The story “Exchange” was written by Trifonov in 1969 and published in Novy Mir the same year in last issue. She opened the cycle of “Moscow stories” about current problems Soviet citizens.
Genre originality
In the foreground in the story are family and everyday problems that reveal philosophical questions about the meaning of human life. This is a story about living and dying with dignity. In addition, Trifonov reveals the psychology of each character, even minor ones. Each of them has their own truth, but dialogue does not work.
Issues
Trifonov addresses the theme of confrontation between two families. Victor Dmitriev, having married Lena Lukyanova, could not convey to her the values of the Dmitriev family: emotional sensitivity, gentleness, tact, intelligence. But Dmitriev himself, in the words of his sister Laura, “got crazy,” that is, he became pragmatic, striving not so much for material wealth as for being left alone.
Trifonov raises important social problems. The modern reader does not understand the problem of the main character. Soviet man, as if he had no property, did not have the right to live in a normal apartment with rooms for spouses and a child. And it was completely wild that the mother’s room after death could not be inherited, but would go to the state. So Lena tried to save the property only possible way: exchanging two rooms in a communal apartment for a two-room apartment. Another thing is that Ksenia Fedorovna immediately guessed about her fatal illness. It is in this, and not in the exchange itself, that the evil emanating from the insensitive Lena lies.
Plot and composition
The main action takes place on an October day and the morning of the next day. But the reader gets acquainted not only with the whole life of the main character, but also learns about the Lukyanov and Dmitriev families. Trifonov achieves this with the help of retrospection. Main character reflects on the events happening to him and his own actions, remembering the past.
The hero faces a difficult task: to inform his terminally ill mother, who does not know the seriousness of her illness, and his sister that his wife Lena is planning an exchange. In addition, the hero needs to get money for treatment for his sister Laura, with whom her mother now lives. The hero solves both problems brilliantly, so his ex-lover offers him money, and by having his mother move in with him, he allegedly helps his sister go on a long business trip.
The last page of the story contains the events of six months: a move occurs, the mother dies, the hero feels unhappy. The narrator adds on his own that Dmitriev’s childhood home was demolished, where he was never able to pass on family values. So the Lukyanovs defeated the Dmitrievs in a symbolic sense.
Heroes of the story
The main character of the story is 37-year-old Dmitriev. He is middle-aged, overweight, with a perpetual smell of tobacco on his breath. The hero is proud, he takes the love of his mother, wife, and mistress for granted. Life credo Dmitrieva - “I got used to it and calmed down.” He comes to terms with the fact that his wife and mother who love him do not get along.
Dmitriev defends his mother, whom Lena calls a hypocrite. The sister believes that Dmitriev became foolish, that is, he betrayed his high spirit and selflessness for the sake of material things.
Dmitriev considers peace to be the most valuable thing in life and protects it with all his might. Another value of Dmitriev and his consolation is that with him “everything is like everyone else.”
Dmitriev is weak-willed. He cannot write his dissertation, although Lena agrees to help with everything. Particularly indicative is the story of Levka Bubrik, for whom his father-in-law, at Lena’s request, found a good place in GINEGA, where Dmitriev himself eventually went to work. Moreover, Lena took all the blame upon herself. Everything was revealed when Lena told Ksenia Fedorovna at Ksenia Fedorovna’s birthday that it was Dmitriev’s decision.
At the end of the story, Dmitriev’s mother explains the subtext of the exchange made by the hero: having exchanged true values for momentary gain, he lost his spiritual sensitivity.
Dmitriev's wife Lena is smart. She is a technical translation specialist. Dmitriev considers Lena selfish and callous. According to Dmitriev, Lena is marked by some spiritual inaccuracy. He throws the accusation into his wife’s face that she has a mental defect, underdeveloped feelings, something subhuman.
Lena knows how to get her way. Wanting to exchange an apartment, she cares not about herself, but about her family.
Dmitriev's father-in-law, Ivan Vasilyevich, was a tanner by profession, but moved along the trade union line. Through his efforts, a telephone was installed at the dacha six months later. He was always on guard and didn't trust anyone. The father-in-law's speech was full of bureaucratic language, which is why Dmitriev's mother considered him unintelligent.
