Thesis: The problem of character in Trifonov’s work “The House on the Embankment.” Historical memory and forgetfulness: “Another Life” and “House on the Embankment Analysis of Trifonov’s story House on the Embankment

literary character of tryphons

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1. INTERPRETATION OF THE CONCEPT OF “CHARACTER” IN LITERARY STUDIES

1.1 Definition of the term “character” in a work of fiction

1.2 Methods of disclosure literary character

CHAPTER 2. THE PROBLEM OF CHARACTER IN YURI VALENTINOVICH TRIFONOV’S STORY “THE HOUSE ON THE EMBANKMENT”

2.1 Researchers about the uniqueness of the hero in the works of Yu.V. Trifonova

2.2 Analysis of the specifics of the hero in the story “House on the Embankment”

CONCLUSION

LITERATURE

INTRODUCTION

Yuri Trifonov was born in Moscow on August 28, 1925. He had a dazzlingly happy childhood in a close-knit family, with his father, a hero of the revolution and the Civil War, with friends the same age who lived in the same “government” house on the Moskva River embankment. This house grew up in the early 30s almost opposite the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, competing with it in size and, it seemed, gaining the upper hand in the competition: soon the temple would be blown up. But a few years later, the residents began to disappear one by one, usually at night. There was a wave of mass repressions. Trifonov’s parents were also arrested. The children and their grandmother were evicted to the outskirts. Yura never saw his father again, his mother only many years later...

During the Great Patriotic War he worked at an aircraft factory, and in 1944 he entered the Literary Institute. A.M. Gorky. Once, when his toothy fellow students tore his story to smithereens, the head of the seminar, famous writer Konstantin Fedin suddenly flared up and even slammed his fist on the table: “And I’m telling you that Trifonov will write!”

Already in his fifth year, Trifonov began writing the story “Students.” In 1950 it was published in the magazine " New world"and immediately received the highest award - the Stalin Prize. “Success is a terrible danger... Many people couldn’t stand it,” Alexander Tvardovsky, then editor-in-chief of Novy Mir, told Trifonov.

The author is very talented,” Ilya Erenburg noted about “Students.” - but I would like to hope that he will someday regret that he wrote this book. And indeed, many years later Trifonov would respond extremely sharply to the story: “The book that was not written by me.” There was still almost no sense of the author’s own view of what was happening around him, but only diligently and obediently reproduced those conflicts, the depiction of which enjoyed the approval of official criticism.

Trifonov was a writer and it is impossible to imagine him as anyone else. Behind the external looseness and phlegmatism was hidden inner strength. A sense of conviction and independence came from his leisurely demeanor and thoughtful speech.

He began publishing early and became a professional writer early; but the reader truly discovered Trifonov in the early 70s. He opened it and accepted it because he recognized himself - and was touched to the quick. Trifonov created his own world in prose, which was so close to the world of the city in which we live that sometimes readers and critics forgot that this was literature and not reality, and treated his heroes as their direct contemporaries.

Hence the jealousy.

This is the devil knows what - some kind of kitchen squabbles, apartment gossip. corridor passions, where is the living image of our contemporary, active personality? - some were indignant.

Trifonov stigmatizes modern urban philistinism, semi-intellectuals, and distinguishes immoral vulgarities! - others objected.

He distorts the image of our intelligentsia! They are much cleaner and better than they appear in his image! This is some kind of charm, he doesn’t value the intelligentsia! - others were indignant.

This writer just doesn't like people. He is not kind, has not loved people since childhood, from the moment that deprived him of his usual way of life, the fourth analyzed.

Trifonov's world is hermetically sealed! You can't breathe in it! - stated lovers of Peredelkino walks and convinced admirers of their air.

Trifonov's prose is distinguished by internal unity. Theme with variations. For example, the theme of exchange runs through all of Trifonov’s works, right down to “The Old Man.” The novel outlines all of Trifonov’s prose - from “Students” to “Exchange”, “The Long Farewell”, “Preliminary Results” and “House on the Embankment”, all Trifonov’s motifs can be found there. “The repetition of themes is the development of the task, its growth,” noted Marina Tsvetaeva. So with Trifonov - the theme deepened, went in circles, returned, but on a different level. “I’m not interested in the horizontals of prose, but in its verticals,” noted Trifonov in one of his last stories.

On Trifonov, as well as on other writers, as well as on the whole literary process In general, of course, time influenced. But in his work he not only honestly and truthfully reflected certain facts of our time, our reality, but sought to get to the bottom of the reasons for these facts. Social historicism is a fundamental quality of his prose: the story “The House on the Embankment” is no less historical than the novel “Impatience,” written on historical material. R. Schroeder described artistic method Trifonov as “a novel with history,” and Trifonov defined this characteristic as “very apt.”

At the same time, Trifonov’s interest in the past was of a special, individual nature. This interest is not simply an expression of historical emotionality - a trait, by the way, quite common. No, Trifonov dwells only on those eras and those historical facts that predetermined the fate of his generation. So he “came out” during the civil war and then to the Narodnaya Volya members. Revolutionary terror is what Trifonov’s latest essay, “The Riddle and Conduct of Dostoevsky,” is devoted to.

Yuri Valentinovich entered the history of Russian literature of the twentieth century as the founder of urban prose and earned a reputation as the creator of a unique artistic world that does not fit into the rigid framework of groups and movements. According to critic L. Anninsky, such thematic isolation was the reason for Trifonov’s “strange loneliness” in Russian literature. Since the emergence and establishment of tryphon studies as an independent branch of literary criticism, researchers have begun to talk about the integrity and consistency of the entire artistic body of his prose. I. Velembovskaya, reviewing the last lifetime editions of Trifonov’s works, called his entire prose “a human comedy,” in which “the destinies seemed to be intertwined, the situations complemented each other, the characters overlapped one another.” I. Dedkov, in a detailed article “Verticals of Yuri Trifonov,” defined the writer’s artistic world as “the focus of memory, ideas, moods, fictional and resurrected people, their torments, fears, heroic and base deeds, their high and everyday passions, where everything is tightly intertwined , socially and psychologically connected, historically brought together, fused to the point of sprouting one into the other, to persistent repetitions and echoes, and where nothing now seems to exist and cannot be understood in complete isolation from the whole.” These observations were summarized by V. M. Piskunov, who outlined the world of Trifonov’s prose as a dialectical unity of two facets of talent: “So, on the one hand, the thirst for constant self-renewal, on the other, an emphasized cyclicality, repetition, persistent return to square one. The result is a unique, fully formed and at the same time flexible artistic system...”

One of the best, most studied is the work of Yu. Trifonov “House on the Embankment”. Researchers have not yet determined exactly its genre - whether it is a story or a novel. The explanation, in our opinion, lies in the following: what is novel in this story is, first of all, the socio-artistic development and understanding of the past and present as an interconnected process. In an interview that followed the publication of “House on the Embankment,” the writer himself explained his creative task: “To see, to depict the passage of time, to understand what it does to people, how it changes everything around... Time is a mysterious phenomenon, to understand and imagine it is as difficult as imagining infinity... I want the reader to understand: this a mysterious “connecting thread of time” runs through you and me, which is the nerve of history.” “I know that history is present in every today, in every human destiny. It lies in broad, invisible, and sometimes quite clearly visible layers in everything that shapes modernity... The past is present both in the present and in the future.” Thus, the author managed to fit a huge array of depicted problems and ideas into the volume of the story, which poses this work at the intersection of genres.

The purpose of our work is to consider the specifics of solving the problem of character in the work “The House on the Embankment” by Yu. Trifonov.

