on Raskolnikov's decision to confess?
How does the hero understand the possibility of humility and will he humble himself?
How did Sonya's stay in hard labor affect Raskolnikov?
1)Whatliterary trends took place
be in the 1900s?
2) What
introduced something fundamentally new into dramaturgy
« The Cherry Orchard"Chekhov? (I’ll give you a hint
features of a “new drama” are needed)
3) For
that Tolstoy was excommunicated from the Church (betrayed
anathema)?
4)Name
the names of the three decadents and explain that
what do you think this was like?
direction in literature (or not according to you
– copy from the lecture)
5)What
is Acmeism? (write word for word
from the Internet - I won’t count), name
several Acmeist authors
6)Who
became our main new peasant
a poet? Which literary direction
did he try to create it later? Was
is it viable (on whom
held)?
7)After
revolution of 1917 Russian literature
was involuntarily divided into... and...
8) From
this avant-garde school came out like this
a poet like Mayakovsky. What kind of creativity
great artist of the 20th century inspired
poets of this school? Why?
9)B
1920s originated literary group
"Serapion Brothers", what kind of group is this,
what goals did she set for herself?
Which famous writer was part of this
group?
10)Name
the most general ledger Isaac Babel. ABOUT
what is she? (in a few words, convey
plot)
11)Name
2-3 works by Bulgakov
12)What
we can attribute Sholokhov's work
to social realism? (This work
corresponded to the official Soviet ideology,
so it was enthusiastically received)
13) Sholokhov
in the language Quiet Don» uses a lot
words from local...
14)What
wrote the most important work
Boris Pasternak? What were the main names?
heroes? What period of time
covers the work? And what is the main thing
the event is at the center of the novel
15)Tell me
what happened to literature in the 1930s
years
he had a presentiment that every day it would become larger and larger. Therefore, it was in vain that in the winter in St. Petersburg he would sit for whole days over the latest works; in vain I listened to the conversations of young people; It was in vain that he rejoiced when he managed to insert his word into their ebullient speeches. “Brother says that we are right,” he thought, “and, putting all pride aside, it seems to me that they are further from the truth than we are, and at the same time I feel that there is something behind them... something we don’t have, some kind of advantage over us... Youth No: not just youth. Isn’t this advantage that there are fewer traces of lordship in them than in us?” Nikolai Petrovich lowered his head and ran his hand over his face. “But reject poetry?,” he thought again, “not sympathize with art, nature?..” And he looked around, as if wanting to understand how one could not sympathize with nature. It was already evening; the sun disappeared behind a small aspen grove that lay half a mile from the garden: its shadow stretched endlessly across the motionless fields. A little man was trotting on a white horse along a dark narrow path along the grove; he was clearly visible, all the way down to the patch on his shoulder, even though he was riding in the shadows; The horse's legs flashed pleasantly and clearly. The sun's rays, for their part, climbed into the grove and, making their way through the thicket, bathed the trunks of the aspens with such a warm light that they became like the trunks of pine trees, and their foliage almost turned blue and a pale blue sky, slightly reddened by the dawn, rose above it. The swallows were flying high; the wind completely stopped; belated bees buzzed lazily and sleepily in the lilac flowers; midges crowded in a column over a lonely, far-stretched branch. "So good, my God!" - thought Nikolai Petrovich, and his favorite poems came to his lips; he remembered Arkady, Stoff und Kraft - and fell silent, but continued to sit, continued to indulge in the sad and joyful play of lonely thoughts. He loved to dream; country life developed this ability in him. How long ago had he dreamed the same way, waiting for his son in the inn courtyard, and since then a change had already occurred, the relationship, then still unclear, had already been determined... and how!
C1. Formulate main idea fragment and briefly comment on the critic’s statement: “Bazarov is still defeated; defeated not by the faces or accidents of life, but by the very idea of life.”