Tanya is Dmitriev’s former lover, with whom he got together 3 years ago for one summer. She is 34 years old, she looks sickly: thin, pale. Her eyes are big and kind. Tanya is afraid for Dmitriev. After her relationship with him, she remained with her son Alik: her husband quit his job and left Moscow because Tanya could no longer live with him. Her husband really loved her. Dmitriev thinks that Tanya would be his best wife, but leaves everything as it is.
Tatyana and Ksenia Fedorovna like each other. Tatyana feels sorry for Dmitriev and loves him, while Dmitriev feels sorry for her only for a moment. Dmitriev thinks that this love is forever. Tatyana knows a lot of poems and recites them by heart in a whisper, especially when there is nothing to talk about.
Dmitrieva’s mother, Ksenia Fedorovna, is an intelligent, respected woman. She worked as a senior bibliographer in one of the academic libraries. The mother is so simple-minded that she does not understand the danger of her illness. She came to terms with Lena. Ksenia Fedorovna is “friendly, compliant, ready to help and takes part.” Only Lena does not appreciate this. Ksenia Fedorovna is not inclined to lose heart; she communicates in a humorous manner.
Mother loves to selflessly help distant friends and relatives. But Dmitriev understands that his mother is doing this in order to gain a reputation a good man. For this, Lena called Dmitriev’s mother a hypocrite.
Dmitriev's grandfather is a keeper family values. Lena called him a well-preserved monster. My grandfather was a lawyer who graduated from St. Petersburg University; in his youth he was imprisoned in a fortress, was in exile, and fled abroad. Grandfather was small and withered, his skin was tanned, and his hands were clumsy and disfigured by hard work.
Unlike his daughter, the grandfather does not despise people if they belong to a different circle, and does not condemn anyone. He lives not in the past, but in his short future. It was the grandfather who gave an apt description of Victor: “You are not a bad person. But not surprising either.”
Laura, Dmitriev’s sister, is middle-aged, with gray-black hair and a tanned forehead. She spends 5 months every year in Central Asia. Laura is cunning and perspicacious. She did not come to terms with Lena's attitude towards her mother. Laura is uncompromising: “Her thoughts never bend. They always stick out and prick.”
Artistic originality
The author uses details instead of extensive characteristics. For example, the sagging belly of his wife, seen by Dmitriev, speaks of his coldness towards her. Two pillows on the marital bed, one of which, stale, belongs to the husband, indicate that there is no true love between the spouses.
After reading Trifonov’s works, the reader may get the impression that the author has no ideals. And indeed in the work “Exchange” the writer does not single out anyone, making only positive, or only negative character. All heroes are on equal terms. Thus, Trifonov shows that he is not “white and black”. After all, everything in life is relative.
The mother of the protagonist of the work, Viktor Dmitriev, is terminally ill. She may have only months, or maybe even days, left to live. All her life she showed in the eyes of the public that there was nothing in her at all. malice, no self-interest. Meanwhile, the woman condemns to my own son because of his choice of “passion”.
The same thing happens with her daughter Laura. A woman with a good “proletarian” education, and from an intelligent family, is herself unhappy in her marriage. For her, one consolation is work. After all, it is there that she can realize herself as an individual.
The work also mentions father and grandfather. Men, seeing how their relatives were “fighting,” often said that one cannot live with hatred. However, first Victor's father and then his beloved grandfather die. stays with his mother, but they have no common themes, plans or even interests. But there is Victor’s wife, Lena, whom both his mother and sister Laura hate, because the woman is completely different both in character and in beliefs.
Nothing is impossible for Lena. What she plans, she will definitely implement. It would seem very positive quality! But there is also another side to the coin. She does not always achieve her goals honestly. If a woman is faced with the choice of compromising with her conscience or stepping aside, then she will choose the first option. Her desires are always very real, and her arguments are very weighty. Lena always hides behind the fact that she does everything for the sake of her family. She repeats the same thing to Victor.
Victor is also not a “positive” character in the work. He completely depends on Lena's decisions and her arguments. His lack of character is evident already at the beginning of the work, when the author clarifies that the man gave up his dream because he was unable to enter the desired university. Later, he met his future wife, and she said that it was too late to dream about anything. You need to live here and now. And there is, of course, some truth in this, which is why Victor “obeyed.”
But is there love between married couple? Most likely no. Both characters are comfortable with each other. “made” what she needed from Dmitriev, and the man, with his own wife, covers up his own low moral imperfections. She is a kind of shield for him, from other people’s comments and condemnations.
