] Centrally in early Gorky is a proud and strong personality who embodies the idea of freedom
. Therefore, Danko, who sacrifices himself for the sake of people, is on a par with the drunkard and thief Chelkash, who does not perform any feats for the sake of anyone. “Strength is virtue,” Nietzsche said, and for Gorky, the beauty of a person lies in strength and feat, even aimless ones: strong man has the right to be “beyond good and evil”, to be outside of ethical principles, like Chelkash, and a feat, from this point of view, is resistance to the general flow of life.
After the series romantic works In the 90s, full of rebellious ideas, Gorky created a play that became, perhaps, the most important link in the entire philosophical and artistic system of the writer - the drama “At the Lower Depths” (1902). Let's see what heroes inhabit the “bottom” and how they live.
II. Conversation on the content of the play “At the Depths”
- How is the scene of action depicted in the play?
(The location of the action is described in the author's remarks. In the first act it is “a cave-like basement”, “heavy, stone vaults, smoke-stained, with crumbling plaster”. It is important that the writer gives instructions on how the scene is lit: "from the viewer and from top to bottom" the light reaches the night shelters from the basement window, as if searching for people among the basement inhabitants. Thin partitions screen off Ash's room.
“Everywhere along the walls there are bunks”. Apart from Kvashnya, Baron and Nastya, who live in the kitchen, no one has their own corner. Everything is on display in front of each other, a secluded place is only on the stove and behind the chintz canopy separating the dying Anna’s bed from the others (by this she is already, as it were, separated from life). There is dirt everywhere: "dirty chintz canopy", unpainted and dirty tables, benches, stools, tattered cardboards, pieces of oilcloth, rags.
Third act takes place in an early spring evening in a vacant lot, “a yard littered with various rubbish and overgrown with weeds”. Let's pay attention to the coloring of this place: the dark wall of a barn or stable “gray, covered with remains of plaster” the wall of the bunkhouse, the red wall of the brick firewall blocking the sky, the reddish light of the setting sun, the black branches of the elderberry without buds.
In the setting of the fourth act, significant changes occur: the partitions of Ash’s former room are broken, the Tick’s anvil has disappeared. The action takes place at night, and light from the outside world no longer penetrates into the basement - the scene is illuminated by a lamp standing in the middle of the table. However, the last “act” of the drama takes place in a vacant lot - there the Actor hanged himself.)
- What kind of people are the inhabitants of the shelter?
(People who have sunk to the bottom of life end up in a rooming house. This is the last refuge for tramps, marginalized people, “former people.” All social strata of society are here: the bankrupt nobleman Baron, the owner of the rooming house Kostylev, the policeman Medvedev, the mechanic Kleshch, the cap maker Bubnov, the merchant Kvashnya , the sharpie Satin, the prostitute Nastya, the thief Ashes. The situation of the dregs of society is equal to everyone. Very young people live here (the shoemaker Alyoshka is 20 years old) and people who are not yet old (the oldest, Bubnov, is 45 years old, however, their lives are almost over). we are an old woman, and she, it turns out, is 30 years old.
Many night shelters don’t even have names, only nicknames remain that expressively describe their bearers. The appearance of the dumpling seller Kvashnya, the character of Kleshch, and the Baron’s ambition are clear. The actor once bore the sonorous surname Sverchkov-Zadunaisky, but now there are almost no memories left - “I forgot everything.”)
- What is the subject of the image in the play?
(The subject of the drama “At the Bottom” is the consciousness of people thrown as a result of deep social processes to the “bottom” of life).
- What is the conflict of the drama?
(Social conflict
has several levels in the play. The social poles are clearly indicated: on one, the owner of the shelter, Kostylev, and the policeman Medvedev, who supports his power, on the other, the essentially powerless roomies. Thus it is obvious conflict between authorities and disenfranchised people. This conflict hardly develops, because Kostylev and Medvedev are not so far from the inhabitants of the shelter.
Each of the night shelters experienced in the past your social conflict
, as a result of which he found himself in a humiliating position.)
Reference:
A sharp conflict situation, playing out in front of the audience, is the most important feature of drama as a type of literature.
- What brought its inhabitants - Satin, Baron, Kleshch, Bubnov, Actor, Nastya, Ash - to the shelter? What is the backstory of these characters?
(Satin fell “to the bottom” after serving time in prison for murder: “I killed a scoundrel in passion and irritation... because of my own sister”; Baron went broke; Mite lost my job: “I’m a working person... I’ve been working since I was little”; Bubnov he left home out of harm’s way so as not to kill his wife and her lover, although he himself admits that he is “lazy” and also a heavy drunkard, “he would have drunk away the workshop”; Actor he drank himself to death, “drank away his soul... died”; fate Ashes was predetermined already at his birth: “I have been a thief since I was a child... everyone always told me: Vaska is a thief, Vaska’s son is a thief!”
The Baron talks in more detail about the stages of his fall (act four): “It seems to me that all my life I’ve only been changing clothes... but why? I don't understand! I studied and wore the uniform of a noble institute... and what did I study? I don’t remember... I got married, put on a tailcoat, then a robe... and took a nasty wife and - why? I don’t understand... I lived through everything that happened - I wore some kind of gray jacket and red trousers... and how did I go broke? I didn’t notice... I served in the government chamber... uniform, cap with a cockade... squandered government money - they put a prisoner’s robe on me... then I put on this... And everything... like in a dream. .. A? That's funny? Each stage of the thirty-three-year-old Baron’s life seems to be marked by a certain costume. These changes symbolize the gradual decline social status, and nothing stands behind these “changes of clothes”, life passed “like in a dream.”)
- How is social conflict interconnected with dramaturgical conflict?
(The social conflict is taken off stage, pushed into the past, it does not become the basis dramatic conflict. We are only observing the result of off-stage conflicts.)
- What kind of conflicts, other than social ones, are highlighted in the play?
(The play has traditional love conflict
. It is determined by the relationships between Vaska Pepla, Vasilisa, the wife of the owner of the shelter, Kostylev and Natasha, Vasilisa’s sister.
Exposition of this conflict- a conversation between the shelters, from which it is clear that Kostylev is looking for his wife Vasilisa in the shelter, who is cheating on him with Vaska Ash.
The origin of this conflict- the appearance of Natasha in the shelter, for whose sake Ashes leaves Vasilisa.
During development of love conflict it becomes clear that the relationship with Natasha revives Ash, he wants to leave with her and start a new life.
Climax of the conflict taken off stage: at the end of the third act, we learn from Kvashnya’s words that “they boiled the girl’s legs with boiling water” - Vasilisa knocked over the samovar and scalded Natasha’s legs.
The murder of Kostylev by Vaska Ash turns out to be tragic outcome of a love conflict. Natasha stops believing Ash: “She’s at the same time! Damn you! You both…")
- What is unique about a love conflict?
(Love conflict becomes edge social conflict
. It shows that anti-human conditions cripple a person, and even love does not save a person, but leads to tragedy: to death, injury, murder, hard labor. As a result, Vasilisa alone achieves all her goals: she takes revenge on her former lover Ash and her rival sister Natasha, gets rid of her unloved and disgusted husband and becomes the sole mistress of the shelter. There is nothing human left in Vasilisa, and this shows the monstrosity of the social conditions that disfigured both the inhabitants of the shelter and its owners. The night shelters are not directly involved in this conflict, they are only third-party spectators.)
III. Teacher's final words
The conflict in which all the heroes participate is of a different kind. Gorky depicts the consciousness of people at the “bottom”. The plot unfolds not so much in external action - in everyday life, but in the dialogues of the characters. Exactly the conversations of the night shelters determine development of dramatic conflict
. The action is transferred to a non-event series. This is typical for the genre philosophical drama
.
So, the genre of the play can be defined as a socio-philosophical drama
.
Additional material for teachers
To record at the beginning of the lesson, you can offer the following: plan for analyzing a dramatic work:
1. Time of creation and publication of the play.
2. The place occupied in the playwright’s work.
3. The theme of the play and the reflection of certain life material in it.
4. Characters and their grouping.
5. The conflict of a dramatic work, its originality, the degree of novelty and acuteness, its deepening.
6. Development of dramatic action and its phases. Exposition, plot, twists and turns, climax, denouement.
7. Composition of the play. The role and significance of each act.
8. Dramatic characters and their connection with action.
9. Speech characteristics characters. The connection between character and words.
10. The role of dialogues and monologues in the play. Word and action.
11. Identification of the author's position. The role of stage directions in drama.
12. Genre and specific uniqueness of the play. Correspondence of the genre to the author's predilections and preferences.
13. Comedy means (if it's a comedy).
14. Tragic flavor (in the case of analyzing a tragedy).
15. Correlation of the play with the aesthetic positions of the author and his views on the theater. The purpose of the play for a specific stage.
16. Theatrical interpretation of drama at the time of its creation and subsequently. The best acting ensembles, outstanding directorial decisions, memorable embodiments of individual roles.
17. The play and its dramatic traditions.
Homework
Identify Luke's role in the play. Write down his statements about people, about life, about truth, about faith.
Lesson 2. “What you believe in is what it is.” The role of Luka in the drama “At the Bottom”
The purpose of the lesson: create a problematic situation and encourage students to express their own point of view on the image of Luke and his life position.
Methodical techniques: discussion, analytical conversation.
During the classes
I. Analytical conversation
Let us turn to the extra-event series of the drama and see how the conflict develops here.
- How do the inhabitants of the shelter perceive their situation before Luka appears?
(IN exposition we see people, in essence, resigned to their humiliating situation. The night shelters sluggishly, habitually squabble, and the Actor says to Satin: “One day they will completely kill you... to death...” “And you are a fool,” Satin snaps. "Why?" - the Actor is surprised. “Because you can’t kill twice.”
These words of Satin show his attitude towards the existence that they all lead in the shelter. This is not life, they are all already dead. Everything seems clear.
But the Actor’s response is interesting: “I don’t understand... Why not?” Perhaps it is the Actor, who has died more than once on stage, who understands the horror of the situation more deeply than others. After all, it is he who commits suicide at the end of the play.)
- What is the meaning of using past tense in the self-characteristics of the heroes?
(People feel "former":
“Satin. I was educated person"(the paradox is that the past tense is impossible in this case).
“Bubnov. I'm a furrier was
».
Bubnov pronounces a philosophical maxim: “It turns out - don’t paint yourself how you look on the outside, everything will be erased... everything will be erased, Yes!")
- Which of the characters contrasts itself with the others?
(Only one The tick hasn't calmed down yet with your fate. He separates himself from the rest of the night shelters: “What kind of people are they? Ragged, golden company... people! I’m a working man... I’m ashamed to look at them... I’ve been working since I was little... Do you think I won’t break out of here? I’ll get out... I’ll rip off the skin, and I’ll get out... Just wait a minute... my wife will die...”
Kleshch's dream of a different life is associated with the liberation that his wife's death will bring him. He does not feel the enormity of his statement. And the dream will turn out to be imaginary.)
- Which scene is the beginning of the conflict?
(The beginning of the conflict is the appearance of Luke. He immediately announces his views on life: “I don’t care! I respect swindlers too, in my opinion, not a single flea is bad: all are black, all jump... that’s how it is.” And one more thing: “For an old man, where it’s warm, there’s a homeland...”
Luka turns out to be in the center of attention of guests: “What an interesting little old man you brought, Natasha...” - and the entire development of the plot is concentrated on him.)
- How does Luka behave with each of the inhabitants of the shelter?
(Luka quickly finds an approach to the shelters: “I’ll look at you, brothers - your life - oh-oh!..”
He feels sorry for Alyoshka: “Eh, guy, you’re confused...”
He does not respond to rudeness, skillfully avoids questions that are unpleasant for him, and is ready to sweep the floor instead of the bunkhouses.
