The relevance of the poem to those who live well in Rus'. Research work on literature on the topic “Folklore motifs in N.A. Nekrasov’s poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'.” The main characters and their characteristics

Nikolai Alekseevich Nekrasov is a wonderful Russian poet, whose works are dedicated to the people. Since childhood, we have been reading his poems about peasant children, Russian women, the urban poor, and nature. Years go by, we grow up, but Nekrasov remains a poet, to whose works we return again and again, discovering poems, poems, songs of our favorite author that we have not yet read.

In Nekrasov’s works we hear sad notes of hopelessness and melancholy. They disturb the soul and force us to look more closely at ourselves and the world around us.
The Yaroslavl land, which became the “small Motherland” for the poet, left its mark on all of his work. Nekrasov spent his childhood in a village on the banks of the Volga, on the estate of his serf-owner father. Communicating with peasants, he absorbed the kindness, sincerity, and breadth of soul of the Russian people. Knowing well the life of ordinary people, the poet was imbued with their pressing problems. And then he sincerely and honestly told in his works about the difficult fate of the people. His poems were a protest against the unrest prevailing in the country. Honestly and openly in the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus',” Nekrasov declares about lawlessness, about atrocities, about the outrage against human life.

The beginning of the work reminds me of an ancient Russian epic in its beginning. Indeed, what is not a fairy tale:
In what year - calculate
In what land - guess.
On the sidewalk
Seven men came together...

But this impression only comes from reading the prologue. The further we move with the seekers of happiness, the more often we encounter the harsh reality of Russia in the second half of the nineteenth century. What are our travelers' views on well-being? Some consider the priest, the official, happy, others - the landowner, the tsar... The dispute between the men shows that they do not have a single concept of happiness. The very first meetings bring confusion into the souls of our wanderers: the clergyman does not live better than them, although he eats more satisfyingly:

...In the dead of autumn night,
In winter, in severe frosts,
And in the spring flood
Go where you are called!..
What's the peace like?..

A series of new disappointments follows. There were so many “happy” people here: Ermil Girin, Matrena Timofeevna, and Yakim Nagoy. But their life seems serene only to an outside observer. Who better to tell about themselves than themselves? But there is no joy in their stories, the life of an ordinary person is full of adversity, the human soul hides a lot of grief within itself.

Nekrasov talks with sympathy about people who mistakenly consider themselves happy and are ready to tell passers-by about their lives for a “glass of vodka.” How many of them are “prosperous”! But what is their happiness? In death, which did not touch the narrator, but took away those close to him from life, in the remarkable strength that a cunning man uses, and squeezes out all the juice from a hero, or in vodka, which gives oblivion from worldly affairs:

And that, firstly, is happiness,
What's in twenty battles
I was, and not killed!

The story about Ermil Girin shows wanderers that they are not looking for happiness there. Some bright images stand out against the background of the peasant world.

vivid images. This is, for example, Yermil. Everything he does and lives is aimed at seeking the happiness of the people. Girin is honest with the peasants and honors ancient Russian customs. It seems that this is a fairy-tale hero acting among the people in a difficult time for them. All the best that is in Ermil Girin attracts the attention of others, makes them fall in love with this person:

He had everything he needed
For happiness...
... An enviable, true honor,
Not bought with money,
Not with fear: with strict truth,
With intelligence and kindness!

Gradually, the wanderers develop a unified concept of happiness and a happy person. You shouldn’t look for well-being in your personal life, it’s not there: Nekrasov leads us to this idea. Only in the respect of the people can true bliss be found, although this does not bring any material benefits to a person, except for the name " people's defender", consumption and Siberia. Author's position gradually becomes the worldview of wanderers.

Nekrasov paints the image of an intellectual who devotes his life to serving the people:

Go to the downtrodden
Go to the offended -
Be the first there!

In the fight for people's happiness Grisha Dobrosklonov will find the meaning of his life. The author brings us to this idea at the end of the work. Only in selfless service to the people did the poet see the meaning of life and the true purpose of man. Best features He gives Grisha a fighter for people's happiness. The road of the “people's defender” is difficult, but:

... they walk along it
Only strong souls
Loving,
To fight, to work...

Any honest person can be in Dobrosklonov’s place, you just need to love your Motherland and respect the people: With love for your poor mother

Love for all the wahlacina
Merged - and about fifteen years old
Gregory already knew for sure
What will live for happiness
A wretched and dark native corner.

Nekrasov’s work “Who Lives Well in Rus'” is still relevant today. Years pass, times change, months, weeks, days fly by, but a person living on earth strives for happiness, wants to find it, but does he find it? We do not have the balance of soul necessary for this state, and happiness is increasingly associated with the word “money”. However, I believe that someday we will know true bliss. For me, the concept of “happiness” consists of several components - this is the ability to find your place in life, do what you love and interesting thing, live a rich life and realize that you are a part of our world, in harmony with the surrounding nature. And my favorite poet supports me in this conviction:

The son cannot look calmly
On my dear mother's grief,
There will be no worthy citizen
I have a cold heart for the Fatherland,
There is no worse reproach for him...
Go into the fire for the honor of the Fatherland,
For conviction, for love...

Chelyabinsk Law College
Department of General Humanitarian and Socio-Economic Disciplines

Research work
in the discipline "Literature"
Folklore motifs in N.A. Nekrasov’s poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'”

Student
Gr. T-1-08, economic department: "_____" Barabash V.A. __ 2009

Teacher: "_____" Akhmetshina E.Z. 2009

Chelyabinsk
2009

Introduction
______________________________ ______________________________ _____________1
Chapter 1. Folklore
______________________________ ______________________________ _____________3
Chapter 2. Genres of folklore
______________________________ ______________________________ _____________5
Chapter 3. The history of the creation of the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'”
______________________________ ______________________________ _____________6
Chapter 4.
Folklore motives in the work of N.A. Nekrasov “Who Lives Well in Rus'”
______________________________ ______________________________ _____________9
Conclusion
______________________________ ______________________________ _____________18
Bibliography
______________________________ ______________________________ ____________ 19

Introduction
The topic “Folklore in the works of Nekrasov” has repeatedly attracted the attention of researchers. Nevertheless, I consider it useful to return to it again. In numerous studies, the attention of researchers was drawn mainly to the study of textual or stylistic matches between folklore texts and texts belonging to Nekrasov, to the establishment of “borrowings” and “sources,” etc. Until now, however, the topic has not been posed in literary terms . After all, we are dealing with a master artist. It goes without saying that this master artist, a major poetic individual, is at the same time a social figure. Nekrasov is a poet of revolutionary democracy, and this determines the nature of his poetry. And naturally, it would be interesting to explore how Nekrasov uses folklore material? What goals does he set for himself? What kind of folklore material does Nekrasov take (not in the sense of accurately identifying the sources, but in the sense of the qualitative, artistic and social characteristics of this material)? What does he do with this material (i.e. what compositional techniques introduces it, to what extent and how it changes)? What is the result of his work (because this result may not coincide with the subjective goals of the artist, that is, the artist may not be able to achieve his goals)? This remains to be found out in the course of the study.
Subject Folklore motifs in N.A. Nekrasov’s poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'.” Target The work consists of finding and classifying folklore motifs in the work of the revolutionary democrat of the sixties, the famous Russian poet N.A. Nekrasov, “Who Lives Well in Rus'.”
Tasks To acquaint listeners with the definition of “folklore”, talk about its goals and objectives. Briefly reveal the main genres of folklore. Tell the story of the creation of the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'.”
Explore and classify folklore motifs in the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'.” Note the goals of Nekrasov’s use of folk art in his works, his attitude towards it, as well as understand what methods and methods the author uses to weave folklore into the narrative and what result he is trying to achieve.
Relevance Of course, the theme of folklore motifs in the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'” is relevant to this day. The folklore in this work helps us better understand the life and difficulties of people, their way of life, thoughts and moods. Although the way of life has changed now (there is no serfdom, people have equal rights), we still face some problems today. And oral folk art, as in those days, helps to escape from the burden of problems of everyday life. Hypothesis The meaning and methods of using folklore in Nekrasov’s work. Object research are the motives of oral folk art in the poem by N.A. Nekrasov “Who Lives Well in Rus'”.

Subject The work uses the method of comparative analysis. Description of literature Many collections of oral folk art from various authors were involved in the work: Rybnikov, Barsov, Shein and others. They helped to understand exactly how Nekrasov modified folklore texts, including them in his works. Also involved were reviews and criticism of the poem, articles analyzing the use of folklore in Nekrasov’s work and literature in general.

Folklore

Folklore refers to verbal art, which includes proverbs, ditties, fairy tales, legends, myths, tongue twisters, riddles, heroic epics, epics, tales, etc.
The word itself came to us from the Old English language and is translated as “folk wisdom.” And this is deeply true. After all, folklore embodies folk experience, traditions, ideals, and worldviews, that is, folk wisdom is truly conveyed.
But folklore is not only folk wisdom. It is also a manifestation of the soul of the people, their self-awareness... Each work is an expression of the life of the people, their history and way of life.
Life has always been difficult for most people, and it remains so, and it inevitably always will be. Many have to work hard, routinely, earning themselves only a small bread, a tolerable existence for themselves and their loved ones. And people have long noticed that they need to distract themselves, those around them, and their colleagues in misfortune from the work they perform every day with something fun or something that distracts attention from the topical everyday life and the unbearable conditions of hard and low-paid work.
The folklore created by the people reveals the philosophy of the people, their undying faith in justice and happiness, in the victory of good over evil. The eternal ideas of folklore for the creativity of all peoples without exception, but at the same time, each nation expresses general ideas in its national forms, which have developed over centuries and reflect the peculiarities of life and its history. For example, the hero of Russian folk tales Ivanushka the Fool, Emelya , the characters of the folk theater Russian Petrushka or Italian Pulcinello always triumph over their enemies, important ranks and titles, and often defeat even the seemingly invincible death itself.
The enormous wealth of represented images, the variety of visual means, the expressiveness of language, laconicism - these are the distinctive qualities of folk art. Since even a very skillful writer is not able to keep up with the diverse and versatile folk imagination, and the number of different words and their successful intricacies perfected over the centuries. Very great artistic and aesthetic value folklore
Folklore, its artistic perfection, the significance of its meaningful forms, like honey, attracts numerous composers, artists and writers. Many managed to write themselves into history by timely and competently using folklore in their works, borrowing for free and learning from the people artistic skill, unmeasured experience, quantity and quality of imagination. Many people know the names of masters of the pen who grew up on prepared

centuries of folklore. The German poet Johann Wolfgang Goethe based his immortal “Faust” on the basis of legends, and the Danish storyteller Hans Christian Andersen retold many folk tales to children and adults. Russian writers A.S. also loved to turn to the selfless help of folklore. Pushkin, V.V. Mayakovsky, Maxim Gorky, N.A. Nekrasov and others (very many).

