Side conflict in drama. Plot and conflict

It is legitimate to distinguish two kinds (types) of plot conflicts: firstly, local and transitory contradictions, and secondly, stable conflict states (positions).

In literature, the most deeply rooted plots are those whose conflicts, in the course of the events depicted, arise, escalate and are somehow resolved - overcome and exhaust themselves. Life's contradictions here are within the series of events and are closed in them, entirely concentrated in the time of action, and are steadily moving towards a denouement. Thus, in W. Shakespeare’s tragedy “Othello,” the hero’s spiritual drama is limited to the period of time when Iago’s devilish intrigue was woven and successfully carried out, without which harmony would have reigned in the lives of Othello and Desdemona mutual love. The evil intent of the envious person is the main and only reason for the sad delusion, the suffering of jealousy of the protagonist and the death of the heroine at his hand. The conflict of the tragedy "Othello" (with all its tension and depth) local And transitory. He is intra-plot. And this is by no means a feature of this particular tragedy, and not a property of Shakespeare’s poetics specifically. And not a feature of the genre as such. The relationship between plot and conflict that we have outlined in the example of Othello is a supra-epochal and supra-genre property of dramatic and epic works. It is present in the traditional epic, and in comedies, and in short stories, and in fables, and in (217) lyric-epic poems, and often in novels. Based on this kind of plots, Hegel wrote: ʼʼAt the root of the collision (ᴛ.ᴇ. conflict. - V.X.) lies violation, ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ cannot be maintained as a violation, but must be eliminated. A collision is such a change in the harmonic state, which in turn must be changed. And further: the conflict “needs resolution following the struggle of opposites.”

Plots based on local and transitory conflicts have been studied in literary criticism of the 20th century. very carefully. The palm belongs to V.Ya. Proppu. In the book “Morphology of a Fairy Tale” (1928), the scientist used the term “function” as a reference charactersʼʼ, which meant the character’s action in its significance for the further course of events. In fairy tales, the functions of the characters (ᴛ.ᴇ. their place and role in the development of the action), according to Propp, are built in a certain way. First of all, the course of events is connected with the initial “lack” - with the desire and intention of the hero to find something (in many fairy tales this is a bride) that he does not have. Secondly, there is a confrontation between the hero (protagonist) and the anti-hero (antagonist). And finally, thirdly, as a result of the events that took place, the hero receives what he is looking for, gets married, and at the same time “reigns.” A happy ending, harmonizing the lives of the central characters, acts as a necessary component of the plot of a fairy tale.

The three-part plot scheme, which Propp spoke about in relation to fairy tales, was considered in literary studies of the 60s and 70s as a supra-genre one: as a characteristic of the plot as such. This branch of science in the literature is called narratology(from lat. narrative - narration). Based on the work of Propp, French scientists of a structuralist orientation (C. Bremont, A.J. Greimas) undertook experiments in constructing a universal model of event series in folklore and literature. They expressed thoughts about the content of the plot, about the philosophical meaning that is embodied in works where the action is directed from the beginning to the denouement. Thus, according to Greimas, in the plot structure studied by Propp, the event series contain “all the signs of human activity - irreversible, free and responsible”; here there is a “simultaneous affirmation of immutability and the possibility of change”<...>obligatory order and freedom, destroying or restoring (218) this order. Event series, according to Greimas, carry out mediation(gaining a measure, a middle, a central position), which, we note, is akin to catharsis: “Mediation of a narrative consists of “humanizing the world,” giving it a personal and eventual dimension. The world is justified by the existence of man, man is included in the world.

The universal plot model in question manifests itself in different ways. In short stories and related genres (this includes fairy tales), the proactive and courageous actions of the heroes are positively significant and successful. Thus, in the endings of most of the Renaissance short stories (in particular, Boccaccio’s), dexterous and cunning, active and energetic people triumph—those who want and know how to achieve their goal, gain the upper hand, and defeat rivals and adversaries. In the novelistic model of the plot, there is an apology for vitality, energy, and will.

