Human creative activity can be directed for good or evil, depending on the worldview and moral principles of each individual. What should I devote my life to? Creation or destruction - this is the classic question of being or not being human.
The end result of any creativity is a created object, a work of art, a product, i.e. then the last link in creative activity, which performs a function planned before its creation to meet the needs of the customer, buyer or consumer. Even if you create something for yourself, the author and the consumer-customer merge into one person. The criterion for assessing creative activity is the purpose of the created object.
There is a special article in the patent legislation of countries around the world that prohibits even the consideration of applications for inventions that do not comply with the standards of morality and humanity. However, although no one patents, many inhumane developments are ordered and used - this is a paradox that has political roots, and politics is impersonal and immoral.
The reason for creating something may be partly humane, but the ultimate purpose is main criterion the humanity of the work. For example, the author of the guillotine wanted to eliminate the suffering of people during execution, guaranteeing instant death without pain.
If you look into ancient times, when people first appeared, then everything that they created was aimed at survival in the animal world. The goal was noble and the tools created and weapons for defense were one and the same. A stone knife or axe, spear or arrow was used for killing and butchering animals. But a line arose when it was necessary to defend ourselves from our own kind - attacking neighboring tribes. Murder assumed legal status and was not punished, but encouraged, because the goal was the same - survival, but man became a predator, a beast, killing his own kind not for food, but for the sake of achieving political the goals of enslaving other tribes and seizing living space occupied by competitors. This is a milestone, the line that separated man from the animal world, which for millions of years lived according to the laws of nature, very fair and humane, where the strongest won, but without cruelty, malice and hatred. In the animal world, generosity and nobility are still preserved in fights for territory or for females. For example, if two leaders wolf packs enter into a duel for power over the pack, then, having given all his strength to achieve victory, the weaker one admits himself defeated, lying on his back and opening his neck. This is where the fight ends and the loser leaves the pack. No one is finishing off or bullying anyone. Predators never kill excessively, i.e. more than they can eat due to physiological natural needs. The principle of minimal necessity and sufficiency in the animal world is impeccably observed. The man became proud and denied him.
Only a person developed greed and cruelty, obviously as a developmental pathology, unexpected by-effect. Since then, specialized weapons have emerged for killing people by people, designed to fulfill ambitions, greed and cruelty leaders, who later became known as politicians. The era of wars without “rules of the game” began, the goal of which was the destruction of people and their places of residence. Entire cities were wiped off the face of the earth along with their cultural heritage, knowledge and skills. To increase the productivity of destruction, weapons of destruction, sophisticated methods and tools for killing people began to be created and improved. This process is still ongoing, the apogee of which was the creation and use of nuclear, chemical and bacteriological weapons, and “conventional” types of weapons have become very advanced and effective in use. Consequently, humanity has lost humanity, morality and humanity in constant wars among themselves. Political ambitions have become priorities in decision-making of national importance, and people have become expendable in achieving political goals through military means. The trade in arms and their use has become very profitable business. It is a fact. Who will challenge?
Against this background, let's look at the topic of creativity. It would seem that creativity is creation for the benefit and prosperity of humanity, but every type of activity has two sides of the coin. The law of unity and struggle of opposites is universal and manifests itself in everything material. Man is dual by nature and his activity is dual by the facts of the final results. The creativity of creation and destruction has a common basis - novelty is created from thoughts and the mechanisms of creativity are the same, and the technology for creating innovations in different fields of activity is the same. What are the differences, especially the opposites, in creativity?
Firstly, in the worldview of the creators, in their moral principles, principles, views, i.e. in the subjective factor.
Secondly, in the goals pursued and civic position.
Thirdly, in a sense of belonging to humanity and responsibility for the results of creative activity on a global scale.
Fourthly, in the “selfishness” of interests.
The opposite is that in creative activity aimed at creation, the material and spiritual values of humanity are multiplied and accumulated, which leads to prosperity and prosperity, strengthening and development of each person and humanity as a whole - everyone becomes richer. Culture is the world of created values. Wars eradicate culture.
In creative activity aimed at destruction and destruction, material and spiritual values are removed from the possession, use and disposal of each person and society as a whole - everyone becomes poorer, but a separate group of politicians and those in power become richer, because for them war is profitable business. They hire creators and pay them to create inhumane and immoral products, ordering research and development aimed at destroying life and culture.