The object of study is the ways of embodying the images of the heroes in this story.

The subject is a system of characters in a work.

The purpose, object and subject determine the following research tasks in our work:

1. Identify the content of the concept of “literary character”, the main approaches to its definition in literary criticism;

2. Consider the ways of artistic embodiment of the characters’ characters in the work;

3. Analyze the different points of view of Trifonov researchers on the problem of the hero in the works of Yu. Trifonov;

4. Study the features of solving a literary problem in the story “The House on the Embankment” through consideration of specific characters and plot.

The scientific novelty of our work is determined by the fact that for the first time an attempt was made to study the specifics of the literary character in the story “The House on the Embankment” as a complex problem that has a cross-cutting basis in the entire work of Yu. Trifonov.

The practical significance of our study lies in the fact that the material and conclusions presented in it can be used for further study creativity of Yu. Trifonov, his other works. The theoretical part of the work can be used in preparation for classes in the course “Literary Studies” and “Theory of Literature” within the framework of the topics “Hero of a literary work”, “Character and character system”, “Type and character in a work of art”.

Composition

IN art world Yuri Trifonov (1925 - 1981) always occupied a special place with images of childhood - the time of personality formation. Starting from the very first stories, childhood and adolescence were the criteria by which the writer seemed to test reality for humanity and justice, or rather, for inhumanity and injustice. Famous words Dostoevsky’s “tear of a child” can be used as an epigraph to Trifonov’s entire work: “the scarlet, oozing flesh of childhood” - this is what the story “The House on the Embankment” says. Vulnerable, we would add. When asked in a 1975 Komsomolskaya Pravda questionnaire about what is the worst loss at sixteen years old, Trifonov answered: “Loss of parents.”

From story to story, from novel to novel, this shock, this trauma, this pain threshold of his young heroes passes - the loss of their parents, which divided their lives into unequal parts: an isolated, prosperous childhood and immersion in the general suffering of “adult life”.

He began publishing early and became a professional writer early; but the reader truly discovered Trifonov in the early 70s. He opened it and accepted it because he recognized himself - and was touched to the quick. Trifonov created his own world in prose, which was so close to the world of the city in which we live that sometimes readers and critics forgot that this was literature and not reality, and treated his heroes as their direct contemporaries.

Trifonov's prose is distinguished by internal unity. Theme with variations. For example, the theme of exchange runs through all of Trifonov’s works, right down to “The Old Man.” The novel “Time and Place” outlines all of Trifonov’s prose - from “Students” to “Exchange”, “The Long Farewell”, “Preliminary Results”; there you can find all Trifonov’s motifs. “The repetition of themes is the development of the task, its growth,” noted Marina Tsvetaeva. But with Trifonov, the theme deepened, went in circles, returned, but on a different level. “I’m not interested in the horizontals of prose, but in its verticals,” noted Trifonov in one of his last stories.

Whatever material he turned to, be it modernity, the time of the Civil War, the 30s of the twentieth century or the 70s of the nineteenth century, he was faced, first of all, with the problem of the relationship between the individual and society, and therefore their mutual responsibility. Trifonov was a moralist - but not in the primitive sense of the word; not a hypocrite or a dogmatist, no - he believed that a person is responsible for his actions, which form the history of the people, the country; and society, the collective cannot, does not have the right to neglect the fate of an individual. Trifonov perceived modern reality as an era and persistently searched for the reasons for change public consciousness, stretching the thread further and further - into the depths of time. Trifonov was characterized by historical thinking; He subjected each specific social phenomenon to analysis, relating to reality, as a witness and historian of our time and a person deeply rooted in Russian history, inseparable from it. While “village” prose was looking for its roots and origins, Trifonov was also looking for his “soil”. “My soil is everything that Russia has suffered through!” – Trifonov himself could subscribe to these words of his hero. Indeed, this was his soil; his destiny was shaped in the fate and suffering of the country. Moreover: this soil began to nourish the root system of his books. The search for historical memory unites Trifonov with many modern Russian writers. At the same time, his memory was also his “home”, family memory - a purely Moscow trait - inseparable from the memory of the country.

Yuri Trifonov, like other writers, as well as the entire literary process as a whole, was, of course, influenced by time. But in his work he not only honestly and truthfully reflected certain facts of our time, our reality, but sought to get to the bottom of the reasons for these facts.

The problem of tolerance and intolerance permeates, perhaps, almost all of Trifonov’s “late” prose. The problem of trial and condemnation, moreover, moral terror, is posed in “Students”, and in “Exchange”, and in “The House on the Embankment”, and in the novel “The Old Man”.

Trifonov's story "The House on the Embankment", published by the magazine "Friendship of Peoples" (1976, No. 1), is perhaps his most social work. In this story, in its sharp content, there was more “novel” than in many bloated multi-page works, proudly designated by their authors as “novels”.

What was novel in Trifonov’s new story was, first of all, the social and artistic exploration and understanding of the past and present as an interconnected process. In an interview that followed the publication of “House on the Embankment,” the writer himself explained his creative task as follows: “To see, to depict the passage of time, to understand what it does to people, how it changes everything around... Time is a mysterious phenomenon, to understand and imagine it like this It’s as difficult as imagining infinity... But time is what we bathe in every day, every minute... I want the reader to understand: this mysterious “time-connecting thread” passes through you and me, that this is the nerve of history.” In a conversation with R. Schroeder, Trifonov emphasized: “I know that history is present in every day, in every human destiny. It lies in broad, invisible, and sometimes quite clearly visible layers in everything that shapes modernity... The past is present both in the present and in the future.”

Time in The House on the Embankment determines and directs the development of the plot and the development of characters; people are revealed by time; time - main director events. The prologue of the story is openly symbolic in nature and immediately defines the distance: “... the shores are changing, the mountains are receding, the forests are thinning and flying away, the sky is darkening, the cold is approaching, we must hurry, hurry - and there is no strength to look back at what has stopped and froze, like a cloud at the edge of the sky." This is an epic time, impartial to whether “those who rake with their hands” will swim out in its indifferent stream.

The main time of the story is social time, on which the heroes of the story feel dependent. This is a time which, by taking a person into submission, seems to free the individual from responsibility, a time on which it is convenient to blame everything. “It’s not Glebov’s fault, and it’s not the people,” goes the cruel internal monologue Glebov, the main character of the story - and the times. So let him not say hello at times.” This social time can radically change a person’s fate, elevate him or drop him to where now, thirty-five years after his “reign” at school, a person who has sunk to the bottom, drunk in the literal and figurative sense of the word, sits on his haunches. Trifonov considers the time from the late 30s to the early 50s not only as a certain era, but also as a fertile soil that formed such a phenomenon of our time as Vadim Glebov. The writer is far from pessimism, nor does he fall into rosy optimism: man, in his opinion, is the object and - at the same time - the subject of the era, that is, he shapes it.

From the burning summer of 1972, Trifonov returns Glebov to those times with which Shulepnikov was still “hello”.

Trifonov moves the narrative from the present to the past, and from modern Glebov restores Glebov of twenty-five years ago; but through one layer the other deliberately shines through. The portrait of Glebov is deliberately doubled by the author: “Almost a quarter of a century ago, when Vadim Aleksandrovich Glebov was not yet bald, plump, with breasts like a woman’s, with thick thighs, a big belly and sagging shoulders... when he was not yet tormented by heartburn in the morning, dizziness, a feeling of weakness throughout his body, when his liver was working normally and he could eat fatty foods, not very fresh meat, drink as much wine and vodka as he wanted, without fear of consequences... when he was quick on his feet, bony, with long hair, wearing round glasses, his appearance resembled a commoner from the seventies... in those days... he was unlike himself and inconspicuous, like a caterpillar.”