The situation is different in fables (as well as parables and similar works, where didacticism is directly or indirectly present). Here, the hero’s decisive actions are illuminated critically, sometimes mockingly, but most importantly, they end in his defeat, which appears as a kind of retribution. The initial situation of novelistic and fable Works is the same (the hero did something to make him feel better), but the result is completely different, even the opposite: in the first case, the character achieves what he wants, in the second he is left with nothing, as happened with the old woman from Pushkin’s “Tale of fisherman and fish. Plots of the fable-parable type can acquire the deepest drama (remember the fate of the heroines of “The Thunderstorm” by A.N. Ostrovsky and “Anna Karenina” by L.N. Tolstoy). The fable-parable beginning, in particular, is present in numerous works of the XIX V. about the loss of humanity of a hero striving for material success and a career ("Lost Illusions" by O. de Balzac, " An ordinary storyʼʼI.A. Goncharova). Such works can rightfully be regarded as the artistic embodiment of the idea of ​​retribution rooted (both in ancient and Christian consciousness) for violations of the deep laws of existence - even if this retribution comes not in the guise of external defeats, but in the form of spiritual emptiness and depersonality.

Plots in which the action moves from beginning to end and: temporary, local conflicts are identified can be called archetypal(since they go back to historically early literature); they dominate centuries of literary and artistic (219) experience. They play a significant role twists and turns Since the time of Aristotle, this term has denoted sudden and sharp shifts in the destinies of characters - all possible turns from happiness to unhappiness, from success to failure, or in the opposite direction. The vicissitudes were of considerable importance in heroic tales antiquity, in fairy tales, in comedies and tragedies of antiquity and the Renaissance, in early short stories and novels (love-knightly and adventure-punctual), later - in adventure and detective prose.

Revealing the stages of confrontation between characters (which are usually accompanied by tricks, tricks, intrigues), twists and turns also have a directly meaningful function. Οʜᴎ carry within themselves a certain philosophical meaning. Thanks to the twists and turns, life emerges as an arena of happy and unhappy coincidences of circumstances, which capriciously and whimsically replace each other. The heroes are depicted as being at the mercy of fate, which is preparing unexpected changes for them. “Oh, full of all sorts of twists and turns and the fickle variability of human fate!” - exclaims the narrator in the novel “Ethiopica” by the ancient Greek prose writer Heliodorus. Such statements are a “common place” in the literature of antiquity and the Renaissance. Οʜᴎ are repeated and varied in every possible way in Sophocles, Boccaccio, Shakespeare: again and again we are talking about “vicissitudes” and “intrigues”, about the “fragile favors” of fate, which is “the enemy of all the happy” and “the only hope of the unfortunate”. In plots with abundant twists and turns, as can be seen, the idea of ​​power over human destinies all possible accidents.

A striking example the plot is, as it were, saturated to the limit with accidents, acting as evidence of the “impermanence” of existence - Shakespeare’s tragedy “Romeo and Juliet”. Its action takes place in repeated twists and turns. The good will and decisive actions of the priest Lorenzo would seem to promise Romeo and Juliet unclouded happiness, but fate decides otherwise every time. The last turn of events turns out to be fatal: Romeo does not receive a letter on time, which says that Juliet did not die, but was put to sleep; Lorenzo appears in the crypt late: Romeo has already taken poison, and Juliet, having woken up, stabbed herself with a dagger.

But chance in traditional plots (no matter how abundant the vicissitudes of the action may be) still does not reign supreme. Necessary in them final episode(denouement or epilogue), if not happy, then at least calming and reconciling, as if curbing the chaos of eventual intricacies and leading life into the proper direction: over all possible deviations, violations, misunderstandings, raging passions and willful impulses the top is a good world order. So, in the Shakespearean tragedy that was discussed, the Montagues and Capulets, having experienced grief and a sense of their own guilt, finally reconcile... Other tragedies of Shakespeare (ʼʼOthelloʼʼ, ʼʼHamletʼʼ, ʼʼKing Learʼʼ) end in a similar way, where after the catastrophic The denouement is followed by a pacifying finale-epilogue, restoring the disturbed world order. The endings that harmonize the reconstructed reality, if they do not bring retribution to the best, then at least mark retribution to the worst (remember Shakespeare's Macbeth).