Genres of folklore

Mystery - from the Old Russian “guess”, which meant to think. The riddle gives a substantive description of a phenomenon, the recognition or guessing of which requires reflection. The riddle forces you to comprehend the language of metaphor and learn to play with traditional images. Proverb is a genre of folklore. It is a logically complete phrase or a figurative aphoristic saying. Proverb always carries an instructive meaning and in most cases has a rhythmic organization. Example proverbs: "Do not count your chickens before they are hatched". Proverb- genre of folklore. IN proverb there is a certain complete meaning, unlike the saying. Proverb - a current expression that has not yet developed into a full proverb, new image, replacing an ordinary word (for example, “doesn’t knit” instead of “drunk”, “didn’t think of gunpowder” instead of “fool”, “pulling the strap”). Fairy tale – from “to say”; a specific, traditional narrative. The term exists only in Russian and German; in other cultures this form is designated as a myth. In a number of studies it is designated as “small mythology”. In folk culture - a form of worldly wisdom. Ditties - a term of folk origin, introduced into literary use by G.I. Uspensky. and united the local names of ditties - gags, choruses, matani, pribaskki, etc. CONSPIRACY - one of the oldest genres of folklore, which embodied the archaic ideas of our ancestors in artistic form. In the broadest sense of the word, a conspiracy is a verbal formula that has a magical meaning. Russian conspiracies in Siberia are often called this way: slander, amulets, drying, drying, whispering, words, etc. Legend (from Wed - lat. legenda"a collection of liturgical passages for daily service") - one of the varietiesnon-fairy tale prose folklore. Poetic legend about some historical event. In a figurative sense, it refers to the events of the past covered in glory, causing admiration. Patter - a short syntactically correct phrase in any language with an artificially complicated articulation . Tongue twisters contain similar sounds, but different phonemes (For example, c And w) and combinations of phonemes that are difficult to pronounce. Often contain alliteration and rhyme . Used for training diction and pronunciation.

The history of the creation of the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'”
Nekrasov devoted many years of his life to working on the poem, which he called his “favorite brainchild.” “I decided,” said Nekrasov, “to present in a coherent story everything that I know about the people, everything that I happened to hear from their lips, and I started “Who can live well in Rus'.” This will be an epic of modern peasant life.” The writer accumulated material for the poem, as he admitted, “a little at a time for twenty years.” Death interrupted this gigantic work. The poem remained unfinished. Shortly before his death, the poet said: “One thing I deeply regret is that I did not finish my poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'.” Nekrasov began work on the poem in the first half of the 60s of the 19th century. The manuscript of the first part of the poem is marked by Nekrasov in 1865. This year the first part of the poem was already written, but it was obviously begun several years earlier. The mention in the first part of the exiled Poles (chapter “The Landowner”) allows us to consider 1863 as a date before which this chapter could not have been written, since the suppression of the uprising in Poland dates back to 1863-1864. However, the first drafts for the poem could have appeared earlier . An indication of this is contained, for example, in the memoirs of G. Potanin, who, describing his visit to Nekrasov’s apartment in the fall of 1860, reports the following words poet: “I... wrote for a long time yesterday, but didn’t finish it a little, now I’ll finish...” These were sketches of his beautiful poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'.” It did not appear in print for a long time after that.” Thus, it can be assumed that some images and episodes of the future poem, the material for which was collected over many years, arose in the poet’s creative imagination and were partially embodied in poems earlier than 1865, which dates back to manuscript of the first part of the poem. Nekrasov began to continue his work only in the 70s, after a seven-year break. The second, third and fourth parts of the poem follow one after another at short intervals: “The Last One” was created in 1872, “The Peasant Woman” - in July-August 1873, “A Feast for the Whole World” - in the fall of 1876. Publication of the poem Nekrasov began shortly after finishing work on the first part. Already in the January book of Sovremennik for 1866, a prologue to the poem appeared. The printing of the first part took four years. Fearing to shake the already precarious position of Sovremennik, Nekrasov refrained from publishing subsequent chapters of the first part of the poem. Nekrasov was afraid of censorship persecution, which began immediately after the release of the first chapter of the poem (“Pop”), published in 1868 in the first issue of the new Nekrasov magazine "Domestic Notes". Censor A. Lebedev gave the following description of this chapter: “In the said poem, like his other works, Nekrasov remained true to his direction; in it he tries to present the gloomy and sad side of the Russian person with his grief and material shortcomings... in it there are... passages that are harsh in their indecency.” Although the censorship committee approved the book “Notes of the Fatherland” for publication, it still sent a disapproving opinion about the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'” to the highest censorship authority. Subsequent chapters of the first part of the poem were published in the February issues of “Notes of the Fatherland” for 1869 (“Rural Fair” and “ drunken night") and 1870 ("Happy" and "Landowner"). The entire first part of the poem appeared in print only eight years after it was written. The publication of “The Last One” (“Otechestvennye zapiski”, 1873, No. 2) caused new, even greater quibbles from the censor, who believed that this part of the poem “is distinguished by... extreme ugliness content... is in the nature of a lampoon on the entire noble class." The next part of the poem, "The Peasant Woman", created by Nekrasov in the summer of 1873, was published in the winter of 1874 in the January book of "Domestic Notes". Nekrasov never saw a separate edition of the poem during his lifetime. In the last year of his life, Nekrasov, having returned seriously ill from Crimea, where he had basically completed the fourth part of the poem - “A Feast for the Whole World,” with amazing energy and persistence entered into a single combat with censorship, hoping to publish “The Feast ...”. This part of the poem was subjected to particularly violent attacks by the censors. The censor wrote that he finds “the entire poem “A Feast for the Whole World” extremely harmful in its content, since it can arouse hostile feelings between the two classes, and that it is especially offensive to the nobility, who so recently enjoyed landowner rights...” However, Nekrasov did not stopped fighting censorship. Bedridden by illness, he stubbornly continued to strive for the publication of “The Feast...”. He reworks the text, shortens it, crosses it out. “This is our craft as a writer,” Nekrasov complained. - When I began my literary activity and wrote my first piece, I immediately encountered scissors; 37 years have passed since then, and here I am, dying, writing my last piece, and again I’m faced with the same scissors!” Having “messed up” the text of the fourth part of the poem (as the poet called the alteration of the work for the sake of censorship), Nekrasov counted on permission. However, “A Feast for the Whole World” was again banned. “Unfortunately,” Saltykov-Shchedrin recalled, “it’s almost useless to bother: everything is so full of hatred and threat that it’s difficult even to approach from afar.” But even after this, Nekrasov still did not lay down his arms and decided to “approach”, as a last resort, to the head of the Main Directorate for Censorship V. Grigoriev, who back in the spring of 1876 promised him “his personal intercession” and, according to rumors that reached through F. Dostoevsky, allegedly considered “A Feast for the Whole World” to be “completely possible for publication.” Nekrasov intended to bypass censorship altogether, having secured the permission of the Tsar himself. To do this, the poet wanted to use his acquaintance with the minister of the court, Count Adlerberg, and also resort to the mediation of S. Botkin, who was at that time the court doctor ("A Feast for the Whole World" was dedicated to Botkin, who treated Nekrasov). Obviously, it was precisely for this occasion that Nekrasov inserted into the text of the poem “with gnashing of teeth” the famous lines dedicated to the tsar, “Hail, who gave freedom to the people!” We do not know whether Nekrasov took real steps in this direction or abandoned his intention, realizing the futility of the troubles. “A feast for the whole world” remained under a censorship ban until 1881, when it appeared in the second book of “Notes of the Fatherland,” however, with large abbreviations and distortions: the songs “Veselaya”, “Corvee”, “Soldier’s”, “The deck is oak ...” and others were omitted. Most of the censored excerpts from “A Feast for the Whole World” were first published only in 1908, and the entire poem, in an uncensored edition, was published in 1920 by K. I. Chukovsky. The poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'” in its unfinished form The form consists of four separate parts, arranged in the following order, according to the time of their writing: part one, consisting of a prologue and five chapters; "Last One"; “The Peasant Woman,” consisting of a prologue and eight chapters; “A feast for the whole world.” From Nekrasov’s papers it is clear that according to plan further development The poem was supposed to create at least three more chapters or parts. One of them, tentatively called “Death” by Nekrasov, was supposed to be about the stay of seven peasants on the Sheksna River, where they find themselves in the midst of a widespread death of livestock from anthrax, and about their meeting with an official. Citing several poems from the future chapter, Nekrasov writes: “This is a song from the new chapter “Who Lives Well in Rus'.” The poet began collecting materials for this chapter in the summer of 1873. However, it remained unwritten. Only a few prose and poetic draft passages have survived. It is also known about the poet’s intention to talk about the arrival of peasants in St. Petersburg, where they had to seek access to the minister, and to describe their meeting with the tsar on a bear hunt. In the last lifetime edition of “Poems” by N. A. Nekrasov (1873-1874) “To whom It’s good to live in Rus'” was published in the following form: “Prologue; Part One” (1865); “The Last One” (From the second part, “Who Lives Well in Rus'”) (1872); live well") (1873).

Folklore motives in the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'”

Let us agree, first of all, that by folklore we will understand the features of traditional oral poetic creativity, and not the features of living, colloquial peasant speech. When Nekrasov wrote, for example:

They swear obscenely,
No wonder they grab it
In each other's hair...
Look - they've already grabbed hold of it!
Roman is pushing Pakhomushka,
Demyan pushes Luka
And the two Gubina brothers
Iron the rights of the stalwart,
And everyone shouts his own!

then it was very “folk” from the point of view of an intelligent reader and, of course, quite understandable and accessible to the peasant reader, but there is no need to talk about folklore here: this is not peasant poetry, but a peasant language. The poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'” is not entirely homogeneous in character: if the “Prologue”, the first part, “The Peasant Woman” and “The Last One” are intended almost entirely for the peasant reader, then in the part “A Feast for the Whole World” there are chapters and episodes presented completely differently (this especially has to be said about Chapter IV - “Good times - good songs”). For
This can be illustrated by comparing at least two songs from this part. In the chapter (“Bitter times - bitter songs”) there is the following song (“Corvee”):

Kalinushka is poor and unkempt,
He has nothing to show off,
Only the back is painted,
Yes, you don’t know behind your shirt... Etc.

In Chapter IV you can take one of Grisha’s songs:

In moments of despondency, O motherland!
My thoughts fly forward.
You are still destined to suffer a lot,
But you won’t die, I know... Etc.

It seems to me that Nekrasov’s two different styles (relatively speaking, “folk” and “civil”) are manifested quite clearly here. However, the poem is mainly written in a “folk” style. In this regard, there is also a widespread use of folklore in it. Folklore and fairy-tale material undoubtedly entered the plot basis of the poem. Thus, a talking warbler interfering in a dispute between men and promising a ransom for a chick is a fairy-tale image. A self-assembled tablecloth is also a fairytale motif, although its use in Nekrasov’s poem is completely original: it is supposed to feed and clothe the men during their wanderings.
The fairy-tale form of plot development chosen by Nekrasov opened up the broadest possibilities for him and allowed him to give a number of vivid realistic pictures of Russian reality; “fabulousness” did not interfere with realism in essence and at the same time helped create a number of sharp clashes (otherwise it would be very difficult
it would be possible to carry out, for example, a meeting of peasants with the tsar). Subsequently, Nekrasov used folklore material especially widely in the part “Peasant Woman”. However, various folklore genres are not used to the same extent. Particularly widely used here are, firstly, funeral lamentations (based on Barsov’s collection “Lamentations of the Northern Region”), secondly, wedding lamentations of the bride, and thirdly, lyrical family and everyday songs. Nekrasov takes mainly works of a lyrical nature, because it was in these works that the moods, feelings and thoughts of the peasantry were most clearly and effectively reflected. But Nekrasov often turns these lyrical works into an epic narrative, and, moreover, fuses them into one whole, thereby creating such a complex complex that does not and cannot exist in folklore. Nekrasov inserts some songs into the narrative precisely as songs and sometimes presents them with absolute accuracy. Thus, Chapter I (“Before Marriage”) is built almost entirely on wedding lamentations from Rybnikov’s collection. In this regard, it is appropriate to give the following parallel, which allows us to draw some conclusions.