Trifonov visibly, in detail, right down to physiology and anatomy, down to the “livers”, shows how time flows like a heavy liquid through a person, similar to a vessel with a missing bottom, connected to the system; how it changes structure; shines through the caterpillar from which the time of today's Glebov, a doctor of sciences, who has settled comfortably in life, has been nurtured. And, turning the action back a quarter of a century, the writer seems to stop the moment.

From the result, Trifonov returns to the reason, to the roots, to the origins of “Glebism”. He returns the hero to what he, Glebov, hates most in his life and what he does not want to remember now - to childhood and youth. And the view “from here,” from the 70s, allows us to remotely examine not random, but regular features, allowing the author to focus his attention on the image of the time of the 30s and 40s.

Trifonov limits art space. Basically, the action takes place on a small patch between a tall gray house on Bersenevskaya embankment, a gloomy, gloomy building, similar to a modernized bastion, built in the late 20s for important workers (Shulepnikov lives there with his stepfather, Professor Ganchuk’s apartment is located there) - and a nondescript two-story house in the Deryuginsky courtyard, where Gleb’s family lives.

Two houses and a platform between them form the whole world with their own heroes, passions, relationships, contrasting social life. A large gray house, darkening the multi-storey alley. Life in it also seems to be stratified, following a floor hierarchy. Modern life - with family quarrels and troubles, pregnancies, scarves, thrift stores and grocery stores - not only highlights the past, but also enriches it, giving a feeling of the real flow of life. Historical, “everyday” problems are impossible in airless space; and everyday life is the air in which memory lives, history lives; everyday life modern life– not only a springboard for memories.

The house on the embankment is outwardly immovable, but not stable. Everything about him is in a state of tension internal movement, struggle. “Everyone scattered from that house, in all directions,” Shulepnikov tells Glebov, having met him after the war. Some are evicted from home, like the lyrical hero of the story: the scene of departure is one of the key ones in the story: it is a change in social status, and a farewell to childhood, growing up; a turning point, a transition to another world - the hero is no longer in the house, but not yet in a new place, in the rain, in a truck.

The big house and the small one define the boundaries of Glebov’s social claims and migrations. Since childhood, he has been overwhelmed by a thirst to achieve another position - not a guest. And the owner is in a big house. The memories through which the young heroes of the story pass are connected with the house on the embankment and with the Deryuginsky courtyard. The tests seem to foreshadow something serious that children will have to experience later: separation from their parents, difficult conditions of military life, death at the front.

The collapse of someone else's life brings Glebov evil joy: Although he himself has not yet achieved anything, others have already lost their home. This means that not everything is so firmly fixed in this life, and Glebov has hope! It is the house that determines Glebov’s values human life. And the path that Glebov takes in the story is the path to home, to the vital territory that he longs to capture, to a higher social status which he wants to find. He feels the inaccessibility of the big house extremely painfully: “Glebov was not very willing to go to visit the guys who lived in the big house, not only reluctantly, he went willingly, but also with caution, because the elevator operators at the entrances always looked with apprehensively and asked: “Who are you going to?” Glebov felt like an intruder caught red-handed. And it was almost never possible to know what the answer would be in the apartment...”

Returning to his place in the Deryuginskoye courtyard, Glebov, “excited, described what a chandelier was in the dining room of Shulepnikov’s apartment, and what a corridor along which you could ride a bicycle.”

Glebov's father, a seasoned and experienced man, is a convinced conformist. The main life rule that he teaches Glebov - caution - is also in the nature of “spatial self-restraint: “My children, follow the tram rule - don’t stick your head out!” The father’s Hermetic wisdom was born of a “long-standing and unerased fear” of life.

The conflict in “The House on the Embankment” between the “decent” Ganchuks, who treat everything with a “shade of secret superiority”, and the Druzyaevs - Shireiko, to whom Glebov internally joins, exchanging Ganchuk for Druzyaev, seems to return the conflict of “Exchange” in a new round - between the Dmitrievs and the Lukyanovs. In this conflict, it would seem that Glebov is located exactly in the middle, at a crossroads; he can turn either way. But Glebov doesn’t want to decide anything; It seems like fate decides everything for him: on the eve of the performance that Druzyaev so demands from Glebov, Nile’s grandmother, an inconspicuous, quiet old woman with a tuft of yellow hair at the back of her head, dies. And everything resolves itself: Glebov doesn’t have to go anywhere.

The house on the embankment disappears from Glebov’s life; the house, which seemed so strong, in fact turned out to be fragile, not protected from anything, it stands on the embankment, at the very edge of the land, near the water; and this is not just a random location, but a symbol deliberately chosen by the writer. The house goes under the water of time, like some kind of Atlantis, with its heroes, passions, conflicts: “the waves closed over it” - these words addressed by the author to Levka Shulepnikov can be applied to the whole house. One by one its inhabitants disappear from life: Anton and Himius died in the war; the elder Shulepnikov was found dead under unclear circumstances; Yulia Mikhailovna died, Sonya first ended up in a home for the mentally ill and also died... “The house collapsed.”

With the disappearance of the house, Glebov deliberately forgets everything, not only surviving this flood, but also reaching new prestigious heights precisely because he “tried not to remember. What was not remembered ceased to exist.” He then lived “a life that did not exist,” Trifonov emphasizes.

The story “The House on the Embankment” became a turning point for the writer in many respects. Trifonov sharply re-emphasizes previous motives, finds a new type, not previously studied in the literature, generalizing the social phenomenon of “Glebism”, analyzes social changes through a single human personality. The idea finally came to fruition artistic embodiment. After all, Sergei Troitsky’s reasoning about man as a thread of history can also be attributed to Glebov: he is the thread that stretched from the 30s to the 70s. The historical view of things developed by the writer in “Impatience”, based on material close to modern times, gives a new artistic result: Trifonov becomes a historian - a chronicler testifying to modernity.

But this is not the only role of “House on the Embankment” in Trifonov’s work. In this story, the writer subjected to a critical rethinking of his “beginning” - the story “Students”.

Memory or oblivion - this is how one can define the deep conflict of the novel “The Old Man”, which followed the story “The House on the Embankment”. In the novel “The Old Man,” Trifonov combined the genre of urban story and the genre of historical narrative into one whole. ical narrative.

Memory, which Professor Ganchuk refuses, becomes the main content of the life of Pavel Evgrafovich Letunov, the main character of the novel “The Old Man”. Memory stretches a thread from the suffocating summer of 1972 into the hot time of revolution and civil war. Joy and self-punishment, pain and immortality - all this is united in memory if it comes in the light of conscience. Pavel Evgrafovich is already on the edge of the abyss, he has come to the end of his life, and his memory reveals what his evil consciousness could previously hide or hide. The novel’s narrative moves in two layers of time, embodied in two stylistic streams. The action takes place in a holiday village, in an old wooden house, where Pavel Evgrafovich Letunov lives with his expanded family. The everyday conflict of the novel in the present tense is a conflict with neighbors in a dacha cooperative associated with obtaining a vacant dacha house. Fifty-year-old children insist that Pavel Evgrafovich show some effort to master the new “living space.” “I'm tired of our eternal blissful beggary. Why should we live worse than everyone else, more cramped than everyone else, more pitifully than everyone else?” The question rises to almost “moral” heights. “Keep in mind,” the children threaten, “there will be sin on your conscience. You think about peace of mind, not about your grandchildren. But they have to live, not you and me.” All this happens because Pavel Evgrafovich refused to carry out their order “to talk with the chairman of the board about this unfortunate house of Agrafena Lukinichna. But he couldn’t, he couldn’t, he finally and irrevocably couldn’t. How could he?.. Against the memory of Galya? It seems to them that if the mother is not alive, then she has no conscience. And everything starts from scratch.”