In the traditional stories that were discussed, the orderly and good reality in its fundamental principles is at times (which is imprinted by a chain of events) attacked by the forces of evil and accidents tending towards chaos, but such attacks are in vain: their result is the restoration and new triumph of harmony and order, which were trampled upon for some period. Human existence, in the process of the events depicted, undergoes something similar to what happens to rails and sleepers when a train passes along them: intense vibration is temporary, and no visible changes occur as a result of it. Plots with abundant twists and turns and a pacifying denouement (or epilogue) embody the idea of ​​the world as something stable, definitely solid, but at the same time not petrified, full of movement (more oscillatory than progressive) - as reliable soil , latently and dully shaken, tested by the forces of chaos. Plots where there are twists and turns and a harmonizing denouement embody deep philosophical meanings and capture a vision of the world that is usually called classical (see p. 22). These plots are invariably involved in the idea of ​​being as orderly and meaningful. At the same time, faith in the harmonizing principles of existence often takes on tones of rosy optimism and idyllic euphoria), which is especially striking in fairy tales (magic and children's).

Such plots also have another purpose: to make the work entertaining. Turning events in the lives of the heroes, sometimes purely random (with accompanying unexpected messages about what happened earlier and spectacular “recognitions”), arouse in the reader an increased interest in further development actions, and at the same time - to the reading process itself: he wants to know what will happen to the hero next and how it will all end.

The focus on catchy eventual intricacies is inherent in both works of a purely entertaining nature (detectives, most of the “lower”, mass literature) and serious, “top”, classical literature. Such is the short story of 0"Henry with its exquisite and spectacular endings, as well as the extremely eventful works of F.M. Dostoevsky, who, regarding his novel “Demons,” said that he is sometimes inclined to put “entertainment”<...>higher than artistry, the intense (221) dynamics of an event, which makes reading fascinating, is characteristic of works intended for youth. These are the novels of A. Dumas and Jules Verne, from among those close to us in time - “Two Captains” by V.A. Kaverina.

The considered event model is historically universal, but not the only one in verbal art. There is another model, equally important (especially in the literature of the last one and a half to two centuries), which remains theoretically unclear. Namely: there is a type of plot composition that serves primarily to identify not local and transitory, occasional conflicts, but stable conflict provisions, which are conceived and recreated as unresolved within the framework of individual life situations, or even unresolvable in principle. In conflicts of this kind (they can rightfully be called substantial) there are no clearly defined beginnings and endings; they invariably and constantly color the lives of the heroes, forming a certain background and a kind of accompaniment to the depicted action. Critics and writers of the second half of the 19th – early 20th centuries. They have repeatedly talked about the advantages of this principle of organizing plots over traditional ones, and noted its relevance for its time. ON THE. Dobrolyubov reproached the young AN in his article “The Dark Kingdom”. Ostrovsky in his commitment to excessively steep endings. Ostrovsky himself later argued that “intrigue is a lie” and that in general “the plot in a dramatic work is not an important matter.” “Many conventional rules,” he pointed out, “have disappeared, and some more will disappear. Now a dramatic work is nothing more than a dramatized life. Chekhov warned the artists of the Art Theater who played in the play “Uncle Vanya” against excessive emphasis on turning points, outwardly dramatic moments in the lives of the characters. He noticed that the clash between Voinitsky and Serebryakov was not the source of drama in their lives, but only one of the cases in which this drama manifested itself. Critic I.F. Annensky said about Gorky’s plays: “Intrigue simply ceased to interest us, because it became banal.” Life<...>now it is variegated and complex, and most importantly, it has begun to tolerate neither partitions, nor the regular rise and fall of isolated action, nor crudely tangible harmony. L.N. Andreev argued that drama and theater should abandon traditional event intricacies, because “ life itself <...>moves further and further from external action, goes more and more into the depths of the soul. In the same vein is the judgment about the plot of B.M. Eikhenbaum: “The (222) larger the idea of ​​a work, the more closely it is connected with the most acute and complex problems of reality, the more difficult it is to successfully “finish” its plot, the more natural it is to leave it “open”.

Similar thoughts were expressed by Western European writers: F. Goebbel (the main thing in drama is not the act, but the experience in the form of internal action), M. Maeterlinck (modern drama is characterized by “progressive paralysis” of external action) and - most persistently - B. Shaw in his work “The Quintessence of Ibsenism” . Shaw considered dramas that corresponded to the Hegelian concept of action and collision to be outdated and ironically called them “well-made plays.” He contrasted all such works (meaning both Shakespeare and Scribe) with modern drama, based not on the vicissitudes of action, but on discussions between characters, i.e., on conflicts associated with the difference in people’s ideals: “A play without a subject of dispute”<...>is no longer rated as a serious drama. Today our plays<...>begin with a discussion. According to Shaw, the playwright’s consistent disclosure of the “layers of life” does not fit with the abundance of accidents in the play and the presence in it traditional interchange. The playwright, seeking to penetrate the depths of human life, argued English writer, ʼʼthereby undertakes to write plays that have no denouementʼʼ.