And yet, deep down, Victor sees himself with Tatyana. He knows that she is not capable of betrayal, base acts, hypocrisy and deception. Dmitriev appreciates this in her and thinks that he himself is the same. Victor will only later understand how different their levels of spiritual and moral state are. He will understand, but it will be too late to fix anything.
Summary of a literature lesson in 11th grade
« Urban prose in modern literature".
Yu. V. Trifonov. story "EXCHANGE"
Goals: give an idea of “urban” prose of the twentieth century; consider eternal problems, raised by the author against the background of urban life; determine the features of Trifonov’s work (the semantic ambiguity of the title, subtle psychologism).
During the classes
Take care of the intimate, the intimate: the intimacy of your soul is more valuable than all the treasures of the world!
V. V. Rozanov
I. “Urban” prose in the literature of the 20th century.
1. Working with the textbook.
Read the article (textbook edited by Zhuravlev, pp. 418-422).
What do you think the concept of “urban” prose means? What are its features?
Present your conclusions in the form of a plan.
Rough plan
1) Features of “urban” prose:
a) this is a cry of pain for a person “being turned into a grain of sand”;
b) literature explores the world “through the prism of culture, philosophy, religion.”
3) “City” prose by Yu. Trifonov:
a) in the story “Preliminary Results” he reasons with “empty” philosophers;
b) in the story “The Long Farewell” he reveals the theme of the collapse of the bright principle in a person in his concessions to philistinism.
2. Appeal to the epigraph of the lesson.
How is the content of “urban” prose related to the epigraph of today’s lesson?
II. “Urban” prose by Yuri Trifonov.
1. Vital and creative path Trifonova.
The complexity of the fate of the writer and his generation, the talent for embodying spiritual quests, the originality of manner - all this predetermines attention to life path Trifonova.
The writer's parents were professional revolutionaries. Father, Valentin Andreevich, joined the party in 1904, was sent into administrative exile in Siberia, and went through hard labor. Later he became a member of the Military Revolutionary Committee in October 1917. In 1923-1925. headed the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR.
In the 30s, father and mother were repressed. In 1965, Yu. Trifonov’s documentary book “Reflection of the Fire” appeared, in which he used his father’s archive. From the pages of the work emerges the image of a man who “kindled a fire and himself died in this flame.” In the novel, Trifonov first used it as a unique artistic technique principle of time editing.
History will constantly disturb Trifonov (“The Old Man”, “House on the Embankment”). The writer realized his philosophical principle: “We must remember - the only possibility of competition with time is hidden here. Man is doomed, time triumphs."
During the war, Yuri Trifonov was evacuated in Central Asia and worked at an aircraft plant in Moscow. In 1944 he entered the Literary Institute. Gorky.
The memories of his contemporaries help to visually imagine the writer: “He was over forty. An awkward, slightly baggy figure, short-cropped black hair, in some places with barely visible lambskin curls, with sparse threads of gray, an open, wrinkled forehead. From a wide, slightly swollen pale face, through heavy horn-rimmed glasses, intelligent gray eyes looked at me shyly and unprotected.”
The first story "Students" - graduate work aspiring prose writer. The story was published by the magazine New world"A. Tvardovsky in 1950, and in 1951 the author received the Stalin Prize for it.
It is generally accepted that the main theme of the writer is everyday life, the procrastination of everyday life. One of the famous researchers of Trifonov’s work, N.B. Ivanova, writes: “When reading Trifonov for the first time, there is a deceptive ease of perception of his prose, immersion in familiar situations close to us, collisions with people and phenomena known in life...” This is true, but only when reading superficially.
Trifonov himself asserted: “It’s not everyday life that I write, but being.”
Critic Yu. M. Oklyansky rightly asserts: “The test of everyday life, the power of everyday circumstances and the hero, one way or another romantically opposing them... is the cross-cutting and main theme of the late Trifonov...”
2. Problems of the story “Exchange” by Yu. Trifonov.
1) - Remember the plot of the work.
The family of Viktor Georgievich Dmitriev, an employee of one of the research institutes, lives in a communal apartment. Daughter Natasha - a teenager - behind the curtain. Dmitriev's dream of moving in with his mother did not find support from Lena, his wife. Everything changed when my mother was operated on for cancer. Lena herself started talking about the exchange. The actions and feelings of the heroes, manifested in solving this everyday issue, which ended in a successful exchange, and soon in the death of Ksenia Feodorovna, form the content of the short story.