Nekrasov’s chapter ends like this: My dear father ordered.
Blessed mother
Set by parents
To the oak table,
With the edges of the spell poured:
“Take the tray, stranger guests
Take me with a bow!”
For the first time I bowed -
The frisky legs trembled;
I bowed second -
The white face has faded;
I bowed for the third time,
And the wolf rolled down
From a girl's head... From Rybnikov: My sir father commanded,
May my mother bless you...
...Put by parents
To the oak table in the capital,
To green wine in the bottle.
I stood at the oak table, -
There were gilded trays in the runes.

There were crystal glasses on the trays,
Intoxicating green wine in a glass
To the villains of strangers,
These guests are strangers.
And I conquered my young head: The first time I bowed, -
My wolf rolled off her head,
Another time I bowed, -
My white face has faded,
The third time I bowed, -
The moth's frisky little legs trembled,
The red girl put her family-tribe to shame...

Undoubtedly, Nekrasov used this particular text, since the proximity
It's completely obvious here. But the author did not use the material mechanically.
We see in Nekrasov an extreme compression of the entire text in terms of the number of lines. Except
Moreover, each line in Nekrasov is shorter than the corresponding folklore line
(for example, in Rybnikov - “To the oak table in the capital”, in Nekrasov - “To
oak table"). This gives Nekrasov’s verse great emotional
tension (folklore meter is slower and more epic) and greater
energy (in particular, male monosyllables are important in this regard
clauses used by Nekrasov, whereas in folklore
they are not in the text). The rearrangement made by Nekrasov is characteristic: in the folklore text, at the first bow, the willow rolled away, at the second, the face faded, at the third, the bride’s legs trembled; Nekrasov rearranges these moments
(first “the playful legs trembled”, then “the white face faded”, and,
finally, “the little girl rolled off the girl’s head”) and thus gives the presentation
great strength and logic. In addition, Nekrasov has the words “And the Volushka”
rolled off a girl’s head” (with a strong masculine ending) complete
Matryona Timofeevna’s narrative about a girl’s life, while in folklore
in lamentation there is a long continuation, which weakens the meaning
this motive. This is how the master artist gives greater strength and significance
the material he is referring to.
In Chapter II (“Songs”), song material is presented precisely in the form of songs,
illustrating the situation married woman. All three songs (“Stand at the court
aches my legs”, “I sleep as a baby, dozes” and “My hateful husband
rises") are known from folklore records (in particular, analogies to
The first and third are in Rybnikov’s collection, the second - in Shane). First
the song is apparently based on Rybnikov's text, but significantly
shortened and sharpened. Nekrasov gave the second song, apparently, completely
exactly (or almost exactly), but without the last verse, in which the husband affectionately
addresses his wife: thereby Nekrasov no longer softens the topic. Third
the song is again given very accurately, but again without the last part, in which
the wife submits to her husband; and here Nekrasov avoids a softening ending. Except
Moreover, this song in the recordings is called a round dance and is a game song: guy,
pretending to be a husband, jokingly hits his girl-wife with a handkerchief, and after the last
verse lifts her from her knees and kisses her (the game ends with the traditional
round dance kiss). Nekrasov gives this song as a household song and
She reinforces Matryona Timofeevna’s story about her husband’s beatings. This is clear
Nekrasov’s desire to show precisely the difficult situation is manifested
peasantry and, in particular, peasant women.
In the same chapter there is a description of Demushka’s beauty (“How written Demushka was”)
relies on the text of glorification of the groom; and here Nekrasov produces
significant reduction of the text. Chapter IV (“Demushka”) is largely built on the basis of 9 funeral lamentations of Irina Fedosova (from Barsov’s collection). Often Nekraso uses a specific lamentation text; but it’s the text that’s important here,
which in itself allows you to expand the picture peasant life. Except
Moreover, we learn in this way about the fact of the existence of funeral lamentations in
peasant environment. This use of folklore, in turn, has
double meaning: firstly, the author selects the strongest and brightest in
artistic data and themes increases emotionality and
the figurativeness of his work, secondly, folklore
works makes it more accessible to the peasantry (and in general
democratic) audience, namely this orientation towards a democratic
audience is typical for Nekrasov. Particularly significant here
borrowing from “Lament for the Elder,” one of the most poignant in social
respect. At the same time, Nekrasov freely handles the material and, together with
thus slightly modifying it. Particularly revealing is the comparison
Nekrasov and Irina Fedosova cursed the judges. Irina Fedosova
ends “Lament for the Elder” like this:

You will fall, my tears will burn,
You will not fall on the water, not on the ground.
You are not in God's church, in a construction site,
You will fall, my tears will burn,
etc.................

MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

FEDERAL RAILWAY TRANSPORT AGENCY

BRANCH OF THE FEDERAL STATE BUDGET EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION

HIGHER PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION

"SAMARA STATE UNIVERSITY OF COMMUNICATIONS"

in Alatyr

IXOPEN COMPETITION FOR RESEARCH AND CREATIVE WORKS "I WILL BE APPRAISED INXXI CENTURY"

Section "Social Sciences and Humanities"

The search for happiness as one of the pressing timeless problems in human life

(using the example of N.A. Nekrasov’s poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'”)

Scientific supervisor - Matveeva N.A.

branch of SamGUPS in Alatyr

Alatyr - 2016

ANNOTATION

The topic of my work is the search for happiness as one of the pressing timeless problems in human life (using the example of N.A. Nekrasov’s poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'”)

The problem of finding happiness is relevant for every person, and especially for young people, since their values ​​and perception of the world around them determine their future life. The above determined the choice of the research topic, determined its goals, objectives and object of study.

Practical significance of the study: Young people form life values ​​and priorities, they analyze their lives and the lives of people around them, so the problem of finding happiness in a broad sense is relevant for them.

Content

1. Introduction............................................... ........................................................ ..................................4

2. Main part................................................... ........................................................ ..........................5

2.1. The problem of searching for happiness in N.A. Nekrasov’s poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'”......5-8

2.2. Research part................................................... ........................................................ ....9

3. Conclusion........................................................ ........................................................ .............................10

4. List of references................................................... ........................................................ .................eleven

5. Application................................................... ........................................................ .....................12-15

Introduction

Each of us has probably thought at least once in our lives about whether he lives well? If not, then who has a good life?

This question has worried, worries and will always worry people. After all, we constantly compare our lives: our salary, clothes and much more with what those around us have. People are in an eternal search for happiness.

We will consider this problem using the example of N.A. Nekrasov’s poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'.”

The purpose of our research is to find outWhat for young people is the main components of happiness. And who lives well in Russia?

A sociological survey was conducted among 1st and 2nd year students of the Alatyr Technical School of Railway Transport.

As a result of the research work, student responses were analyzed. The Appendix reflects the most interesting statements.

2.1. The problem of finding happiness in the poem "Who Lives Well in Rus'"

In the poem by N.A. Nekrasov, peasant peasants are looking around the world for a person who lives well in Rus'.

Men's dreams of happiness are simple, their requirements for the joys of life are real and ordinary: bread, vodka, cucumbers, kvass and hot tea.
In search of happiness, men turn to the bird:

“Oh, you little birdie!

Give us your wings

We'll fly around the whole kingdom,

Let's see, let's explore,

Let's ask and find out:

Who lives happily?

Is it at ease in Rus'?

Drawing before the reader a gallery of social types, N.A. Nekrasov beginsfrom the butt . This is natural, because a church minister should, logically, understand the idea of ​​the divine world order and social justice better than anyone else. It is no coincidence that men ask the priest to answer “according to conscience, according to reason,” “in a divine way.” It turns out that the priest is simply carrying his cross through life and does not consider himself happy:

“Our roads are difficult,

Our parish is large.

Sick, dying,

Born into the world

They don’t choose time:

In reaping and haymaking,

<...>And in the spring flood

Go where you are called!”

However, the peasant has a different view of the priest’s life: one of the men knows this well:“For three years he lived with the priest as a worker and knows that he has porridge with butter and pie with filling.”

The scene of a fair in the rich trading village of Kuzminskoye sheds light on folk life in Rus'. There is dirt everywhere. One detail is noteworthy:“The house with the inscription: school,

Empty, packed tightly.

A hut with one window,

With the image of a paramedic,

Bleeding."

Nobody cares about public education and healthcare in the state.

The fair fun ends in drunkenness and fights. From the stories of women, the reader learns that many of them feel sick at home, as if they were in hard labor. On the one hand, the author is offended to look at this endless drunkenness, but on the other hand, he understands that it is better for the men to drink and forget themselves between hours of hard work than to understand where the fruits of their work go:

“And the work is almost over,

Look, there are three shareholders standing:

God, king and lord!

From the storyabout Yakima Nagy we learn about the fate of people who are trying to defend their rights:

“Yakim, wretched old man,

Once lived in St. Petersburg,

Yes, he ended up in jail:

I decided to compete with the merchant!

Like a piece of velcro,

He returned to his homeland

And he took up the plow.”

While saving paintings, Yakim lost money during the fire: preserving spirituality and art is higher for him than everyday life.

The landowner in Rus', too, as it turns out, does not feel happy. WhenObolt-Obolduev talks about his family tree, we learn that the feats that his ancestors performed can hardly be called such.
Obolt-Obolduev yearns for the time of serfdom, remembering how voluntary gifts were brought to him and his family in addition to the corvee.

ON THE. Nekrasov shows that the landowners found themselves in a difficult situation: they are accustomed to living on the labor of others and do not know how to do anything. Obolt-Obolduev talks about this in his confession:

"Work hard! Who did you think

I'm not a peasant lapotnik -

I am by God's grace

Russian nobleman!

Russia is not foreign,

Our feelings are delicate,

We are proud!

Noble classes

We don't learn how to work."

The chapter “Peasant Woman” is devoted to the situationRussian woman . This is a cross-cutting theme in the work of N.A. Nekrasov, which indicates her importance in the writer’s worldview. The main character is Matryona Timofeevna (a dignified woman of about thirty-eight). Drawing her portrait, the author admires the beauty of the Russian peasant woman:

“Beautiful; gray streaked hair,

The eyes are large, strict,

The richest eyelashes,

Severe and dark."

When asked by men about happiness, the woman at first refuses to answer at all, saying that there is labor suffering going on. However, the men agree to help her reap rye, and Timofeevna still decides to tell about herself. Before her marriage, her life was happy, although it was spent in labor (she had to get up early, bring breakfast to her father, feed ducklings, pick mushrooms and berries). In her marriage, Matryona endured beatings and barbs from her husband’s relatives. Monotony, the inability to even think calmly about her life, the need to constantly spend it in endless labor - this is the lot of the Russian woman of the lower classes in Russia. Soon Matryona lost her parents and child. Submitting to her father-in-law in everything, Timofeevna lives, essentially, for the sake of her children. One way out for a woman is to pray.

The most striking episode of the chapter is the fragment “About the exemplary slave - Yakov the Faithful.” It poses the problem of servility.