The above statements testified to a serious restructuring of plot structure taking place in literature, which was carried out by a number of writers, especially intensively at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. This is G. Ibsen, M. Maeterlinck, in Russia - first of all Chekhov. “In “The Seagull”, “Uncle Vanya”, “Three Sisters”, in “The Cherry Orchard”, wrote A.P. Skaftymov, who has done a lot for the study of Chekhov’s drama, - “there are no guilty ones,” there are no individual and conscious obstacles to the happiness of others<...>There are no guilty ones, therefore, there are no direct opponents<...>there is not and there should not be a struggle. Literature of the 20th century (both narrative and dramatic) relies to a very large extent on an unconventional plot structure, corresponding not to the concept of Hegel, but to judgments in the spirit of B. Shaw.

The origins of this plot structure are in the distant past. So, hero ʼʼ Divine Comedyʼʼ A. Dante (at the same time this is the author himself) is a man who has lost the right path and followed evil paths. This turns into dissatisfaction with himself, doubts about the world order, confusion and horror, from which he later moves on to purification, knowledge of reconciling truth and joyful faith. The reality perceived (223) by the hero (its “otherworldly appearance” is recreated in the first part of the poem “Hell”) appears as inevitably conflicting. The contradiction, which formed the basis of the Divine Comedy, is not a passing incident, something removable through human actions. Existence inevitably contains something terrible and ominous. What we have before us is not a collision in the Hegelian sense, not a temporary violation of harmony that must be restored. In the spirit of Catholic dogma, Dante (through the mouth of Beatrice) says that there is more generosity in the punishments to which God condemned sinners by placing them in hell than in the “mercy of simple justification” (Paradise, Canto VII). The conflict emerges as universal and at the same time intensely, acutely experienced by the hero. It is presented not as a temporary deviation from harmony, but as an integral facet of imperfect earthly existence.

The plot of Dante's poem does not consist of a chain of accidents that would act as twists and turns. It is built on the discovery and emotional mastery by the hero of the fundamental principles of existence and its contradictions, which exist independently of the will and intentions of individual people. In the course of events, it is not the conflict itself that undergoes changes, but the hero’s attitude towards it: the degree of knowledge of existence changes, and as a result it turns out that even a world full of the deepest contradictions is orderly: there is always a place in it for both fair retribution (the torment of sinners in hell) and mercy and retribution (the fate of the hero). Here, as in the lives, which were also formed and strengthened in the mainstream of the Christian tradition, a persistent conflict reality, an imperfect and sinful world (a general conflict that appears as insoluble within the framework of earthly existence) and the intense formation of harmony and order in individual consciousness and destiny are consistently distinguished hero (a private conflict that finds completion in the finale of the work).

The stable conflict state of the world is explored in a number of works of the 17th century. The deviation from the plot canon is noticeable even in such an action-packed work as Shakespeare’s Hamlet, where the action in its deepest essence takes place in the hero’s mind, only occasionally breaking through in his own words (To be or not to be? and other monologues). In Cervantes' Don Quixote, the concept of an adventure plot is reinvented: the knight, who believes in his victorious will, is invariably overcome by the hostile "power of things". The hero’s repentant mood at the end of the novel is also significant - a motif close to the lives of people. Fundamentally unresolvable, even on the broadest scale of historical time (in accordance with (224) the Christian worldview), the vital contradictions in the Paradise Lostʼʼ J. Milton, the finale of which is Adam's insight into the difficult future of humanity. The discord between the hero and those around him is constant and inescapable in the famous “Life of Archpriest Avvakum”. “It’s fitting for me to cry for myself,” - with these words Habakkuk concludes his story, burdened both by his own sins and the cruel trials that befell him, and by the untruth reigning around him. Here (unlike the “Divine Comedy”) the final episode has nothing in common with the usual denouement, reconciling and pacifying. In this famous work of ancient Russian literature, perhaps for the first time, the traditional hagiographic composition, based on the idea that merit is always rewarded, was rejected. In “The Life of Archpriest Avvakum,” the ideas of medieval hagiographic optimism, which did not allow for the possibility of a tragic situation for a “true” ascetic, weaken.