Denis Fonvizin wrote the comedy “The Minor” in the 18th century. At that time, a decree of Peter I was in force in Russia, prescribing that young men under 21 without education were prohibited from joining the military and public service, and also get married. In this document, young people under this age were called “minors” - this definition formed the basis of the title of the play. In the work, the main character is Mitrofanushka the undergrowth. Fonvizin portrayed him as a stupid, cruel, greedy and lazy young man of 16 who behaves like Small child, does not want to study and is capricious. Mitrofan is a negative character and the funniest hero of the comedy - his absurd statements, stupidity and ignorance cause laughter not only among readers and spectators, but also among other heroes of the play. The character plays an important role in ideological plan plays, therefore the image of Mitrofan the Minor requires detailed analysis.
Mitrofan and Prostakova
In Fonvizin’s work “The Minor,” the image of Mitrofanushka is closely connected with the theme of education, since in fact it was the wrong upbringing that became the cause of the evil character of the young man and all his negative traits. His mother, Mrs. Prostakova, is an uneducated, cruel, despotic woman, for whom the main values are material wealth and power. She adopted her views on the world from her parents - representatives of the old nobility, uneducated and ignorant landowners like herself. The values and views received through upbringing were passed on to Prostakova and Mitrofan - the young man in the play is depicted as a “mama's boy” - he cannot do anything on his own, the servants or his mother do everything for him. Having received from Prostakova cruelty towards servants, rudeness and the opinion that education is one of last places in life, Mitrofan also adopted disrespect for loved ones, a readiness to deceive them or betray them for the sake of more advantageous offer. Let us remember how Prostakova persuaded Skotinin to take Sophia as his wife in order to essentially get rid of the “extra mouth.”
Whereas the news about the girl’s large inheritance made her a “caring teacher”, supposedly loving Sophia and wishing her happiness. Prostakova is looking for her own self-interest in everything, which is why she refused Skotinin, because if the girl married Mitrofan, who listened to his mother in everything, Sophia’s money would go to her.
The young man is as selfish as Prostakova. He becomes worthy son his mother, adopting her “best” traits, which explains final scene comedy, when Mitrofan abandons Prostakova, who has lost everything, leaving to serve the new owner of the village, Pravdin. For him, his mother’s efforts and love turned out to be insignificant before the authority of money and power.
The influence of his father and uncle on Mitrofan
Analyzing the upbringing of Mitrofan in the comedy “The Minor,” one cannot fail to mention the figure of the father and his influence on the personality of the young man. Prostakov appears before the reader as a weak-willed shadow of his wife. It was passivity and the desire to transfer the initiative to someone stronger that Mitrofan took over from his father. It is paradoxical that Pravdin speaks of Prostakov as a stupid person, but in the action of the play his role is so insignificant that the reader cannot fully understand whether he really is that stupid. Even the fact that Prostakov reproaches his son when Mitrofan abandons his mother at the end of the work does not point to him as a character with positive features. The man, like the others, does not try to help Prostakova, remaining on the sidelines, thus again showing an example of weak-will and lack of initiative to his son - he doesn’t care, just as he didn’t care while Prostakova beat his peasants and disposed of his property in her own way.
The second man who influenced Mitrofan’s upbringing is his uncle. Skotinin, in essence, represents the person that the young man could become in the future. They are even brought together by a common love for pigs, whose company is much more pleasant for them than the company of people.
Mitrofan's training
According to the plot, the description of Mitrofan's training is in no way connected with the main events - the fight for Sophia's heart. However, it is these episodes that reveal many important problems that Fonvizin covers in the comedy. The author shows that the reason for the young man’s stupidity is not only bad upbringing, but also poor education. Prostakova, when hiring teachers for Mitrofan, chose not educated, smart teachers, but those who would take less. Retired sergeant Tsyfirkin, dropout Kuteikin, former groom Vralman - none of them could give Mitrofan a decent education. They all depended on Prostakova, and therefore could not ask her to leave and not interfere with the lesson. Let us remember how the woman did not allow her son to even think about the decision arithmetic problem, offering “your solution.” The exposure of Mitrofan's useless teaching is the scene of the conversation with Starodum, when the young man begins to come up with his own rules of grammar and does not know what geography is studying. At the same time, the illiterate Prostakova also does not know the answer, but if the teachers could not laugh at her stupidity, then the educated Starodum openly ridicules the ignorance of the mother and son.
