Gorky's play “At the Depths” was written in 1902 and soon brought the author world fame. This work touched on the most pressing problems of our time, so the play immediately attracted the attention of the Russian public.

With this play, Gorky completed his cycle of works about “tramps.” Watching the world " former people", influenced the formation of the social consciousness of the author himself. In comparison with stories written in the 90s of the 19th century, the play presents deeper socio-psychological characteristics of representatives of “tramp anarchism”.

When Gorky painted images of the inhabitants of the shelter, he sought to present them in the most general way from a socio-philosophical point of view.

Almost all the heroes had their own “doubles” from real life. Each "tramp" has his own life story, complex and ambiguous.

At the beginning of the 20th century, an acute industrial and economic crisis broke out in Russia. The harsh picture of reality was reflected in the play, and it became a kind of verdict on the existing social order, who was thrown to the “bottom of life” huge amount smart and talented people, dooming them to tragic death.

The play “At the Bottom” has colossal power of exposure. Gorky argued that a society that destroys the human in man cannot exist. Therefore, at the end of each act of the play, the death of one of the inhabitants of the shelter occurs. A chain of various (from natural to murder) deaths symbolizes the tragedy of life in such a society. Therefore, the genre of the play is defined as tragedy, distinctive feature which is maximum truthfulness and realism.

Using the example of Kleshch’s life, the problem of the “bottom” and the “masters” is revealed, which acquires a political resonance.

Gorky opposed all manifestations of consolation, considering them one of the forms of reconciliation with reality.

The problem of consoling illusions becomes the theme of many of Gorky’s works (“The Rogue,” “Ill,” “The Reader”), but it is most fully revealed in the play “At the Depths.” The writer exposes this problem in its various manifestations and condemns those who blindly succumb to the illusions of comforters.

The main question of the play is the question of what is better, compassion or truth? Is it worth taking compassion to such an extent that you use lies, like Luke? Around this problem in the play, heated debates unfold about the meaning of human life, about the future.

The writer contrasted this false philosophy of humility with the truth about a free man who rejects the pity that humiliates him. Man creates his own future; he has enormous opportunities and potential. A person should not be humiliated with pity, he should be respected and appreciated.

The problem of the “bottom” is clearly illustrated by the example of Natasha’s fate. This image is strikingly different from the other inhabitants of the shelter. Purity, dignity and pride are clearly visible in the girl; it is these qualities that captivated Ash. But will Natasha be able to keep them? Most likely not. Proof of this can be the example of her sister Vasilisa. She and Natasha have a lot in common. Vasilisa has the same will and directness. Obviously, she used to be the same as Natasha, but life circumstances made her a “reptile.” Vasilisa herself admits that she feels sorry for Natasha, but she can’t help herself, and therefore torments her sister. Perhaps in the future Natasha will become the same.

The play “At the Bottom” is of a socio-philosophical nature. There are no positive characters in it, but they shouldn’t be here. The main idea of ​​the play is the idea that absolutely every person has the right to be happy.

In the history of Russian culture there are many names known throughout the world. Among them, the name of M. Gorky occupies a worthy place. As an artist, he enriched world literature new themes, plots, conflicts and images. Among Gorky's works, the play “At the Lower Depths” occupies a special place. The writer showed in it the life of outcasts, people who have severed ties with society and are completely rejected by it. In my opinion, it is very interesting that the age-old philosophical debate about man is conducted not by sophisticated representatives of the intelligentsia, but by people from the lowest levels of life, barefoot and undressed, hungry and deprived of all rights. They discuss spiritual, social and ethical problems, which in the play have acquired extreme depth and intensity. The inhabitants of the shelter are not indifferent to the problems of good and evil, freedom, conscience, honor, happiness, life and death. All this interests them in connection with an even more important problem: what is a person, why does he appear on. earth, what is the meaning of his life? I think that it is precisely in the acute clash of ideas that the moral problematics of the play “At the Bottom” are revealed.

Disputes, passionate and emotional discussion of issues that concern a person, allow us to make a fairly accurate conclusion about his character, about those traits that are usually hidden. Like alive real people the gloomy fatalist and skeptic Bubnov, the wanderer-comforter Luke, the preacher of truth and the greatness of man Satin and others appear before us. Behind each of them there is a whole system of moral and ethical views. Apparently, they did not know or read Nietzsche and Schopenhauer, Tolstoy and Dostoevsky - the real contradictions of real life force them to painfully search for an explanation for the situation in which they find themselves.