With more energy than ever before, non-canonical plotting made itself felt in XIX literature century, in particular in the works of A.S. Pushkin. Both “Eugene Onegin”, and “The Feast During the Plague”, and “The Bronze Horseman” capture stable conflict situations that cannot be overcome and harmonized within the framework of the depicted action. Unconventional plot principles are present even in such an “action-packed” writer as F.M. Dostoevsky. If Mitya in “The Brothers Karamazov” appears mainly as the hero of a traditional, up-and-coming plot, then this cannot be said about Ivan, who is more reasoning than acting, and about Alyosha, who does not pursue any personal goals. The episodes dedicated to the younger Karamazovs are filled with discussions of what is happening, thoughts on personal and general topics, discussions that, according to B. Shaw, in most cases do not have direct “outputs” to the series of events and internal completion. The increasingly persistent turn of writers to non-canonical plots was accompanied by a transformation of the character sphere (as already mentioned, the adventurous and heroic principles noticeably “receded”). Accordingly, the artistically captured picture of the world also changed: human reality appeared more and more clearly in its far from complete orderliness, and in a number of cases, especially characteristic of the 20th century. (remember F. Kafka) as chaotic, absurd, essentially negative.

Canonical and non-canonical plots are addressed to readers differently. Authors of works that reveal occasional conflicts usually strive to captivate and entertain readers, and at the same time, to calm them down, console them, and strengthen them in the idea that everything in life will eventually fall into place. In other words, traditional stories are cathartic (about catharsis, see pp. 81–82). The series of events that reveal substantial conflicts affect us differently. The dominant focus here is not on the strength of the impression, but on the depth of the reader's penetration (following the author) into the complex and contradictory layers of life. The writer does not so much inspire as he appeals to the spiritual and, in particular, mental activity of the reader. Using Bakhtin's vocabulary, we will say that traditional plots are more monological, while non-traditional plots persistently strive for dialogism. Or in other words: in the first, the author’s deep intonation tends to be rhetorical, in the second, towards colloquialism.

The described types of plots are woven into literary creativity, actively interact and often coexist in the same works, because they have a common property: they equally need characters who have a certain attitude, consciousness, and behavior. If the characters (which happens in “near-avant-garde” literature of the 20th century) lose character, are leveled out and dissolve in a faceless “stream of consciousness” or self-sufficient “language games”, in a chain of associations that do not belong to anyone, then at the same time the plot as a whole is reduced to nothing and disappears. like this: it turns out there is no one and nothing to depict, and therefore there is no longer a place for the events. One of the creators of the “new novel” in France, A. Robbe-Grillet, convincingly spoke about this pattern. Based on the assertion that a “novel with characters”<...>belongs to the past (an era “marked by the apogee of individuality”), the writer concluded that the possibilities of the plot as such were exhausted: “... to tell stories (ᴛ.ᴇ. to build series of events. – V.H.) has now become simply impossible. Robbe-Grillet sees an increasingly intense movement of literature towards “plotlessness” in the works of G. Flaubert, M. Proust, S. Beckett.

At the same time, the art of plotting continues to live (both in literature and in theater and cinema) and, apparently, is not going to die.

PLOT AND CONFLICT - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "PLOT AND CONFLICT" 2017, 2018.

Innovation of the comedy "Woe from Wit"

Comedy A.S. Griboyedov's "Woe from Wit" is innovative. This is due to artistic method comedies. Traditionally, “Woe from Wit” is considered the first Russian realistic play. The main departure from classicist traditions lies in the author’s rejection of the unity of action: there is more than one conflict in the comedy “Woe from Wit”. In the play, two conflicts coexist and flow from one another: love and social. It is advisable to turn to the genre of the play to identify the main conflict in the comedy “Woe from Wit”.

The role of love conflict in the comedy "Woe from Wit"

As in a traditional classic play, the comedy “Woe from Wit” is based on a love affair. However, the genre of this dramatic work is social comedy. That's why social conflict dominates over love.

Nevertheless, the play opens with a love conflict. Already in the exposition of the comedy, a love triangle is outlined. Sophia's night date with Molchalin in the very first scene of the first act shows the girl's sensual preferences. Also in the first appearance, the maid Liza remembers Chatsky, who was once connected with Sophia by youthful love. Thus, a classic love triangle unfolds before the reader: Sophia - Molchalin - Chatsky. But as soon as Chatsky appears in Famusov’s house, a social line begins to develop in parallel with the love one. The plot lines closely interact with each other, and this is the uniqueness of the conflict in the play “Woe from Wit.”