So, exchange is the plot core of the story, but can we say that this is also a metaphor that the author uses?
2) The main character of the story is a representative of the third generation of Dmitrievs.
Grandfather Fyodor Nikolaevich is intelligent, principled, and humane.
What can you say about the hero’s mother?
Find the characteristic in the text:
“Ksenia Fedorovna is loved by friends, respected by colleagues, appreciated by her neighbors in the apartment and at Pavlinov’s dacha, because she is friendly, compliant, ready to help and take part...”
But Viktor Georgievich Dmitriev falls under the influence of his wife and “becomes foolish.” The essence of the title of the story, its pathos, author's position, as it follows from the artistic logic of the story, is revealed in the dialogue between Ksenia Fedorovna and her son about the exchange: “I really wanted to live with you and Natasha...” Ksenia Fedorovna paused. - But now - no” - “Why?” - “You have already exchanged, Vitya. The exchange took place."
What is the meaning of these words?
3) What makes up the image of the main character?
Characteristics of an image based on text.
How does the emerging conflict with your wife over the exchange end?(“...He lay down in his place against the wall and turned his face to the wallpaper.”)
What does this pose of Dmitriev express?(This is the desire to escape the conflict, humility, non-resistance, although in words he did not agree with Lena.)
And here’s another subtle psychological sketch: Dmitriev, falling asleep, feels his wife’s hand on his shoulder, which first “lightly strokes his shoulder” and then presses “with considerable heaviness.”
The hero understands that his wife’s hand is inviting him to turn around. He resists (as the author depicts in detail internal struggle). But... “Dmitriev, without saying a word, turned on his left side.”
What other details indicate the hero’s submission to his wife when we understand that he is a driven man?(In the morning, my wife reminded me of the need to talk to my mother.
“Dmitriev wanted to say something,” but he “took two steps after Lena, stood in the corridor and returned to the room.”)
This detail - “two steps forward” - “two steps back” - is clear evidence of the impossibility for Dmitriev to go beyond the boundaries imposed on him by external circumstances.
What rating does the hero receive?(We learn his assessment from his mother and grandfather: “You are not a bad person. But you are not amazing either.”)
4) Dmitriev was denied the right to be called an individual by his relatives. Lena was denied by the author: “...she bit into her desires like a bulldog. Such a pretty bulldog woman... She didn’t let go until her desires - right in her teeth - turned into flesh..."
Oxymoron* pretty bulldog womanfurther emphasizes the author’s negative attitude towards the heroine.
Yes, Trifonov has clearly defined his position. This is contradicted by N. Ivanova’s statement: “Trifonov did not set himself the task of either condemning or rewarding his heroes: the task was different - to understand.” This is partly true...
It seems that another remark of the same literary critic: “...behind the external simplicity of presentation, calm intonation, designed for an equal and understanding reader, there is Trifonov’s poetics. And - an attempt at social aesthetic education.”
What is your attitude towards the Dmitriev family?
Would you like life to be like this in your families?(Trifonov managed to draw typical picture family relations of our time: feminization of the family, the transfer of initiative into the hands of predators, the triumph of consumerism, lack of unity in raising children, the loss of traditional family values. The desire for peace as the only joy forces men to put up with their inferiority in the family. They lose their solid masculinity. The family is left without a head.)
III. Lesson summary.
What questions did the author of the story “Exchange” make you think about?
Do you agree with what B. Pankin, speaking about this story, calls a genre that combines a physiological sketch of modern urban life and a parable?
Homework.
“The exchange was published in 1969. At this time, the author was criticized for reproducing the “terrible sludge of little things”, for the fact that in his work “there is no enlightening truth”, for the fact that in Trifonov’s stories spiritual dead people roam, pretending to be alive. There are no ideals, man is crushed and humiliated, crushed by life and his own insignificance.”
Express your attitude to these assessments by answering the questions:
What in the story comes to the fore when we perceive it now?
Does Trifonov really have no ideals?
In your opinion, will this story remain in literature and how will it be perceived in another 40 years?
It turns out that the moral values and traditions of the protagonist are replaced by prudence and indifference to others.
Victor Dmitriev“betrayed” his ideals. He did not want to fight with his wife for the right to be “heard” and completely submitted to her “leadership.” But most likely, this seed of an “immoral personality” was always present in him, and his wife was only a cover.