In all states scientific discoveries and developments are censored and all achievements of scientific and technological progress are first assessed from the point of view of the possibility of being used in the sphere of the military-industrial complex for the production of weapons or at least for political blackmail of states and the public, and what is unsuitable for these purposes is allowed to be used for civilian use sphere of activity for so-called peaceful purposes. Hence the whole secrecy regime and a colossal diversion of the intellectual and material resources of humanity, which, in addition to the direct extermination of people in military conflicts, actually robs all of humanity, creating a shortage of resources for people’s lives. This is the main cause of mass poverty on earth.
As a result of competition, the latest research and development results quickly become outdated and the loss of resources becomes irreplaceable and thrown away. The stupidity becomes obvious. Despite the understanding that Natural resources The lands are exhaustible and irreplaceable, a crazy arms race continues due to the fault of individual, powerful politicians, super-rich people who turn politics into business. To satisfy the ambitions of this handful of people, millions of creators and high professionals are hired quite deliberately to work at enterprises and institutions of the military-industrial complex in any country, because the most favorable conditions for creative activity are created there, which allows creators to realize themselves and have a livelihood. Creators are faced with a choice: to work for good, but at the same time be poor with a high moral level, or to work for evil, prospering materially, but degrading spiritually, because... drowning out the voice of conscience, spiritual development becomes impossible.
A person has free will and the right to choose who to be and what to do.
Human duality creates a paradox in creativity. It is impossible to create and destroy at the same time - you can go crazy trying to find a compromise. For example, Nobel invented dynamite for mining and excavation, but the military used it for destruction and murder. Here it is appropriate to give a harsh but convincing allegory: after the birth of a child, parents raise and raise him in order to kill him. However, the comedy of the absurd is popular among modern politicians.
Good and evil in creativity is a philosophical and inexhaustible topic, but is the problem solvable in principle?
Homework and the topic of the essay for the module test:
Topic 1. “My understanding of creativity of creation and creativity of destruction.”
Topic 2. “Can politicians be creators?”
Topic 3. “Can there be destroyers in humanitarian creativity or is this phenomenon inherent only in technical creativity?”
Topic 4. “Is it possible to creatively kill or creatively destroy?”
Topic 5. “Can creativity be neutral, and the creator indifferent?”
Topic 6. “Can a creator be an executioner?”
Gorshkova Elena Pavlovna
Download:
Preview:
Good and evil in works of Russian literature
Scientific work
Completed by: Gorshkova Elena Pavlovna
Student of 11th grade A of school No. 28
Checked by: Sabaeva Olga Nikolaevna
Russian language teacher and
literature school No. 28
Nizhnekamsk, 2012
1. Introduction 3
2. “The Life of Boris and Gleb” 4
3. A.S. Pushkin “Eugene Onegin” 5
4. M.Yu. Lermontov “Demon” 6
5. F.M. Dostoevsky "The Brothers Karamazov" and "Crime and Punishment" 7
6. A.N. Ostrovsky "Thunderstorm" 10
7. M.A. Bulgakov "The White Guard" and "The Master and Margarita" 12
8. Conclusion 14
9. List of references 15
1. Introduction
My work will focus on good and evil. The problem of good and evil is eternal problem, which has and will continue to excite humanity. When we are read fairy tales as children, in the end, good almost always wins, and the fairy tale ends with the phrase: “And they all lived happily ever after...”. We are growing, and over time it becomes clear that this is not always the case. However, it does not happen that a person is absolutely pure in soul, without a single flaw. Each of us has shortcomings, and there are many of them. But this does not mean that we are evil. We have a lot of good qualities. So the theme of good and evil already appears in ancient Russian literature. As it says in the “Teaching of Vladimir Monomakh”: “... Think, my children, how merciful and merciful God, the Lover of Mankind, is to us. We are sinful and mortal people, and yet, if someone does us harm, we are ready, it seems, to immediately pin him and take revenge; and the Lord, the Lord of belly (life) and death, endures our sins for us, although they exceed our heads, and throughout our entire life, like a father who loves his child, he punishes and again draws us to Himself. He showed us how to get rid of the enemy and defeat him - with three virtues: repentance, tears and alms...”
"Teaching" - not only literary work, but also an important monument of social thought. Vladimir Monomakh, one of the most authoritative Kyiv princes, tries to convince his contemporaries of the harmfulness of internecine strife - weakened by internal hostility, Rus' will not be able to actively resist external enemies.
In my work I want to trace how this problem has changed among different authors in different times. Of course, I will dwell in more detail only on individual works.