“Memory from the deepest depths”, which suddenly surged upon Letunov after receiving a letter from Asya, with whom he was in love during the hot revolutionary times, - this memory is opposed to a purely topical and very popular life concept like “Everything starts from scratch.” No, nothing passes, nothing disappears. The act of remembering becomes an ethical, moral act. Although this memory will have its own specific problems and characteristic failures - but more on that later.

Since the two main lines of the novel are connected by the life and memory of Letunov, the novel seems to follow the twists and turns of his memory; epic start is closely intertwined with Letunov’s internal monologue about the past and the lyrical digressions conducted on his behalf.

Trifonov seems to insert into the novel the proven genre of the “Moscow” story, with all its motives, the same set of problems, but he illuminates everything with that tragic historical background, on which the current melodramatic passions around the ill-fated house are boiling. The Serebryany Bor dacha plot near Moscow is a favorite setting for Trifonov’s prose. Childhood fears and childhood love, first trials and life losses - all this is enshrined in Trifonov’s mind in the image of the suburban dacha village of Sokoliny Bor, the Red Partisan cooperative, somewhere near the Sokol metro station; a place where you can arrive by trolleybus - Trifonov needs precise topography here, just as in the case of the gray house on Bersenevskaya embankment near the Udarnik cinema.

Time in the village does not pass by years and eras, but by hours and minutes. The activities of Letunov’s children and grandchildren are momentary, and he himself goes with the bowls for lunch, fearing to be late, receives it, drinks tea, hears how the children, killing time, play cards, engage in useless chatter that leads nowhere - live their lives. Sometimes disputes break out historical topic, which have no vital importance for the debaters - so, scratching their tongues, another round in a waste of time.

Is it possible to justify a person's actions at times? That is, is it possible to hide behind the times, and then, when they pass, “not say hello” to them, as the resourceful Glebov suggested?

This is the main, core theme and core problem of the novel “The Old Man”. What is a person - a sliver of circumstances, a play of the elements, or an active personality capable of at least to some extent expanding the “frames of time” and influencing the historical process? “Man is doomed, time triumphs,” Trifonov bitterly noted. “But all the same, all the same!” This is “all the same”, stubbornly repeated twice, this is “but”, stubbornly resisting! What – “all the same”? “...Despite the dangers, we must remember that the only possibility of competition with time is hidden here,” this is how the writer answered the question about the doom of human efforts.

History and time have power over Letunov, they dictate their will to him, but fate, as it seems to Letunov, could have turned out completely differently: “An insignificant little thing, like a slight turn of an arrow, throws the locomotive from one track to another, and instead of Rostov you end up in Warsaw...I there was a boy intoxicated by the mighty time.”

Note that here the train motif, persistent for Trifonov’s prose, appears here, symbolizing the fate of the hero. “The train is an allegory of life by Yu. Trifonov. If the hero jumped on the train, it means he was in time, life was good,” writes I. Zolotussky. But this train is still not an allegory of life, but an illusion of choice with which its heroes console themselves. So it seems to Letunov that the train could have turned towards Warsaw; in fact, he inevitably (“lava”, “flow”) follows his elemental path, carrying the hero along with him.

Letunov feels his subordination to the burning flow. This subordination reminds him of powerlessness before death - also controlled by the elements. At the bedside of his mother, dying of pneumonia in the hungry January 1918, he thinks: “Nothing can be done. You can kill a million people, overthrow a tsar, organize a great revolution, blow up half the world with dynamite, but you cannot save one person.” And, nevertheless, people chose the path to the revolution and the path in the revolution; and Trifonov shows different roads, different destinies, in general, and formed time - what seems to be an element, a flow. Trifonov analyzes human behavior and capabilities within the historical process, traces the dialectic of the relationship between personality and history.

Shura, Alexander Danilovich Pimenov, a crystal clear Bolshevik (the ideal revolutionary for Trifonov), carefully delves into the essence of the matter connected with people's lives. “Shura is trying to argue: it can be difficult to discern who is a counter-revolutionary and who is not... Each case must be carefully checked, because it is about the fate of people...” But people like Shura are surrounded by completely different people: Shigontsev, a man with a skull that resembles unbaked bread ; Braslavsky, who wants to “walk through the hot land like Carthage”: “Do you know why the revolutionary court was established? To punish the enemies of the people, and not for doubts and trials.” Shigontsev and Braslavsky also “rely” on history, imagine themselves as historical figures: “there is no need to be afraid of blood! Milk serves as food for children, and blood is food for the children of freedom, said Deputy Julien..."

But Shura, and with him Trifonov, tests historical justice at the cost of the life of an individual. So Shura is trying to cancel the execution of the hostages and the local teacher Slaboserdov, who warns the revolutionaries against careless actions in carrying out the issued directive. Braslavsky and others like him immediately decide to let Slaboserdov go to waste; Shura does not agree.

Revolutionary and historical justice is tested on the Weakhearts. “Shura whispers: “Why don’t you, unfortunate fools, see what will happen tomorrow? We rested our foreheads in today. And our suffering is for the sake of another, for the sake of tomorrow...” historical consciousness inherent specifically in Shura; Shigontsev and Braslavsky do not see the prospects for their actions, and therefore they are doomed. They, like Kandaurov (in their own way, of course), are fixed only in the current moment and are now going “all the way”, without thinking about the past (about the history of the Cossacks, which must not be forgotten, as Slaboserdov insists.

History and man, revolutionary necessity - and the price of human life. Trifonov's heroes, directly involved in the revolution and civil war, are heroes - ideologists who build the concept of man and history, theorists who put their idea into practice.

Migulin is a very colorful figure, and Trifonov could well put him at the center of the novel. He really novel hero- from his tragic fate, an “old man” at forty-seven years old, beloved of nineteen-year-old Asya, who fell in love with him for the rest of her life. The life of Migulin, a passionate, indomitable man, contrasts in the structure of the novel with Kandaurov. Kandaurov in the novel is the center of the present; Migulin is the center of the past. The merciless author's trial and death sentence to Kandaurov contrasts with the trial of Migulin, whose personality, born of history, belongs to history: the controversial figure of Migulin remained in it, although the man died. The tragic irony of life, however, lies precisely in the fact that it is the Migulins who die, while the Kandaurovs are alive and feeling great. Kandaurov’s doom is still a kind of violence by the artist against the truth of life; a desire that Trifonov is trying to pass off as reality.