Thus, Fonvizin, introducing into the play scenes of Mitrofan’s training and the exposure of his ignorance, raises acute social problems of education in Russia in that era. Noble children were taught not by authoritative educated individuals, but by literate slaves who needed pennies. Mitrofan is one of the victims of such an old-time landowner, outdated and, as the author emphasizes, meaningless education.
Why is Mitrofan the central character?
As the title of the work makes clear, the young man is centrally Comedy "Minor". In the character system, he is contrasted with the positive heroine Sophia, who appears to the reader as an intelligent, educated girl who respects her parents and older people. It would seem, why did the author make the key figure of the play a weak-willed, stupid undergrowth with a completely negative characteristic? Fonvizin in the image of Mitrofan showed a whole generation of young Russian nobles. The author was concerned about the mental and moral degradation of society, in particular, young people who adopted outdated values from their parents.
In addition, in “Nedorosl” Mitrofan’s characterization is a composite image of the negative traits of Fonvizin’s contemporary landowners. The author sees cruelty, stupidity, lack of education, sycophancy, disrespect for others, greed, civic passivity and infantilism not only in extraordinary landowners, but also in officials at the court, who also forgot about humanism and high morality. For the modern reader, the image of Mitrofan is, first of all, a reminder of what a person becomes when he stops developing, learning new things and forgets about eternal human values - respect, kindness, love, mercy.
A detailed description of Mitrofan, his character and way of life will help students in grades 8-9 when preparing a report or essay on the topic “Characteristics of Mitrofan in the comedy “The Minor””
Work test
What and how does Mitrofan study? Is he stupid? How does he feel about learning?
Fonvizin, minor
From the play we see that Mitrofan is stupid, lazy and uneducated; he does not have any goal in life, he does not want to know anything, does not want to learn, although no one forces him to do this.
Mitrofan is rude to all the teachers, does not value his father, sucks up to his mother, who dotes on him.
He has no interest in studying. Mitrofanushka is rude and ignorant.
Fonvizin ridiculed the way noble children were raised in the 18th century.
Mitrofan had teachers. Mitrofanushka is taught French by the German Vralman, exact sciences will be taught by retired sergeant Tsifirkin, and grammar by seminarian Kuteikin, dismissed from all teaching.
He treats his studies carelessly and during the exam shows complete disrespect for those who taught him. Mitrofan is translated as “revealed by the mother,” and also, after the publication of the work, this name began to mean a lazy, stupid young man, a dropout.
(One of the main characters of Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” is Prostakov Mitrofan Terentievich, the noble son of the Prostakovs.
The name Mitrofan means “similar”, similar to his mother. Maybe with this name Mrs. Prostakova wanted to show that her son is a reflection of Prostakova herself.
Mitrofanushka was sixteen years old, but his mother did not want to part with her child and wanted to keep him with her until he was twenty-six, without letting him go to work.
Mrs. Prostakova herself was stupid, arrogant, impolite, and for this reason she did not listen to anyone’s opinion.
“While Mitrofan is still in his infancy, it’s time to get him married; and then in ten years, when he enters, God forbid, into the service, you’ll have to endure everything.”
Mitrofanushka himself has no goal in life, he only loved to eat, laze around and chase pigeons: “I’ll run to the dovecote now, maybe, or...” To which his mother replied: “Go and frolic, Mitrofanushka.”