2. “The Life of Boris and Gleb”
We find a pronounced opposition of good and evil in the work ancient Russian literature“The Life and Death of Boris and Gleb”, written by Nestor, a monk of the Kiev Pechersk Monastery. Historical background events is like this. In 1015, the old prince Vladimir dies, who wanted to appoint his son Boris, who was not in Kyiv at that time, as heir. Boris's brother Svyatopolk, planning to seize the throne, orders to kill Boris and his younger brother Gleb. Miracles begin to happen near their bodies, abandoned in the steppe. After the victory of Yaroslav the Wise over Svyatopolk, the bodies were reburied and the brothers were proclaimed saints.
Svyatopolk thinks and acts at the instigation of the devil. The “historiographical” introduction to the life corresponds to the ideas about the unity of the world historical process: the events that took place in Rus' are only a special case of the eternal struggle between God and the devil - good and evil.
“The Life of Boris and Gleb” is a story about the martyrdom of saints. The main theme determined and artistic structure of such a work, the opposition of good and evil, martyr and torturers, dictated the special tension and “poster-like” directness of the climactic murder scene: it should be long and moralizing.
A.S. Pushkin looked at the problem of good and evil in his own way in the novel “Eugene Onegin”.
3. A.S. Pushkin "Eugene Onegin"
The poet does not divide his characters into positive and negative. He gives each of the heroes several contradictory assessments, forcing you to look at the heroes from several points of view. Pushkin wanted to achieve maximum lifelikeness.
Onegin's tragedy lies in the fact that he rejected Tatiana's love, fearing to lose his freedom, and could not break with the light, realizing its insignificance. In a depressed state of mind, Onegin left the village and “began wandering.” The hero who returned from the journey is not like the former Onegin. Now he will no longer be able, as before, to go through life, completely ignoring the feelings and experiences of the people he encountered, and think only about himself. He has become much more serious, more attentive to those around him, now he is capable of strong feelings that completely captivate him and shake his soul. And then fate brings him and Tatyana together again. But Tatyana refuses him, since she was able to see the selfishness, the egoism that lay at the basis of his feelings for her. her soul.
In Onegin’s soul there is a struggle between good and evil, but in the end good wins. ABOUT future fate we don't know the hero. But perhaps he would have become a Decembrist, to which the whole logic of the development of character, which changed under the influence of a new circle of life impressions, led..
4.M.Yu. Lermontov "Demon"
The theme runs through the poet’s entire work, but I want to dwell only on this work, because... in it the problem of good and evil is considered very acutely. The demon, the personification of evil, loves the earthly woman Tamara and is ready for her sake to be reborn to goodness, but Tamara by her nature is not able to respond to his love. The earthly world and the world of spirits cannot come together, the girl dies from one kiss of the Demon, and his passion remains unquenched.
At the beginning of the poem, the Demon is evil, but by the end it becomes clear that this evil can be eradicated. Tamara initially represents good, but she causes the Demon suffering since she cannot respond to his love, which means that for him she becomes evil.
5.F.M. Dostoevsky "The Brothers Karamazov"
The history of the Karamazovs is not just a family chronicle, but a typified and generalized image of modern intelligentsia Russia. This epic work about the past, present and future of Russia. From a genre point of view, this is complex work. It is a fusion of “life” and “novel”, philosophical “poems” and “teachings”, confessions, ideological disputes and judicial speeches. The main issues are the philosophy and psychology of “crime and punishment”, the struggle between “God” and “the devil” in the souls of people.
Dostoevsky formulated the main idea of the novel “The Brothers Karamazov” in the epigraph “Truly, truly, I say to you: if a grain of wheat falls into the ground and does not die, it will bear much fruit” (Gospel of John). This is the thought of the renewal that inevitably occurs in nature and in life, which is certainly accompanied by the dying of the old. The breadth, tragedy, and invincibility of the process of life renewal were explored by Dostoevsky in all its depth and complexity. The thirst for overcoming the ugly and ugly in consciousness and actions, the hope for moral revival and initiation into a pure, righteous life overwhelm all the heroes of the novel. Hence the “strain”, the fall, the frenzy of the heroes, their despair.