In the novel, the definition of “old man” is persistently repeated: Migulin is called an old man, an old man of 30 is a convict; the old man is Trifonov’s age that constantly attracts attention; in old people, in his opinion, experience and time are condensed. In old people historical time flows into the present: through the “life memories” of old people, Trifonov carries out a synthesis of history and modernity: through a single existence on the threshold of death, he reveals the essence of historical phenomena and changes. “So many years... But perhaps the days were extended only for this reason and he was saved, so that he could collect the shards like a vase and fill them with the sweetest wine. It's called: truth. All the truth, of course, all the years that dragged, flew... all my losses, labors, all the turbines, trenches, trees in the garden, dug holes, people around; everything is true, but there are clouds that sprinkle your garden, and there are storms that thunder over the country, embracing half the world. Everything once spun like a whirlwind, threw it into the heavens, and never again did I swim in those heights... And then what? Everything is lack of time, neglect, lack of attention... Youth, greed, misunderstanding, enjoyment of the minute... My God, but there was never time! S. Eremina and V. Piskunov noted the connection of this motive with another: “no time” is Kandaurov’s leitmotif; there is no time for a balanced decision on Migulin’s fate; and only in old age Letunov (the irony of time!) finds time for conscientious work - not only on Migulin: this is only an excuse (albeit tragic) for Pavel Evgrafovich to understand himself to the end. Letunov is convinced that he is dealing with Migulin’s case, and he is looking into Letunov’s case. In the epilogue of the novel - after Letunov’s death - a certain graduate student appears - a historian who is writing a dissertation on Migulin. And this is what he thinks about (answering questions about the truth that Letunov constantly asks, asking about history): “The truth is that the kind Pavel Evgrafovich in the twenty-first, when asked by the investigator whether he admits the possibility of participating in a counter-revolutionary uprising, answered sincerely : “I admit it,” but, of course, I forgot about it, nothing surprising, then everyone or almost everyone thought so ... "

The burning summer of 1972, depicted so realistically and in detail in the novel, develops into a symbol: “The cast iron was crushing, the forests were burning. Moscow was dying in suffocation, suffocating from a gray, ashy, brown, reddish, black - at different hours of the day of different colors - haze that filled the streets and houses with a slowly flowing cloud, spreading like fog or poisonous gas, the smell of burning permeated everywhere, it was possible to escape it’s impossible, the lakes became shallow, the river exposed the stones, water barely trickled out of the taps, the birds didn’t sing, life came to an end on this planet, being killed by the sun.” The picture is both reliable, almost documentary, and generalizing, almost symbolic. The old man is before death, on the threshold of oblivion, and the “black and red” mourning darkness of this summer for him is both a harbinger of departure and hellish fire, scorching the soul that has betrayed it three times. Burning, fire, smoke, not enough air - these natural emblematic images are persistent in the landscapes of the nineteenth year: “A distinct night horror in the steppe, where there is the burning of herbs and the smell of wormwood.” “And the water has become like wormwood, and people are dying from bitterness,” mutters the deranged seminarian

We can say that Trifonov does not paint a landscape in the usual understanding this word, but the landscape of time. The social landscape in the story “Exchange” (river bank) or the urban social landscape in “House on the Embankment” preceded this landscape of time, more accurate and - at the same time - more generalized. But The Old Man also contains a vivid social landscape. As in “Exchange,” this is a landscape of a dacha cooperative village on the river bank. Harsh, fire-breathing time, passing through “years filled with hot coals and blazing with heat,” destroys the children’s dacha idyll, and Trifonov shows the passage of time through the landscape: “Collapsed and collapsed.” old life, as the sandy shore collapses - with a quiet noise and suddenly. ...The shore collapsed. Along with pine trees, benches, paths strewn with fine gray sand, white dust, pine cones, cigarette butts, pine needles, scraps of bus tickets, condoms, hairpins, pennies that fell from the pockets of those who hugged here once on warm evenings. Everything flew down under the pressure of the water.”

The river bank is a persistent Trifonov image – an emblem. A house on the banks of a river, on an embankment in the city, or a dacha in the Moscow region, seems to stand on the banks of an element that can suddenly destroy everything: both the house and its inhabitants. The elements of a river, as deceptively quiet as in the Moscow region, or “black water” breathing winter steam in Moscow, can insidiously undermine and collapse an unstable bank - and with it all your previous life will collapse. “It was a disastrous place, although in appearance there was nothing special: pine trees, lilacs, fences, old dachas, a steep bank with benches that were moved away from the water every two years, because the sandy bank was collapsing, and a rough road with small pebbles , tar; the tar was laid in the mid-thirties... On both sides of the Big Alley stretched areas of new huge dachas, and the pine trees, surrounded by fences, now creaked in the wind and oozed a resinous spirit in the heat for someone personally, sort of like musicians invited to play at a wedding. ...Yes, yes, it was a bad place. Or rather, a damned place. Despite all its charms. Because people died here in a strange way: some drowned in the river during their nightly swims, others were struck down by a sudden illness, and some took their own lives in the attic of their dachas.”

Trifonov seems to be implementing, deploying in everyday life the metaphor of “seeing time.” There are blind people, but there are also people who see it: “Why don’t you see, poor fools, what will happen tomorrow?” - says Shura; “how to see time if you are in it?” - Letunov thinks, remembering the time when “red foam obscured the eyes.” Shigontsev’s “look is still the same flaming, satanic” - that is, not seeing, blind to the real historical process, clouded by frenzied fury; about the death of the Trotskyist Braslavsky, whose (telling detail) “By evening his vision deteriorated,” Shigontsev says: “It’s your own fault, you blind devil!” “A dark second” is not only a figurative expression in the text, but also a person’s real blindness to the course of history, the inability to recognize and discern the essence of historical changes. : “It’s your own fault, blind devil!” “A dark second” is not only a figurative expression in the text, but also a person’s real blindness to the course of history, the inability to recognize and discern the essence of historical changes.

Only blood involvement in history, says the novel “The Old Man” as a whole, is capable of taking a person beyond the limits of an individual, self-contained existence; Only responsibility can save a person from daily night blindness, can make a blind man sighted, otherwise he will spend his whole life “croaking like a frog in a swamp. And in the affirmation of this historical responsibility of modern man, which protects him from the tricks of convenient unconsciousness, is the pathos of the novel.

The fate of Trifonov's prose can be called happy. It is read by a country where Trifonov’s books have collected impressive circulations in thirty years; it is translated and published by East and West, Latin America and Africa. Thanks to the deep social specificity of the person he depicted and the key moments of Russian history, he became interesting to readers all over the world. Whatever Trifonov wrote about - about the People's Will or about the civil war - he wanted to understand our time, convey its problems, reveal the causes of modern social phenomena. He perceived life as a single artistic process, where everything is connected, everything rhymes. And “man is a thread stretching through time, the thinnest nerve of history...”. Yuri Trifonov felt himself and remains for us to be such a “nerve of history,” responding to pain.

Many famous works Yuri Trofimov are associated with touching images childhood. In his prose there is a sense of unity of thoughts and themes that are not repeated, they only complement each other.

From “Students” to “Preliminary Results” Trifonov develops a single motive of his work; he allows the themes to grow in own works, thereby helping them fulfill their tasks for realistic prose. Trifonov himself said that he “is not interested in the horizontals of literature, but in its verticals,” and it is difficult to characterize the general idea of ​​his stories more succinctly than he himself.

The main character of the story “House on the Embankment” is time

Trofimov’s story “The House on the Embankment” was published in the magazine “Friendship of Peoples” in 1976. This work is called the most social novel writer, in “The House on the Embankment” Trofimov pursued the goal of depicting the passage of mysterious and irreversible time, which changes everything, including mercilessly changing people and their destinies.

The social orientation of the story is determined by the understanding of the past and present, and both of these categories represent an interconnected process. With the plot itself, Trofimov emphasizes that history is created here and now, that history is in every day, and the presence of the past is felt in both the future and the present.

Many critics say that key hero The story is time itself, at the same time elusive and most conscious of man as a phenomenon. Trofimov describes the time period from the 30s to the 70s, and using the example of the hero Glebov, he shows the power and mystery of time changing everything.

Image of Glebov

The narrative moves from the present to the past, from the Glebov we know, and to that twenty-five-year-old guy whom, it would seem, we cannot know. PhD, modern man Glebov most of all does not want to remember his childhood and youth, but it is precisely to this period that the author returns him.