Luka becomes necessary for Anna, he takes pity on her: “Is it possible to abandon a person like that?”
Luka skillfully flatters Medvedev, calling him “under,” and he immediately falls for this bait.)
- What do we know about Luke?
(Luka says practically nothing about himself, we only learn: “They crushed a lot, that’s why he’s soft...”)
- How does Luka affect night shelters?
(In each of the shelters, Luke sees a person, reveals their bright sides, the essence of personality
, and it produces life revolution
heroes.
It turns out that the prostitute Nastya dreams of beautiful and bright love;
the drunken Actor receives hope for a cure for alcoholism - Luke tells him: “A man can do anything, if only he wants to...”;
The thief Vaska Pepel plans to leave for Siberia and start a new life there with Natasha, becoming a strong master.
Luke gives Anna consolation: “Nothing, dear! You - hope... That means you will die, and you will be at peace... you won’t need anything else, and there’s nothing to be afraid of! Silence, peace - lie down!”
Luke reveals the good in every person and instills faith in the best.)
- Did Luka lie to the night shelters?
(There may be different opinions on this matter.
Luke selflessly tries to help people, instill in them faith in himself, and awaken the best sides of nature.
He sincerely wishes well shows real ways to achieve new things, better life
. After all, there really are hospitals for alcoholics, Siberia really is the “golden side”, and not just a place of exile and hard labor.
As for the afterlife with which he beckons Anna, the question is more complicated; it is a matter of faith and religious belief.
What did he lie about? When Luka convinces Nastya that he believes in her feelings, in her love: “If you believe, you had real love... that means it was her! Was!" - he only helps her find the strength for life, for real, not fictitious love.)
- How do the inhabitants of the shelter react to Luke’s words?
(The lodgers are at first incredulous of Luka’s words: “Why are you lying all the time?” Luka doesn’t deny this, he answers the question with a question: “And... what do you really desperately need... think about it! She really can , butt for you..."
Even to a direct question about God, Luke answers evasively: “If you believe, he is; If you don’t believe it, no... What you believe in is what it is...")
- What groups can the characters of the play be divided into?
(The characters in the play can be divided into "believers" and "non-believers"
.
Anna believes in God, Tatar believes in Allah, Nastya believes in “fatal” love, Baron believes in his past, perhaps invented. Kleshch no longer believes in anything, and Bubnov never believed in anything.)
- In what sacred meaning name "Luke"?
(Name "Luke" double meaning: this name reminds Evangelist Luke, means "light", and at the same time associated with the word "sly"(euphemism for "crap").)
- What is the author’s position in relation to Luke?
(The author's position is expressed in the development of the plot.
After Luke left everything is not happening at all as Luke convinced and as the heroes expected
.
Vaska Pepel does end up in Siberia, but only to hard labor, for the murder of Kostylev, and not as a free settler.
The actor, who has lost faith in himself and in his strength, exactly repeats the fate of the hero of Luke's parable about the righteous land. Luke, having told a parable about a man who, having lost faith in the existence of a righteous land, hanged himself, believes that a person should not be deprived of dreams, hopes, even imaginary ones. Gorky, showing the fate of the Actor, assures the reader and viewer that it is false hope that can lead a person to suicide
.)
Gorky himself wrote about his plan: “ The main question I wanted to pose is what is better, truth or compassion.
What is more necessary? Is it necessary to take compassion to the point of using lies, like Luke? This is not a subjective question, but a general philosophical one.”
- Gorky contrasts not truth and lies, but truth and compassion. How justified is this opposition?
(Discussion.)
- What is the significance of Luke’s influence on the shelters?
(All the characters agree that Luke instilled in them false hope
. But he didn’t promise to raise them from the bottom of life, he just showed them own capabilities, showed that there is a way out, and now everything depends on them.)
- How strong is the self-confidence awakened by Luka?
(This faith did not have time to take hold in the minds of the night shelters; it turned out to be fragile and lifeless; with the disappearance of Luka, hope fades away)
- What is the reason for the rapid decline of faith?
(Maybe it's in the weaknesses of the heroes themselves
, in their inability and unwillingness to do at least something to implement new plans. Dissatisfaction with reality and a sharply negative attitude towards it are combined with a complete unwillingness to undertake anything to change this reality.)
- How does Luke explain the failures in the life of the night shelters?
(Luke explains failures in the lives of homeless shelters due to external circumstances
, does not at all blame the heroes themselves for their failed lives. That’s why she was so drawn to him and became so disappointed, having lost external support with Luka’s departure.)
II. Teacher's final words
Gorky does not accept passive consciousness, whose ideologist he considers Luka.
According to the writer, it can only reconcile a person with outside world, but will not encourage him to change this world.
Although Gorky does not accept Luka’s position, this image seems to be out of the author’s control.
According to the memoirs of I.M. Moskvin, in the 1902 production, Luka appeared as a noble comforter, almost a savior of many desperate inhabitants of the shelter. Some critics saw in Luke “Danko, to whom only real features were given,” “an exponent of the highest truth,” and found elements of Luke’s exaltation in Beranger’s poems, which the Actor shouts:
Gentlemen! If the truth is holy
The world doesn't know how to find a way -
Honor the madman who inspires
A golden dream for humanity!
K. S. Stanislavsky, one of the directors of the play, planned path "decrease" hero.“Luka is cunning”, “looking slyly”, “slyly smiling”, “ingratiatingly, softly”, “it’s clear that he’s lying.”
Luke is a living image precisely because he is contradictory and ambiguous.
Homework
Find out how the issue of truth is resolved in the play. Find sayings different heroes about the truth.
Lesson 3. The question of truth in Gorky’s drama “At the Depths”
The purpose of the lesson: identify the positions of the characters in the play and the author’s position in relation to the issue of truth.
Methodical techniques: analytical conversation, discussion.
During the classes
I. The teacher's word
The philosophical question that Gorky himself posed: What is better - truth or compassion?
The question of truth is multifaceted. Each person understands the truth in his own way, still keeping in mind some final, highest truth. Let's see how truth and lies relate in the drama “At the Bottom.”
II. Working with a dictionary
- What do the characters in the play mean by “truth”?
(Discussion. This word has many meanings. We advise you to look into Dictionary and identify the meaning of the word “truth”.
Teacher's comment:
You can select two levels of "truth".
One is " private truth which the hero defends, assures everyone, and above all himself, of the existence of extraordinary, bright love. The Baron is in the existence of his prosperous past. Kleshch truthfully calls his situation, which turned out to be hopeless even after the death of his wife: “There is no work... no strength! That's the truth! Shelter... there is no shelter! You have to breathe... here it is, the truth!” For Vasilisa, the “truth” is that she is “tired” of Vaska Ash, that she mocks her sister: “I’m not bragging - I’m telling the truth.” Such a “private” truth is at the level of fact: it was - it wasn’t.
Another level of "truth" "worldview"- in Luke's remarks. Luke's "truth" and his "lies" are expressed by the formula: “What you believe in is what it is.”
III. Conversation
- Is the truth necessary at all?
(Discussion.)
- Which character's position contrasts with Luke's position?
(Luke’s position, compromise, consoling, Bubnov's position is opposed
.
This is the darkest figure in the play. Bubnov enters into the argument implicitly, as if talking to myself
, supporting the polyphony (polylogue) of the play.
Act 1, scene at the bedside of dying Anna:
Natasha (to the tick). If only you could treat her more kindly now... it won't be long...
Mite. I know...
Natasha. You know... It's not enough to know, you - understand. After all, dying is scary...
Ash. But I'm not afraid...
Natasha. How!.. Bravery...
Bubnov (whistles). And the threads are rotten...
This phrase is repeated several times throughout the play, as if
The Fox knows many truths, but the Hedgehog knows one, but a big one.
Archilochus
The play “At the Bottom” is a socio-philosophical drama. More than a hundred years have passed since the creation of the work, the social conditions that Gorky exposed have changed, but the play is still not outdated. Why? Because it raises an “eternal” philosophical topic that will never cease to excite people. Usually for Gorky's play this theme is formulated as follows: a dispute about truth and lies. Such a formulation is clearly insufficient, since truth and lies do not exist by themselves - they are always associated with a person. Therefore, it would be more accurate to formulate philosophical theme“At the bottom” in a different way: a dispute about true and false humanism. Gorky himself, in Satin’s famous monologue from the fourth act, connects truth and lies not only with humanism, but also with human freedom: “Man is free... he pays for everything himself: for faith, for unbelief, for love, for intelligence - man He pays for everything himself, and therefore he is free! Man - that’s the truth!” It follows that the author in the play talks about man - truth - freedom, that is, about the main moral categories of philosophy. Since it is impossible to unambiguously define these ideological categories (“the last questions of humanity,” as F.M. Dostoevsky called them), Gorky presented in his drama several points of view on the problems posed. Drama became polyphonic (the theory of polyphonism in a work of art was developed in his book “The Poetics of Dostoevsky’s Work” by M. M. Bakhtin). In other words, there are several ideologue heroes in the play, each with their own “voice”, that is, with a special point of view on the world and man.
It is generally accepted that Gorky portrayed two ideologists - Satin and Luka, but in fact there are at least four of them: Bubnov and Kostylev should be added to those named. According to Kostylev, the truth is not needed at all, since it threatens the well-being of the “masters of life.” In the third act, Kostylev talks about real wanderers and simultaneously expresses his attitude to the truth: “A strange person... not like others... If he is truly strange... knows something... learned something like that... . no one needs... maybe he learned the truth there... well, not all truth is needed... yes! He - keep it to himself... and - be silent! If he is truly strange... he is silent! And then he says things that no one understands... And he doesn’t want anything, doesn’t interfere with anything, doesn’t bother people in vain...” (III). Indeed, why does Kostylev need the truth? In words he is for honesty and work (“It is necessary for a person to be useful... for him to work...” III), but in reality he buys stolen goods from Ash.
Bubnov always speaks the truth, but this is the “truth of fact,” which only captures the disorder and injustice of the existing world. Bubnov does not believe that people can live better, more honestly, helping each other, as in a righteous land. Therefore, he calls all dreams of such a life “fairy tales” (III). Bubnov frankly admits: “In my opinion, throw out the whole truth as it is! Why be ashamed? (III). But a person cannot be satisfied with the hopeless “truth of fact.” Kleshch speaks out against Bubnov’s truth when he shouts: “Which truth? Where is the truth? (...) No work... no power! That's the truth! (...) You have to breathe... here it is, the truth! (...) What do I need it for - is it true?” (III). Another hero also speaks out against the “truth of fact,” the same one who believed in the righteous land. This faith, as Luke says, helped him live. And when faith in the possibility of a better life was destroyed, the man hanged himself. There is no righteous land - this is the “truth of fact”, but to say that it should never exist is a lie. That is why Natasha explains the death of the hero of the parable this way: “I could not tolerate deception” (III).
The most interesting hero-ideologist in the play is, of course, Luke. Critics have varied assessments of this strange wanderer - from admiration for the old man’s generosity to exposure of his harmful consolation. Obviously, these are extreme estimates and therefore one-sided. The objective, calm assessment of Luka, which belongs to I.M. Moskvin, the first performer of the role of the old man on theater stage. The actor played Luka as a kind and smart person, in whose consolations there is no self-interest. Bubnov notes the same thing in the play: “Luka, for example, lies a lot... and without any benefit to himself... Why would he?” (III).