At the center of this novel is the figure of the young commoner Rodion Raskolnikov, who succumbed to new ideas, new theories floating around in society. Raskolnikov is a thinking man. He creates a theory in which he tries not only to explain the world, but also to develop his own morality. He is convinced that humanity is divided into two categories: some “have the right,” and others are “trembling creatures” who serve as “material” for history. Raskolnikov came to this theory as a result of observations of contemporary life, in which the minority is allowed everything, and the majority nothing. Dividing people into two categories inevitably raises Raskolnikov’s question about what type he himself belongs to. And to find out this, he decides on a terrible experiment, he plans to sacrifice an old woman - a pawnbroker, who, in his opinion, brings only harm, and therefore deserves death. The action of the novel is structured as a refutation of Raskolnikov's theory and his subsequent recovery. By killing the old woman, Raskolnikov placed himself outside of society, including even his beloved mother and sister. The feeling of being cut off and alone becomes a terrible punishment for the criminal. Raskolnikov becomes convinced that he was mistaken in his hypothesis. He experiences the torments and doubts of an “ordinary” criminal. At the end of the novel, Raskolnikov picks up the Gospel - this symbolizes the hero’s spiritual turning point, the victory of the good beginning in the hero’s soul over his pride, which gives rise to evil.
Raskolnikov, it seems to me, is generally a very contradictory person. In many episodes to modern man he is difficult to understand: many of his statements are refuted by each other. Raskolnikov's mistake is that he did not see in his idea the crime itself, the evil that he committed.
Raskolnikov’s condition is characterized by the author with words such as “gloomy,” “depressed,” “indecisive.” I think this shows the incompatibility of Raskolnikov’s theory with life. Although he is convinced that he is right, this conviction is something not very confident. If Raskolnikov had been right, then Dostoevsky would have described the events and his feelings not in gloomy yellow tones, but in light ones, but they appear only in the epilogue. He was wrong in taking on the role of God, in having the courage to decide for Him who should live and who should die.
Raskolnikov constantly fluctuates between faith and unbelief, good and evil, and Dostoevsky fails to convince the reader even in the epilogue that the gospel truth has become Raskolnikov’s truth.
So Raskolnikov’s own doubts were reflected in his searches, mental anguish and dreams, internal struggle, debates with himself that Dostoevsky constantly wages.
6. A.N. Ostrovsky “Thunderstorm”
A.N. Ostrovsky in his work “The Thunderstorm” also touches on the theme of good and evil.
In “The Thunderstorm,” according to the critic, “the mutual relations of tyranny and voicelessness are brought to the most tragic consequences. Dobrolyubov considers Katerina a force that can resist the skeletal old world, a new force brought up by this kingdom and shaking its foundations.
The play “The Thunderstorm” contrasts two strong and integral characters of Katerina Kabanova, a merchant’s wife, and her mother-in-law Marfa Kabanova, who has long been nicknamed Kabanikha.
The main difference between Katerina and Kabanikha, the difference that takes them to different poles, is that following the traditions of antiquity for Katerina is a spiritual need, and for Kabanikha it is an attempt to find the necessary and only support in anticipation of the collapse of the patriarchal world. She does not think about the essence of the order that she protects; she has emptied the meaning and content from it, leaving only the form, thereby turning it into dogma. She turned the beautiful essence of ancient traditions and customs into a meaningless ritual, which made them unnatural. We can say that Kabanikha in “The Thunderstorm” (as well as Wild) personifies a phenomenon characteristic of the crisis state of the patriarchal way of life, and not inherent in it initially. The deadening effect of boars and wild animals on living life manifests itself with particular clarity precisely when life forms are deprived of their previous content and are preserved as museum relics.. Katerina represents best qualities patriarchal life in its pristine purity.
Thus, Katerina belongs to the patriarchal world, including all other characters. The artistic purpose of the latter is to outline the reasons for the doom of the patriarchal world as fully and multi-structured as possible. So, Varvara learned to deceive and take advantage of opportunities; she, like Kabanikha, follows the principle: “do what you want, as long as it’s safe and covered.” It turns out that Katerina in this drama is good, and the rest of the characters are representatives of evil.
7. M.A. Bulgakov “The White Guard”
The novel tells about the events of 1918-1919, when Kyiv was abandoned by German troops, who surrendered the city to the Petliurists. Officers of the former tsarist army were betrayed to the mercy of the enemy.
At the center of the story is the fate of one such officer family. For the Turbins, a sister and two brothers, the fundamental concept is honor, which they understand as service to the fatherland. But in the vicissitudes of the Civil War, the fatherland ceased to exist, and the usual landmarks disappeared. The turbines are trying to find a place for themselves in a world that is changing before our eyes, to preserve their humanity, the goodness of their souls, and not to become embittered. And the heroes succeed.
The novel makes an appeal to To higher powers, which should save people in times of timelessness. Alexey Turbin has a dream in which both Whites and Reds go to heaven (Paradise), because both are loved by God. This means that in the end good must win.
The devil, Woland, comes to Moscow with an audit. He observes the Moscow petty bourgeoisie and passes judgment on them. The climax of the novel is Woland's ball, after which he learns the Master's story. Woland takes the Master under his protection.