And Glebov’s face is complemented by new features and nuances, which to our eyes were already hidden in wrinkles. Why is the title of the story so simple and unambiguous?

The answer to this question, first of all, lies in Glebov’s values; for him, a house is a symbol of possessing something, a symbol of becoming; a sustainable and stable life in which there is a home is his ideal.

Being young, he even experiences evil and unworthy of a person the joy of someone else losing their home is proof to him that life is changeable, and unfortunately, it gives him the false hope that if he doesn’t have something now, he will have it in the future.

This is how he sees the law of the passage of time. And the house is the main symbol of the story; its very location tells about the key meaning of the story. The house stands on the edge of the land, the house is located right next to the sea, and over time the house collapses, it goes under water.

The destructive power of time also affects the inhabitants of the house, their lives change radically or even end. And only Glebov thinks that he survived, he not only survived, he achieved the heights he dreamed of. And he tries not to remember what happened, so it’s easier for him to believe that nothing happened.

The opposite pole is relatively village prose– this is urban prose. Characteristic figures - Trifonov, Bitov, Makanin, Kim, Kireev, Orlov and some others.

Yu.V. Trifonov (1925-81) is considered one of the most prominent masters of “urban” prose (ideological and artistic direction). This is more of a thematic designation. Trifonov is extremely rationalistic. Chekhov's tradition. Early Trifonov - realism; late – elements of postmodernism. Chekhov's artistic and aesthetic principles - his commitment to ordinary plots, to the "realism of the simplest case", to reticence, incompleteness of the plot situation, to muted conflicts, to "endlessness", to hidden subtext, to the lyrical activity of the author's narrative, his trust in the reader, recreating the unsaid by the writer

Urban - social and everyday, morally descriptive. At first it is almost an intermediate designation. Trifonov turned this term into an ideologically meaningful one; he is interested in a certain social type - urban philistinism. Philistinism is not a class, as in the 19th century, but a moral phenomenon. Most of Trifonov's heroes are people of intellectual labor or belonging to the intelligentsia layer (philologists, translators, playwrights, actresses, engineers, historians). Mainly humanists. Shows that the overwhelming majority lack the features of the intelligentsia of Gorky and Chekhov. They strive for personal comfort, are shallow, superficial, and petty.

The cycle of “Moscow stories”": "Exchange", "Another Life", "Preliminary Results", "House on the Embankment". Heroes of middle age, average income. He views the world of the intelligentsia very sharply and evilly. The main test for modern man is everyday life, the war with everyday life. Many died morally in this war. He writes an article about it. Trifonov is interested in any moments of life, incl. household (exam). Considers the very course of life; tries to show “small” emotional experiences (excitement before an exam). People are very responsible about what is happening.

A hermetically sealed small world of “little people” who, by social level, belong to the elite of society (artists, writers, philologists). But their level of interests and relationships are small. Trifonov assesses the moral ill-being of society.

1969 – story “Exchange”. The concept is multi-layered, not so much an exchange as a substitution that happened to the hero during an apartment exchange. Social antagonism. Substitution is moral degradation.

"House on the Embankment" (1976): the world, which seemed fundamentally significant to the heroes of Trifonov’s first novel, is crushed, becoming musty, provincial, small. Prudence and self-interest prevail. The image of a house (“House on the Embankment”): a house is a kind of state; symbolic, frightening image. a painful work, a lot of biography.

The beginning is essentially a prose poem. A novel about students, but from an ideological position. The narrative extends beyond student life. Social differentiation is shown. Childhood is entrusted to the character.

The house takes on the features of an idyllic space. This is the key to peace of mind and continuity of generations.

The category of memory and the tradition of Dostoevsky are fundamentally significant. Dostoevsky is presented in the background. Sonya is the symbolic name of the victim. Sonya's mother is trying to buy herself out of fate. Sonya's parents are in some ways victims, in some ways culprits. The category of memory is in Vadim’s memoirs. Talk about Raskolnikov. Vadim - Raskolnikov, Sonya's parents and she herself are his victims. The motive of memory is the motive of oblivion.

The main character of the story “House on the Embankment” is time. The action takes place in Moscow and unfolds in several time plans: the mid-1930s, the second half of the 1940s, the beginning of the 1970s. Like in Klim Samgin. Trofimov pursued the goal of depicting the passage of mysterious and irreversible time, which changes everything, including mercilessly changing people and their destinies. The social orientation of the story is determined by the understanding of the past and present, and both of these categories represent an interconnected process. With the plot itself, Trofimov emphasizes that history is created here and now, that history is in every day, and the presence of the past is felt in both the future and the present.

In the artistic world of Yuri Trifonov (1925 - 1981), a special place has always been occupied by images of childhood - the time of personality formation. Starting from the very first stories, childhood and adolescence were the criteria by which the writer seemed to test reality for humanity and justice, or rather, for inhumanity and injustice. Dostoevsky’s famous words about “a child’s teardrop” can be used as an epigraph to Trifonov’s entire work: “the scarlet, oozing flesh of childhood” - this is what they say in the story “The House on the Embankment”.

Trifonov was characterized by historical thinking; He subjected each specific social phenomenon to analysis, relating to reality as a witness and historian of our time and a person deeply rooted in Russian history, inseparable from it. Man's responsibility before history.

A person in the context of history, a hero of time. In later works - an account of history, family history. In "Exchange" - the image of a grandfather who feels that he has no followers (People's Will). Disappointment in the people of the 1970s who did not resemble the ideal. Trifonov is trying to understand something, then he tries to blame the revolutionaries. Gradually, anti-revolutionary issues arise.

Some historical characters are included in the plot (Nechaev's circle, Kletochnikov). Reflection on history is very important and is presented in different ways (heroes are playwrights/historians, scientists). Theme of history and historical subjects. Looking through the prism of time, the category of time is very multi-layered. The main theme is how a person changes dramatically throughout life. A person lives several lives, and the changes are irreversible. The motive of another life (“Duck Hunt” by Vampilov, monologue by Zilov; “Three Sisters” by Chekhov).

The world through the prism of the protagonist’s perception, which is often deliberately biased, distorts what is happening. Prism – false mirror(“Life of Klim Samgin”). The art of artistic detail (Chekhov).

The motive of fear, the motivation for the actions (or rather inaction) of the hero.

The story “The House on the Embankment” is built “on an intense polemic with the philosophy of oblivion, with crafty attempts to hide behind “times.” This polemic is the pearl of the work.” What Glebov and his ilk are trying to forget, burn into memory, is restored by the entire fabric of the work, and the detailed descriptiveness inherent in the story is artistic and historical evidence of a writer recreating the past, resisting oblivion. The author’s position is expressed in the desire to restore, not to forget anything, to immortalize everything in the reader’s memory.

He invites the reader to understand, decide, see. Consciously conveys to the reader his right to evaluate life and people. The writer sees his task in the most profound, psychologically convincing reconstruction of the character of a complex person and the confusing, unclear circumstances of his life.

The author's voice sounds openly only once: in the prologue of the story, setting a historical distance; after the introduction, all events acquire internal historical completeness. The living equivalence of different layers of time in the story is obvious; none of the layers is given abstractly, by hint, it is unfolded plastically; Each time in the story has its own image, its own smell and color.