The play sharply compares the images of the characters, their thoughts, feelings and experiences. Sharp dialogues capture the reader's attention, creating an atmosphere of tension and conflict. Gorky uses bright, succinct words to express the main idea - about the purpose of Man.

The concept of “man” opens up in different facets in the writer’s work, even in those works where, as in the play “At the Bottom,” attention is focused on dark sides life. Characteristic feature The play is that the hymn to Man sounds loudly in it, as if in contrast to the terrible living conditions, poverty and hopelessness.

The literature of previous years, depicting “little” people, humiliated and insulted, expressed deep compassion for them. But when people stop being “small”, pity for them is not enough. It seems to me that the image of the wanderer-comforter Luke was introduced partly in order to emphasize this idea. To this day, the image of this “apostle of comforting lies” causes heated debate. Who is he - goodie or negative, does he pity people or is indifferent to them, strives to heal them with consolations or pursues other goals? I agree with B. Bialik’s point of view that in the very formulation of the question there is an error, “a lack of understanding of the entire complexity and depth of Gorky’s play. The point is not whether Luke pities people (of course he does) and whether he wants to help them with his consolations (of course he does), but how he understands people, how he evaluates a person.”

On the one hand, Luka sees a person in every inhabitant of the shelter. But at the same time, such pity implies powerlessness to change anything in life. Luke's consolations support the illusions that the characters in the play live by, trying to isolate themselves from the surrounding abomination. And the effect of Luke’s “fairy tales” is somewhat reminiscent of drugs: they do not cure an illness, but allow a person to reduce pain for a while and feel better.

Satin feels and understands all this. I think that is why he says: “He (Luke)... acted on me like acid on an old and dirty coin...” Satin’s famous monologue: “Man! This is great! It sounds... proud! Human! We must respect the person! Don’t feel sorry... don’t humiliate him with pity, you have to respect him!” - is a reaction to Luke’s worldview. Gorky contrasts consoling and reconciling lies with faith in free man who only needs the truth, no matter how harsh it may be.

Thus, the moral issues of M. Gorky’s play “At the Depths” are determined by ideological problems. On their basis, the plot is built and the author’s position is expressed. Portraying Russian reality in extremely harsh tones, which breaks people, causing them grief and suffering, Gorky persistently “collected small, rare crumbs of everything that could be called unusual - kind, selfless, beautiful”, strove to reveal in the soul of the most “destroyed” person the undestroyed inclinations or remnants of humanity. The work of M. Gorky is full of love for man and pain for him, for all his humiliation. And at the same time, the writer expresses faith in a happy future for humanity.

/ / Social issues Gorky's plays "At the Depths"

Despite the fact that Maxim Gorky's play "" is already more than a hundred years old, it continues to be staged in many theaters around the world. This work, which showed the life of people who have sunk to the bottom, has not lost its relevance in our time. Gorky showed us daily life the poorest segment of the population in its usual terms.

The action of the play takes place in a flophouse that sheltered people of different age categories, different professions. Many of them had another life before, but now they are all at the bottom of this life.

Talking about social conflict plays, it is worth noting that it is ambiguous and multifaceted. It is revealed in the confrontation between the inhabitants of the shelter and its owners, and also manifests itself in the personal tragedy of each hero of the work and the reasons that forced them to sink to the bottom of life.

To understand the conflict between the inhabitants of the shelter and its owners, it is necessary to understand what kind of people they were.

So, the owner of the shelter was Mikhail Kostylev. He was a hypocritical and greedy man. On the one hand, he gave shelter to those in need, and on the other, he ripped off their last money for accommodation.

His wife Vasilisa also treated the residents of the shelter with disgust. She was in love with Vaska Pepla, and was constantly jealous of his sister Natalya. Natalya Vasilisa and her husband were bullied with special zeal. Natalya, on the contrary, was quiet girl and did not allow herself to contradict her sister and her husband.

In the relationship between two sisters, Gorky showed us how social status affects the relationship between two people, even though they were sisters.

Vaska Pepel was one of the inhabitants of the Kostylevo shelter. He said to himself that since childhood he had been called a thief. Therefore, all his life he did nothing else except steal. It should be noted that Vasilisa encouraged Ash’s occupation by buying stolen things from him.

Another inhabitant of the shelter, Anna, had an unenviable fate. She was sick with a fatal disease and lived last days. Her husband, a mechanic, Kleshch had been waiting for his wife’s death for a long time. She was a burden to him. He thought that after Anna's death he would be able to earn money and live new life. But this was not destined to happen. Anna lived and endured, endured daily humiliation and beatings from her husband. There was no place for joy and happiness in her life. The girl no longer remembered when she ate her fill and put on something other than old rags.