It is for this reason that Victor suddenly takes a position that a friend of the Dmitriev family was really counting on getting. He “piously believes” that he is doing this for the sake of his family and wife, but in fact, the man deceived his friend for personal gain.
Lena Ivanova intervened in the scandal that arose due to betrayal. The woman told everyone that it was entirely her “fault”, since it was she who insisted on changing her husband’s job. Because of this, Laura’s mother and sister very much condemned Victor, calling him “foolish.”
The Lukyanovs and Dmitrievs were in conflict. Different views on life, goals and means of achieving them created a whole abyss of misunderstanding between families. Victor was on edge. He couldn’t fully accept anyone’s side, because it’s difficult to choose between dear mother and the mother of her child.
But the man was far from an exemplary family man. The author notes that while his wife and daughter were on vacation and left the city, Victor started an affair with his colleague Tatyana. The girl fell in love with Victor, and subsequently, because of her feelings, was forced to divorce her husband. She didn’t think that Victor, unlike her, would be able to continue deceiving his wife.
But the man was not going to lie. He simply abandoned Tatiana upon arrival Lena with his daughter and with a clear conscience “returned” to the family. The poor woman was left to live with the hope that they would someday be together again. She even suggested ex-lover borrowed money when he needed it urgently.
Victor took a certain amount from the woman. Of course, he was going to give them to her, but was there such a need to “raise the past”? Or maybe he specifically gave her hope?!
One way or another, he really really needed the funds. The mother, who had recently undergone major surgery, needed treatment. Yes, and Lena put pressure on him with the inevitable exchange of living space. The woman had planned everything for a long time, and now having learned about Ksenia Fedorovna’s fatal diagnosis, she decided to act.
This action was blasphemy towards Dmitrieva, and the son understood this very well. He even tried to object to his wife’s “pressure”, but gave up after unsuccessful attempt"protest". His wife's arguments were more powerful than all his arguments and condemnations.
Soon, just recently, the warring parties “reunited” and began to live in the same two-room apartment. Ksenia Fedorovna’s room was exchanged in addition to a room in Dmitriev’s communal apartment. Lena thought of everything here too. She knew that her mother-in-law’s days were numbered and she wouldn’t have to “tolerate” her for long. Ivanova turned out to be right - Victor’s mother died soon after.
Victor became very ill. It slowly began to dawn on him that the man had really changed, but not for the better...
In the 50-80s, the genre of so-called “urban” prose flourished. This literature primarily addressed the individual, the problems of everyday moral relations.
The culminating achievement of “urban” prose was the work of Yuri Trifonov. It was his story “Exchange” that marked the beginning of the cycle of “urban” stories. In his “city” stories, Trifonov wrote about love and family relationships, the most common, but at the same time complex, about the collision different characters, different life positions, about problems, joys, worries, hopes ordinary person, about his life.
At the center of the story “Exchange” is a rather typical, run-of-the-mill life situation, which nevertheless reveals very important moral issues, arising during its resolution.
The main characters of the story are engineer Dmitriev, his wife Lena and Dmitriev’s mother Ksenia Fedorovna. They share a rather complicated relationship. Lena never loved her mother-in-law, moreover, the relationship between them “was minted in the form of ossified and lasting enmity.” Previously, Dmitriev often started a conversation about moving in with his mother, an elderly and lonely woman. But Lena always protested violently against this, and gradually this topic arose less and less in conversations between husband and wife, because Dmitriev understood: he could not break Lena’s will. In addition, Ksenia Fedorovna became a kind of instrument of hostility in their family clashes. During quarrels, the name of Ksenia Fedorovna was often heard, although it was not she who started the conflict. Dmitriev mentioned his mother when he wanted to accuse Lena of selfishness or callousness, and Lena talked about her, trying to put pressure on the patient or simply be sarcastic.
Speaking about this, Trifonov points to the flourishing of hostile, hostile relations where, it would seem, there should always be only mutual understanding, patience and love.
The main conflict of the story is related to the serious illness of Ksenia Fedorovna. Doctors suspect “the worst.” This is where Lena takes the bull by the horns. She decides to urgently resolve the issue of the exchange and move in with her mother-in-law. Her illness and, possibly, approaching death become the path to a decision for Dmitriev’s wife. housing issue. Lena doesn’t think about the moral side of this enterprise. Having heard from his wife about her terrible idea, Dmitriev tries to look into her eyes. Perhaps he hopes to find doubt, awkwardness, guilt there, but he finds only determination. Dmitriev knew that his wife’s “mental inaccuracy” worsened “when Lena’s other, strongest quality came into play: the ability to get her way.” The author notes that Lena “bit into her desires like a bulldog” and never deviated from them until they came true.