In “The House on the Embankment” Trifonov also combines different voices in the narrative. Most of the story is written in the third person, but Glebov’s inner voice, his assessments, his reflections are woven into the dispassionate protocol study of Glebov’s psychology. Moreover: as A. Demidov accurately notes, Trifonov “enters into a special lyrical contact with the hero.” What is the purpose of this contact? Convicting Glebov is too simple a task. Trifonov sets as his goal the study of Glebov’s psychology and life concept, which required such a thorough penetration into the hero’s microworld. Trifonov follows his hero as a shadow of his consciousness, plunging into all the nooks and crannies of self-deception, recreating the hero from within himself.

“...One of my favorite techniques - it has even become, perhaps, repeated too often - is the author’s voice, which seems to be woven into the hero’s internal monologue,” admitted Yu. Trifonov.

“...The image of the author, which appears repeatedly in the prehistory of the story, is completely absent during the unfolding of its central conflict. But in the most acute, climactic scenes, even the very voice of the author, which sounds quite clearly in the rest of the narrative, is reduced, almost completely drowned out.” V. Kozheinov emphasizes precisely that Trifonov does not correct Glebov’s voice, his assessment of what is happening: “The author’s voice exists here, in the end, as if only in order to fully embody Glebov’s position and convey his words and intonations. This is how and only Glebov creates the image of Krasnikova. And this unpleasant image is not corrected in any way by the author’s voice. It inevitably turns out that the author’s voice is, to one degree or another, echoed here by the voice of Glebov.”

In the lyrical digressions, the voice of a certain lyrical “I” sounds, in which Kozheinov sees the image of the author. But this is only one of the voices of the narrative, from which one cannot fully judge the author’s position in relation to events, and especially to himself in the past. In these digressions, some autobiographical details are read (moving from a large house to an outpost, loss of a father, etc.). However, Trifonov specifically separates this lyrical voice from the voice of the author - the narrator.

V. Kozheinov reproaches Trifonov for the fact that “the author’s voice did not dare, so to speak, to speak openly next to Glebov’s voice in the climactic scenes. He chose to withdraw altogether. And it belittled general meaning stories. But it's the other way around.

The story of the successful critic Glebov, who once did not stand up for his teacher-professor, became in the novel the story of psychological self-justification for betrayal. Unlike the hero, the author refused to justify betrayal by the cruel historical circumstances of the 1930s and 1940s.

In “The House on the Embankment” Trifonov turns, as a witness, to the memory of his generation, which Glebov wants to cross out (“the life that never happened”). And Trifonov’s position is expressed, ultimately, through artistic memory, striving for socio-historical knowledge of the individual and society, vitally connected by time and place.

Candidate of Sciences, modern man Glebov most of all does not want to remember his childhood and youth, but it is precisely to this period that the author returns him (25 years ago). The author leads the narrative from the present to the past, and from modern Glebov restores Glebov of twenty-five years ago; but through one layer another is visible. The portrait of Glebov is deliberately given by the author: “Almost a quarter of a century ago, when Vadim Aleksandrovich Glebov was not yet bald, plump, with breasts like a woman’s, with thick thighs, a big belly and sagging shoulders... when he was not yet tormented by heartburn in the morning, dizziness, and a feeling of weakness throughout his whole body, when his liver worked normally and he could eat fatty foods, not very fresh meat, drink as much wine and vodka as he wanted, without fear of consequences... when he was quick on his feet, bony, with long hair, in round glasses, his appearance resembled a commoner from the seventies... in those days... he was unlike himself and inconspicuous, like a caterpillar.”.

Trifonov shows clearly, in detail down to physiology and anatomy, how time changes a person. Portrait characteristics are negative. Not in better side time has changed a person - neither externally nor internally.

2) “He was absolutely nothing, Vadik Baton,” recalls the lyrical hero. - But this, as I later realized, is a rare gift: to be nothing. People who know how to be nothing go far.”.

However, the voice of the lyrical hero is heard here, and not the author’s position. The loaf is just “nothing” at first glance. In fact, he clearly carries out his line, satisfies his passion, achieves what he wants by any means.

3) The highlighted word links together several temporal layers of the work. Helps the narrator move both in time and in the space of a literary text. " And I still remember how we were leaving that house on the embankment. Rainy October, the smell of mothballs and dust, the corridor is littered with bundles of books, bundles, suitcases, bags, packages. We need to demolish all this “hurda-murda” from the fifth floor down. The guys came to help. Some person asks the elevator operator: “Whose hurda-murda is this?”

“I remember how we were leaving that house on the embankment...” This is a memory text in which the highlighted word participates in the organization of a retrospective plan. We do not enter into the time plane of the past, but look detachedly from the present. And from the present we see “bundles of books, bundles, suitcases, bags, packages.” And here a collective concept appears, a word from childhood - “khurda-murda”. This word links together the past and the present. The narration is now told from the past, from the perspective of a participant in the events, rather than someone remembering them. The narrator enters into a dialogue with himself, with his little self, with his company. The function of distinguishing between one’s own and someone else’s words is also manifested here. Khurda-murda is a word belonging to the child, the lyrical hero and his company; a word that needs to be clarified so that it is clear, give a comment on it.

The second direction is "Home".

The FIPI website gives the following definition: “Home” - the direction is aimed at thinking about home as the most important value of existence, rooted in the distant past and continuing to be a moral support in today’s life. The ambiguous concept of “home” allows us to talk about the unity of small and large, the relationship between material and spiritual, external and internal.

HOUSE- a word with multiple meanings...
This is a family home. This is a symbol of reliability and safety, comfort and warmth. We were born in our parents' house, our close and beloved people live here, our childhood passed here, we grew up here... We keep warm memories of the years we lived in our parents' house all our lives. In our own home we receive our first lessons in morality. It is not for nothing that it is called a cradle, a pier, a pier. A person’s true self is revealed in his home; it is here that he sheds all his masks behind which he hides in society. There is no point in pretending at home, because nothing threatens you there.
This small homeland. In our hometown or village, we discover the world, we learn to love nature, and get to know people.
This is the Motherland. A big house for all the people. It is the Motherland that calls its sons and daughters for help during the terrible years of war.
This is a haven for the soul, because the beauty and warmth of the house are closely related to the beauty of the soul of its owners. This spirituality our thoughts.
This is the Earth, and every corner of it is a piece of a large and beautiful planet, which we should love just like our parents’ home.

WHAT ESSAY TOPICS CAN BE ON DECEMBER 2nd?

Our home is Russia.
“Parental home is the beginning of the beginning.”
Home is a place where you are always welcome.
The house is an island, a fortress in the chaos of revolutionary and military events.
Home is a refuge for a tired soul, a place for rest and recuperation.
Home is a place where spiritual, moral and cultural traditions are preserved.
Home is a statement of eternity, beauty and strength of life.
Home is the basis of human existence.
Home is a wonderful dream of happiness.
A house is a portrait of the soul of a family.
Losing a home is a disaster moral ideals. (About the flooding of villages in the 1970s–80s)
Home is a discord with oneself and the world.

WHAT BOOKS YOU MUST READ WHEN PREPARING FOR THIS DIRECTION:

N.V. Gogol "Dead Souls".
I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov".
L.N. Tolstoy "War and Peace".
A.I. Solzhenitsyn "Matryonin's Dvor".

ADDITIONAL LITERATURE:

M.A. Bulgakov " White Guard", "Dog's heart".
F.M. Dostoevsky "Crime and Punishment". Description of Raskolnikov’s life.
M. Gorky “At the Bottom”.
Yu.V. Trifonov "House on the Embankment".
V.S. Rasputin "Farewell to Matera".
A.P. Chekhov. "The Cherry Orchard".
A.S. Pushkin "Eugene Onegin".
I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons".
M.A. Sholokhov " Quiet Don».