The reproaches leveled at Luke do not stand up to serious criticism. It should be specially noted that the old man does not “lie” anywhere. He advises Ash to go to Siberia, where he can start a new life. And it is true. His story about a free hospital for alcoholics, which made a strong impression on the Actor, is true, which is confirmed by special research by literary scholars (see the article by Vs. Troitsky “Historical realities in M. Gorky’s play “At the Lower Depths”” // Literature at school, 1980 , No. 6). Who can say that in describing Anna’s afterlife, Luke is being disingenuous? He consoles a dying man. Why blame him? He tells Nastya that he believes in her romance with the noble Gaston-Raoul, because he sees in the story of the unfortunate maiden not just a lie, like Bubnov, but a poetic dream.
Luke’s critics also claim that the harm from the old man’s consolations tragically affected the fate of the night shelters: the old man did not save anyone, did not really help anyone, the death of the Actor is on Luke’s conscience. How easy it is to blame one person for everything! He came to degraded people whom no one cared about, and consoled them as best he could. Neither the state, nor the officials, nor the homeless shelters themselves are to blame—Luke is to blame! It’s true, the old man didn’t save anyone, but he didn’t destroy anyone either - he did what was in his power: he helped people feel like people, the rest depended on them. And the Actor, an experienced heavy drinker, has absolutely no willpower to stop drinking. Vaska Pepel, in a stressed state, having learned that Vasilisa crippled Natalya, accidentally kills Kostylev. Thus, the reproaches expressed against Luke seem unconvincing: Luke is not “lying” anywhere and is not to blame for the misfortunes that happened to the night shelters.
Usually, researchers, condemning Luke, agree that Satin, in contrast to the crafty wanderer, formulates the correct ideas about freedom - truth - man: “Lies are the religion of slaves and masters... Truth is the god of a free man!” Satin explains the reasons for lying this way: “Whoever is weak at heart... and who lives on other people’s juices - those who need lies... some are supported by it, others hide behind it... And who is their own master... who is independent and does not eat someone else’s - why would he lie?” (IV). If we decipher this statement, we get the following: Kostylev lies because he “lives on other people’s juices,” and Luka lies because he is “weak at heart.” Kostylev’s position, obviously, should be rejected immediately; Luka’s position requires serious analysis. Satin demands to look life straight in the eye, and Luka looks around in search of a comforting deception. Satin's truth differs from Bubnov's truth: Bubnov does not believe that a person can rise above himself; Satin, unlike Bubnov, believes in man, in his future, in his creative talent. That is, Satin is the only hero in the play who knows the truth.
What is the author's position in the debate about truth - freedom - man? Some literary scholars argue that only in the words of Satin is the author’s position stated, however, it can be assumed that the author’s position combines the ideas of Satin and Luke, but is not completely exhausted even by both of them. In other words, in Gorky Satin and Luke as ideologists are not opposed, but complement each other.
On the one hand, Satin himself admits that Luke, with his behavior and consoling conversations, pushed him (formerly an educated telegraph operator, and now a tramp) to think about Man. On the other hand, Luke and Satin both talk about goodness, about faith in the best that always lives in the human soul. Satin recalls how Luke answered the question: “What do people live for?” The old man said: “For the best!” (IV). But doesn’t Satin, when discussing Man, repeat the same thing? Luke says about people: “People... They will find and invent everything! You just need to help them... you need to respect them...” (III). Satin formulates a similar thought: “We must respect a person! Don’t feel sorry... don’t humiliate him with pity... you have to respect him!” (IV). The only difference between these statements is that Luke focuses on respect for a specific person, and Satin - on the Person. Diverging in particulars, they agree on the main thing - in the statement that a person is the highest truth and the value of peace. In Satin's monologue, respect and pity are contrasted, but it cannot be said for sure that this is the author's final position: pity, like love, does not exclude respect. On the third hand, Luka and Satin are extraordinary personalities who never clash in an argument in the play. Luka understands that Satin does not need his consolations, and Satin, carefully watching the old man in the shelter, never ridiculed him or cut him off.
To summarize what has been said, it should be noted that in the socio-philosophical drama “At the Lower Depths” the main and most interesting thing is philosophical content. This idea is proven by the very structure of Gorky’s play: almost all the characters participate in the discussion of the philosophical problem of man - truth - freedom, while in the everyday storyline only four sort things out (Ashes, Natalya, the Kostylev couple). Plays showing the hopeless life of the poor in pre-revolutionary Russia, many have been written, but it is very difficult to name another play other than the drama “At the Bottom”, in which, along with social problems, the “last” philosophical questions would be posed and successfully resolved.
The author's position (the fifth in a row, but perhaps not the last) in the play “At the Lower Depths” is created as a result of repulsion from false points of view (Kostylev and Bubnov) and the complementarity of two other points of view (Luka and Satin). The author in a polyphonic work, according to M.M. Bakhtin’s definition, does not subscribe to any of the points of view expressed: the solution to the posed philosophical questions does not belong to one hero, but is the result of the searches of all participants in the action. The author, like a conductor, organizes a polyphonic choir of heroes “singing” in different voices the same topic.
Still, there is no final solution to the question of truth - freedom - man in Gorky's drama. However, this is how it should be in a play that poses “eternal” philosophical questions. Open final works makes the reader think about them.
M. Gorky's play “At the Lower Depths” is rightfully one of the best dramatic works of the writer. This is evidenced by its incredible success for a long time in Russia and abroad. The play has caused and still causes conflicting interpretations about the characters depicted and its philosophical basis. Gorky acted as an innovator in dramaturgy, posing an important philosophical question about a person, about his place, role in life, about what is important to him. “Which is better: truth or compassion? What is more necessary?” - these are the words of M. Gorky himself. The incredible success and recognition of the play “At the Lower Depths” was also facilitated by its successful production on the stage of the Moscow Art Theater in 1902. V. N. Nemirovich-Danchenko wrote to M. Gorky: “The appearance of “Bottom” paved entire paths with one blow theatrical culture... Having an authentic sample in “At the Bottom” folk play, we consider this performance the pride of the theater.”
M. Gorky acted as the creator of a new type social drama. He accurately and truthfully depicted the environment of the inhabitants of the shelter. This is a special category of people with their own destinies and tragedies.
Already in the first author's remark we find a description of the shelter. This is a “cave-like basement.” Poor surroundings, dirt, light coming from top to bottom. This further emphasizes that we are talking about the very “day” of society. At first the play was called “At the Bottom of Life,” but then Gorky changed the name - “At the Bottom.” It more fully reflects the idea of the work. A sharpie, a thief, a prostitute are representatives of the society depicted in the play. The owners of the shelter are also at the “bottom” of moral rules; they do not have any moral values in their souls, and they carry a destructive element within them. Everything in the shelter takes place away from the general flow of life and events in the world. The “bottom of life” does not capture this flow of life.
The characters in the play previously belonged to different strata of society, but now they all have one thing in common - their present, hopelessness, inability to change their fate, and some kind of reluctance to do this, a passive attitude towards life. At first, Tick differs from them, but after Anna’s death he becomes the same - he loses hope of escaping from here.
Different origins determine the behavior and speech of the heroes. The Actor's Speech contains quotes from literary works. The speech of the former intellectual Satin is full of foreign words. Luke's quiet, leisurely, soothing speech can be heard.
There are many different conflicts in the play, storylines. This is the relationship between Ash, Vasilisa, Natasha and Kostylev; Baron and Nastya; Klesch and Anna. We see tragic fates Bubnov, Actor, Satin, Alyoshka. But all these lines seem to run in parallel; there is no common, core conflict between the characters. In the play we can observe a conflict in the minds of people, a conflict with circumstances - this was unusual for the Russian audience.
The author does not tell in detail the history of each shelter, and yet we have enough information about each of them. The life of some, their past, for example, Satin, Bubnov, Actor, is dramatic, worthy in itself separate work. Circumstances forced them to sink to the “bottom”. Others, such as Ash and Nastya, have known the life of this society since birth. There are no main characters in the play; everyone occupies approximately the same position. In the long term, they have no improvement in life, which is depressing with its monotony. Everyone is used to Vasilisa beating Natasha, everyone knows about the relationship between Vasilisa and Vaska Ash, everyone is tired of the suffering of dying Anna. Nobody pays attention to how others live; there are no connections between people; no one is able to listen, sympathize, or help. It’s not for nothing that Bubnov repeats that “the threads are rotten.”
People no longer want anything, do not strive for anything, they believe that everyone on earth is superfluous, that their life has already passed. They despise each other, each considers himself higher, better than others. Everyone is aware of the insignificance of their situation, but does not try to get out, stop eking out a miserable existence and start living. And the reason for this is that they are used to it and have come to terms with it.
But not only social and everyday problems are raised in the play, the characters also argue about the meaning of human life, about its values. The play “At the Bottom” is deep philosophical drama. People thrown out of life, who have sunk to the “bottom”, argue about the philosophical problems of existence.
M. Gorky raised the question in his work about what is more useful to a person: the truth of real life or a comforting lie. This is the question that has caused so much controversy. The preacher of the idea of compassion and lies is Luke, who consoles everyone and speaks kind words to everyone. He respects*^ every person (“not a single flea is bad, all are black”), sees a good beginning in everyone, believes that a person can do anything if he wants. He naively tries to awaken people’s faith in themselves, in their strengths and capabilities, in a better life.
Luke knows how important this faith is for a person, this hope for the possibility and reality of the best. Even just kindness sweet Nothing, a word that supports this faith can give a person support in life, solid ground under his feet. Belief in one’s ability to change and improve one’s own life reconciles a person with the world, as he immerses himself in his imaginary world and lives there, hiding from what frightens him real world, in which a person cannot find himself. And in reality this person is inactive.
But this only applies to a weak person who has lost faith in himself.
That is why such people are drawn to Luke, listen to him and believe him, because his words are a miraculous balm for their tormented souls.
Anna listens to him because he alone sympathized with her, did not forget about her, said a kind word to her, which she, perhaps, had never heard. Luke gave her hope that in another life she would not suffer.
Nastya also listens to Luka, because he does not deprive her of the illusions from which she draws vitality.
He gives Ash hope that he can start life anew where no one knows either Vaska or his past.
Luke talks to the actor about a free hospital for alcoholics, in which he can recover and return to the stage again.
Luke is not just a comforter, he philosophically substantiates his position. One of the ideological centers of the play is the wanderer's story about how he saved two escaped convicts. The main idea of Gorky’s character here is that it is not violence, not prison, but only goodness that can save a person and teach goodness: “A person can teach goodness...”
The other inhabitants of the shelter do not need Luke's philosophy, support for non-existent ideals, because it is more strong people. They understand that Luke is lying, but he is lying out of compassion and love for people. They have questions about the necessity of these lies. Everyone argues, and everyone has their own position. All the sleepovers are involved in an argument about truth and lies, but do not take each other very seriously.
In contrast to the philosophy of the wanderer Luke, Gorky presented the philosophy of Satin and his judgments about man. “Lies are the religion of slaves and masters... Truth is the god of a free man!” When pronouncing monologues, Satin does not expect to convince others of anything. This is his confession, the result of his long thoughts, a cry of despair and a thirst for action, a challenge to the world of the well-fed and a dream of the future. He speaks with admiration about the power of man, about the fact that man was created for the best: “man - this sounds proud!”, “man is above satiety,” “do not feel sorry..., do not humiliate him with pity... you must respect him.” This monologue, pronounced among the ragged, degraded inhabitants of the shelter, shows that faith in genuine humanism, in the truth, does not fade.
M. Gorky's play “At the Depths” is an acute social and philosophical drama. Social, since it presents drama caused by the objective conditions of society. The philosophical aspect of drama is rethought in a new way by each generation. For a long time, the image of Luke was assessed as unequivocally negative. Today, in view historical events last decade, the image of Luke is read in many ways differently, he has become much closer to the reader. I believe that there is no clear answer to the author’s question. It all depends on the specific situation and historical era.