“People of servile rank -

Real dogs Sometimes:

The heavier the punishment,

That’s why gentlemen are dearer to them,” - writes N.A. Nekrasov. The poet convincingly shows that some peasants even like the feeling of servility. They have a slave psychology so firmly developed that they even enjoy humiliation:

“Jacob had only joy:

To pamper the master, take care of him, please him.”

Another important image in the poem is the image of the people's intercessorGrisha Dobrosklonova . Only he smiled in the poem to experience happiness. Grisha is still young, but“At the age of fifteen, Gregory already knew for sure that he would live for the happiness of his wretched and dark native corner.” For this hero, happiness lies in serving the people and protecting their interests.

2.2. Research part.

The goal of our research work was to find out what are the main components of happiness for modern youth and what kind of person lives well in our country, as well as to encourage students to think about the perception of their own lives.

A sociological survey was conducted among student groups of 1-2 years of ATJT.

128 people took part in the survey.

During the research process, students were asked to answer two questions:

1. What is the main component of happiness for you?

The main component happy life 41% respondents consider family.

For28% For happiness, health is necessary first of all..

12% can’t imagine a happy life without friends.

8% First of all, money is needed.

For7% happiness is impossible without love.

For4% A happy life depends on your career.

In addition to the above options, some students gave the following answers:

“I need it for happiness”:

Car,

Apartment,

Dacha for parents,

Trips,

Food,

Health of loved ones,

Music,

Communication,

Comfort and tranquility,

Full time job,

Dream,

Don't be lonely

So that there is no evil in the world.

To the second question:“Who do you think lives well in Russia?” students gave answers in free form. The most interesting answers are presented in the Appendix.

Conclusion

Of course, each person understands the meaning of the word “happiness” in his own way.

However, erroneous ideas about a happy life (“being rich”, “having expensive car", etc.) and the inability to achieve what they want make a person deeply unhappy and complex. While other people, who have significantly less material wealth, live in harmony with themselves and others, they see happiness in simple things: the health of loved ones, the hugs of a loved one, a sunny day, the smile of a child, a peaceful sky above... And in general, the very opportunity to live is already happiness.

Probably, if each of us looked around and looked at life from this point of view, there would be many more happy people in the world.

Summing up the results of the study, we can come to a rather optimistic conclusion that for the majority of modern youth, happiness still lies not in material values, but in spiritual ones.

Bibliography

1. Nekrasov N.A. Who lives well in Rus'? M., 2011.

2. Klibanov A.I. People's social utopia in Russia in the 19th century. M., 1978.

3. Rozanova L.A. About the work of N.A. Nekrasova - M., 1988.

4. Skatov N.N. “I dedicated the lyre to my people” - M., 1985.

Annex 1

Survey results

" What is the main component of happiness for you?"

Appendix 2

Student survey results

"Who can live well in Russia?"

* Life is good for those people who have all their loved ones alive, healthy and nearby. They are the happiest, affectionate and feel good. If a person has close people and he is not alone, then he should be happy.

* It is good to live for a person who has happiness in life. Who has loving family, favorite work. Some people feel good when they have a lot of money, others feel good when their loved one is nearby. I live well in General. Well, for now.

* For me, it’s good to live for someone who has a job he loves, good friends, a girlfriend, and healthy parents.

* In my opinion, life is good for those people who work in the State Duma. They are in the president's service, but they still have their drawbacks...

* Life is good for many, but not for everyone. If a person is rich and has everything, this does not mean that everything is fine with him. It’s good when you have a girlfriend, children who are waiting for you and love you, and when love and harmony reign in the family. When a person is rich, he is afraid of everything and everyone.

* I think everyone lives well in Russia, because every person wants to live in their own way. Everyone lives the way they know how. Sees the world with his own eyes and evaluates everything in his own way.

* In Russia, life is good for billionaires, businessmen and other people who have enough money. Because nowadays everything we need can be bought.
* The rich live well because they have everything they want, while the poor live from paycheck to paycheck.

* Rich people live well because they have a lot of money and any problem in the current world can be solved with their help.

* A good life is for those who have enough to feed and clothe their family, relax with friends, and help family and friends.

* My life is good, everything is fine with me, I’m happy.

* People who are versatile live well. He can only find knowledge that he likes and likes. And he begins to develop these abilities.

* In Russia, life is good for those whom everyone respects. Who is honest? Someone else has a lot of money and if he earned it honestly.

* I believe that living in Russia is good for those people who have: soul, love, children, health and at least a little money to be able to provide for their closest people and themselves.

* Life is good for the person who has a broad soul, who has many friends and is sociable.

* I believe that a person who has a home has a good life a happy family and the income that will be enough for him to live a normal life.

* A good life is when everyone is healthy, happy, there are no big problems and there is a stable income. Love cannot be bought with money.

* The President of the Russian Federation lives well because he has subordinates who do everything for him.

* The one who does everything right lives well, even if he makes mistakes, he steps over them and steps forward. That's who lives well.

* Life is good for those who have a lot of money, a wife, children, parents, a car, a dog, and their own company. This person doesn't need anything else.

* I believe that life is bad for everyone in Russia. There is none ideal life. Everyone is stressed at work, the children are hungry at home, etc.

* Everyone lives well who has health, happiness and true friends. Each person makes his own destiny and if he doesn’t like something, he changes something and his life is good. Money, of course, is important. But not like spiritual balance. A person already lives well if he knows how to speak and see, because others cannot do this.

* V.V. Putin lives well in Russia, because he is not only rich, the people love him, people respect him. He works for the benefit of the people.

* In Russia, life is good for a middle-income person who has feelings. They spend more time with their families than rich people.

* Life is good for Putin in Russia. He has power, money, respect.

* In Russia, not everyone lives well, some have a good life, some have a bad life. Maybe someone has no home, no family, no money.

* Since there are wars in many countries, people suffer without food and clothing, water and shelter. The happiest people live in Russia. We have everything!

* Everyone lives well in Russia, especially in peacetime. The exception is those who see only problems around them.

* Life is good for those who have all their dreams come true.

* Everyone lives well in their own way. For some, at the expense of money, power, and for others, at the expense of happiness, it is enough that they are surrounded by close people and that everything is fine with them.

* Everyone lives well, because each person lives in his own way, what he wants is what he does: he wants to be rich - he will be. A person decides for himself what to do and how to live.

* Those who have everything that they consider happiness live well.

* Oligarchs live well in Russia, they have a lot of money. In this age, money can buy everything: health, love, etc.

* No one, every person has their own problems.

* Fools live well. Smart and adequate people are always dissatisfied with something, but fools always feel good, they support the opinion of the crowd.

* Children of oligarchs live well.

* In Russia, life is good for those who feel happy.

* Life in Russia is good in its own way. Life is good for those who have purpose, health and love.

* Every person has some problems, experiences and a dark streak in life. But over time, a bright streak comes and life is good.

* All people live well because they have their own homeland.

* Life is good for those who want to live.

* Life is good for those who love Russia.

*Life is good for those who have many friends, good friends who will not abandon you at a difficult moment.

* In Russia, peaceful people live well, not deputies, not oligarchs, but ordinary people, because living well means being loved and loving.

* People in love live well because they do not notice all the problems around them.

* Students live well.

Who can live well in Rus'? This question still worries many people, and this fact explains the increased attention to Nekrasov’s legendary poem. The author managed to raise a topic that has become eternal in Russia - the topic of asceticism, voluntary self-denial in the name of saving the fatherland. It is service high goal makes a Russian person happy, as the writer proved with the example of Grisha Dobrosklonov.

“Who Lives Well in Rus'” is one of Nekrasov’s last works. When he wrote it, he was already seriously ill: he was struck by cancer. That's why it's not finished. It was collected bit by bit by the poet’s close friends and arranged the fragments in random order, barely catching the confused logic of the creator, broken by a fatal illness and endless pain. He was dying in agony and yet was able to answer the question posed at the very beginning: Who lives well in Rus'? He himself turned out to be lucky in a broad sense, because he faithfully and selflessly served the interests of the people. This service supported him in the fight against his fatal illness. Thus, the history of the poem began in the first half of the 60s of the 19th century, around 1863 (serfdom was abolished in 1861), and the first part was ready in 1865.

The book was published in fragments. The prologue was published in the January issue of Sovremennik in 1866. Later other chapters were published. All this time, the work attracted the attention of censors and was mercilessly criticized. In the 70s, the author wrote the main parts of the poem: “The Last One,” “The Peasant Woman,” “A Feast for the Whole World.” He planned to write much more, but due to the rapid development of the disease he was unable to and settled on “The Feast...”, where he expressed his main idea regarding the future of Russia. He believed that such holy people as Dobrosklonov would be able to help his homeland, mired in poverty and injustice. Despite the fierce attacks of reviewers, he found the strength to stand up for a just cause to the end.

Genre, kind, direction

ON THE. Nekrasov called his creation “the epic of modern peasant life” and was precise in his formulation: the genre of the work is “Who can live well in Rus'?” - epic poem. That is, at the heart of the book, not one type of literature coexists, but two: lyricism and epic:

1. Epic component. There was a turning point in the history of the development of Russian society in the 1860s, when people learned to live in new conditions after the abolition of serfdom and other fundamental transformations of their usual way of life. This difficult historical period was described by the writer, reflecting the realities of that time without embellishment or falsehood. In addition, the poem has a clear linear plot and many original characters, which indicates the scale of the work, comparable only to a novel (epic genre). The book also incorporates folklore elements of heroic songs telling about the military campaigns of heroes against enemy camps. All this - birth characteristics epic
2. Lyrical component. The work is written in verse - this is the main property of lyrics as a genre. The book also contains space for the author's digressions and typically poetic symbols, means of artistic expression, and features of the characters' confessions.

The direction within which the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'” was written is realism. However, the author significantly expanded its boundaries, adding fantastic and folklore elements (prologue, beginning, symbolism of numbers, fragments and heroes from folk legends). The poet chose the form of travel for his plan, as a metaphor for the search for truth and happiness that each of us carries out. Many researchers of Nekrasov’s work compare the plot structure with the structure of a folk epic.

Composition

The laws of the genre determined the composition and plot of the poem. Nekrasov finished writing the book in terrible agony, but still did not have time to finish it. This explains the chaotic composition and many branches from the plot, because the works were shaped and restored from drafts by his friends. He himself is in recent months life was unable to strictly adhere to the original concept of creation. Thus, the composition “Who Lives Well in Rus'?” is comparable only to folk epic, is unique. It was developed as a result of the creative development of world literature, and not the direct borrowing of some well-known example.

1. Exposition (Prologue). The meeting of seven men - the heroes of the poem: “On a pillared path / Seven men came together.”
2. The plot is the characters' oath not to return home until they find the answer to their question.
3. The main part consists of many autonomous parts: the reader gets acquainted with the soldier, happy ones, that he was not killed, a slave proud of his privilege to eat from the master's bowls, a grandmother whose garden yielded turnips to her delight... While the search for happiness stands still, the slow but steady growth of national self-awareness is depicted, which the author wanted to show even more than the declared happiness in Rus'. From random episodes emerges big picture Rus': poor, drunk, but not hopeless, striving for a better life. In addition, the poem has several large and independent inserted episodes, some of which are even included in autonomous chapters (“The Last One,” “The Peasant Woman”).
4. Climax. The writer calls Grisha Dobrosklonov, a fighter for people's happiness, a happy person in Rus'.
5. Denouement. A serious illness prevented the author from completing his great plan. Even those chapters that he managed to write were sorted and designated by his proxies after his death. You must understand that the poem is not finished, it was written by a very sick person, therefore this work- the most complex and confusing of all literary heritage Nekrasova.
6. The final chapter is called “A Feast for the Whole World.” All night long the peasants sing about the old and new times. Grisha Dobrosklonov sings kind and hopeful songs.