The person who could not find use for his knowledge and skills, and now found himself in a shelter with its other inhabitants, was Satin. WITH early age he worked at the telegraph office and was fond of reading. But now he has become a beggar, not expecting anything from life. From the old days he only had a few intricate words left in foreign language which he loved to show off to others.

Orphan Nastya was forced to sell her body in order to somehow make ends meet. She was a dreamer. Nastya was fond of romance novels and believed that someday it would happen to her too true love. For her dreaminess and naivety, the girl endured daily ridicule from other inhabitants of the shelter.

Another inhabitant of the shelter was Bubnov. He ended up here because he found out about his wife’s betrayal and, not finding best option, went to Kostylev’s shelter.

In my opinion, the most tragic fall to the bottom was the fall of Baron. He was a former nobleman and held a high position. But now he is forced to spend time with those people whom he simply did not notice before. The Baron often recalled his past “well-fed” years. All that remained from that life was his arrogant manner of communicating with others.

The next inhabitant of the shelter was a man of the stage, a man who basked in applause, but who, succumbing bad habit, rolled down. The worst thing is that the Actor understands the cause of his suffering, but cannot do anything about it.

Now all these once different people equal in their lack of rights. They find themselves at the bottom of their lives and are forced to accept their fate. These people have no future, they only have memories of their past life. They are all united by one road - the road down into the abyss. Such a life destroyed all human feelings and qualities in the inhabitants of the shelter and gave rise to not only social, but also moral degradation.

Old man Luka becomes a ray of light for the inhabitants of the shelter, who tried to “stir them up” by giving them hope. Unfortunately, it was already too late; no one could find the strength to climb up again. The actor commits suicide, Vaska Pepel was exiled to Siberia, and the rest of the inhabitants of the shelter suffered a worse fate.

Maxim Gorky in his play “At the Bottom” tried to show us all the lack of rights of a person burdened with social problems, how important it is to be able to solve them in time in order to change your life.

How does M. Gorky reveal the problems of morality in the play “At the Lower Depths”?

All of Gorky's works contain a complex moral issues. The play “At the Bottom” is no exception. In it, the author combined many of his theories, thoughts, and assumptions.

Gorky made his heroes the inhabitants of the shelter, people who had sunk to the social and moral bottom. And this is no coincidence. It is at that depth of fall that is reflected in the play that a person is able to discuss eternal problems existence, because in real life he has nothing, and his existence comes rather from the mercy of his superiors. Everything is at the bottom social signs and the differences between people are erased: “There are no gentlemen here... everything has faded away, only one naked man remains.”

So, what problems can be identified in this work? The author prompts us to think about man, about truth and saving lie, about mercy and cruelty, suffering and patience.

The dispute about conscience in the work is very interesting. The question of whether it is needed in life arises after Kleshch’s remark that “trash, a golden company” lives in the shelter...” Objecting to Kleshch, Vaska Pepel notes that he agrees with those who, like Satin, consider having a conscience to be completely unprofitable. Bubnov’s position is the same: “What’s the use of conscience?” And the reader begins to wonder whether it is so necessary for people at the very “bottom” of life.

Also in his work, Gorky outlined the problem of a real way out of the situation. It is associated with the image of the mechanic Kleshch, who wants to return to a “normal” life through hard, honest work. At first, Kleshch proudly opposes himself to those around him, believes in the feasibility of his plan, and works hard. But then his dream is shattered by harsh reality: he loses his job and experiences a crisis. At the end of the play, the hero gives up his dreams of work, reconciles himself with the “idling tramps,” and gets drunk with Satin, who preaches the principle of “not doing.”

Through the image of Anna, Tick's wife, the problem of life and death, as well as compassion, develops. Anna is a “patient”, humbly bears her cross and calls only for sympathy. Also, thanks to her, the hard-heartedness of the Tick is emphasized. In response to Anna’s request not to shout or quarrel, he just tiredly says: “I’m sore!”

Anna is out of breath and asks to open the door to the hallway, but Kleshch refuses her this, fearing that she will catch a cold. In such social conditions, people have no room for basic pity. In this sense, Bubnov acts as a preacher of the principle of indifference to one’s neighbor, lack of compassion.

By the way, it is Bubnov who can be called a special hero of the play; his statements often seem cynical, but they show the true meaning of the situation, not allowing illusions to succumb.