The author's position (the fifth in a row, but perhaps not the last) in the play “At the Lower Depths” is created as a result of repulsion from false points of view (Kostylev and Bubnov) and the complementarity of two other points of view (Luka and Satin). The author in a polyphonic work, according to M.M. Bakhtin’s definition, does not subscribe to any of the points of view expressed: the solution to the posed philosophical questions does not belong to one hero, but is the result of the searches of all participants in the action. The author, like a conductor, organizes a polyphonic choir of characters, “singing” the same theme in different voices.
Still, there is no final solution to the question of truth - freedom - man in Gorky's drama. However, this is how it should be in a play that poses “eternal” philosophical questions. The open ending of the work forces the reader himself to think about them.
The author's position is expressed, first of all, in the ambiguous, nonlinear development of the plot action. At first glance, the movement of the plot is motivated by the dynamics of the traditional “conflict polygon” - the relationships of Kostylev, Vasilisa, Ash and Natasha. But love affairs, jealousy and the “culminating” murder scene - the intrigue that connects these four characters - only externally motivate the stage action. Some of the events that make up the plot of the play take place off stage (the fight between Vasilisa and Natasha, Vasilisa’s revenge - overturning a boiling samovar on her sister). Kostylev’s murder takes place around the corner of the flophouse and is almost invisible to the viewer. All other characters in the play remain uninvolved in the love affair. The author deliberately takes all these events “out of focus”, inviting the viewer to take a closer look, or rather, listen to something else - the content of the numerous conversations and disputes of the night shelters.
Compositional plot disunity characters, their alienation from each other (everyone thinks “about his own”, worries about himself) - is expressed in the organization of the stage space. The characters are scattered across different corners of the stage and “closed” in disconnected, hermetic micro-spaces. Gorky organizes communication between them with an eye to Chekhov’s principles of composition. Here is a typical fragment of the play:
"Anna. I don’t remember when I was full... All my life I walked around in rags... all my miserable life... For what?
Luke. Oh, baby! Tired? Nothing!
Actor. Move with jack... jack, damn it!
Baron. And we have a king.
Mite. They will always beat you.
Satin. This is our habit...
Medvedev. King!
Bubnov. And I... w-well...
Anna. I'm dying, here..."
In the above fragment, all replicas are heard from different angles: Anna's dying words are confused with the cries of the night shelters playing cards (Satin and Baron) and checkers (Bubnov and Medvedev). This polylogue, composed of replicas inconsistent with each other, well conveys the author’s desire to emphasize the disunity of the night shelters: failures of communication are clearly visible, replacing communication. At the same time, it is important for the author to keep the viewer’s attention on the semantic supports of the text. The dotted line of leitmotifs (truth - faith, truth - lies) becomes such a support in the play, organizing the movement of the speech flow.
Other techniques are also noticeable that compensate for the relative weakening of the plot action and deepen the meaning of the drama. This is, for example, the use of “rhyming” (i.e., repeating, mirroring) episodes. Thus, two dialogues between Nastya and Baron, symmetrically located relative to each other, are mirrored. At the beginning of the play, Nastya defends herself from the Baron’s skeptical remarks: his attitude towards Nastya’s stories about “fatal love” and Gaston is formulated by the saying “If you don’t like it, don’t listen, and don’t bother lying.” After Luka leaves, Nastya and the Baron seem to change roles: all the Baron’s stories about “wealth... hundreds of serfs... horses... cooks... carriages with coats of arms” are accompanied by the same remark from Nastya: “It wasn’t!”
The exact semantic rhyme in the play consists of Luke’s parable about the righteous land and the episode with the Actor’s suicide. Both fragments coincide verbatim in the final lines: “And after that I went home and hanged myself...” / “Hey... you! Come... come here! There... The actor... hanged himself! "-Such a compositional connection reveals the author's position in relation to the results of Luke's “preaching” activity. However, as already mentioned, the author is far from placing all the blame for the death of the Actor on Luka. The fate of the Actor is also connected with a twice-repeated episode in which the night shelters sing their song - “The sun rises and sets.” The actor “ruined” this particular song - in the final act the lines “I just want to be free... / I can’t break the chain” were never sung in it.
“Rhyming” episodes do not carry new information about the characters, but connect disparate fragments of action, giving it semantic unity and integrity. Even more subtle techniques of compositional “arrangement”, for example, a system of literary and theatrical allusions, serve the same purpose.
In one of the early episodes, the Actor mentions " good play", referring to Shakespeare's tragedy Hamlet. A quote from Hamlet (“Ophelia! O... remember me in your prayers!..”) already in the first act predicts the future fate of the Actor himself. His last words before suicide, addressed to Tatarin are as follows: “Pray for me.” In addition to Hamlet, the Actor quotes King Lear several times (“Here, my faithful Kent...”). The phrase “I am on the way to rebirth”, which is important for the Actor, is also attributed to Lear. The Actor’s favorite poem was Beranger’s poem, which in the context of the play took on the meaning of a philosophical declaration: “Honor to the madman who will inspire/ Humanity with a golden dream.” Along with quotes from Western classics, a Pushkin line unexpectedly slips into the Actor’s speech: “Our nets brought in a dead man” (from the poem “The Drowned Man”). The semantic core of all these literary reminiscences is departure from life, death. The Actor’s plot path is thus set at the very beginning of the work, and by those artistic means that define his profession - a “foreign” word, a quote pronounced from the stage.
In general, spoken speech, in accordance with the dramatic nature of the work, turns out to be an important means of deepening the meaning of the action. What is striking in the play is the incredibly dense background literary tradition aphorism. Here are just a few examples from a real waterfall of aphorisms and sayings: “The kind of life that makes you wake up in the morning and howl again”; “Expect some sense from the wolf”; “When work is a duty, life is slavery!”; “Not a single flea is bad: all are black, all jump”; “Where it is warm for an old man, there is his homeland”; “Everyone wants order, but there is a lack of reason.”
Aphoristic judgments acquire particular significance in the speech of the main “ideologists” of the play - Luka and Bubnov - heroes whose positions are indicated most clearly and definitely. A philosophical dispute, in which each of the characters in the play takes its own position, is supported by a common folk wisdom expressed in proverbs and sayings. True, this wisdom, as the author subtly shows, is not absolute, it is crafty. A statement that is too “round” can not only “push” towards the truth, but also lead away from it. In this regard, it is interesting that Satin’s most important monologue in the play, also rich in “chased” (and clearly conveyed to the hero by the author) formulations, is deliberately dotted with ellipses, signaling how difficult it is for the most important words in his life to be born in Satin’s mind.
Maksim Gorky - literary pseudonym Alexey Maksimovich Peshkov (March 16 (28), 1868, Nizhny Novgorod, Russian empire- June 18, 1936, Gorki, Moscow region, USSR) - Russian writer, prose writer, playwright.
Dedicated to Konstantin Petrovich Pyatnitsky
Characters:
Mikhail Ivanov Kostylev, 54 years old, hostel owner.
Vasilisa Karpovna, his wife, 26 years old.
Natasha, her sister, 20 years old.
Medvedev, their uncle, policeman, 50 years old.
Vaska Pepel, 28 years old.
Klesch, Andrey Mitrich, mechanic, 40 years old.
Anna, his wife, 30 years old.
Nastya, girl, 24 years old.
Kvashnya, dumpling seller, about 40 years old.
Bubnov, cap maker, 45 years old.
Baron, 33 years old.
Satin, Actor - approximately the same age: about 40 years old.
Luke, wanderer, 60 years old.
Alyoshka, shoemaker, 20 years old.
Crooked Zob, Tatar - hookers.
A few tramps without names or speeches.
Analysis of the drama “At the Lower Depths” by Gorky M.Yu.
Drama, by its very nature, is meant to be performed on stage.. Focus on stage interpretation limits the artist's means of expressing the author's position. Unlike the author of an epic work, she cannot directly express her position - the only exceptions are the author's remarks, which are intended for the reader or actor. but which the viewer will not see. The author's position is expressed in the monologues and dialogues of the characters, in their actions, in the development of the plot. In addition, the playwright is limited in the volume of the work (the play can run for two, three, or at most four hours) and in the number of characters (all of them must “fit” on the stage and have time to realize themselves in the limited time of the performance and the space of the stage).
That is why , an acute clash between heroes over a very significant and significant issue for them. Otherwise, the heroes simply will not be able to realize themselves in the limited volume of drama and stage space. The playwright ties such a knot, when unraveling it, a person shows himself from all sides. Wherein There can’t be “extra” characters in a drama- all characters must be included in the conflict, the movement and course of the play must capture them all. Therefore, a sharp, conflict situation that plays out before the eyes of the viewer turns out to be the most important feature of drama as a type of literature.
The subject of the image in Gorky’s drama “At the Bottom”(1902) becomes the consciousness of people thrown as a result of deep social processes to the bottom of life. In order to embody a similar subject image stage means, the author needed to find the appropriate situation, the appropriate conflict, as a result of which the contradictions in the consciousness of the night shelters, its strong and weak sides. Is social conflict suitable for this?
Indeed, social conflict is presented in the play on several levels. Firstly, this is a conflict between the owners of the shelter, the Kostylev spouses, and its inhabitants. It is felt by the characters throughout the play, but it turns out to be static, devoid of dynamics, non-developing. This happens because The Kostylevs themselves are not so far in socially left the inhabitants of the shelter. The relationship between the owners and the inhabitants can only create tension, but not become the basis of a dramatic conflict that can “start” the drama.
Besides , each of the heroes experienced their own social conflict in the past, as a result of which they found themselves at the “bottom” of life, in a shelter.
But these social conflicts are fundamentally taken off stage, pushed into the past and therefore do not become the basis of a dramaturgical conflict. We see only the result of social turmoil, which had such a tragic impact on people’s lives, but not these clashes themselves.
The presence of social tension is indicated already in the title of the play. After all, the very fact of the existence of the “bottom” of life also presupposes the presence of a “rapid stream,” its upper course, to which the characters strive. But this cannot become the basis of a dramatic conflict - after all, this tension is also devoid of dynamics, all attempts of the heroes to escape from the “bottom” turn out to be futile. Even the appearance of the policeman Medvedev does not give impetus to the development of the dramatic conflict.
Maybe, Is the drama organized by a traditional love conflict? Really, such a conflict is present in the play. It is determined by the relationships between Vaska Pepla, Vasilisa, Kostylev’s wife, the owner of the shelter and Natasha.
Exposition love story It turns out that Kostylev appears in the rooming house and a conversation between the roommates, from which it is clear that Kostylev is looking for his wife Vasilisa in the rooming house, who is cheating on him with Vaska Ash. The beginning of a love conflict is the appearance of Natasha in the rooming house, for whose sake Ashes leaves Vasilisa. As the love conflict develops, it becomes clear that the relationship with Natasha enriches Ash and revives him to a new life.
The climax of the love conflict is fundamentally taken off stage: we don’t see exactly how Vasilisa scalds Natasha with boiling water, we only learn about it from the noise and screams behind the stage and the conversations of the night shelters. The murder of Kostylev by Vaska Ash turns out to be the tragic outcome of a love conflict.
Of course love conflict is also a facet of social conflict. He shows that the anti-human conditions of the “bottom” cripple a person, and the most sublime feelings, even love, lead not to personal enrichment, but to death, mutilation and hard labor. Having thus unleashed a love conflict, Vasilisa emerges victorious from it, achieves all her goals at once: she takes revenge on her former lover Vaska Ash and her rival Natasha, gets rid of her unloved husband and becomes the sole mistress of the flophouse. There is nothing human left in Vasilisa, and her moral impoverishment shows the monstrosity of the social conditions in which both the inhabitants of the shelter and its owners are immersed.
But a love conflict cannot organize stage action and become the basis of a dramatic conflict, if only because, unfolding before the eyes of the night shelters, it does not affect them themselves . They are keenly interested in the vicissitudes of these relations, but do not participate in them, remaining only by outside spectators. Hence, a love conflict also does not create a situation that could form the basis of a dramatic conflict.