Mitrofan did not want to study, his mother hired teachers for him only because this was how it was supposed to be in noble families, and not so that her son would learn intelligence. As he told his mother: “Listen, mother. I'll amuse you. I'll study; just let it be the last one. The hour of my will has come. I don’t want to study, I want to get married.” And Mrs. Prostakova always echoed him: “It’s very nice to me that Mitrofanushka doesn’t like to step forward, With his mind, may he sweep you far, and God forbid!” Only you suffer, but all I see is emptiness. Don't learn this stupid science! The worst qualities of character, the most backward views on science characterize such young nobles as Mitrofan. He is also unusually lazy.
Mrs. Prostakova herself doted on Mitrofanushka. Fonvizin understood the unreasonableness of her blind, animal love for her brainchild, Mitrofan, a love that, in essence, destroys her son. Mitrofan ate until his stomach hurt, and his mother kept trying to persuade him to eat more. The nanny said: “He’s already eaten five buns, mother.” To which Prostakova replied: “So you feel sorry for the sixth one, you beast.” These words show concern for his son. She tried to provide him with a carefree future and decided to marry him to a rich wife. If someone offends her son, she immediately goes to the defense. Mitrofanushka was her only consolation.
Mitrofan treated his mother with disdain: “Yes!” Just look at the trouble from the uncle: and then from his fists and for the book of hours” What, what do you want to do? Come to your senses, darling!” “It’s here and the river is close. I’ll dive in, remember your name.” “Killed me!” God killed you!”: these words prove that he does not love at all and does not feel sorry for his own mother at all, Mitrofan does not respect her and plays on her feelings. And when Prostakova, who has lost power, rushes to her son with the words: You are the only one left with me, my dear friend, Mitrofanushka! " And in response he hears the heartless: “Let yourself go, mother, you forced yourself on me.” “I had such crap in my eyes all night.” “What kind of rubbish is Mitrofanushka?” “Yes, either you, mother, or father.”
Prostakov was afraid of his wife and in her presence spoke about his son like this: “At least, I love him, as a parent should, a smart child, a reasonable child, a funny man, an entertainer; sometimes I am overjoyed by him, I truly don’t believe that he is my son,” and added, looking at his wife: “Before your eyes, mine see nothing.”
Taras Skotinin, looking at everything that was happening, repeated: “Well, Mitrofanushka, you, I see, are mother’s son, not father’s son!” And Mitrofan turned to his uncle: “Why, uncle, have you eaten too much henbane? Get out, uncle, get out."
Mitrofan was always rude to his mother and snapped at her. Although Eremeevna did not receive a penny for raising the undergrowth, she tried to teach him good things, defended him from his uncle: “I’ll die on the spot, but I won’t give up the child. Show up, sir, just kindly show up. I’ll scratch out those thorns.” I tried to make him a decent person: “Yes, teach me at least a little.” “Well, say another word, you old bastard!” I’ll finish them off; I’ll complain to my mother again, so she’ll deign to give you a task like yesterday.” Of all the teachers, only the German Adam Adamych Vralman praised Mitrofanushka, and only so that Prostakova would not be angry with him and scold him. The other teachers openly scolded him. For example, Tsyfirkin: “Your honor will always be idle.” And Mitrofan snapped: “Well! Give me the board, garrison rat! "Kick your butts." “All butts, your honor. We’re still behind our backs for centuries.” Mitrofan's dictionary is small and poor. “Take them and Eremeevna too”: this is how he spoke about his teachers and nanny.
Mitrofan was ill-mannered, rude, a spoiled child, whom everyone around obeyed and obeyed, and he also had freedom of speech in the house. Mitrofan was confident that the people around him should help him and give advice. Mitrofan had high self-esteem.
No matter how smart and hardworking a person is, there is a piece of such Mitrofanushka in him. Every person is lazy sometimes. There are also people who try to live only at the expense of their parents, without doing anything themselves. Of course, much depends on how children are raised by their parents.