What is the poem about?

Seven men met on the road and argued about who would live well in Rus'? The essence of the poem is that they looked for the answer to this question on the way, talking with representatives of different classes. The revelation of each of them is a separate story. So, the heroes went for a walk in order to resolve the dispute, but they only quarreled and started a fight. In the night forest, during a fight, a bird's chick fell from its nest, and one of the men picked it up. The interlocutors sat down by the fire and began to dream of also acquiring wings and everything necessary for their journey in search of the truth. The warbler turns out to be magical and, as a ransom for her chick, tells people how to find a self-assembled tablecloth that will provide them with food and clothing. They find her and feast, and during the feast they vow to find the answer to their question together, but until then not to see any of their relatives and not to return home.

On the road they meet a priest, a peasant woman, the farcical Petrushka, beggars, an overworked worker and a paralyzed former servant, honest man Ermila Girin, the landowner Gavrilo Obolt-Obolduev, the deceased Last-Duckling and his family, the servant Yakov the faithful, God's wanderer Jonah Lyapushkin, but none of them were happy man. Each of them is associated with a story of suffering and misadventures full of genuine tragedy. The goal of the journey is achieved only when the wanderers stumbled upon seminarian Grisha Dobrosklonov, who is happy with his selfless service to his homeland. With good songs, he instills hope in the people, and this is where the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'” ends. Nekrasov wanted to continue the story, but did not have time, but he gave his heroes a chance to gain faith in the future of Russia.

The main characters and their characteristics

About the heroes of “Who Lives Well in Rus'” we can say with confidence that they represent a complete system of images that organizes and structures the text. For example, the work emphasizes the unity of the seven wanderers. They do not show individuality or character; they express common features of national self-awareness for all. These characters are a single whole; their dialogues, in fact, are collective speech, which originates from oral folk art. This feature makes Nekrasov’s poem similar to the Russian folklore tradition.

1. Seven wanderers represent former serfs “from adjacent villages - Zaplatova, Dyryavina, Razutov, Znobishina, Gorelova, Neelova, Neurozhaika and also.” They all put forward their versions of who should live well in Rus': a landowner, an official, a priest, a merchant, a noble boyar, a sovereign minister or a tsar. Their character is characterized by persistence: they all demonstrate a reluctance to take someone else's side. Strength, courage and the desire for truth are what unites them. They are passionate and easily angered, but their easygoing nature compensates for these shortcomings. Kindness and responsiveness make them pleasant interlocutors, even despite some meticulousness. Their disposition is harsh and harsh, but life did not spoil them with luxury: the former serfs always bent their backs working for the master, and after the reform no one bothered to provide them with a proper home. So they wandered around Rus' in search of truth and justice. The search itself characterizes them as serious, thoughtful and thorough people. The symbolic number “7” means a hint of luck that awaited them at the end of the journey.
2. Main character– Grisha Dobrosklonov, seminarian, son of a sexton. By nature he is a dreamer, a romantic, loves to compose songs and make people happy. In them he talks about the fate of Russia, about its misfortunes, and at the same time about its mighty strength, which will one day come out and crush injustice. Although he is an idealist, his character is strong, as are his convictions to devote his life to the service of truth. The character feels a calling to be the people's leader and singer of Rus'. He is happy to sacrifice himself to a high idea and help his homeland. However, the author hints that something is waiting for him. hard lot: prisons, exile, hard labor. The authorities do not want to hear the voice of the people, they will try to silence them, and then Grisha will be doomed to torment. But Nekrasov makes it clear with all his might that happiness is a state of spiritual euphoria, and you can only know it by being inspired by a lofty idea.
3. Matrena Timofeevna Korchagina – main character, a peasant woman whom her neighbors call lucky because she begged her husband from the wife of the military leader (he, the only breadwinner of the family, was supposed to be recruited for 25 years). However, the woman's life story reveals not luck or fortune, but grief and humiliation. She experienced the loss of her only child, the anger of her mother-in-law, and everyday, exhausting work. Her fate is described in detail in an essay on our website, be sure to check it out.
4. Saveliy Korchagin- grandfather of Matryona’s husband, a real Russian hero. At one time, he killed a German manager who mercilessly mocked the peasants entrusted to him. For this, a strong and proud man paid with decades of hard labor. Upon his return, he was no longer good for anything; the years of imprisonment trampled his body, but did not break his will, because, as before, he stood up for justice. The hero always said about the Russian peasant: “And it bends, but does not break.” However, without knowing it, the grandfather turns out to be the executioner of his own great-grandson. He did not look after the child, and the pigs ate him.
5. Ermil Girin- a man of exceptional honesty, mayor in the estate of Prince Yurlov. When he needed to buy the mill, he stood in the square and asked people to chip in to help him. After the hero got back on his feet, he returned all the borrowed money to the people. For this he earned respect and honor. But he is unhappy, because he paid for his authority with freedom: after a peasant revolt, suspicion fell on him about his organization, and he was imprisoned.
6. Landowners in the poem“Who lives well in Rus'” are presented in abundance. The author portrays them objectively and even gives some images a positive character. For example, governor Elena Alexandrovna, who helped Matryona, appears as a people's benefactor. Also, with a touch of compassion, the writer portrays Gavrila Obolt-Obolduev, who also treated the peasants tolerably, even organized holidays for them, and with the abolition of serfdom, he lost ground under his feet: he was too accustomed to the old order. In contrast to these characters, the image of the Last-Duckling and his treacherous, calculating family was created. The relatives of the old cruel serf owner decided to deceive him and persuaded him former slaves participate in the performance in exchange for profitable territories. However, when the old man died, the rich heirs brazenly deceived the common people and drove him away with nothing. The apogee of noble insignificance is the landowner Polivanov, who beats his faithful servant and gives his son as a recruit for trying to marry his beloved girl. Thus, the writer is far from denigrating the nobility everywhere; he is trying to show both sides of the coin.
7. Serf Yakov- an indicative figure of a serf peasant, an antagonist of the hero Savely. Jacob absorbed the entire slavish essence of the oppressed class, overwhelmed by lawlessness and ignorance. When the master beats him and even sends his son to certain death, the servant humbly and resignedly endures the insult. His revenge was consistent with this humility: he hanged himself in the forest right in front of the master, who was crippled and could not get home without his help.
8. Jonah Lyapushkin- God's wanderer who told the men several stories about the life of people in Rus'. It tells about the epiphany of Ataman Kudeyara, who decided to atone for his sins by killing for good, and about the cunning of Gleb the elder, who violated the will of the late master and did not release the serfs on his orders.
9. Pop- a representative of the clergy who complains about the difficult life of a priest. The constant encounter with grief and poverty saddens the heart, not to mention the popular jokes addressed to his rank.

The characters in the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'” are diverse and allow us to paint a picture of the morals and life of that time.

Subject

• The main theme of the work is Liberty- rests on the problem that the Russian peasant did not know what to do with it, and how to adapt to new realities. National character is also “problematic”: people-thinkers, people-seekers of truth still drink, live in oblivion and empty conversations. They are not able to squeeze slaves out of themselves until their poverty acquires at least the modest dignity of poverty, until they stop living in drunken illusions, until they realize their strength and pride, trampled upon by centuries of humiliating state of affairs that were sold, lost and bought.
• Theme of happiness. The poet believes that a person can get the highest satisfaction from life only by helping other people. The real value of being is to feel needed by society, to bring goodness, love and justice into the world. Selfless and selfless service to a good cause fills every moment with sublime meaning, an idea, without which time loses its color, becomes dull from inaction or selfishness. Grisha Dobrosklonov is happy not because of his wealth or his position in the world, but because he is leading Russia and his people to a bright future.
• Homeland theme. Although Rus' appears in the eyes of readers as a poor and tortured, but still a beautiful country with a great future and a heroic past. Nekrasov feels sorry for his homeland, devoting himself entirely to its correction and improvement. For him, the homeland is the people, the people are his muse. All these concepts are closely intertwined in the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'.” The author's patriotism is especially clearly expressed at the end of the book, when the wanderers find a lucky man who lives in the interests of society. In a strong and patient Russian woman, in the justice and honor of a heroic peasant, in sincere kindness folk singer the creator sees the true appearance of his power, full of dignity and spirituality.
• Theme of labor. Useful activity elevates Nekrasov's poor heroes above the vanity and depravity of the nobility. It is idleness that destroys the Russian master, turning him into a self-satisfied and arrogant nonentity. But the common people have skills and true virtue that are really important for society, without them there will be no Russia, but the country will manage without noble tyrants, revelers and greedy seekers of wealth. So the writer comes to the conclusion that the value of each citizen is determined only by his contribution to the common cause - the prosperity of the homeland.
• Mystical motive. Fantastic elements appear already in the Prologue and immerse the reader in the fabulous atmosphere of the epic, where it is necessary to follow the development of the idea, and not the realism of the circumstances. Seven eagle owls on seven trees - the magic number 7, which promises good luck. A raven praying to the devil is another mask of the devil, because the raven symbolizes death, grave decay and infernal forces. He is opposed by a good force in the form of a warbler bird, which equips the men for the journey. A self-assembled tablecloth is a poetic symbol of happiness and contentment. “The Wide Road” is a symbol of the open ending of the poem and the basis of the plot, because on both sides of the road travelers are presented with a multifaceted and authentic panorama of Russian life. The image of an unknown fish in unknown seas, which has absorbed “the keys to female happiness,” is symbolic. A crying wolf with bloody nipples also clearly demonstrates hard fate Russian peasant woman. One of the most bright images reform is a “great chain”, which, having broken, “split one end to the master, the other to the peasant!” The seven wanderers are a symbol of the entire people of Russia, restless, waiting for change and seeking happiness.

Issues

• In the epic poem Nekrasov touched upon a large number of acute and topical issues of the time. the main problem in “Who can live well in Rus'?” - the problem of happiness, both socially and philosophically. It is connected with the social theme of the abolition of serfdom, which greatly changed (and not for the better) the traditional way of life of all segments of the population. It would seem that this is freedom, what else do people need? Isn't this happiness? However, in reality, it turned out that the people, who, due to long slavery, do not know how to live independently, found themselves thrown to the mercy of fate. A priest, a landowner, a peasant woman, Grisha Dobrosklonov and seven men are real Russian characters and destinies. The author described them based on his rich experience of communicating with people from the common people. The problems of the work are also taken from life: disorder and confusion after the reform to abolish serfdom really affected all classes. No one organized jobs or at least land plots for yesterday's slaves, no one provided the landowner with competent instructions and laws regulating his new relations with workers.
• The problem of alcoholism. The wanderers come to an unpleasant conclusion: life in Rus' is so difficult that without drunkenness the peasant will completely die. He needs oblivion and fog in order to somehow pull the burden of a hopeless existence and hard labor.
• The problem of social inequality. The landowners have been torturing the peasants with impunity for years, and Savelia has had her whole life ruined for killing such an oppressor. For deception, nothing will happen to the relatives of the Last One, and their servants will again be left with nothing.
• The philosophical problem of searching for truth, which each of us encounters, is allegorically expressed in the journey of seven wanderers who understand that without this discovery their lives become worthless.