QUOTE MATERIAL

Proverbs and sayings:

Being a guest is good, but being at home is better.
Not at home as a guest: once you've been there, you won't leave.
Your home is not someone else’s: you can’t leave it.
Without an owner, a house is an orphan.
Love at home what you want, and in people - what they give.
The hut is not red in its corners, but red in its pies.
It is not the owner's house that is painted, but the owner's house.
Nice for someone who has a lot of stuff in the house.
It’s a good speech that there is a stove in the hut.
Thanks to this house, let's go to another one.
Life is bad for someone who has nothing in his home.
Every house is held by its owner.
For the lonely, everywhere is home.

1ST ESSAY SAMPLE

on the topic "Parental home"

1. Introduction to the essay.
Home...Parental home. For each of us it has exceptional significance. After all, a person is not only born in his father’s house, but also receives a spiritual and moral charge for the rest of his life; in his home and family, those moral guidelines that he will need throughout his life are laid in a person.

It is here that a person feels and learns all the beginnings in life. “Everything in a person begins from childhood,” emphasized writer S.V. Mikhalkov. And what we will be like in life depends on the family in which we grew up, on the spiritual atmosphere that reigned in our parents’ home.

The theme of home is a cross-cutting theme of the world fiction. Writers in their works told us about different families and the houses in which these families lived.

2. The main part of the essay - literary arguments(analysis literary works or specific episodes of works).
Argument 1.

In the comedy “The Minor,” Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin shows the landowner’s house of the Prostakov nobles. What kind of house is this?
It is dominated not by a man, the head of the family, but by Mrs. Prostakova.
The atmosphere in this house is very difficult, because from morning to evening you can hear screams, swearing, rude words. The landowner watches everyone, cheats, lies, no one can calm her down.
Prostakova has no human dignity. She scolds the tailor Trishka and her henpecked husband, who only indulges her. The wife is tyrannical towards her husband. For the sake of her son, she throws herself at her brother. She feels sorry for her overworked son.
Sophia complains to Milon about the hard life in the Prostakovs' house.
Lawlessness is happening in this lady's house. An ignorant, cruel, narcissistic mistress builds family relationships from a position of strength. Despotism destroys and destroys everything human in a person.
Starodum remarks: “These are the worthy fruits of evil.” But this evil and cruel woman is a mother. She loves her Mitrofanushka very much. In the atmosphere of his home, ruled by his mother, the son could not learn anything good from his mother; he did not receive the strong moral charge that he so needed in life.
Such a situation in the parental home cannot give Mitrofan good and strong moral lessons.

Argument 2.

A completely different house, the house of the Rostov family, is shown to us by Lev Nikolaevich Tolstoy in the novel “War and Peace”.
We see big house on Povarskaya Street in the center of Moscow. A big one lives here Friendly family Count Ilya Nikolaevich Rostov. The doors of this house were open to everyone; there was enough space for everyone.
The head of the house is Count Ilya Nikolaevich Rostov, a lover of home holidays. He loves his family and trusts his children. "He is kindness itself." “He was a most wonderful man,” this is how his acquaintances spoke about him after his death. Tolstoy emphasizes that the gift of a teacher is inherent in Countess Rostova. She is the first adviser for her daughters, she is generous, sincere in her interactions with children, hospitable, and open.
The family is musical and artistic; they love singing and dancing in the house. All this contributed to the fact that the parental home became a special atmosphere of spirituality. “Amorous air” reigned in the Rostovs’ house.
Happy home at the Rostovs! Children feel parental tenderness and affection! Peace, harmony and love are the moral climate in a Moscow home. The life values ​​that the children took from the Rostov parental home are worthy of respect - they are generosity, patriotism, nobility, respect, mutual understanding and support. All children have inherited from their parents the ability to participate, to empathize, to sympathize, to be merciful.
For the Rostovs, the parental home and family are the source of all moral values ​​and moral guidelines, this is the beginning of beginnings.

3. Conclusion.

Two houses - Mrs. Prostakova's house at Fonvizin's and the Rostovs' house at Tolstoy's. And how different they are! And this depends on the parents themselves and the moral and spiritual atmosphere that is created in the parental home, in the family. I really want to believe that in our time there will be as many parents as possible who care about their home and the strong spiritual atmosphere in it. Let every home become a real source of moral guidelines for young people!

2ND SAMPLE ESSAY

“The theme of home in the novel “Quiet Don” by M.A. Sholokhov"

In the epic novel “Quiet Don” M. Sholokhov painted a grandiose picture of the life of the Cossack Don with its primordial traditions and unique way of life. The theme of home and family is one of the central ones in the novel.
This theme sounds powerfully from the very beginning of the work. “Melekhovsky yard is on the very edge of the farm,” - this is how the epic novel begins, and throughout the entire narrative M. Sholokhov will tell us about the inhabitants of this yard. A line of defense runs through the Melekhovs’ yard; it is occupied either by Reds or Whites, but for the heroes, their father’s house forever remains the place where the closest people live, always ready to receive and warm them.
The life of the inhabitants of the Melekhov house appears in an interweaving of contradictions, attractions and struggles. The first chapters show how a common cause, household concerns, unite these different people into a single whole - a family. That is why M. Sholokhov describes in such detail various labor processes - fishing, plowing, etc. Mutual assistance, caring for each other, the joy of work - this is what unites the Melekhov family.
The house rests on the dominance of the elders. Panteley Prokofich and Ilyinichna are truly the stronghold of the family. Panteley Prokofich was hardworking, economical, very hot-tempered, but kind and sensitive at heart. Despite the intra-family split, Panteley Prokofich tries to unite the pieces of the old way of life into one whole - at least for the sake of his grandchildren and children. He constantly strives to bring something into the house, to do something useful for the household. And the fact that he dies outside the home that he loved more than anything in the world is the tragedy of a man from whom time has taken away the most precious things - family and shelter.
M. Sholokhov calls Ilyinichna “a courageous and proud old woman.” She is characterized by wisdom and justice. She consoles her children when they feel bad, but she also judges them harshly when they do wrong. All her thoughts are connected with the fate of the children, especially the youngest, Gregory. And it is deeply symbolic that at the last minute before her death, already realizing that she was not destined to see Gregory, she leaves the house and, turning to the steppe, says goodbye to her son: “Grishenka! My dear! My little blood!
The entire Melekhov family found itself at the crossroads of great historical events. But the thought of a home is also alive in the souls of the younger generation of this family.
Grigory Melekhov feels a blood connection with his home, his native land. Passionately loving Aksinya, he refuses her offer to leave, to give up everything. Only later does he decide to leave, and even then not far, beyond the boundaries of the farm. He sees his home and peaceful work as the main values ​​of life. In war, shedding blood, he dreams of how he will prepare for sowing, and these thoughts make his soul warm.
Natalya is also closely connected with the Melekhov house. Even realizing that she is unloved, even knowing that Grigory is with Aksinya, she remains in the house of her father-in-law and mother-in-law. Instinctively, she understands that only here, in her husband’s house, can she wait for him and start a new life with him. happy life. And perhaps that is precisely why the love of Aksinya and Gregory is doomed from the very beginning, because it is homeless. They meet outside the home, outside established customs. And in order to be together, they both need to leave home. It is deeply symbolic that Aksinya dies on the road, and Grigory at the end of the novel finds himself in front of his home, with his son in his arms. And this turns out to be his only salvation and hope of surviving in a collapsing, splitting world.
For M. Sholokhov, a person is the most valuable thing on our planet, and the most important thing that helps shape a person’s soul is his home, in which he was born, raised, where he will always be expected and loved, and where he will definitely return.