The problem of cruel truth and saving lies plays a very important role in the work. The philosophy of humane deception in the play is preached by the wanderer Luke. He appears, and with him pity and compassion enter the lives of the night shelters. This old man has a warm, affectionate word for everyone. The Wanderer believes that one should approach a person only through kindness and pity. With his story about two escaped convicts who broke into a dacha, Luka confirms the connection between pity for a person and goodness: “If I had not had pity for them, they might have killed me... or something else... Prison will not teach goodness, but a person will teach... Yes!"

Here Luka is contrasted with Bubnov. This hero says: “In my opinion, throw out the whole truth as it is! Why be ashamed? But the truth he calls for is not within everyone's reach. And in this dispute, Mite opens up in a new way. He “trembles with excitement”, “screams” about his hatred of the truth: “I must breathe out... here it is, the truth! She doesn’t let you breathe, you can’t live with her...”

A kind of culmination in this dispute between the heroes is Luke’s parable about the righteous land. One man kept getting ready to go look for the righteous land where they live " good people... they respect each other, they help each other for simple things... and everything is nice and good with them!” For this he was ready to endure everything. The only thing he could not stand was the scientist’s explanation that the righteous land was not on the maps. After this news, he “went home and hanged himself!..”

Faith in the ideal of goodness helps to live, “gives joy.” Trying to find out the truth, a person becomes convinced that its embodiment is in reality impossible, and this deprives him vitality, the ability to fight fate. Satin, in turn, said: “man is the truth!”

And in fact, in the play significant place occupies a dispute about a person. Bubnov says that “no matter how you paint yourself, everything will be erased... everything will be erased, yes!” Luke doesn’t see much difference between people: “I don’t care! I respect swindlers too; in my opinion, not a single flea is bad: they are all black, they all jump...” Satin, in his famous monologue, proclaims: “What is a person?.. It’s not you, not me, not them... no! - it’s you, me, them, the old man, Napoleon, Mohammed... in one!.. Everything is in a person, everything is for a person! Human! This is great! That sounds… proud!”

The author raises in his play a lot of various problems that cannot be answered unequivocally. We can say that each of the heroes of the work, to one degree or another, reveals Gorky’s positions on moral issues.

The action of the play "At the Bottom" takes place in a gloomy, semi-dark basement, like a cave, with a vaulted, low ceiling that presses on people with its stone weight, where it is dark, there is no space and it is difficult to breathe. The furnishings in this basement are also wretched: instead of chairs there are dirty stumps of wood, a roughly knocked together table, bunks along the walls

Thieves, cheaters, beggars, cripples - everyone who was thrown out of life - gathered here; different in their habits, life behavior, past fate, but equally hungry, exhausted and useless to anyone: the former aristocrat Baron, the drunken Actor, the former intellectual Satin, the mechanic-artisan Kleshch, the fallen woman Nastya, the thief Vaska. They have nothing, everything has been taken away, lost, erased and trampled into the dirt.

The motley gallery of characters in the play are victims of a soulless public order. Even here, at the very bottom of life, exhausted and completely destitute, they serve as an object of exploitation, even here the owners, the philistine owners, do not stop at any crime and try to squeeze a few pennies out of them.

The fates of all these people and the very existence of the “bottom” serve as a formidable indictment of the bourgeois world.

A. M. Gorky in one of his interviews spoke about the problems of the play as follows: “The main question that I wanted to pose is - what is better, truth or compassion? What is more necessary? Is it necessary to bring compassion to the point of using lies, like Luke? "

A. M. Gorky attacked the bourgeois philosophy of comforting lies with great force. Luke considers all people insignificant, pitiful, weak, incapable of actively fighting for their rights and in need of condolences and consolation. Luke is a sower of illusions, comforting fairy tales, which desperate, weak people greedily grabbed. “White lies” is the principle that Luke follows. He inspires Vaska Pepl with the idea of ​​going to Siberia, where he can start a new, honest life; The actor promises to name the city where he is cured of alcoholism in a luxurious hospital; He calms the dying Anna with the hope that for her unbearable torment on earth, after death she will find peace and eternal bliss in heaven. Luke's comforting lie meets with sympathy from the night shelters. They believe him because they want to believe in the existence of another truth, because they passionately want to break out of the shelter and make their way to another life, even though the path to it is unclear.