Idea of ​​the work

A road fight between men is not an everyday quarrel, but an eternal, great dispute, in which all layers of Russian society of that time figure to one degree or another. All its main representatives (priest, landowner, merchant, official, tsar) are summoned to the peasant court. For the first time, men can and have the right to judge. For all the years of slavery and poverty, they are not looking for retribution, but for an answer: how to live? This expresses the meaning of Nekrasov’s poem “Who can live well in Rus'?” - growth of national self-awareness on the ruins of the old system. The author’s point of view is expressed by Grisha Dobrosklonov in his songs: “And fate, the companion of the Slav’s days, lightened your burden! You are still a slave in the family, but the mother of a free son!..” Despite the negative consequences of the reform of 1861, the creator believes that behind it lies a happy future for the fatherland. At the beginning of change it is always difficult, but this work will be rewarded a hundredfold.

The most important condition for further prosperity is overcoming internal slavery:

Enough! Finished with past settlement,
The settlement with the master has been completed!
The Russian people are gathering strength
And learns to be a citizen

Despite the fact that the poem is not finished, Nekrasov voiced the main idea. Already the first of the songs in “A Feast for the Whole World” gives an answer to the question posed in the title: “The share of the people, their happiness, light and freedom, above all!”

End

In the finale, the author expresses his point of view on the changes that have occurred in Russia in connection with the abolition of serfdom and, finally, sums up the results of the search: Grisha Dobrosklonov is recognized as the lucky one. It is he who is the bearer of Nekrasov’s opinion, and in his songs Nikolai Alekseevich’s true attitude to what he described is hidden. The poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'” ends with a feast for the whole world in the literal sense of the word: that’s what it’s called final chapter, where the characters celebrate and rejoice at the happy conclusion of the quest.

Conclusion

In Rus', it is good for Nekrasov’s hero Grisha Dobrosklonov, since he serves people, and, therefore, lives with meaning. Grisha is a fighter for truth, a prototype of a revolutionary. The conclusion that can be drawn based on the work is simple: the lucky one has been found, Rus' is embarking on the path of reform, the people are reaching through thorns to the title of citizen. The great meaning of the poem lies in this bright omen. It has been teaching people altruism and the ability to serve high ideals, rather than vulgar and passing cults, for centuries. From the point of view of literary excellence, the book is also of great importance: it is truly a folk epic, reflecting a controversial, complex, and at the same time the most important historical era.

Of course, the poem would not be so valuable if it only taught lessons in history and literature. She gives life lessons, and this is its most important property. The moral of the work “Who Lives Well in Rus'” is that it is necessary to work for the good of your homeland, not to scold it, but to help it with deeds, because it is easier to push around with a word, but not everyone can and really wants to change something. This is happiness - to be in your place, to be needed not only by yourself, but also by the people. Only together can we achieve significant results, only together can we overcome the problems and hardships of this overcoming. Grisha Dobrosklonov tried to unite and unite people with his songs so that they would face change shoulder to shoulder. This is his holy purpose, and everyone has it; it is important not to be lazy to go out on the road and look for it, as the seven wanderers did.

Criticism

The reviewers were attentive to Nekrasov’s work, because he himself was an important person in literary circles and had enormous authority. Entire monographs were devoted to his phenomenal civic lyricism with a detailed analysis of the creative methodology and ideological and thematic originality of his poetry. For example, here is how the writer S.A. spoke about his style. Andreevsky:

He brought the anapest, abandoned on Olympus, out of oblivion and for many years made this heavy but flexible meter as common as the airy and melodious iambic had remained from the time of Pushkin to Nekrasov. This rhythm, favored by the poet, reminiscent of the rotational movement of a barrel organ, allowed him to stay on the boundaries of poetry and prose, joke around with the crowd, speak smoothly and vulgarly, insert a funny and cruel joke, express bitter truths and imperceptibly, slowing down the beat, in more solemn words, move into floridity.

Korney Chukovsky spoke with inspiration about Nikolai Alekseevich’s careful preparation for work, citing this example of writing as a standard:

Nekrasov himself constantly “visited Russian huts,” thanks to which both soldier and peasant speech became thoroughly known to him from childhood: not only from books, but also in practice, he studied the common language and from a young age became a great connoisseur of folk poetic images, folk forms thinking, folk aesthetics.

The poet's death came as a surprise and a blow to many of his friends and colleagues. As you know, F.M. spoke at his funeral. Dostoevsky with a heartfelt speech inspired by impressions from a poem he recently read. In particular, among other things, he said:

He, indeed, was highly original and, indeed, came with a “new word.”

First of all, his poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'” became a “new word”. No one before him had understood so deeply the peasant, simple, everyday grief. His colleague in his speech noted that Nekrasov was dear to him precisely because he bowed “to the people’s truth with all his being, which he testified to in his the best creatures" However, Fyodor Mikhailovich did not support his radical views on the reorganization of Russia, however, like many thinkers of that time. Therefore, criticism reacted to the publication violently, and in some cases aggressively. In this situation, the honor of his friend was defended by the famous reviewer, master of words Vissarion Belinsky:

N. Nekrasov in his last work remained true to his idea: to arouse the sympathy of the upper classes of society for the common people, their needs and wants.

Quite caustically, recalling, apparently, professional disagreements, I. S. Turgenev spoke about the work:

Nekrasov's poems, collected into one focus, are burned.

The liberal writer was not a supporter of his former editor and openly expressed his doubts about his talent as an artist:

In the white thread stitched, seasoned with all sorts of absurdities, painfully hatched fabrications of the mournful muse of Mr. Nekrasov - there is not even a penny of it, poetry.”

He truly was a man of very high nobility of soul and a man of great intelligence. And as a poet he is, of course, superior to all poets.

Interesting? Save it on your wall!

Kurganova Dina Yurievna

This work is due to increased attention to the work of N.A. Nekrasova. Researchers have been turning to him for many generations. But each “generation” has its own approach to a seemingly long-studied problem. For example, the topic of using folklore motifs in the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'” is relevant to this day. folk art helps to better understand the way of life of peasants in the 19th century, their life, thoughts and moods.

Download:

Preview:

MUNICIPAL STATE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION "SADOVSKAYA SECONDARY SCHOOL" OF BYKOVSKY MUNICIPAL DISTRICT OF VOLGOGRAD REGION

Literature Research Paper

on the topic

"Folklore motives in the poem

N.A. Nekrasova “Who Lives Well in Rus'.”

Completed by: 11th grade student

Kurganova Dina Yurievna

Head: teacher of Russian language and literature

Zhivak N.N.

Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………2 p.

Chapter 1.

The history of the creation of the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'”………………………………..4 pp.

Chapter 2.

Folklore motifs in the work of N.A. Nekrasov “Who Lives Well in Rus'”..7pp.

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………......18 p.

References……………………………………………………………………………………….19 pages.

Introduction

The topic “Folklore in the works of Nekrasov” has repeatedly attracted the attention of researchers. Nevertheless, I think it would be useful to return to it again. In numerous studies, the attention of researchers was drawn mainly to the study of textual or stylistic matches between folklore texts and texts belonging to Nekrasov, to the establishment of “borrowings” and “sources,” etc. Until now, however, the topic has not been posed in literary terms . After all, we are dealing with a master artist. It goes without saying that this master artist, a major poetic individual, is at the same time a social figure. Nekrasov is a poet of revolutionary democracy, and this determines the nature of his poetry. And naturally, it would be interesting to explore how Nekrasov uses folklore material? What goals does he set for himself? What kind of folklore material does Nekrasov take (not in the sense of accurately identifying the sources, but in the sense of the qualitative, artistic and social characteristics of this material)? What does he do with this material (i.e., with what compositional techniques does he introduce it, to what extent and how does he change it)? What is the result of his work? This remains to be determined in the course of the study.

Relevance This work is due to increased attention to the work of N.A. Nekrasova. Researchers have been turning to him for many generations. But each “generation” has its own approach to a seemingly long-studied problem. For example, the topic of using folklore motifs in the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'” is relevant to this day. It is folk art that helps to better understand the way of life of peasants in the 19th century, their way of life, thoughts and moods.

In this regard, it was put forwardworking hypothesis, which consists in the fact that N.A. Nekrasov’s inclusion of folklore motifs in the poem is ambiguous and requires a comprehensive consideration of the language of the poem.

Research topic:“Folklore motifs in N.A. Nekrasov’s poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'.”

Object of study:poem by N.A. Nekrasov “Who Lives Well in Rus'.”

Goal of the work: identify and classify folklore motifs in the work of the Russian poet N.A. Nekrasov “Who Lives Well in Rus'.”

To achieve this goal, it is necessary to solve the following

Tasks:

• Consider the history of the creation of the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'.”
• Note the goals of Nekrasov’s use of folk art in his works, his attitude towards it
• Understand what methods and methods the author uses to introduce folklore into the narrative and what result he is trying to achieve.
• Classify folklore motifs in the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'.”

Object of study are the motives of oral folk art in the poem by N.A. Nekrasov “Who Lives Well in Rus'”.

During the study, methods such as observation, description, and comparison were used.

Practical significance.The results of the study can be used in studying the creativity of N.A. Nekrasov in school course literature, both in lessons and in elective classes, as well as for further research in this area.

CHAPTER 1

The history of the creation of the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'”

The crowning achievement of Nekrasov’s work is the folk poem “Who Lives Well in Rus',” written in the 60s and 70s of the 19th century. The poem can be called a panorama of peasant Russia. “I decided,” said Nekrasov, “to present in a coherent story everything that I know about the people, everything that I happened to hear from their lips, and I started “Who Lives Well in Rus'.” This will be an epic of modern peasant life.”