I treat people like Mitrofan neither good nor bad. I just try to avoid communicating with such people. And in general, I think that we should try to help such people with their difficulties and problems. We need to reason with him and force him to study. If such a person himself does not want to improve, study and study, but, on the contrary, remains stupid and spoiled, treats his elders with disrespect, then he will remain an underage and ignorant for the rest of his life.
Depiction of the people and images in the work “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow” by Radishchev A. Radishchev’s novel “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow” is one of the most significant phenomena of Russian literature of the eighteenth century. It was written in the then popular “travel” genre, which was discovered by L. Stern, the founder of sentimentalism. In his assessment of man, Radishchev generally followed the sentimentalist writers and wrote that what distinguishes man from the beast is precisely the ability to sympathize. Sympathy and compassion are the main emotions of the narrator in the novel: “I looked around me - my soul became wounded by the suffering of humanity.”
What does the narrator have compassion for? The situation of the people. The novel gives a broad panorama of the life of the serf peasantry. And Radishchev is outraged not so much by the poverty and hard work of the peasants, but by the fact that they, like serfs, are deprived of free will and legally have no rights. “The peasant is dead in law,” writes Radishchev. Moreover, he is dead only when the protection of the law is required. The head of “Zaitsevo” speaks about this. For many years, the cruel landowner and his family tortured the peasants, and no one ever stood up for the unfortunate people. When the peasants, driven out of patience, killed the monster, the law remembered them, and they were sentenced to death.
The fate of the peasant is terrible: “And the lot of the one riveted in chains, and the lot of the prisoner in a stinking dungeon, and the lot of the ox in the yoke.” But the narrator, brought up on the ideas of enlightenment, asserts the equality of all people. But the peasants for the most part are simply human better than the landowners. Almost all of the landowners in Radishchev’s novel are negative characters, nonhumans. The morals of the peasants are healthy and natural, they are not infected by artificial civilization. This is especially clearly seen when comparing city and village girls: “Look how all the members of my beauties are round, tall, not bent, not spoiled. It's funny to you that they have feet the size of five. vershoks, and maybe even six. Well, my dear niece, with your three-vershok leg, stand next to them and run in a hurry, who will most quickly reach the tall birch tree standing at the end of the meadow?”
Village beauties are healthy and virtuous, but city girls have “rouge on their cheeks, rouge on their hearts, rouge on their conscience, soot on their sincerity.”
Radishchev's main merit and his main difference from the majority of accusatory literature of the eighteenth century is that he does not complain about individual negative examples, but condemns the very order of things, the existence of serfdom: The peace of slavery will not increase under the shadow of golden fruits; Where everything disgusts the mind with aspiration, Greatness will not vegetate there.
The originality of “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow” lies in the fact that Radishchev, taking the form of a “journey,” filled it with accusatory content. The sensitive hero of sentimental literature, although capable of compassion, seeks to escape from the evil of this world into himself, and the narrator from “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow” is concerned with public issues and strives to serve the public good.
“Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow” is the first Russian ideological novel, which poses not so much artistic as political goals. This is its originality and significance for all of our literature. The image of Mitrofan in Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor.” The name Mitrofan is translated as like a mother, like a mother. He was sixteen years old, he should have already entered the service at the age of fifteen, but Mrs. Prostokova did not want to be separated from her son.
He had no goal in life, he did not think about the future or his studies, and all day long Mitrofanushka chased pigeons. He was not hardworking, but was very lazy. He never overworked himself. After all, from a spoiled son, Mitrofani turns into a cruel person, a traitor. He betrays his mother when he finds out that she is no longer the mistress of the house. He shows his real attitude towards her. It seems to me that there cannot be a worse punishment, even for someone like Prostakova. Mrs. Prostakova says that people live and have lived without science.
Nanny Eremeevna, who raised Mitrofanushka as best she could, endured all the insults, but after all this Mitrofan wanted her to protect him from everyone.