To enhance the comic effect of the play, the author introduces two more love triangle(Sofya - Molchalin - maid Liza; Lisa - Molchalin - bartender Petrusha). Sophia, in love with Molchalin, does not even suspect that the maid Liza is much nicer to him, which he clearly hints to Liza. The maid is in love with the bartender Petrusha, but is afraid to confess her feelings to him.

Social conflict in the play and its interaction with the love story

The social conflict of the comedy was based on the confrontation between the “present century” and the “past century” - the progressive and conservative nobility. The only representative of the “present century,” with the exception of off-stage characters, in the comedy is Chatsky. In his monologues, he passionately adheres to the idea of ​​serving “the cause, not persons.” The moral ideals of Famus society are alien to him, namely the desire to adapt to circumstances, to “serve the favor” if this will help him get another rank or other material benefits. He appreciates the ideas of the Enlightenment, and in conversations with Famusov and other characters he defends science and art. This is a person free from prejudice.

The main representative of the “past century” is Famusov. All the vices of the aristocratic society of that time were concentrated in it. Most of all, he is concerned with the opinion of the world about himself. After Chatsky leaves the ball, his only concern is “what Princess Marya Aleksevna will say.”

He admires Colonel Skalozub, a stupid and shallow man who only dreams of “getting” the rank of general. It is his Famusov who would like to see him as his son-in-law, because Skalozub has the main advantage recognized by the world - money. With rapture, Famusov talks about his uncle Maxim Petrovich, who, after an awkward fall at a reception with the Empress, was “bestowed with the highest smile.” In Famusov’s opinion, the uncle’s ability to “curry favor” is worthy of admiration: to amuse those present and the monarch, he fell two more times, but this time on purpose. Famusov is sincerely afraid of Chatsky’s progressive views, because they threaten the usual way of life of the conservative nobility.

It should be noted that the clash between the “present century” and the “past century” is not at all a conflict between the fathers and children of “Woe from Wit”. For example, Molchalin, being a representative of the “children” generation, shares the views of the Famus society about the need to make useful contacts and skillfully use them to achieve their goals. He feeds the same tremulous love to awards and ranks. In the end, he communicates with Sophia and supports her passion for him only out of a desire to please her influential father.

Sophia, Famusov’s daughter, cannot be attributed either to the “present century” or to the “past century.” Her opposition to her father is connected only with her love for Molchalin, but not with her views on the structure of society. Famusov, who openly flirts with the maid, is a caring father, but is not a good example for Sophia. The young girl is quite progressive in her views, smart, and not worried about the opinions of society. All this is the reason for the disagreement between father and daughter. “What a commission, creator, to be a father to an adult daughter!” - Famusov laments. However, she is not on Chatsky’s side. With her hands, or rather with a word spoken out of revenge, Chatsky is expelled from the society he hates. It is Sophia who is the author of the rumors about Chatsky’s madness. And the world easily picks up these rumors, because in Chatsky’s accusatory speeches everyone sees a direct threat to their well-being. Thus, in spreading the rumor about the protagonist’s madness in the world, a love conflict played a decisive role. Chatsky and Sophia do not clash on ideological grounds. Sophia is just worried that ex-lover could destroy her personal happiness.

conclusions

Thus, main feature conflict of the play “Woe from Wit” – the presence of two conflicts and their close relationship. A love affair opens the play and serves as the reason for Chatsky’s clash with the “past century.” A love story helps too Famusov society declare your enemy insane and disarm him. However, the social conflict is the main one, because “Woe from Wit” is a social comedy, the purpose of which is to expose the mores of the noble society of the early 19th century.

Work test

In order to determine the meaning of side conflicts in dramaturgy entertainment shows, we will first look at the theory of dramaturgy as a whole.

Drama is one of the three types of literature, along with epic and lyric poetry. The main purpose of drama is acting on stage, and therefore the dramatic text consists of the characters’ remarks and the author’s remarks, which are necessary for correct perception and the best production. Note that the word drama itself is translated from ancient Greek as “action,” which in fact means the content, the essence of this type of literature.