Let us repeat once again: the subject of depiction in Gorky’s play is not only and not so much the social contradictions of reality or possible ways to resolve them; his interested in the consciousness of the night shelters in all its contradictions. Such a subject of depiction is typical for the genre of philosophical drama. Moreover, it also requires non-traditional forms of artistic expression: traditional external action (event series) gives way to the so-called internal action. Everyday life is reproduced on stage: minor quarrels occur between the night shelters, some of the characters appear and disappear. But these circumstances are not the plot-shaping ones. Philosophical issues forces the playwright to transform traditional forms of drama: the plot is manifested not in the actions of the characters, but in their dialogues; Gorky translates the dramatic action into an extra-event series.
In the exhibition we see people who, in essence, have come to terms with their tragic situation at the bottom of their lives. The beginning of the conflict is the appearance of Luke. Outwardly, it does not affect the lives of the shelters in any way, but in their minds hard work begins. Luka immediately becomes the center of their attention, and the entire development of the plot is concentrated on him. In each of the heroes he sees bright sides his personality, finds the key and approach to each of them. And this produces a true revolution in the lives of the heroes. The development of internal action begins at the moment when the heroes discover in themselves the ability to dream of a new and better life.
It turns out that those bright sides, What Luke guessed in each character of the play, and constitute his true essence. Turns out, prostitute Nastya dreams of beautiful and bright love; Actor, a drunken man remembers creativity and is seriously thinking about returning to the stage; "hereditary" thief Vaska Pepel finds within himself the desire to honest life, wants to go to Siberia and become a strong owner there.
Dreams reveal the true human essence of Gorky's heroes, their depth and purity.
This is how another facet of the social conflict appears: the depth of the heroes’ personality, their noble aspirations find themselves in blatant contradiction with their current social position. The structure of society is such that a person does not have the opportunity to realize his true essence.
Luke from the first moment of his appearance in the shelter, he refuses to see the shelters as swindlers. “I respect swindlers too, in my opinion, not a single flea is bad: all are black, all jump.”- this is what he says, justifying his right to call his new neighbors "honest people" and rejecting Bubnov’s objection: “I was honest, but the spring before last.” The origins of this position are in the naive anthropologism of Luke, who believes that a person is initially good and only social circumstances make him bad and imperfect.
This story-parable of Luke clarifies the reason for his warm and friendly attitude towards all people - including those who find themselves at the “bottom” of life .
Luke's position appears very complex in the drama, and author's attitude looks ambivalent towards him . On the one hand, Luke is absolutely unselfish in his preaching and in his desire to awaken in people the best, hitherto hidden sides of their nature, which they did not even suspect - they contrast so strikingly with their position at the very bottom of society. He sincerely wishes the best to his interlocutors and shows real ways to achieve a new, better life. And under the influence of his words, the heroes really experience a metamorphosis.
Actor stops drinking and saves money in order to go to a free hospital for alcoholics, not even suspecting that he doesn’t need it: the dream of returning to creativity gives him the strength to overcome his illness.
Ash Subordinates his life to the desire to leave with Natasha for Siberia and get on his feet there.
Dreams of Nastya and Anna, Kleshch's wife, are completely illusory, but these dreams also give them the opportunity to feel happier.
Nastya imagines herself as a heroine of pulp novels, showing in her dreams of a non-existent Raoul or Gaston feats of self-sacrifice of which she is truly capable;
dying Anna, dreaming of an afterlife, also partly escapes from a feeling of hopelessness: Only Bubnov Yes Baron, people completely indifferent to others and even to themselves, remain deaf to the words of Luke.
Luke's position is exposed by the controversy About what is the truth, which arose between him and Bubnov and Baron, when the latter mercilessly exposes Nastya’s groundless dreams about Raul: “Here... what you say is true... It’s true, it’s not always due to a person’s illness... it’s not always true to the soul you will cure...” In other words, Luke affirms the charity of a comforting lie for a person. But is it only lies that Luke asserts?
Our literary criticism has long been dominated by the concept according to which Gorky unequivocally rejects Luke’s comforting sermon. But the writer’s position is more complicated.
Vaska Pepel will indeed go to Siberia, but not as a free settler, but as a convict convicted of the murder of Kostylev.
The actor, who has lost faith in his own abilities, will exactly repeat the fate of the hero of the parable about the righteous land, told by Luke. Trusting the hero to tell this plot, Gorky himself in the fourth act will beat him, drawing exactly the opposite conclusions. Luke, having told a parable about a man who, having lost faith in the existence of a righteous land, hanged himself, believes that a person should not be deprived of hope, even illusory. Gorky, through the fate of the Actor, assures the reader and viewer that it is false hope that can lead a person to a noose. But let's return to the previous question: How did Luka deceive the inhabitants of the shelter?
The actor accuses him of not leaving the address of the free hospital . All the characters agree that hope, which Luke instilled in their souls, - false. But after all he did not promise to lead them out of the bottom of life - he simply supported their timid faith that there was a way out and that it was not closed to them. That self-confidence that awoke in the minds of the night shelters turned out to be too fragile and with the disappearance of the hero who was able to support it, it immediately faded away. It's all about the weakness of the heroes, their inability and unwillingness to do at least a little in order to resist the ruthless social circumstances that doom them to existence in the Kostylevs' doss house.
Therefore, the author addresses the main accusation not to Luke, but to the heroes who are unable to find the strength to oppose their will to reality. Thus Gorky manages to reveal one of the characteristic features of the Russian national character: dissatisfaction with reality, a sharply critical attitude towards it and a complete unwillingness to do anything to change this reality . That is why Luke finds such a warm response in their hearts: after all, he explains the failures of their lives by external circumstances and is not at all inclined to blame the heroes themselves for their failed lives. And the thought of trying to somehow change these circumstances does not occur to either Luke or his flock. That's why it's so The heroes experience Luke's departure dramatically: the hope awakened in their souls cannot find internal support in their characters; they will always need external support, even from such a helpless person in a practical sense as the “patchless” Luka.
Luka is an ideologist of passive consciousness, so unacceptable for Gorky.
According to the writer, passive ideology can only reconcile the hero with his current situation and will not encourage him to try to change this situation, as happened with Nastya, with Anna, with the Actor . But who could object to this hero, who could oppose at least something to his passive ideology? There was no such hero in the shelter. The point is that the bottom cannot develop a different ideological position, which is why Luke’s ideas are so close to its inhabitants. But his preaching gave impetus to the emergence of a new life position. Satin became its spokesman.
He is well aware that his state of mind is a reaction to Luke’s words: “Yes, it was he, the old yeast, who fermented our roommates... Old man? He is a smart guy!.. The old man is not a charlatan! What is truth? Man - that's the truth! He understood this... you don’t!.. He... acted on me like acid on an old and dirty coin...” Satin’s famous monologue about a person, in which he affirms the need for respect instead of pity, and considers pity as humiliation - expresses a different life position. But this is still only the very first step towards the formation of an active consciousness capable of changing social circumstances.
The tragic ending of the drama (the suicide of the Actor) raises the question of the genre nature of the play “At the Bottom”. Let me remember the main genres of drama. The difference between them is determined by the subject of the image. Comedy is a morally descriptive genre, so the subject of the comedy is a portrait of society at the non-heroic moment of its development. The subject of depiction in a tragedy most often becomes the tragic, insoluble conflict of the hero-ideologist with society, the outside world, and insurmountable circumstances. This conflict can move from the external sphere to the sphere of the hero’s consciousness. In this case we are talking about internal conflict. Drama is a genre that tends to explore philosophical or social issues..
Do I have any reason to consider the play “At the Bottom” as a tragedy? Indeed, in this case, I will have to define the Actor as a hero-ideologist and consider his conflict with society as ideological, because the hero-ideologist affirms his ideology through death. Tragic death- the last and often the only opportunity not to bow to the opposing force and to affirm ideas.
I think not. His death is an act of despair and lack of faith in his own strength for rebirth. Among the heroes of the “bottom” there are no obvious ideologists opposed to reality. Moreover, their own situation is not understood by them as tragic and hopeless. They have not yet reached that level of consciousness when a tragic worldview of life is possible, for it presupposes a conscious opposition to social or other circumstances.
Gorky clearly does not find such a hero in Kostylev’s doss house, at the “bottom” of life. Therefore, it would be more logical to consider “At the Lower Depths” as a socio-philosophical and social-everyday drama.
When thinking about the genre nature of the play, you need to find out what clashes are the focus of the playwright's attention, which becomes the main subject of the image. In the play “At the Lower Depths,” the subject of Gorky’s research is the social conditions of Russian reality at the turn of the century and its reflection in the minds of the characters. At the same time, the main, main subject of the image is precisely the consciousness of the night shelters and the aspects of the Russian national character that manifest themselves in it.
Gorky is trying to determine what the social circumstances were that influenced the characters’ characters. To do this, he shows the backstory of the characters, which becomes clear to the viewer from the characters' dialogues. But it is more important for him to show those social circumstances, the circumstances of the “bottom” in which the heroes now find themselves. It is this position that equates the former aristocrat Baron with the sharper Bubnov and the thief Vaska Pepl and forms the common features of consciousness for all: rejection of reality and at the same time a passive attitude towards it.
Within Russian realism, starting from the 40s of the last century, a direction has been emerging that characterizes the pathos of social criticism in relation to reality. It is this direction, which is represented, for example, by the names of Gogol, Nekrasov, Chernyshevsky, Dobrolyubov, Pisarev, that received the name critical realism.
Gorky, in the drama “At the Lower Depths,” continues these traditions, which is manifested in his critical attitude to the social aspects of life and, in many respects, to the heroes immersed in this life and shaped by it.
Typical does not mean the most common: on the contrary, the typical is more often manifested in the exceptional. To judge typicality means to judge what circumstances gave rise to this or that character, what caused this character, what the hero’s background is, what twists of fate led him to current situation and determined certain qualities of his consciousness.
Analysis of the play "At the Lower Depths" (opposition)
Chekhov's tradition in Gorky's dramaturgy. Gorky said originally about the innovation of Chekhov, who “killed realism”(traditional drama), raising the images to "spiritualized symbol". This marked the departure of the author of “The Seagull” from the acute clash of characters and from the tense plot. Following Chekhov, Gorky sought to convey the leisurely pace of everyday, “eventless” life and highlight in it the “undercurrent” of the characters’ inner motivations. Naturally, Gorky understood the meaning of this “trend” in his own way. Chekhov's plays contain refined moods and experiences. In Gorky there is a clash of heterogeneous worldviews, the same “ferment” of thought that Gorky observed in reality. One after another, his dramas appear, many of them are significantly called “scenes”: “The Bourgeois” (1901), “At the Lower Depths” (1902), “Summer Residents” (1904), “Children of the Sun” (1905), “Barbarians” ( 1905).
“At the Bottom” as a socio-philosophical drama. From the cycle of these works, “At the Bottom” stands out with its depth of thought and perfection of construction. Delivered Art Theater, which was a rare success, the play amazed with its “non-stage material” - from the lives of tramps, cheaters, prostitutes - and, despite this, its philosophical richness. The author’s special approach to the inhabitants of the dark, dirty flophouse helped to “overcome” the gloomy coloring and frightening way of life.
The play received its final title theater poster, after Gorky went through others: “Without the Sun”, “Nochlezhka”, “The Bottom”, “At the Bottom of Life”. Unlike the original ones, which emphasized the tragic situation of the tramps, the latter clearly had ambiguity and was widely perceived: “at the bottom” not only of life, but first of all of the human soul.