And his mother, to whom he constantly complained about the nanny and his teachers, always cursed and did not pay her, thinking that the nanny was already obliged to her for feeding her and living with them. He treated his teachers, of whom only the arithmetic teacher tried to pass on his knowledge to Mitrofan, with disdain.
Mitrofan doesn’t notice Father at all, because he doesn’t help him in anything.
Mitrofanushka is a very capricious and careless child, he is stupid and impolite, does not think about his future and about people.
I believe that people like Mitrofanushka do not know what happiness is, since they don’t even think about it, so they cannot be happy.
Bibliography
To prepare this work, materials were used from the site http://sochinenia1.narod.ru/
Tutoring
Need help studying a topic?
Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.
» Fonvizin created in quite difficult time For Russia. At this moment, Catherine II sat on the throne. The empress herself described this period in the history of the country's development very negatively in her diaries. She noted that she came to power in a state in which laws were used only in the rarest cases and, as a rule, if they favored some noble person.
Already based on this statement, one can understand that spiritual life Russian society during this period was in decline. In his work, Fonvizin tried to draw the attention of readers specifically to the problem of education younger generation, on which the future of the entire country depends.
During the period described in the comedy, a decree was issued according to which all young nobles under eighteen years of age were obliged to receive an education. Otherwise, they were assigned to military service to Her Imperial Majesty.
The heroine of the comedy Prostakova, a powerful and aggressive woman, is used to deciding everything herself. She leads her family: her husband is afraid to take a step without her command, and her son, whom she named Mitrofan, which means “close to his mother,” was raised to be an absolute lazy and ignorant person.
His mother decides everything for him, she is afraid of his independence and is always ready to be there. The main thing for her is that Mitrofan feels good. But since she raised him to be a lazy person, he has a negative attitude towards education, which requires some effort and time, and does not receive it of his own free will.
The fear of losing her son because of a government decree forces the mother to take an unwanted step - to hire teachers for Mitrofan.
At first, she approaches this issue decisively, because in addition to fear, she is also possessed by a feeling of envy. She doesn’t want to be worse than others, and other noble children have been studying with teachers for a long time. She imagines that her son will go to St. Petersburg and there will seem like an ignoramus among smart people. This picture scares her, because her son will make fun of her in this way. Therefore, Prostakova does not skimp on money and hires several teachers at once.
The most not indifferent of them can be called retired soldier Pafnuty Tsyfirkin, who taught arithmetic to the teenager. His speech is full of military terms, he is constantly doing calculations. He is hardworking, he himself notes that he does not like to sit idle. He is responsible and wants to teach Mitrofan his subject, but he constantly experiences harassment from the student’s mother.
She suffers, believing that her beloved son will be exhausted from his lessons and thus creates a reason for interrupting classes ahead of schedule. And Mitrofanushka himself avoids classes and calls Tsyfirkin names. The teacher even refused to take money for the lessons at the end, because “the stump,” as he called his student, he could not teach anything.
Mitrofan is taught grammar by the seminarian-dropout Kuteikin. He considers himself very smart, says that he comes from a learned family and quit only for fear of being too wise. He is a greedy man. The main thing for him is to obtain material benefits, and not to provide true knowledge to the student. Mitrofan often misses his classes.
The most unlucky teacher turned out to be the German Vralman, hired to teach Mitrofan French and other sciences. Other teachers cannot tolerate him. But he has taken root in the family: he eats with the Prostakovs at the same table, and earns more than anyone else. And all because Prostakova is happy, because this teacher does not enslave her son at all.
Vralman believes that all sciences are of no use to Mitrofan, he only needs to avoid communication with smart people and be able to show yourself advantageously in the world. It is clear that Vralman, who turned out to be a former groom, taught neither French nor any other sciences to the undergrowth.
Thus, Prostakova did not hire teachers so that Mitrofan would learn science. She did this so that her son could always be with her and in every possible way contributes to this with his behavior.