After reading a novel about himself, Yeshua (in the novel he is a representative of the forces of Light) decides that the Master, the creator of the novel, is worthy of Peace. The master and his beloved die, and Woland accompanies them to the place where they will now live. This is a pleasing house, the very embodiment of an idyll. This is how a person, tired of the battles of life, receives what his soul was striving for. Bulgakov hints that in addition to the posthumous state, defined as “Peace”, there is another higher state - “Light”, but the Master is not worthy of Light. Researchers are still arguing why the Master was denied Light. In this sense, the statement of I. Zolotussky is interesting: “It is the Master himself who punishes himself for the fact that love has left his soul. The one who leaves home or who is abandoned by love does not deserve the Light... Even Woland is lost before this tragedy of fatigue, the tragedy of the desire to leave the world, to leave life.”
Bulgakov's novel is about the eternal struggle between good and evil. This is a work dedicated not to the fate of a specific person, family or even a group of people somehow connected with each other - it considers the fate of all humanity in its historical development. The time interval of almost two millennia, separating the action of the novel about Jesus and Pilate and the novel about the Master, only emphasizes that the problems of good and evil, the freedom of the human spirit, and his relationship with society are eternal, enduring problems that are relevant for a person of any era.
Bulgakov's Pilate is not at all shown as a classic villain. The procurator does not want to harm Yeshua; his cowardice led to cruelty and social injustice. It is fear that makes good, intelligent and brave people blind weapons of evil will. Cowardice is an extreme expression of internal subordination, lack of freedom of spirit, and human dependence. It is also especially dangerous because, once having come to terms with it, a person is no longer able to get rid of it. Thus, the powerful procurator turns into a pitiful, weak-willed creature. But the vagabond philosopher is strong with his naive faith in goodness, which neither the fear of punishment nor the spectacle of universal injustice can take away from him. In the image of Yeshua, Bulgakov embodied the idea of goodness and unchanging faith. Despite everything, Yeshua continues to believe that the evil ones bad people not in the world. He dies on the cross with this faith.
The clash of opposing forces is most clearly presented at the end of A.N. Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita,” when Woland and his retinue leave Moscow. What do we see? “Light” and “darkness” are on the same level. Woland does not rule the world, but Yeshua does not rule the world either.
8.Conclusion
What is good and what is evil on earth? As you know, two opposing forces cannot help but come into conflict with each other, therefore the struggle between them is eternal. As long as man exists on earth, good and evil will exist. Thanks to evil, we understand what good is. And good, in turn, reveals evil, illuminating a person’s path to the truth. There will always be a struggle between good and evil.
Thus, I came to the conclusion that the forces of good and evil in the world of literature are equal. They exist in the world side by side, constantly confronting and arguing with each other. And their struggle is eternal, because there is no person on Earth who has never committed a sin in his life, and there is no person who has completely lost the ability to do good.
9. List of references used
1. S.F. Ivanova “Introduction to the Temple of the Word.” Ed. 3rd, 2006
2. Big school encyclopedia, volume 2. 2003
3. Bulgakov M.A., plays, novels. Comp., intro. and note. V.M. Akimova. True, 1991
4. Dostoevsky F.M. “Crime and Punishment”: Novel - M.: Olympus; TKO AST, 1996
Good and evil is the most popular topic chosen by students during the final exam. To write such an essay for the maximum score, you need high-quality and outstanding arguments from the literature. In this collection we have given just such examples from different sources: M. A. Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita”, F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “Crime and Punishment” and Russian folklore. There are 4 arguments under each heading.
- People perceive good and evil differently. It often happens that one thing replaces the other, but the appearance remains, which a person takes for granted: he attributes to virtue evil intent, and takes outright evil for good. For example, Mikhail Bulgakov in his novel “The Master and Margarita” describes the life and customs of Soviet writers and critics. Writers from MOSSOLITH write only what the authorities want. In a conversation with Ivan Bezdomny, Berlioz directly points out that in his poem it is necessary to clearly define the atheistic position, which is part of the ideology of the USSR. It doesn’t matter to him what the artist of words wants to say, he is only concerned with how a superior person will evaluate the book. Such slavish involvement in the political process only harms art. The true genius of the Master was hounded by critics, and the mediocrities in the role of creators only sat in the restaurant and ate up people's money. This is an obvious evil, but society, represented by the same writers and critics, saw this as a good thing, and only a few honest people like Margarita and the Master saw that this system was vicious. Thus, people often make mistakes and mistake evil for good and vice versa.