Bubnov speaks about himself and his roommates: “...everything has faded away, only one naked man remains.” Because of their “shadyness” and loss of their previous position, the heroes of the drama actually bypass particulars and gravitate towards some universal concepts. In this version, the internal state of the individual appears visibly. " Dark Kingdom” made it possible to highlight the bitter meaning of existence, imperceptible under normal conditions.
The atmosphere of spiritual separation of people. The role of the polylogue. Characteristic of all literature of the early 20th century. the painful reaction to a disunited, spontaneous world in Gorky’s drama acquired a rare scale and convincing embodiment. The author conveyed the stability and extreme mutual alienation of Kostylev’s guests in the original form of a “polylogue”. In Act I All the characters speak, but each, almost without listening to the others, talks about his own things. The author emphasizes the continuity of such “communication”. Kvashnya (the play begins with her remark) continues the argument that began behind the scenes with Kleshch. Anna asks to stop what goes on “every single day.” Bubnov interrupts Satin: “I’ve heard it a hundred times.”
In the stream of fragmentary remarks and altercations, words that have a symbolic sound are shaded. Bubnov repeats twice (while working as a furrier): “But the threads are rotten...” Nastya characterizes the relationship between Vasilisa and Kostylev: “Tie every living person to such a husband...” Bubnov remarks about Nastya’s own situation: “You’re the odd one out everywhere.” . Phrases said on a specific occasion reveal the “subtextual” meaning: the imaginary connections, the identity of the unfortunate.
The originality of the internal development of the play. The situation is changing with the appearance of Luke. It is with his help that illusory dreams and hopes come to life in the recesses of the souls of the night shelters. Acts II and III of the drama allow us to see in the “naked man” an attraction to another life. But, based on false ideas, it ends only in misfortune.
Luke's role in this outcome is very significant. An intelligent, knowledgeable old man indifferently looks at his real surroundings, believes that “people live for a better person... For a hundred years, and maybe more, they live for a better person.” Therefore, the delusions of Ash, Natasha, Nastya, and Actor do not touch him. Nevertheless, Gorky did not at all limit what was happening to the influence of Luke.
The writer, no less than human disunity, does not accept naive faith in miracles. It is precisely the miraculous that Ash and Natasha imagine in some “righteous land” of Siberia; for the actor - in a marble hospital; Tick - in honest work; Nastya - in love happiness. Luke’s speeches were effective because they fell on the fertile soil of secretly cherished illusions.
The atmosphere of Acts II and III is different compared to Act I. A cross-cutting motive arises for the inhabitants of the shelter to leave for some unknown world, a mood of exciting expectation and impatience. Luke advises Ash: “...from here, step by step! - leave! Go away..." The actor says to Natasha: "I'm leaving, leaving...<...>You, too, leave...” Ash persuades Natasha: “... you have to go to Siberia of your own free will... We’re going there, okay?” But then other, bitter words of hopelessness sound. Natasha: “There’s nowhere to go.” Bubnov once “came to his senses in time” - he walked away from the crime and remained forever in the circle of drunkards and cheaters. Satin, recalling his past, sternly asserts: “There is no move after prison.” And Kleshch painfully admits: “There is no shelter... there is nothing.” In these remarks from the inhabitants of the shelter, one senses a deceptive liberation from circumstances. Gorky's tramps, due to their rejection, experience this eternal drama for man with rare nakedness.
The circle of existence seems to have closed: from indifference to an unattainable dream, from it to real shocks or death. Meanwhile, it is in this state of the characters that the playwright finds the source of their spiritual turning point.
The meaning of Act IV. In Act IV the situation is the same. And yet something completely new happens - the previously sleepy thoughts of the tramps begin to ferment. Nastya and Actor for the first time angrily denounce their stupid classmates. The Tatar expresses a conviction that was previously alien to him: it is necessary to give the soul a “new law.” The tick suddenly calmly tries to recognize the truth. But the main thing is expressed by those who have long believed in no one and nothing.
The Baron, admitting that he “never understood anything,” thoughtfully notes: “... after all, for some reason I was born...” This bewilderment binds everyone. And the question “Why were you born?” is extremely intensified. Satin. Smart, daring, he correctly assesses tramps: “dumb as bricks,” “brutes,” who know nothing and do not want to know. That’s why Satin (he is “kind when he’s drunk”) tries to protect the dignity of people, to open their possibilities: “Everything is in a person, everything is for a person.” Satin’s reasoning is unlikely to be repeated, the life of the unfortunate will not change (the author is far from any embellishment). But Satin’s flight of thought fascinates listeners. For the first time, they suddenly feel like a small part of a big world. That is why the actor cannot stand his doom, ending his life.
The strange, not fully realized rapprochement of the “bitter brethren” takes on a new shade with the arrival of Bubnov. “Where are the people?” - he shouts and suggests “singing... all night”, “crying out” your fate. That is why Satin reacts sharply to the news of the Actor’s suicide: “Eh... ruined the song... fool.”
Philosophical subtext of the play. Gorky's play is a socio-philosophical genre and, despite its vital concreteness, was undoubtedly directed towards universal human concepts: alienation and possible contacts of people, imaginary and real overcoming a humiliating situation, illusions and active thought, sleep and the awakening of the soul. The characters in “At the Bottom” only intuitively touched the truth, without overcoming the feeling of hopelessness. Such a psychological collision enlarged the philosophical sound of the drama, which revealed the universal significance (even for the outcasts) and the elusiveness of genuine spiritual values. The combination of the eternal and the momentary, the stability and at the same time the instability of familiar ideas, a small stage space (a dirty flophouse) and thoughts about the big world of humanity allowed the writer to embody complex life problems in everyday situations.
At the bottom is mine summary by chapter
Act one
A cave-like basement. The ceiling is heavy, with crumbling plaster. Light from the audience. To the right behind the fence is Ash's closet, next to Bubnov's bunk, in the corner there is a large Russian stove, opposite the door to the kitchen where Kvashnya, Baron, and Nastya live. Behind the stove is a wide bed behind a chintz curtain. There are bunks all around. In the foreground, on a piece of wood, is a vice with an anvil. Kvashnya, Baron, and Nastya are sitting nearby, reading a book. On the bed behind the curtain, Anna coughs heavily. On the bunk, Bubnov examines the old, torn trousers. Next to him, Satin, who has just woken up, lies and growls. The Actor is fiddling around on the stove.
The beginning of spring. Morning.
Kvashnya, talking with the Baron, promises to never marry again. Bubnov asks Satin why he “grunts”? Kvashnya continues to develop her idea that she free woman and will never agree to “give himself up to the fortress.” The tick rudely shouts to her: “You're lying! You will marry Abramka yourself.”
The Baron snatches the book from Nastya, who is reading, and laughs at the vulgar title “Fatal Love.” Nastya and Baron are fighting over a book.
Kvashnya scolds Kleshch as an old goat who brought his wife to death. The tick scolds lazily. Kvashnya is sure that Kleshch does not want to hear the truth. Anna asks for silence in order to die in peace, Kleshch reacts impatiently to his wife’s words, and Bubnov philosophically remarks: “Noise is not a hindrance to death.”
Kvashnya is surprised how Anna lived with such a “sinister”? The dying woman asks to be left alone.
Kvashnya and Baron are going to the market. Anna refuses the offer to eat dumplings, but Kvashnya still leaves the dumplings. The Baron teases Nastya, tries to anger her, and then hurriedly leaves to fetch Kvashnya.
Satin, who has finally woken up, asks who beat him the day before and why. Bubnov argues that it doesn’t matter, but they beat him for cards. The actor shouts from the stove that one day Satin will be completely killed. The Tick calls the Actor to get off the stove and start cleaning the basement. The actor objects, it’s the Baron’s turn. The Baron, peeking in from the kitchen, makes an excuse that he is busy - he is going with Kvashnya to the market. Let the Actor work, he has nothing to do, or Nastya. Nastya refuses. Kvashnya asks the Actor to take it away, he won’t break. The actor uses illness as an excuse: it is harmful for him to breathe dust, his body is poisoned by alcohol.
Satin says unclear words: “sicambrus”, “macrobiotics”, “transcendental”. Anna invites her husband to eat the dumplings left by Kvashnya. She herself languishes, anticipating an imminent end.
Bubnov asks Satin what these words mean, but Satin has already forgotten their meaning, and in general he is tired of all this talk, all the “human words” that he has heard probably a thousand times.
The actor recalls that he once played a gravedigger in Hamlet and quotes Hamlet’s words from there: “Ophelia! Oh, remember me in your prayers!”
A tick, sitting at work, creaks with a file. And Satin recalls that once in his youth he served at the telegraph office, read a lot of books, and was an educated man!
Bubnov skeptically notes that he has heard this story “a hundred times!”, but he himself was a furrier and had his own establishment.
The actor is convinced that education is nonsense, the main thing is talent and self-confidence.
Meanwhile, Anna asks to open the door, she is stuffy. The tick does not agree: he is cold on the floor, he has a cold. The Actor approaches Anna and offers to take her out into the hallway. Supporting the patient, he takes her into the air. Kostylev, who meets them, laughs at them, what a “wonderful couple” they are.
Kostylev asks Kleshch whether Vasilisa was here this morning? I didn't see a tick. Kostylev scolds Kleshch that he takes up space in the shelter for five rubles, but pays two, he should have charged fifty dollars; “It’s better to throw a noose,” Kleshch retorts. Kostylev dreams that with this fifty dollars he will buy lamp oil and pray for his own and other people’s sins, because Kleshch does not think about his sins, so he brought his wife to the grave. The tick can't stand it and starts screaming at its owner. The returning Actor says that he arranged Anna well in the entryway. The owner notes that the good Actor will be credited with everything in the next world, but the Actor would be more satisfied if Kostylev now knocked off half of his debt. Kostylev immediately changes his tone and asks: “Can kindness of heart be compared with money?” Kindness is one thing, but duty is another. The actor calls Kostylev a scoundrel. The owner knocks on Ash's closet. Satin laughs that Ash will open it, and Vasilisa is with him. Kostylev is angry. Opening the door, Ash demands money from Kostylev for the watch, and when he finds out that he didn’t bring the money, he gets angry and scolds the owner. He roughly shakes Kostylev, demanding from him a debt of seven rubles. When the owner leaves, they explain to Ash that he was looking for his wife. Satin is surprised that Vaska hasn’t killed Kostylev yet. Ash replies that “he won’t ruin his life because of such rubbish.” Satin teaches Ash to “kill Kostylev cleverly, then marry Vasilisa and become the owner of the flophouse.” Ash is not happy with this prospect; the roomies will drink all his property in the tavern, because he is kind. Ash is angry that Kostylev woke him up at the wrong time, he just had a dream that he caught a huge bream. Satin laughs that it was not bream, but Vasilisa. Ash sends everyone and Vasilisa to hell. A tick returning from the street is dissatisfied with the cold. He didn’t bring Anna - Natasha took her to the kitchen.
Satin asks Ash for a nickel, but the Actor says that between them they need a dime. Vasily gives until they ask for a ruble. Satin admires the kindness of the thief, “there are no better people in the world.” Mite notices that they get money easily, that’s why they are kind. Satin objects: “Many get money easily, but few part with it easily,” he reasons that if the work is pleasant, he might work. “When work is pleasure, life is good! When work is a duty, life is slavery!”
Satin and Actor go to the tavern.
Ash asks Kleshch about Anna’s health, he replies that he will soon die. Ash advises Tick not to work. “How to live?” - he asks. “Others live,” notes Ash. The tick speaks with contempt of those around him; he believes that he will escape from here. Ash objects: those around him are no worse than Tick, and “they have no use for honor and conscience. You can't wear them instead of boots. Those who have power and strength need honor and conscience.”