Having done the hardest thing - saying what she had planned - Lena acts very methodically. Like a subtle psychologist, she “licks” her husband’s wound and achieves reconciliation with him. And he, suffering from lack of will, cannot, does not know how to resist her. He perfectly understands the horror of what is happening, realizes the price of the exchange, but does not find the strength to do anything to prevent Lena, just as he once did not find the strength to reconcile her with his mother.
Naturally, Lena entrusted the mission of telling Ksenia Fedorovna about the upcoming exchange to her husband. This conversation is the worst, most painful thing for Dmitriev. After the operation, which confirmed the “worst neck”, Ksenia Fedorovna felt an improvement, she had confidence that she was on the mend. To tell her about the exchange means to deprive her of her last hope for life, because she will not guess the reason for such loyalty long years this daughter-in-law who is at war with her clever woman I could not. The realization of this becomes the most painful thing for Dmitriev. Lena easily plans a conversation with Ksenia Fedorovna for her husband. “Put it all on me!” - she advises. And Dmitriev seems to accept Lenin’s condition. His mother is simple-minded, and if he explains to her everything according to Lenin’s plan, she may well believe in the selflessness of the exchange. But Dmitriev is afraid of his sister Laura, who is “cunning, “perceptive and really doesn’t like Lena.” Laura has long figured out her brother’s wife and will immediately guess what intrigues are behind the idea of exchange. Laura believes that Dmitriev quietly betrayed her and her mother, “got crazy,” that is, he began to live by the rules on which Lena and her mother, Vera Lazarevna, rely in life, which their enterprising father, Ivan Vasilyevich, once established in their family , a “mighty” man. It was Laura who noticed Lena’s tactlessness at the very beginning of her family life with Dmitriev, when Lena, without hesitation, took all their best cups for herself, placed a bucket near Ksenia Fedorovna’s room, and without hesitation took a portrait of her father-in-law from the walls of the middle room and hung it into the hallway. Outwardly, these are just everyday little things, but behind them, as Laura was able to discern, there is something more hidden.
Lena’s blasphemy is revealed especially clearly the morning after her conversation with Dmitriev. She has Bad mood because her mother, Vera Lazarevna, fell ill. Vera Lazarevna has brain spasms. What is not a reason for sadness? Of course there is a reason. And no harbinger of the mother-in-law’s death can compare with her grief. Lena is callous in soul and, moreover, selfish.
It’s not only Lena who is endowed with selfishness. Dmitriev’s colleague Pasha Snitkin is also selfish. The question of his daughter’s admission to music school for him it is much more important than the death of a person. Because, as the author emphasizes, the daughter is her own, dear, but a stranger dies.
Lena's inhumanity contrasts with her spirituality ex-lover Dmitriev, Tatyana, who, as Dmitriev realizes, “would probably be his best wife.” The news of the exchange makes Tanya blush, because she understands everything perfectly, she puts herself in Dmitriev’s position, offers him a loan and shows all sorts of sympathy.
Lena is also indifferent to her own father. When he lies with a stroke, she only thinks about the fact that her trip to Bulgaria is on fire, and she calmly goes on vacation.
Contrasted with Lena is Ksenia Fedorovna herself, who “is loved by friends, respected by colleagues, appreciated by neighbors in the apartment and at Pavlinov’s dacha, because she is virtuous, compliant, ready to help and take part.”
Lena still achieves her goal. The sick woman agrees to the exchange. Soon she dies. Dmitriev suffers a hypertensive crisis. The portrait of the hero, who yielded to his wife in this merciless matter, realizing the significance of his act and therefore experiencing mental suffering, changes dramatically at the end of the story. “Not yet an old man, but already an elderly man with limp cheeks,” this is how the narrator sees him. But the hero is only thirty-seven years old.
The word “exchange” in Trifonov’s story takes on more broad meaning. We are talking not only about an exchange of housing, a “moral exchange” is being made, a “concession to dubious life values” is being made. “The exchange took place...” says Ksenia Fedorovna to her son. - It was a long time ago".