- The great danger of evil lies in the fact that it often disguises itself as good. An example is the situation described by M. A. Bulgakov in the novel “The Master and Margarita”. Pontius Pilate believed that he was serving good by sentencing Yeshua to death penalty. He feared that because of his conflict with the local elite over deciding who should be pardoned in honor of the holiday, a mob riot would break out against the Roman soldiers and much blood would be shed. With a small sacrifice, the procurator hoped to prevent major upheavals. But his calculation was immoral and selfish, because Pilate, first of all, feared not for the city entrusted to him, which he hated with all his soul, but for his position in it. Yeshua suffered martyrdom because of the cowardice of his judge. Thus, the hero mistook an evil act for a good and wise decision, and was punished for it.
- The theme of good and evil greatly worried M. A. Bulgakov. In his novel “The Master and Margarita” he interpreted these concepts in his own way. So, Woland, the embodiment of evil and the king of shadows, committed truly good deeds. For example, he helped Margarita return the Master, despite the fact that she had already used her wish by helping Frida. He also gave them the opportunity to live in eternal peace and finally find harmony in life together. Unlike representatives of the forces of light, Woland tried to find a suitable solution for the couple, without condemning them as harshly as Matvey Levi. Probably, the author was inspired to create his image by Goethe’s character, Mephistopheles, who strived for evil, but did good. The Russian writer showed this paradox using the example of his heroes. Thus, he proved that the concepts of good and evil are subjective, their essence depends on what the person evaluating them comes from.
- A person spends his whole life forming and expanding his ideas about good and evil. Often he turns off the right path and makes mistakes, but still it’s never too late to reconsider your views and accept right side. For example, in M. A. Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita,” Ivan Bezdomny served party interests all his life: he wrote bad poems, put propaganda into them and convinced readers that everything was fine in the Soviet Union, and the only problem was those who were jealous general happiness. He blatantly lied, like most of his colleagues. The consequences of the devastation after the civil war were clearly felt in the USSR. For example, M.A. Bulgakov subtly ridicules the absurdity of what is happening, citing as an example Likhodeev’s speeches, where he boasts that he orders “pike perch a la naturel” in a restaurant. He believes that this exquisite dish is the height of luxury, which cannot be prepared in an ordinary kitchen. But the irony is that pike perch is a cheap fish, and the prefix “a la naturel” means that it will be served in its natural form, even without any original decoration or recipe. Under the tsar, every peasant could afford this fish. And this wretched new reality, where pike perch has become a delicacy, is defended and extolled by the poet. And only after meeting the Master, he realizes how wrong he was. Ivan admits his mediocrity, stops being rude and writing bad poetry. Now he is not attracted to serving the state, which fools its population and brazenly deceives them. Thus, he abandoned the generally accepted false good and began to profess faith in the true good.
- The struggle between good and evil is depicted by F. M. Dostoevsky in the novel “Crime and Punishment.” Main character is very kind person. This fact is convincingly proven by his dream, where he, as a little boy, pities a beaten horse to tears. His actions also speak of the exclusivity of his character: he leaves his last money to the Marmeladov family, seeing their grief. But there is also in Rodion dark side: he longs to prove to himself that he has the right to decide the fate of the world. To achieve this, Raskolnikov decides to kill; evil has prevailed over him. However, gradually the hero comes to the idea that he needs to repent of his sin. He was directed to take this step by Sonya Marmeladova, who managed to strengthen Rodion’s protesting conscience. He confessed to the evil he had done, and already in hard labor his moral rebirth began for goodness, justice and love.
- The confrontation between good and evil was depicted by F. M. Dostoevsky in his novel “Crime and Punishment.” We see a hero who lost in this fight. This is Mr. Marmeladov, whom we meet in the tavern, his habitat. Before us appeared an alcohol-dependent middle-aged man who had driven his family into poverty. And once he did a very kind and merciful act, marrying a poor widow with children. Then the hero worked and could support them, but then something in his soul broke, and he started drinking. Left without service, he began to lean even harder on alcohol, which brought his household to the threshold of physical death. Because of this, his own daughter began to earn money through prostitution. But this fact did not stop the father of the family: he continued to drink away these rubles obtained with shame and disgrace. Evil, clothed in vice, finally captured Marmeladov; he could no longer fight it due to lack of willpower.