A chilled Bubnov enters and, in response to Ash’s question about honor and conscience, says that he doesn’t need a conscience: “I’m not rich.” Ash agrees with him, but Tick is against it. Bubnov asks: does Kleshch want to occupy his conscience? Ash advises Tick to talk about conscience with Satin and Baron: they are smart, although they are drunkards. Bubnov is sure: “He who is drunk and smart has two lands in him.”
Ash recalls how Satin said that it is convenient to have a conscientious neighbor, but being conscientious yourself is “not profitable.”
Natasha brings the wanderer Luka. He politely greets those present. Natasha introduces the new guest, inviting him to go to the kitchen. Luke assures: for old people, where it’s warm, there’s a homeland. Natasha tells Kleshch to come for Anna later and be kind to her, she is dying and she is scared. Ash objects that dying is not scary, and if Natasha kills him, then he will also be happy to die from a clean hand.
Natasha doesn't want to listen to him. Ash admires Natasha. He wonders why she is rejecting him; she will disappear here anyway.
“It will disappear through you”— Bubnov assures.
Kleshch and Bubnov say that if Vasilisa finds out about Ash’s attitude towards Natasha, it will not be good for both of them.
In the kitchen, Luka sings a mournful song. Ash wonders why people suddenly feel sadness? He shouts at Luka not to howl. Vaska loved to listen to beautiful singing, and this howl brings melancholy. Luke is surprised. He thought he was a good singer. Luka says that Nastya is sitting in the kitchen and crying over a book. The Baron assures that it was out of stupidity. Ash offers the Baron to bark like a dog on all fours for half a bottle of booze. The Baron is surprised at how happy Vaska is from this. After all, now they are equal. Luka sees the baron for the first time. I saw counts, princes, and the baron for the first time, “and even then he was spoiled.”
Luke says that the night shelters have a good life. But Baron remembers how he used to drink coffee with cream while still in bed.
Luke notes: people become smarter over time. “They live worse and worse, but they want everything better, stubborn!” The Baron is interested in the old man. Who it? He answers: wanderer. He says that everyone in the world is a wanderer, and “our land is a wanderer in the sky.” The Baron goes with Vaska to the tavern and, saying goodbye to Luka, calls him a rogue. Alyosha enters with an accordion. He starts screaming and acting like a fool, which is no worse than others, so why doesn’t Medyakin allow him to walk down the street. Vasilisa appears and also swears at Alyosha, driving him out of sight. He orders Bubnov to drive Alyosha away if he appears. Bubnov refuses, but Vasilisa angrily reminds him that since he lives out of mercy, then let him obey his masters.
Interested in Luka, Vasilisa calls him a rogue, since he has no documents. The hostess is looking for Ash and, not finding him, snaps at Bubnov for the dirt: “So that there is no speck!” She angrily shouts at Nastya to clean up the basement. Having learned that her sister was here, Vasilisa becomes even more angry and shouts at the shelters. Bubnov is surprised how much anger there is in this woman. Nastya replies that with a husband like Kostylev, everyone will go wild. Bubnov explains: the “mistress” came to her lover and didn’t find him there, that’s why she’s angry. Luka agrees to clean the basement. Bubnov learned from Nastya the reason for Vasilisa’s anger: Alyoshka blurted out that Vasilisa was tired of Ash, so she was driving the guy away. Nastya sighs that she’s superfluous here. Bubnov replies that she is superfluous everywhere... and all people on earth are superfluous...
Medvedev enters and asks about Luka, why doesn’t he know him? Luka replies that not all the land is included in his plot, there is some left. Medvedev asks about Ash and Vasilisa, but Bubnov denies that he knows nothing. Kvashnya returns. She complains that Medvedev is asking her to marry. Bubnov approves of this union. But Kvashnya explains: a woman is better off in the hole than in marriage.
Luke brings Anna. Kvashnya, pointing to the patient, says that she was driven to death by a noise in the entryway. Kostylev calls Abram Medvedev: to protect Natasha, who is being beaten by her sister. Luka asks Anna what the sisters didn’t share. She replies that they are both well-fed and healthy. Anna tells Luka that he is kind and gentle. He explains: “They crushed it, that’s why it’s soft.”
Act two
Same situation. Evening. On the bunks, Satin, Baron, Crooked Zob and Tatar are playing cards, Kleshch and Actor are watching the game. Bubnov plays checkers with Medvedev. Luka is sitting by Anna's bedside. The stage is dimly lit by two lamps. One is burning near the gamblers, the other is near Bubnov.
Tatar and Crooked Zob sing, Bubnov sings too. Anna tells Luka about her hard life, in which she remembers nothing except beatings. Luke consoles her. The Tatar shouts at Satin, who is cheating in a card game. Anna recalls how she was hungry all her life, afraid of eating up her family, of eating an extra piece; Could there really be torment waiting for her in the next world? In the basement you can hear the screams of gamblers, Bubnov, and then he sings a song:
Guard as you wish...
I won’t run away anyway...
I want to be free - oh!
I can't break the chain...
Crooked Zob sings along. The Tatar shouts that the Baron is hiding the card in his sleeve and is cheating. Satin calms Tatarin down, saying that he knows: they are swindlers, why did he agree to play with them? The Baron reassures him that he lost a ten-kopeck piece, but shouts at him for a three-ruble note. Crooked Zob explains to the Tatar that if the shelters begin to live honestly, they will die of hunger in three days! Satin scolds the Baron: he is an educated man, but has not learned to cheat at cards. Abram Ivanovich lost to Bubnov. Satin counts the winnings - fifty-three kopecks. The actor asks for three kopecks, and then he himself wonders why he needs them? Satin invites Luka to the tavern, but he refuses. The actor wants to read poetry, but realizes with horror that he has forgotten everything, that he has drunk away his memory. Luka reassures the Actor that there is a cure for drunkenness, but he forgot in which city the hospital is located. Luka convinces the Actor that he will be cured, pull himself together, and begin to live well again. Anna calls Luka to talk to her. The tick stands in front of his wife, then leaves. Luka feels sorry for Kleshch - he feels bad, Anna replies that she has no time for her husband. She withered away from him. Luka consoles Anna that she will die and she will feel better. “Death - it calms everything down... it is gentle for us... If you die, you will rest!” Anna is afraid that suffering will suddenly await her in the next world. Luke says that the Lord will call her and say that she lived hard, let her now rest. Anna asks what if she recovers? Luka asks: for what, for new flour? But Anna wants to live longer, she even agrees to suffer if peace awaits her later. Ash comes in and screams. Medvedev is trying to calm him down. Luka asks to be silent: Anna is dying. Ash agrees with Luka: “If you please, grandfather, I will respect you!” You, brother, are great. You lie well... you tell fairy tales nicely! Lie, there’s nothing... there’s not enough pleasant things in the world, brother!”
Vaska asks Medvedev if Vasilisa beat Natasha badly? The policeman makes an excuse: “it’s a family matter, not his, Ash’s, business.” Vaska assures that if he wants, Natasha will leave with him. Medvedev is outraged that the thief dares to make plans about his niece. He threatens to take Ash to clean water. At first, Vaska says passionately: try it. But then he threatens that if he is taken to the investigator, he will not remain silent. He will tell you that Kostylev and Vasilisa pushed him into stealing; they sell stolen goods. Medvedev is sure: no one will believe a thief. But Ash confidently says that they will believe the truth. Ash also threatens Medvedev that he himself will be confused. The policeman leaves so as not to run into trouble. Ash smugly remarks: Medvedev ran to complain to Vasilisa. Bubnov advises Vaska to be careful. But you can’t take Yaroslavl’s Ashes with your bare hands. “If there is war, we will fight,” the thief threatens.
Luka advises Ash to go to Siberia, Vaska jokes that he will wait until he is taken at public expense. Luka persuades that people like Pepel are needed in Siberia: “They are needed there.” Ash replies that his path was predetermined: “My path is marked out for me! My parent spent his whole life in prison and ordered the same for me... When I was little, at that time they called me a thief, the son of a thief...” Luka praises Siberia, calls it the “golden side.” Vaska wonders why Luka keeps lying. The old man replies: “And what do you really need badly... think about it! She really might be too much for you...” Ash asks Luke if there is a God? The old man replies: “If you believe, it is; If you don’t believe it, no... What you believe in is what it is.” Bubnov goes to the tavern, and Luka, slamming the door as if leaving, carefully climbs onto the stove. Vasilisa goes to Ash’s room and calls Vasily there. He refuses; he was tired of everything and so was she. Ash looks at Vasilisa and admits that, despite her beauty, he never had a heart for her. Vasilisa is offended that Ash suddenly stopped loving her. The thief explains that it’s not all of a sudden, she doesn’t have a soul, like animals, she and her husband. Vasilisa admits to Ash that she loved in him the hope that he would get her out of here. She offers Ash her sister if he frees her from her husband: “Take this noose off me.” Ash grins: she came up with everything great: her husband - in the coffin, her lover - in hard labor, and herself... Vasilisa asks him to help through her friends, if Ash himself does not want. Natalya will be his payment. Vasilisa beats her sister out of jealousy, and then she cries out of pity. Kostylev, who entered quietly, finds them and shouts at his wife: “Beggar... pig...”
Ash drives Kostylev, but he is the master and decides where he should be. The ashes shake Kostylev vigorously by the collar, but Luka makes a noise on the stove, and Vaska lets the owner out. Ash realized that Luke had heard everything, but he didn’t deny it. He started making noise on purpose so that Ash wouldn’t strangle Kostylev. The old man advises Vaska to stay away from Vasilisa, take Natasha, and go with her away from here. Ash can't decide what to do. Luke says that Ash is still young, he will have time to “get a woman, it’s better to go from here alone before he is killed here.”
The old man notices that Anna has died. Ashes don't like dead people. Luke replies that we must love the living. They go to the tavern to inform Kleshch about his wife’s death. The actor remembered a poem by Paul Beranger, which he wanted to tell Luke in the morning:
Gentlemen! If the truth is holy
The world doesn't know how to find a way,
Honor the madman who inspires
A golden dream for humanity!
If tomorrow our land were the way
Our sun forgot to illuminate
Tomorrow the whole world would be illuminated
The thought of some madman...
Natasha, who was listening to the Actor, laughs at him, and he asks where did Luka go? As soon as it gets warm, the Actor is going to go look for a city where he can be treated for drunkenness. He admits that he stage name Sverchkov-Zavolzhsky, but no one here knows this and no one wants to know, it’s a shame to lose his name. “Even dogs have nicknames. Without a name there is no person."
Natasha sees the deceased Anna and tells Actor and Bubnov about this. Bubnov notes: there will be no one to cough at night. He warns Natasha: The ashes “will break her head,” Natasha doesn’t care who she dies from. Those who enter look at Anna, and Natasha is surprised that no one regrets Anna. Luke explains that the living should be pitied. “We don’t feel sorry for the living... we can’t feel sorry for ourselves... where is it!” Bubnov philosophizes - everyone will die. Everyone advises Klesh to report his wife’s death to the police. He is grieving: he only has forty kopecks, what should he use to bury Anna? Crooked Goiter promises that he will collect a nickel or a ten-kopeck piece for each night's shelter. Natasha is afraid to walk through the dark hallway and asks Luka to accompany her. The old man advises her to be afraid of the living.
The actor shouts to Luka to name the city where he is treated for drunkenness. Satin is convinced that everything is a mirage. There is no such city. The Tatar stops them so they don’t shout in front of the dead woman. But Satin says that the dead don't care. Luka appears at the door.
Act three
A vacant lot littered with various rubbish. In the back there is a wall made of refractory bricks, to the right there is a log wall and everything is overgrown with weeds. To the left is the wall of Kostylev’s shelter. In the narrow passage between the walls there are boards and beams. Evening. Natasha and Nastya are sitting on the boards. On the firewood are Luka and Baron, next to them are Kleshch and Baron.