A. M. Gorky in one of his interviews spoke about the problems of the play as follows: “The main question that I wanted to pose is - what is better, truth or compassion? What is more necessary? Is it necessary to bring compassion to the point of using lies, like Luke? "

In the play “At the Bottom” the author combined many of his theories, thoughts, and assumptions. Gorky made his heroes the inhabitants of the shelter, people who had sunk to the social and moral bottom. And this is no coincidence. It is at that depth of fall, which is reflected in the play, that a person is able to discuss the eternal problems of existence, because in real life he has nothing, and his existence comes rather from the mercy of his superiors. At the “bottom” all social signs and differences between people are erased: “There are no gentlemen here... everything has faded away, only one naked man remains.” So, what problems can be identified in this work? The author prompts us to think about man, about truth and saving lies, about mercy and cruelty, suffering and patience. The dispute about conscience in the work is very interesting. The question of whether it is needed in life arises after Kleshch’s remark that “trash, a golden company” lives in the shelter...” Objecting to Kleshch, Vaska Pepel notes that he agrees with those who, like Satin, consider having a conscience to be completely unprofitable. Bubnov’s position is the same: “What’s the use of conscience?” And the reader begins to wonder whether it is so necessary for people at the very “bottom” of life. Also in his work, Gorky outlined the problem of a real way out of the situation. It is associated with the image of the mechanic Kleshch, who wants to return to a “normal” life through hard, honest work. At first, Kleshch proudly opposes himself to those around him, believes in the feasibility of his plan, and works hard. But then his dream is shattered by harsh reality: he loses his job and experiences a crisis. At the end of the play, the hero gives up his dreams of work, reconciles himself with the “idling tramps,” and gets drunk with Satin, who preaches the principle of “not doing.” Through the image of Anna, Tick's wife, the problem of life and death, as well as compassion, develops. Anna is a “patient”, humbly bears her cross and calls only for sympathy. Also, thanks to her, the hard-heartedness of the Tick is emphasized. In response to Anna’s request not to shout or quarrel, he just tiredly says: “I’m sore!” Anna is out of breath and asks to open the door to the hallway, but Kleshch refuses her this, fearing that she will catch a cold. In such social conditions, people have no room for basic pity. In this sense, Bubnov acts as a preacher of the principle of indifference to one’s neighbor, lack of compassion. By the way, it is Bubnov who can be called a special hero of the play; his statements often seem cynical, but they show the true meaning of the situation, not allowing illusions to succumb. The problem of cruel truth and saving lies plays a very important role in the work. The philosophy of humane deception in the play is preached by the wanderer Luke. He appears, and with him pity and compassion enter the lives of the night shelters. This old man has a warm, affectionate word for everyone. The Wanderer believes that one should approach a person only through kindness and pity. With his story about two escaped convicts who broke into a dacha, Luka confirms the connection between pity for a person and goodness: “If I had not had pity for them, they might have killed me... or something else... Prison will not teach goodness, but a person will teach... Yes!" Here Luka is contrasted with Bubnov. This hero says: “In my opinion, throw out the whole truth as it is! Why be ashamed? But the truth he calls for is not within everyone's reach. And in this dispute, Mite opens up in a new way. He “trembles with excitement”, “screams” about his hatred of the truth: “I must breathe out... here it is, the truth! She doesn’t let you breathe, you can’t live with her...” A kind of culmination in this dispute between the heroes is Luke’s parable about the righteous land. One man kept getting ready to go in search of a righteous land, where “good people live... they respect each other, they help each other for simple things... and everything is nice and good with them!” For this he was ready to endure everything. The only thing he could not stand was the scientist’s explanation that the righteous land was not on the maps. After this news, he “went home and hanged himself!..” Faith in the ideal of goodness helps to live, “gives joy.” Trying to find out the truth, a person becomes convinced that its embodiment is in reality impossible, and this deprives him of vitality and the ability to fight fate. Satin, in turn, said: “man is the truth!” And in fact, a significant place in the play is occupied by a dispute about a person. Bubnov says that “no matter how you paint yourself, everything will be erased... everything will be erased, yes!” Luke doesn’t see much difference between people: “I don’t care! I respect swindlers too; in my opinion, not a single flea is bad: they are all black, they all jump...” Satin, in his famous monologue, proclaims: “What is a person?.. It’s not you, not me, not them... no! - it’s you, me, them, the old man, Napoleon, Mohammed... in one!.. Everything is in a person, everything is for a person! Human! This is great! That sounds… proud!”

With his play “At the Lower Depths,” A. M. Gorky refuted idealistic ideas: the ideas of non-resistance, forgiveness, humility. The whole play is imbued with faith in a real person, a Man with a capital M. The author raises in his play a lot of various problems that cannot be answered unequivocally. We can say that each of the heroes of the work, to one degree or another, reveals Gorky’s positions on moral issues.