- It happens that even in the midst of absolute evil, sprouts of good sprout. An example was described by F. M. Dostoevsky in the novel Crime and Punishment. The heroine, trying to feed her family, began working as a prostitute. In the midst of vice and sin, Sonya inevitably had to become a cynical and dirty corrupt woman. But the persistent girl did not lose faith in God and retained purity in her soul. The external dirt did not touch her. Seeing human tragedies, she sacrificed herself to help people. It was very difficult for her to live, but Sonya overcame the pain and was able to get rid of the vicious craft. She sincerely fell in love with Raskolnikov and followed him to hard labor, where she gave her responsiveness to all the needy and oppressed inhabitants of prisons. Her virtue overpowered the malice of the whole world.
- The battle between good and evil occurs everywhere, not only in the human soul. For example, F. M. Dostoevsky in “Crime and Punishment” described how good and evil people collide in life. Oddly enough, most often those who bring good, not harm, win, because we all subconsciously gravitate toward good things. In the book, Dunya Raskolnikova defeats Svidrigailov with her will, escaping from him and not succumbing to his humiliating persuasion. Her Inner Light Even Luzhin with his reasonable egoism cannot be extinguished. The girl realizes in time that this marriage is a shameful deal in which she is just a discounted product. But she finds a kindred spirit and life partner in Razumikhin, her brother’s friend. This young man also defeated the evil and vice of the world around him, taking the right path. He earned money honestly and helped his neighbors without taking credit for it. Remaining true to their beliefs, the heroes were able to overcome temptations, trials and temptations in order to bring good to the people around them.
- Russian folklore is rich in examples of the struggle between good and evil. For example, in the fairy tale “Little Khavroshechka” the heroine was modest and kind girl. She became an orphan early and was taken in by strangers. But her patrons were distinguished by malice, laziness and envy, so they always tried to give her impossible tasks. Unhappy Khavroshechka only meekly listened to the abuse and got to work. All her days were filled with honest work, but this did not stop her tormentors from beating and starving the heroine. And yet Khavroshechka did not harbor anger towards them, she forgave cruelty and insults. That is why mystical powers helped her fulfill all the housewives' wishes. The girl's kindness was generously rewarded by fate. The master saw her hard work, beauty and modesty, appreciated them and married her. The moral is simple: good always triumphs over evil.
- The victory of good over evil is often found in fairy tales, because people want to teach their children the main thing - the ability to do good deeds. For example, in the fairy tale “Morozko” main character She worked honestly and zealously around the house, did not contradict her elders and was not capricious, but her stepmother still disliked her. Every day she tried to bring her stepdaughter to complete exhaustion. One day she got angry and sent her husband into the forest with a demand: to leave him there. my own daughter. The man obeyed and left the girl to certain death in the winter thicket. However, she was lucky enough to meet Morozko in the forest, who was immediately captivated by the kind and modest disposition of her interlocutor. Then he rewarded her with valuable gifts. But he punished her evil and rude stepsister, who came to him demanding a reward, for her insolence and left her with nothing.
- In the fairy tale "Baba Yaga" good clearly defeats evil. The heroine was disliked by her stepmother and sent her to the forest to Baba Yaga while her father was away. The girl was kind and obedient, so she fulfilled the order. Before that, she went to her aunt and received life lesson: you need to treat everyone humanely, and then even the evil witch is not scary. The heroine did just that when she realized that Baba Yaga intended to eat her. She fed her cat and dogs, greased the gates and tied up the birch tree on her way so that they would let her through and teach her how to escape from their mistress. Thanks to kindness and affection, the heroine was able to return home and get her father to kick her evil stepmother out of the house.
- In the fairy tale “The Magic Ring,” rescued animals helped their owner in difficult times. One day he spent his last money to save them from certain death. And so he himself found himself in a difficult situation. Having found the magic ring, the hero married the princess, because he fulfilled her father’s condition - he built a palace, a cathedral and a crystal bridge in one day with the help of magical powers. But the wife turned out to be a cunning and evil woman. Having learned the secret, she stole the ring and destroyed everything that Martin had built. Then the king locked him in prison and doomed him to starvation. The cat and the dog decided to pull out the owner after finding the ring. Then Martin returned his position, his buildings
Crime and Punishment
Folk tales
If the list does not contain arguments from the work that you need, write to us in the comments what to add!
Interesting? Save it on your wall!Good and evil in the works of Russian writers were the center of attention. The writers reflected in their Works of Russian writers these moral categories by different means.
Pushkin touches on the theme of evil several times. In the poem "Anchar" the author believes that evil should balance good. Nature has set aside a place for evil at the edge of the universe. People who are driven by the thirst for power, wealth, envy (of the king) and fear (of the slave) became the spreaders of evil throughout the earth. These feelings are conductors of evil. Money can play a similar role in a person’s life. They make people lose noble knightly qualities, family ties, love (“ Stingy Knight"). They poison the creative process (“Egyptian Nights”). One of the main manifestations of evil is violence. Its use leads to tragedy. Pushkin denies it in the ode “Liberty”, in prose works"Dubrovsky", "The Captain's Daughter".