From 1963 until his last days, Nekrasov worked on the poem. He sought to show in it as fully as possible the main features of modern reality. The writer accumulated material for his “brainchild,” as he admitted, “by word of mouth for twenty years.” Death interrupted this gigantic work. The poem remained unfinished. Shortly before his death, the poet said: “One thing I deeply regret is that I did not finish my poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'.” The manuscript of the first part of the poem is marked by Nekrasov in 1865. This year the first part of the poem was already written, but it was obviously begun several years earlier. The mention in the first part of the exiled Poles (chapter “Landowner”) allows us to consider 1863 as a date before which this chapter could not have been written, since the suppression of the uprising in Poland dates back to 1863-1864. However, the first sketches for the poem could have appeared earlier. An indication of this is contained, for example, in the memoirs of G. Potanin, who, describing his visit to Nekrasov’s apartment in the fall of 1860, conveys the following words of the poet: “I... wrote for a long time yesterday, but I didn’t finish it a little, now I’ll finish...” These were sketches of his poem “Who can live well in Rus'?” Thus, it can be assumed that some images and episodes of the future poem, the material for which had been collected over many years, arose in the poet’s creative imagination and were partially embodied in poems earlier than 1865, when the manuscript of the first part of the poem is dated. Nekrasov began to continue his work only in the 70s, after a seven-year break. The second, third and fourth parts of the poem follow one after another at short intervals: “The Last One” was created in 1872, “The Peasant Woman” - in July-August 1873, “A Feast for the Whole World” - in the fall of 1876. Nekrasov began publishing the poem soon after finishing work on the first part. Already in the January book of Sovremennik for 1866, a prologue to the poem appeared. The printing of the first part took four years. Fearing to shake the already precarious position of Sovremennik, Nekrasov refrained from publishing subsequent chapters of the first part of the poem. Nekrasov was afraid of censorship persecution, which began immediately after the release of the first chapter of the poem (“Pop”), published in 1868 in the first issue of Nekrasov’s new magazine “Otechestvennye zapiski.” Censor A. Lebedev gave the following description of this chapter: “In the said poem, like his other works, Nekrasov remained true to his direction; in it he tries to present the gloomy and sad side of the Russian person with his grief and material shortcomings... in it there are... passages that are harsh in their indecency.” Although the censorship committee approved the book “Notes of the Fatherland” for publication, it still sent a disapproving opinion about the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'” to the highest censorship authority. Subsequent chapters of the first part of the poem were published in the February issues of Otechestvennye Zapiski for 1869 (“ Country fair"and "Drunken Night") and 1870 ("Happy" and "Landowner"). The entire first part of the poem appeared in print only eight years after it was written. The publication of “The Last One” (“Otechestvennye zapiski”, 1873, No. 2) caused new, even greater quibbles from the censors, who believed that this part of the poem “is distinguished by... extreme ugliness of content... has the character of a libel on the entire noble class.” The next part of the poem, “The Peasant Woman,” created by Nekrasov in the summer of 1873, was published in the winter of 1874 in the January book of “Notes of the Fatherland.” Nekrasov never saw a separate edition of the poem during his lifetime. In the last year of his life, Nekrasov, having returned seriously ill from Crimea, where he had basically completed the fourth part of the poem - “A Feast for the Whole World,” with amazing energy and persistence entered into a single combat with censorship, hoping to publish “The Feast ...”. This part of the poem was subjected to particularly violent attacks by the censors. The censor wrote that he finds “the entire poem “A Feast for the Whole World” extremely harmful in its content, since it can arouse hostile feelings between the two classes, and that it is especially offensive to the nobility, who so recently enjoyed landowner rights...” However, Nekrasov did not stopped fighting censorship. Bedridden by illness, he stubbornly continued to strive for the publication of “The Feast...”. He reworks the text, shortens it, crosses it out. “This is our craft as a writer,” Nekrasov complained. - When I started my literary activity and wrote his first piece, he immediately met with scissors; 37 years have passed since then, and here I am, dying, writing my last work, and again I am faced with the same scissors!” Having “messed up” the text of the fourth part of the poem (as the poet called the alteration of the work for the sake of censorship), Nekrasov counted on permission. However, “A Feast for the Whole World” was again banned. “Unfortunately,” Saltykov-Shchedrin recalled, “it’s almost useless to bother: everything is so full of hatred and threat that it’s difficult even to approach from afar.” But even after this, Nekrasov still did not lay down his arms and decided to “approach”, as a last resort, to the head of the Main Directorate for Censorship V. Grigoriev, who back in the spring of 1876 promised him “his personal intercession” and, according to rumors that reached through F. Dostoevsky, allegedly considered “A Feast for the Whole World” to be “completely possible for publication.” Nekrasov intended to bypass censorship altogether, having secured the permission of the Tsar himself. To do this, the poet wanted to use his acquaintance with the minister of the court, Count Adlerberg, and also resort to the mediation of S. Botkin, who was at that time the court doctor ("A Feast for the Whole World" was dedicated to Botkin, who treated Nekrasov). Obviously, it was precisely for this occasion that Nekrasov inserted into the text of the poem “with gnashing of teeth” the famous lines dedicated to the tsar, “Hail, who gave freedom to the people!” We do not know whether Nekrasov took real steps in this direction or abandoned his intention, realizing the futility of the efforts. “A Feast for the Whole World” remained under a censorship ban until 1881, when it appeared in the second book of “Notes of the Fatherland”, however, with large abbreviations and distortions: the songs “Veselaya”, “Corvee”, “Soldier’s”, “ The deck is oak..." and others. Most of the censored excerpts from “A Feast for the Whole World” were first published only in 1908, and the entire poem, in an uncensored edition, was published in 1920 by K. I. Chukovsky. The poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'” in its unfinished form consists of four separate parts, arranged in the following order according to the time of their writing: part one, consisting of a prologue and five chapters; "Last One"; “The Peasant Woman,” consisting of a prologue and eight chapters; “A feast for the whole world.” From Nekrasov’s papers it is clear that according to the plan for the further development of the poem, it was planned to create at least three more chapters or parts. One of them, tentatively called “Death” by Nekrasov, was supposed to be about the stay of seven peasants on the Sheksna River, where they find themselves in the midst of a widespread death of livestock from anthrax, and about their meeting with an official. Citing several verses from the future chapter, Nekrasov writes: “This is a song from the new chapter “Who Lives Well in Rus'.” The poet began collecting materials for this chapter in the summer of 1873. However, it remained unwritten. Only a few prose and poetic draft passages have survived. It is also known that the poet intended to talk about the arrival of peasants in St. Petersburg, where they were supposed to seek access to the minister, and to describe their meeting with the tsar on a bear hunt. In the last lifetime edition of “Poems” by N. A. Nekrasov (1873-1874), “Who Lives Well in Rus'” is printed in the following form: “Prologue; Part One" (1865); “The Last One” (From the second part “Who Lives Well in Rus'”) (1872); “Peasant Woman” (From the third part “Who Lives Well in Rus'”) (1873).

CHAPTER 2.

Folklore motives in the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'”

In “Who Lives Well in Rus',” the artistic principles of folk art are especially widely used. Not only the song rhythm of the entire poem is clearly visible, but also numerous inclusions of songs, both processed folklore ones and those belonging to Nekrasov himself. An illustration of this can be compared with at least two songs from this part. In the chapter (“Bitter times - bitter songs”) there is the following song (“Corvee”):

Kalinushka is poor and unkempt,

He has nothing to show off,

Only the back is painted,

Yes, you don’t know behind your shirt... Etc.

In Chapter IV you can take one of Grisha’s songs:

In moments of despondency, O motherland!

My thoughts fly forward.

You are still destined to suffer a lot,

But you won’t die, I know... Etc.

It seems to me that Nekrasov’s two different styles (relatively speaking, “folk” and “civil”) are manifested quite clearly here. However, the poem is mainly written in a “folk” style. Both the language and the very structure of images go back entirely to folk poetry. Folklore and fairy tale motifs are included in the plot basis of the poem. Thus, a talking warbler who intervenes in a dispute between men and promises a ransom for a chick is a fairy-tale image, or, for example, a self-assembled tablecloth. Although her use in Nekrasov’s poem is completely original: she must feed and clothe the men during their wanderings.

The fairy-tale form of plot development chosen by Nekrasov opened up the broadest possibilities for him and allowed him to give a number of vivid realistic pictures of Russian reality; “fabulousness” did not interfere with realism in essence and at the same time helped create a number of sharp clashes (otherwise it would have been very difficult to carry out, for example, a meeting between the peasants and the tsar). Subsequently, Nekrasov used folklore material especially widely in the part “Peasant Woman”. However, various folklore genres are not used to the same extent. Particularly widely used here are, firstly, funeral lamentations (based on Barsov’s collection “Lamentations of the Northern Region”), secondly, wedding lamentations of the bride, and thirdly, lyrical family and everyday songs. Nekrasov takes mainly works of a lyrical nature, because it was in these works that the moods, feelings and thoughts of the peasantry were most clearly and effectively reflected. But Nekrasov often turns these lyrical works into an epic narrative, and fuses them into one whole, creating such a complex complex that does not and cannot exist in folklore. Nekrasov inserts some songs into the narrative precisely as songs and sometimes presents them with absolute accuracy. Thus, Chapter I (“Before Marriage”) is built almost entirely on wedding lamentations from Rybnikov’s collection. In this regard, it is appropriate to give the following parallel, which allows us to draw some conclusions.

Nekrasov’s chapter ends like this:My dear father ordered.

Blessed mother

Set by parents

To the oak table,

With the edges of the spell poured:

“Take the tray, stranger guests

Take me with a bow!”

For the first time I bowed -

The frisky legs trembled;

I bowed second -

The white face has faded;

I bowed for the third time,

And the wolf rolled down

From a girl's head... From Rybnikov: My sir father commanded,

May my mother bless you...

Set by parents

To the oak table in the capital,

To green wine in the bottle.

I stood at the oak table, -

There were gilded trays in the runes.

There were crystal glasses on the trays,

Intoxicating green wine in a glass

To the villains of strangers,

These guests are strangers.

And I conquered my young head: The first time I bowed, -

My wolf rolled off her head,

Another time I bowed, -

My white face has faded,

The third time I bowed, -

The moth's frisky little legs trembled,

The red girl put her family-tribe to shame...

Undoubtedly, Nekrasov used this particular text, since the proximity

We see in Nekrasov an extreme compression of the entire text in terms of the number of lines. Except

Moreover, each line in Nekrasov is shorter than the corresponding folklore line

(for example, in Rybnikov - “To the oak table in the capital”, in Nekrasov - “To

oak table"). This gives Nekrasov’s verse great emotional

tension (folklore meter is slower and more epic) and greater

energy (in particular, male monosyllables are important in this regard

clauses used by Nekrasov, whereas in folklore

they are not in the text). The rearrangement made by Nekrasov is characteristic: in the folklore text, at the first bow, the willow rolled away, at the second, the face faded, at the third, the bride’s legs trembled; Nekrasov rearranges these moments

(first “the playful legs trembled”, then “the white face faded”, and,

finally, “the little girl rolled off the girl’s head”) and thus gives the presentation

great strength and logic. In addition, Nekrasov has the words “And the Volushka”

rolled off a girl’s head” (with a strong masculine ending) complete

Matryona Timofeevna’s narrative about a girl’s life, while in folklore

this motive. This is how the master artist gives greater strength and significance

the material he is referring to.

In Chapter II (“Songs”), song material is presented precisely in the form of songs,

illustrating the position of a married woman. All three songs (“Stand at the court

aches my legs”, “I sleep as a baby, dozes” and “My hateful husband

rises") are known from folklore records (in particular, analogies to

The first and third are in Rybnikov’s collection, the second - in Shane). First

the song is apparently based on Rybnikov's text, but significantly

shortened and sharpened. Nekrasov gave the second song, apparently, completely

exactly (or almost exactly), but without the last verse, in which the husband affectionately

addresses his wife: thereby Nekrasov no longer softens the topic. Third

the song is again given very accurately, but again without the last part, in which

the wife submits to her husband; and here Nekrasov avoids a softening ending. Except

Moreover, this song in the recordings is called a round dance and is a game song: guy,

pretending to be a husband, jokingly hits his girl-wife with a handkerchief, and after the last

verse lifts her from her knees and kisses her (the game ends with the traditional

round dance kiss). Nekrasov gives this song as a household song and

She reinforces Matryona Timofeevna’s story about her husband’s beatings. This is clear

Nekrasov’s desire to show precisely the difficult situation is manifested

peasantry and, in particular, peasant women.

