“Substantiating documents”).

What the author teaches

Saltykov-Shchedrin draws readers' attention to the fact that all the problems of the Russian government system arose a very long time ago. The desire of the rulers to “slash” and “burn”, together with the eternal obedience of the population, became typical of the Russian way of life and self-awareness

Mikhail Evgrafovich Saltykov-Shchedrin ridiculed the Russian government with his novel and described all its flaws in a satirical form. The novel is written about a city that has changed a large number of bosses, but none of them could do anything good for the city. Saltykov-Shchedrin highlighted in his work reality intertwined with fantasy.

In such a light and satirical form, the writer was able to fully express his thought and intended idea. The novel “The Story of a City” depicts the problem of all of Russia. In a city where bosses are constantly changing and cannot lead the state normally. All bosses are very stupid and each of them pursues their own goals.

Saltykov-Shchedrin writes about the city of Glupov as a capital, or as a provincial small town, or generally calls it a village. The author collected all segments of the population and described different times for the city. Mikhail Evgrafovich writes that the city stands on a swamp, and at other times it stands on seven hills.

In the novel “The History of a City,” the main part is occupied by a description of the mayors who were sent to govern the city. Here Saltykov-Shchedrin also approached with great exaggeration and a satirical note. Each of the mayors did nothing to make the city prosper, but only destroyed it and tore it to pieces. Some bosses had an empty head, and only an organ stood in the corner, while others had a head that smelled like minced meat, so much so that it had even been eaten.

But the novel also describes the inhabitants of this very city who are inactive. They do absolutely nothing to change the situation in their hometown and in their lives. The people simply watched as a myriad of bosses were replaced and how they destroyed the city and, at the same time, their lives. Residents of the city only adapt to each new boss and did not want to get out of this circle of injustice. One might think that the residents themselves do not want a good mayor for themselves, but are content with the ones they have.

Each leader is despotic towards the people in his own way, and the people, in turn, have already resigned themselves to their fate. The last mayor who decides to destroy the city and rebuild it. Gloomy-Burcheev's gaze terrifies the townspeople, and they follow him unconditionally. Construction began just like that, and the townspeople were left with the ruins of their own city.

In his novel, Saltykov-Shchedrin was able to vividly describe the problems of society and the state.

Option 2

Most writers of one era or another tried to convey their dissatisfaction with a particular situation through their works, trying to convey them as best as possible to the general mass of people. Some tried to identify a problem that was inherent only to the period of their life, while others tried to convey their experiences about a topic that was characteristic not only of their generation, but also of previous ones. One of these writers was Saltykov-Shchedrin.

Many of his works were educational in nature, trying to help people see the problem and suggest ways to solve it. Reading such works, people realized what was happening around them and tried to do at least something, and this is what makes the works of Saltykov-Shchedrin good, they gave reason to think.

The work “The History of a City” told the reader about one city in which lived people who, without exaggeration, could be called the personification of a particular period in the life of our homeland. The city was called Foolov, and its inhabitants called themselves Foolovites; most likely, Saltykov-Shchedrin tried to convey their ignorance and limitations as strongly as possible. Further in the course of the story, we see that the city and its inhabitants are the literal personification of everything that a person would like to hide in himself and not let out. All the vices that are in him. The city is full of stupid people who try to obey rather than think for themselves.

The works reveal many problems that were inherent in a particular period. For example, the work clearly shows the problem of excessive corruption in the bureaucracy. Also in the work we see the problem of human rejection from society, the residents of the city don’t care about everyone except themselves, they only care about their loved ones, which makes us think about human indifference in our society.

Also in the work one can see the obvious comic superiority of officials over ordinary people, as it was in the time of the writer.

One way or another, the work tells us about the most important things in human life, which we need to adhere to and follow. Saltykov-Shchedrin tells us that spiritual things are much more important for a person than material values. The author tells us to stick to ourselves and not be led by surrounding opinions, which can often be wrong. Saltykov-Shchedrin recommends that you be guided by this generalized opinion throughout your life, which is what he, in fact, did.

Also, for his works, he experienced pressure from the authorities for his seemingly revolutionary impulses and oppositional themes.

IN this essay I analyzed the work of Saltykov-Shchedrin “The History of a City” from which I concluded that the work has a number of issues that the author reflected on in the work, and the problems of which are described above. The opinion described in the essay is subjective and does not claim to be truly correct.

Essay on the story The Story of a City

Mikhail Evgrafovich Saltykov-Shchedrin wrote his work over several years, from 1869 to 1870. Initially, the novel was called “The Foolov Chronicler.” Later it was renamed “The History of a City” and published in parts in the journal “Otechestvennye zapiski” and aroused strong emotions among readers.

Most readers compare a written book with a short story, in fact this is not the case. Genre: “Stories of a City” - “ Satirical novel", which describes the life of the fictional city of Foolov, but chronological events events occurring in it take place from the chronicles found by the writer.

The action of the novel takes place in the city of Foolov, whose name speaks for itself. The novel describes the life of the mayors, their “great deeds”: bribery, imposition of tribute, collection of various taxes and much more. Saltykov-Shchedrin in his work raised the main problem - the essence of the history of the Russian state. He assessed the past and present of Russia quite critically, since he considered the majority of the country’s inhabitants to be “Fools.” What is translated from the language ancient people means "bigheads." Because of his ignorance and lack of understanding, he renamed them.

The novel begins with small warring tribes. Tired of the constant war among themselves, they decided to choose a person who would manage the affairs of the tribes and command their people. This is how the first prince in Rus' and the city of Foolov appeared.
With this he described the formation of Ancient Rus' and the reign of the Rurik dynasty.

At first, the prince, called to power, entrusted part of the affairs to his landowner. But he turned out to be a thief, the ruler had to take tough measures himself. The writer then lists most of the rulers Russian state, their contribution to history and the deeds in which he distinguished himself. The bosses changed one after another, their worldview and the absurdity of the government, which the author points out in his work, also changed.

Madness and unnecessary reforms created chaos and disorder in the country, people became beggars, and devastation set in. But the monarchs were in a constant state of either drunkenness or war, and they had nothing to do with the ordinary people. A gradual series of mistakes on the part of the authorities led to dire consequences, which the author narrates with sarcasm and satire. Ultimately, the death that overtook the last ruler of Ugryum-Burcheev, due to which the narrative ends, gives hope to the Russian people to change their lives for the better.

In the novel “The History of a City,” the writer touched on many topics important for the history of Russia, such as war, power, ignorance, religion, servility and fanaticism. Each topic is important in its own way and carries great meaning to the way of life of ordinary people.

The main problem described in the work, which Saltykov-Shchedrin wanted to emphasize, is the inaction and humility of the common people in relation to the authorities, their agreement with the fact that monarchs infringe and oppress their rights, infringe on them. The writer is inclined to believe that people are afraid of being without their ruler. The fear of falling into anarchy is so strong that they are driven by force, and the desire to obey their boss.

The essence of the novel “The History of a City” is that society does not want to make responsible decisions on its own, placing everything on the shoulders of one person who cannot change the history of the country. The author wants to show that without the will of the people, their awareness and desire for better life nothing will change. The writer does not call for open rebellion or revolution, but he is trying to convince the people that one cannot have blind obedience, only people and their will can influence changes for the better, one cannot be afraid of power, but, on the contrary, turn to it with one’s problems.

Genius. What does this concept mean? I think it's the ability to come up with something new, the ability to make a discovery. Everyone knows great scientists and artists who, thanks to their talent