Power acquired through violence will not receive recognition from the people (“Boris Godunov”). A person who chooses the path of crime cannot be a creative person.
Genius and villainy are incompatible (“Mozart and Salieri”), Pushkin’s humanism lies in the conclusion that any Evil always punishable. He sees a good beginning in nature (“I visited again...”), in art (the image of Mozart, “The Poet”), in natural human feelings of love and friendship (“I remember wonderful moment", "October 19, 1827").
Lermontov's creative heyday occurred in a darker decade than Pushkin's. Lermontov developed the theme of evil more sharply. He divides evil into two types. Evil The author respects the romantic for its strength and awareness of doom. This is revealed in the cycle of poems about Napoleon and in the poem “The Demon”. Another evil comes from society. This is the evil of the “mocking ignoramuses,” high-society philistines who persecuted Pushkin (“The Death of a Poet,” “How often, surrounded by a motley crowd...”).
Pushkin writes bitterly about the crowd that does not understand the poet. Lermontov strengthens this motive (“The Prophet”). For him, people of light are the bearers of evil. Lermontov's heroes, actively pursuing life, rush between good and evil (“Hero of Our Time”). Good in creativity Lermontov is concentrated in nature, where lyrical hero resonates psychological state("I go out alone on the road").
Gogol has a different concept. He put everything together Evil in Russia, contrasting him with faith in the spiritual revival of his homeland. Gogol gave pictures of evil from mystical images of ancient evil (“Evenings on a farm near Dikanka”, “Viy”, “Terrible Vengeance”) to evil in contemporary society. The spirit of demonism inhabits real people and is intertwined with petty philistine evil. This is the story of the terrible portrait and the fate of the artist Chertkov, who exchanged his creative soul with money, who sold himself to the devil (“Portrait”). In "The Inspector General", "Overcoat", " Dead souls“The writer gives an extensive description of small but numerous evils, showing their danger to society and the human soul.
At Nekrasov's Evil has a specific social origin. The real source of evil is serfdom. It allows the nobleman to live in idleness and disdain the people (“ Railway", chapter 3). Serfdom transforms spiritually free man into a slave (“Hey, Ivan!” and chapters from the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus',” “The Last One,” “About the Faithful Yakov, an Exemplary Slave”). Good in creativity Nekrasova also has a social connotation. The poet's goodness has a connotation of sacrifice (“The Poet and the Citizen,” “On the Day of Gogol’s Death,” “N. G. Chernyshevsky,” “A Knight for an Hour”). The poet sees the moral principles of Russian life in the people's soul:
Burned in slavery
The sun is free.
Gold, gold -
People's heart.
(“Rus”, song by Grisha Dobrosklonov from the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'”)
L. Tolstoy agrees with Nekrasov in his assessment of serfdom and violence against the individual. Tolstoy views the concepts of good and evil philosophically. If a person lives in harmony with the world around him and his own nature, then he was created for good (Karataev). If people lose national roots, try to remake the human essence in order to rise above those around them, then they fall into evil. In War and Peace such characters are Napoleon and Kuragin. They are contrasted with Bolkonsky, Kutuzov, and Rostov, who are spiritually connected with nature and the people. Tolstoy considers war to be the greatest evil.
Dostoevsky talks about good and evil passionately. He reveals the origins of evil. The social side of life is the background of the story about the struggle between God and the devil in the human soul. good and evil exist in the world in balance.
Raskolnikov (“Crime and Punishment”) suffers from social evil and in the fight against injustice chooses the most terrible form. Compulsory good, based on violence, degenerates into evil. Initially, Raskolnikov feels like a liberator of humanity from harmful bloodsuckers. But in the end it turns out that he “killed it for himself.” Sonya helps Raskolnikov make a paradoxical turn towards goodness. Sonya steps over herself for the well-being of others, keeping her soul pure. The path from evil to good lies through suffering, repentance, and purification of the soul. Raskolnikov experiences all this in the epilogue, and the light of truth is revealed to him. Dostoevsky leaves any deeply fallen person the right to repent and rise to the light from the depths of hell.
Good and evil in the works of Russian writers occupy an important place because these moral categories are decisive in the spiritual life of humanity. Classic literature sought to reveal the deadly nature of evil and protect the soul from its destructive influence.