In the same chapter there is a description of Demushka’s beauty (“How written Demushka was”)

relies on the text of glorification of the groom; and here Nekrasov produces

significant reduction of the text. Chapter IV (“Demushka”) is largely built on the basis of 9 funeral lamentations of Irina Fedosova (from Barsov’s collection). Often Nekrasov uses a specific lamentation text; but what is important here is the text, which in itself allows us to develop a picture of peasant life. In addition, we learn in this way about the fact of the existence of funeral lamentations among the peasantry. This use of folklore, in turn, has a double meaning: firstly, the author selects the strongest and brightest in artistically data and thereby increases the emotionality and figurativeness of his work, secondly, the folklore nature of the work makes it more accessible to the peasantry (and in general

democratic) audience, namely this orientation towards a democratic

audience is typical for Nekrasov. Particularly significant here

borrowing from “Lament for the Elder,” one of the most poignant in social

respect. At the same time, Nekrasov freely handles the material and, together with

thus slightly modifying it. Particularly revealing is the comparison

Nekrasov and Irina Fedosova cursed the judges. Irina Fedosova

ends “Lament for the Elder” like this:

You will not fall on the water, not on the ground.

You are not in God's church, in a construction site,

You will fall, my tears will burn,

You are adversarial to this villain,

Yes, you are right to the zealous heart,

Yes, please, God, Lord,

So that decay comes on his colorful dress,

Like a crazy woman would have her head in a riot.

Give me more, God, Lord,

He wants a stupid wife for his house,

Produce foolish children,

Hear, Lord, my sinful prayers

Accept, Lord, you tears of small children...

From Nekrasov:

Villain! Executioners!

Fall my tears,

Not on land, not on water,

Not to the Lord's temple.

Fall right on your heart

My villain!

Please, God, Lord,

So that decay comes on the dress,

It's crazy

My villain!

His wife is stupid

Let's go, holy fool children!

Accept, hear, Lord,

Prayers, mother's tears,

Punish the villain!..

And here Nekrasov, following his rule (“so that words are cramped”),

significantly shortens the folklore text without, however, reducing the number

lines: each line is much shorter than that of Irina Fedosova, so

how freed from “ballast” words. As a result, the rhythm changes:

Irina Fedosova, with great internal strength, the presentation is given slowly and

therefore it is relatively little tense, while Nekrasov has short lines with

numerous exclamations create a great emotional

tension (and here masculine clauses have the same meaning). Except

Moreover, picking up the word “villain” from Irina Fedosova’s lamentation, Nekrasov

repetition of this word four times turns it into a leitmotif

the whole curse, especially since this word sounds at the very beginning, and then in

the end of each semantic segment. So here it is emphasized and intensified

social significance of the text.

In Chapter V (“She-Wolf”), in addition to some minor borrowings, you can

note the following parallel: In Nekrasov:

At Demina's grave

I lived day and night.

Prayed for the deceased

I grieved for my parents:

Are you afraid of my dogs?

Are you ashamed of my family? -

Oh, no, dear, no!

Your dogs are not afraid.

Your family is not ashamed.

And it’s forty miles to go

Tell your troubles

Ask about your troubles -

It’s a pity to drive the drill!

We should have arrived a long time ago

Yes, we thought that thought:

We'll come - you'll cry,

Let's leave - you'll roar!

A song quite similar in motives and in some details was recorded by Shane in the Pskov province:

The sun walks low,

Ride close brother

Don't come visit me.

Al yon don't know the roads?

Al yon can't stop the paths?

Can't you control a good horse?

Is Al Yong ashamed of my family?

Is Al Yong afraid of my dogs?

Hey, sad sister!

I'm not afraid of your dogs

I am not ashamed of your family.

I'll come, and you cry,

I’ll go, and you’ll cry

Matryona's lamentation, highlighted by Nekrasov in a special meter (trochaic)

Timofeevna (“I went to the fast river”), not being an adaptation of any

or one text, echoes the funeral lamentations for parents, which are found both in Rybnikov and in Barsov’s collection.

In Chapter VI (“Difficult Year”), depicting the situation of the soldier, Nekrasov uses funeral lamentations from Barsov’s collection, thus changing the use of the text. This change does not create implausibility, however, since the position of the soldier was essentially similar to that of the widow.

From Nekrasov:

Hungry

Orphan children are standing

In front of me... Unkind

The family looks at them.

They are noisy in the house

There are pugnacious people on the street,

Gluttons at the table...

And they began to pinch them,

Beat your head...

Shut up, soldier mother!

From Barsov:

Little orphans will be orphaned,

There will be stupid kids on the street,

In the huts, orphans are troublesome,

There will be children riding at the table;

After all, the uncles will begin to walk around the hut

And it’s not fun to look at kids,

They are rude to talk to them;

They will begin to twitch the victorious children,

In a riot the head of the orphans and beating...

The principles of processing, as we see, are the same as above.

Thus, “The Peasant Woman” (especially some of its chapters) is

a kind of mosaic of song materials that Nekrasov handles

very freely, at the same time, however, very carefully treating individual

elements. This whole mosaic is subordinated to one main task - to show

the severity of the woman’s situation: where the material turns out to be sharp enough,

the poet uses it almost exactly, where this sharpness is not enough, he

resorts to processing and change. At the same time, Nekrasov modifies

folklore material and in artistic terms: using

means of folklore, he at the same time strives to organize the material and to

enhancing his artistic expressiveness. In other chapters (“The Last One” and “A Feast for the Whole World”) such folklore

we will no longer see the song mosaic. In particular, in the chapter “A Feast for the Whole World”

Nekrasov takes a different path. Here we will find a whole series of “songs”, but these songs

not folklore, but created by Nekrasov himself according to the folklore type. Just

Nekrasov gives these songs a particularly acute social character, and they

can be called propaganda. These are the songs “Veselaya” (“Eat the prison, Yasha!

There’s no milk”), “Covee” (“Poor, unkempt Kalinushka”), “Hungry”

(“The man is standing, swaying”), “Soldatskaya” (“The light is sick, there is no truth”),

“Salty (“Nobody like God!”). In part, perhaps, this may also be the case

one of Grisha’s songs is attributed - “Rus” (“You are both wretched, you are also abundant”);

the rest of Grisha's songs are obviously literary character, “Rus” is different

comparative simplicity. It is impossible to pinpoint a direct source in folklore for any of these songs; There are not even relatively close analogies. Only in the most general terms can we say that among folk songs there are songs depicting the severity of serfdom, the severity of soldiering, etc. However, Nekrasov’s songs differ from folk songs in their greater clarity and sharpness of image. Nekrasov’s task was not to follow folklore, to reproduce folklore samples, but to, using folklore techniques and thereby making his works accessible to the peasantry, influence the peasant consciousness, awaken and clarify it, create new works that could enter into song use and thus become a means of propaganda

revolutionary ideas (it’s not for nothing that these songs were subject to censorship cuts and

direct prohibition).

The songs “Veselaya”, “Corvee” and “Pakhomushka” are dedicated to the image

serfdom. These songs can be compared with, for example,

folk songs:

That our heads are gone

For the boyars, for the thieves!

They persecute the old, they persecute the little one

Going to work early

And sir, work is a little late...

How to take father and mother across the Volga,

Forge a big brother into a soldier,

And the middle brother should be cut into a lackey,

And the younger brother is a guard...

Ruined our side

Villain, boyar, master,

How did he choose, the villain,

Our young guys

To the soldiers

And us, red girls,

To the maids,

Young girls

To feeders,

And mothers and fathers

To work...

We'll come early in the morning.

Made by whip;

Let us become the vindicator

They tell us to undress;

The shirts were taken off the shoulders,

They started to beat us painfully...

The songs “Hungry” and “Salty” depict in extremely sharp terms

extreme poverty and hunger of the peasantry. The theme of poverty and hunger also appears

in folklore songs, but the images used are different from those of Nekrasov.

Finally, “Soldatskaya” evilly depicts the situation of a retired soldier,

walking “in the world, in the world.” Soldiering is often depicted in folk songs

in the darkest colors (in particular, in recruit lamentations).

Because of the forest, the dark forest,

Because of the green garden

The clear sun came out.

What a white king behind the sun.

Leads a strong woman, not a small one,

He is neither small nor great -

One hundred and fifty thousand regiments.

They walked and passed, they cried,

Got on my knees:

“You, father, are our white king!

He starved us to death.

Hungry, cold!..”

Thus, the themes and moods of Nekrasov’s songs were close and

understandable to the peasantry; in particular, they are characteristic of the peasant

folklore In the design, Nekrasov also gives his songs character,

close to folk songs (partly living peasant speech). So,

“Merry” is built on the repetition at the end of each stanza of the words: “It’s nice to live

Saint to the people of Rus'!” In "Corvee", "Hungry" and "Pakhomushka" there is a lot

diminutive and affectionate forms (Kalinushka, spinushka, mother,

Pankratushka, Pakhomushka, little cow, little head), inserted into “Soldatskaya”

couplet about the three Matryonas and Luke and Peter (cf. Pushkin’s “Matchmaker Ivan, how to drink”

we will become"). Small types of folklore are quite richly represented in the poem.

creativity - riddles, proverbs, signs and sayings. Saturation of these

works gives the poem a particularly clear folkloric flavor. All

Nekrasov’s riddles are given, however, not in the form of riddles themselves, but in the form

metaphors or comparisons, with the names of the clues (“the castle is a faithful dog”, etc.)

P.). Proverbs, as a rule, have a brightly colored social character -

“Praise the grass in the stack, and the master in the coffin,” “They (gentlemen) are boiling in the cauldron, but

We’ll add wood.” Also noteworthy is the abundance of folklore in the text.

will accept and believe.

parallelism in the chapter “Demushka” - mother swallow; negative comparisons -

“It is not the wild winds that blow, it is not mother earth that sways - makes noise, sings, swears,

people are swinging, lying around, fighting and kissing at the holiday,” etc.;

constant epithets - “frequent stars”, “red girl”, etc.; repetition and

folklore formulas - “Did they walk long, did they walk short, did they walk close, did they walk far.”

Overall, “Who Lives Well in Rus'” really takes on character

“people's book”, as Nekrasov wanted according to Gleb

Uspensky. This is a poem about the “people” and for the “people”, a poem in which the author

acts as a defender of “people's (peasant) interests.

Conclusion

Analysis of the material revealed that N.A. Nekrasov uses folklore material for various purposes. On the one hand, folklore, as an integral element of peasant life, is included in Nekrasov’s works for a more complete depiction of the life of peasants in the 19th century. On the other hand, weaving motifs of oral folk art into the poem makes it more accessible to a peasant audience.

In the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'” folklore material is used

Nekrasov in various ways. He either includes a specific

text of lamentations or songs taken from book sources, or

modifies folklore material, increasing its emotionality and

figurativeness, or creates his own works, using

only folklore style.

Various folk genres are not used equally

Nekrasov. He has a particularly rich representation of wedding and funeral

lamentations and everyday lyrical songs, which made it possible to show the most vividly and effectively the difficult aspects of the life of peasants.

Small species are also presented in the poem folklore creativity(riddles, proverbs and sayings), which gives the poem a special folk flavor, while epics and historical songs, fairy tales and legends are represented relatively little.

Thus, all of Nekrasov’s work on the use of folklore material is subordinated to the task of providing the most powerful text in artistic and ideological terms. Nekrasov strives to give a vivid and emotionally effective image

peasant life, to evoke sympathy for the peasantry, to awaken the desire to fight for peasant happiness. This task determines the selection of the most valuable material in artistic and social terms and its processing.

Bibliography

1. Library of world literature for children. Moscow, ed. "Children's

literature", 1981

2. Eleonsky S.F. Literature and folk art. Teacher's Guide

high school. Moscow, 1956

3. Besedina T.A. Study of the poem by N.A. Nekrasov “Who Lives Well in Rus'” in

school. Vologda, 1974