Nastya talks about her alleged former date with a student in love with her, who was ready to shoot himself because of his love for her. Bubnov laughs at Nastya’s fantasies, but the Baron asks not to interfere with her further lies.
Nastya continues to fantasize that the student’s parents do not give consent to their marriage, but he cannot live without her. She supposedly says a tender farewell to Raoul. Everyone laughs - last time the lover’s name was Gaston. Nastya is indignant that they don’t believe her. She claims: she had true love. Luka consoles Nastya: “Tell me, girl, it’s nothing!” Natasha reassures Nastya that everyone behaves this way out of envy. Nastya continues to fantasize about the tender words she spoke to her lover, persuading him not to take his own life, not to upset his beloved parents/The Baron laughs - this is a story from the book “Fatal Love”. Luka consoles Nastya and believes her. The Baron laughs at Nastya’s stupidity, although noting her kindness. Bubnov wonders why people love lies so much. Natasha is sure: it is more pleasant than the truth. So she dreams that tomorrow a special stranger will come and something completely special will happen. And then he realizes that there is nothing to wait for. The Baron picks up her phrase that there is nothing to wait for, and he doesn’t expect anything. Everything has already... happened! Natasha says that sometimes she imagines herself dead and she becomes terrified. The Baron takes pity on Natasha, who is being tormented by her sister. She asks: who has it easier?
Suddenly Mite shouts that not everyone is feeling bad. If only everyone wouldn't be so sad. Bubnov is surprised by Kleshch's cry. The Baron goes to make peace with Nastya, otherwise she won’t give him money for a drink.
Bubnov is unhappy that people lie. Okay, Nastya is used to “touching up her face... it puts a blush on her soul.” But why does Luka lie without any benefit to himself? Luka reprimands the Baron not to upset Nastya’s soul. Let her cry if she wants. Baron agrees. Natasha asks Luka why he is kind. The old man is sure that someone needs to be kind. “It’s time to feel sorry for a person... it happens well...” He tells the story of how, as a watchman, he felt sorry for the thieves who were breaking into the dacha guarded by Luka. Then these thieves turned out to be good men. Luka concludes: “If I hadn’t had pity on them, they might have killed me... or something else... And then - a trial, a prison, and Siberia... what’s the point? Prison will not teach you goodness, and Siberia will not teach you... but man will teach you... yes! A person can teach goodness... very simply!”
Bubnov himself cannot lie and always tells the truth. The tick jumps up as if stung and screams, where does Bubnov see the truth?! “There is no work - that’s the truth!” The tick hates everyone. Luka and Natasha regret that Tick resembles a madman. Ash asks about Tick and adds that he doesn’t love him - he’s painfully angry and proud. What is he proud of? Horses are the most hardworking, so are they superior to humans?
Luka, continuing the conversation started by Bubnov about the truth, tells the following story. There lived a man in Siberia who believed in a “righteous land” inhabited by special good people. This man endured all the insults and injustices in the hope that someday he would go there; this was his favorite dream. And when the scientist came and proved that there was no such land, this man hit the scientist, cursed him as a scoundrel, and hanged himself. Luka says that he will soon leave the shelter for the “Khokhols” to look at the faith there.
Ash invites Natasha to leave with him, she refuses, but Ash promises to stop stealing, he is literate and will work. He offers to go to Siberia, assures us that we must live differently from how they live, better, “so that you can respect yourself.”
Since childhood he was called a thief, so he became a thief. “Call me something else, Natasha,” Vaska asks. But Natasha doesn’t trust anyone, she’s waiting for something better, her heart aches, and Natasha doesn’t love Vaska. At times she likes him, and at other times it makes her sick to look at him. Ash persuades Natasha that over time she will love him as he loves her. Natasha asks mockingly how Ash manages to love two people at the same time: her and Vasilisa? Ash replies that he is drowning, as if in a quagmire, no matter what he grabs, everything is rotten. He could have loved Vasilisa if she had not been so greedy for money. But she doesn’t need love, but money, will, debauchery. Ash admits that Natasha is a different matter.
Luka persuades Natasha to leave with Vaska, just to remind him more often that he is good. And who does she live with? Her relatives are worse than wolves. And Ash is a tough guy. Natasha doesn't trust anyone. Ash is sure: she has only one road... but he won’t let her go there, he’d rather kill her himself. Natasha is surprised that Ash is not her husband yet, but is already going to kill her. Vaska hugs Natasha, and she threatens that if Vaska touches her with a finger, she will not tolerate it and will hang herself. Ash swears that his hands will wither if he offends Natasha.
Vasilisa, standing at the window, hears everything and says: “So we got married! Advice and love!..” Natasha is scared, but Ash is sure: no one will dare to offend Natasha now. Vasilisa objects that Vasily does not know how to offend or love. He was more daring in words than in deeds. Luka is surprised by the poisonousness of the “mistress’s” language.
Kostylev drives Natalya to put the samovar and set the table. Ash intercedes, but Natasha stops him so as not to command her, “it’s too early!”
Ash tells Kostylev that they mocked Natasha and that’s enough. “Now she’s mine!” The Kostylevs laugh: he hasn’t bought Natasha yet. Vaska threatens not to have much fun, so that they don’t have to cry. Luka drives Ashes, whom Vasilisa incites and wants to provoke. Ash threatens Vasilisa, and she tells him that Ash’s plans will not come true.
Kostylev wonders if it’s true that Luka decided to leave. He replies that he will go wherever his eyes lead him. Kostylev says that it is not good to wander. But Luke calls himself a wanderer. Kostylev scolds Luka for not having a passport. Luke says that “there are people, and there are men.” Kostylev does not understand Luka and gets angry. And he replies that Kostylev will never be a man, even if “the Lord God himself commands him.” Kostylev drives Luka away, Vasilisa joins her husband: Luka has a long tongue, let him get out. Luke promises to leave into the night. Bubnov confirms that it is always better to leave on time, tells his story about how, by leaving on time, he avoided hard labor. His wife got involved with the master furrier, and so cleverly that, just in case, they would poison Bubnov so as not to interfere.
Bubnov beat his wife, and the master beat him. Bubnov even thought about how to “kill” his wife, but came to his senses and left. The workshop was registered to his wife, so he turned out to be as naked as a falcon. This is also facilitated by the fact that Bubnov is a heavy drinker and very lazy, as he himself admits to Luka.
Satin and Actor appear. Satin demands that Luka confess to lying to the Actor. The actor didn’t drink vodka today, but worked and washed the street. He shows the money he earned - two five-altyn. Satin offers to give him the money, but the Actor says that he earns his way.
Satin complains that he blew the cards “all to smithereens.” There are “sharps smarter than me!” Luke calls Satin a cheerful person. Satin recalls that in his youth he was funny, loved to make people laugh, and to represent on stage. Luke wonders how Satin got to his present life? It’s unpleasant for Satin to stir up his soul. Luka wants to understand how such a smart person suddenly ended up at the very bottom. Satin replies that he spent four years and seven months in prison, and after prison there is no going anywhere. Luka wonders why Satin went to prison? He replies that he is a scoundrel, whom he killed in passion and irritation. In prison I learned to play cards.
- Because of whom did you kill? - asks Luka. Satin replies that because of his own sister, but he does not want to say anything more, and his sister died nine years ago, she was nice.
Satin asks the returning Tick why he is so gloomy. The mechanic doesn’t know what to do, there is no tool - the whole funeral was “eaten.” Satin advises not to do anything - just live. But Kleshch is ashamed of living like this. Satin objects, because people are not ashamed that they doomed Tick to such a bestial existence.
Natasha screams. Her sister hits her again. Luka advises calling Vaska Ash, and the Actor runs away after him.
Crooked Zob, Tatarin, Medvedev take part in the fight. Satin is trying to push Vasilisa away from Natasha. Vaska Pepel appears. He pushes everyone aside and runs after Kostylev. Vaska sees that Natasha’s legs are scalded with boiling water, she, almost unconscious, says to Vasily: “Take me, bury me.” Vasilisa appears and shouts that Kostylev was killed. Vasily does not understand anything, he wants to take Natasha to the hospital, and then settle accounts with her offenders. (The lights on the stage go out. Individual surprised exclamations and phrases are heard.) Then Vasilisa shouts in a triumphant voice that Vaska Ash killed her husband. Calling the police. She says that she saw everything herself. Ash approaches Vasilisa, looks at Kostylev’s corpse and asks if she should also be killed, Vasilisa? Medvedev calls the police. Satin reassures Ash: killing in a fight is not a very serious crime. He, Satin, also beat the old man and is ready to act as a witness. Ash admits: Vasilisa encouraged him to kill her husband. Natasha suddenly shouts that Ash and her sister are together. Vasilisa was disturbed by her husband and sister, so they killed her husband and scalded her by knocking over the samovar. Ash is stunned by Natasha's accusation. He wants to refute this terrible accusation. But she does not listen and curses her offenders. Satin is also surprised and tells Ash that this family “will drown him.”
Natasha, almost delirious, screams that her sister taught her, and Vaska Pepel killed Kostylev, and asks to be put in prison.
Act four
The setting of the first act, but there is no Ashes room. Kleshch sits at the table and repairs the accordion. At the other end of the table are Satin, Baron, Nastya. They drink vodka and beer. The Actor is fiddling with the stove. Night. It's windy outside.
The tick did not even notice how Luka disappeared in the confusion. The Baron adds: “... like smoke from the face of fire.” Satin says in the words of a prayer: “In this way sinners disappear from the presence of the righteous.” Nastya stands up for Luka, calling everyone present rusty. Satin laughs: For many, Luka was like a crumb for the toothless, and the Baron adds: “Like a plaster for abscesses.” Kleshch also stands up for Luka, calling him compassionate. The Tatar is convinced that the Koran should be a law for people. Mite agrees - we must live according to Divine laws. Nastya wants to leave here. Satin advises her to take the Actor with her, they are on their way.
Satin and Baron list the muses of art, but cannot remember the patroness of the theater. The actor tells them - this is Melpomene, calls them ignoramuses. Nastya screams and waves her arms. Satin advises the Baron not to interfere with the neighbors doing what they want: let them scream and go to God knows where. The Baron calls Luka a charlatan. Nastya indignantly calls him a charlatan.
Kleshch notes that Luka “really did not like the truth and rebelled against it.” Satin shouts that “man is the truth!” The old man lied out of pity for others. Satin says that he read: there is a truth that is comforting and reconciling. But this lie is needed by those who are weak in soul, who hide behind it like a shield. He who is the master is not afraid of life, does not need lies. “Lies are the religion of slaves and masters. Truth is the God of a free man."
The Baron recalls that their family, which came from France, was rich and noble under Catherine. Nastya interrupts: the Baron made it all up. He's angry. Satin reassures him, “... forget about grandfather’s carriages... in the carriage of the past, you won’t go anywhere...”. Satin asks Nastya about Natasha. She replies that Natasha left the hospital a long time ago and disappeared. The night shelters are discussing who will “seat” whom more tightly, Vaska Ashes Vasilisa or she Vaska. They come to the conclusion that Vasily is cunning and will “get out”, and Vaska will go to hard labor in Siberia. The Baron again quarrels with Nastya, explaining to her that he is no match for him, the Baron. Nastya laughs in response - the Baron lives on her handouts, “like a worm on an apple.”
Seeing that the Tatar has gone to pray, Satin says: “Man is free... he pays for everything himself, and therefore he is free!.. Man is the truth.” Satin claims that all people are equal. “Only man exists, everything else is the work of his hands and his brain. Human! It's great! That sounds… proud!” He then adds that a person should be respected, and not humiliated with pity. He talks about himself that he is a “convict, a murderer, a sharpie” when he walks