Of course, it should be noted that conflict and its significance in a work can be discussed not only in relation to drama, but also in epic and lyrical works. But television shows, which will be analyzed during the work, are closest to drama. Just like the texts of dramas, show scripts are not intended to be read, but exist specifically for production (in our case, for production on television). Thus, it is advisable to pay attention to the role of conflict specifically in drama.

First you need to understand what lies at the heart of any dramatic work. “The action of a drama in the theories of the 19th century was understood as a sequence of actions of characters defending their interests in clashes with each other.” This perception of drama goes back to G. Hegel, who, in turn, relied on the teachings of Aristotle. Hegel believed that conflict and confrontation drive the action of drama, and he perceived the entire dramatic process as a constant movement towards the resolution of this conflict. That is why Hegel considered those scenes that do not contribute to resolving the conflict and moving forward to be contrary to the essence of drama. Therefore, the actions of the heroes, which constantly led to inevitable conflicts, according to Hegel, are one of the main features of a dramatic work.

Many other researchers agree with this perception of drama. For example, Doctor of Art History, theorist and playwright of the 20th century, V.A. Sakhnovsky-Pankeev argues that the key condition for the existence of drama is action, “arising as a result of the volitional efforts of individuals who, in pursuit of their goals, enter into confrontation with other individuals and objective circumstances.” Russian playwright, theater critic and screenwriter V.M. agrees with this. Wolkenstein, who believed that the action develops “in a continuous dramatic struggle.”

In contrast to this perception of a dramatic work, there is another one. For example, such theorists as the Soviet literary critic B.O. Kostelanetz, and the German drama researcher M. Pfister, in their works, were of the opinion that drama can be based not only on the direct confrontation of heroes with each other, but also on certain events that themselves were the focus of conflicts and changed the fate of the heroes and their life circumstances. Likewise, B. Shaw believed that in addition to external conflicts, drama can be based “on discussions between characters, and ultimately on conflicts arising from the clash of different ideals.” That is why, adhering to a similar point of view, K.S. Stanislavsky separated two actions - internal and external. And speaking of internal action, then one cannot fail to mention A.P. Chekhov, in whose plays there is almost no such action. The conflicts in Chekhov's dramas are not resolved through the actions of the characters; they are determined not by their lives, but by reality as a whole.

Combining these seemingly different approaches, V.E. Khalizev argues that in this way, “the subject of depiction in drama can be any intensely active orientation of a person in life situations, especially in situations marked by conflict.”

Accordingly, in any dramatic work there is a main conflict around which the entire plot is built. The main conflict is the main condition for the development, and therefore for the existence in general, of drama. And it is precisely in this contradiction, which is the conflict, according to A.A. Aniksta “displays the general state of the world.”

Let's take one of the generally accepted approaches to the composition of a drama, according to which its elements will be beginning, development, climax, and denouement. When talking about these parts of the composition of a dramatic work, we essentially mean the stages of development of the conflict. The conflict becomes main theme drama and the main plot-forming element. And that is why “the conflict revealed in the work must exhaust itself with a denouement.” This perception of conflict as a necessary element of any dramatic work originated with Aristotle, who spoke of the inevitability of both beginnings and resolutions in tragedies.

Based on theories that arose in antiquity and were reflected in subsequent dramatic works, we can talk about the existence of a plot structure that was valid for the times of Hegel. It consists of three parts:

• 1) Initial order (balance, harmony)
• 2) Disturbance of order
• 3) Restoration or strengthening of order.

It is logical that if this system implies the restoration of lost harmony, then the conflict that formed the basis of the drama will inevitably be eliminated. This position is controversial for the drama of modern times, according to which “conflict is a universal property human existence". In other words, some conflicts are so large-scale that they cannot be resolved by the aspirations of several heroes, and therefore cannot disappear in principle.

Based on these opposing views on the theory of conflicts in a dramatic work, V.E. Khalizev in his work talks about the existence of two types of conflict - “local”, which can be resolved through the efforts of several characters, and “substantial”, that is, those that are either universal in nature, and therefore cannot be resolved, or that have arisen (and accordingly and disappeared after some time) not by the will of man, but in the course of the historical process, natural changes. “The conflict of a dramatic (and any other) plot, therefore, either marks a violation of the world order, which is basically harmonious and perfect, or acts as a feature of the world order itself, evidence of its imperfection and disharmony.”

The main confrontation of a dramatic work, that is, its main conflict, organizes the main storyline works, being the main theme of the drama. So V.M. Wolkenstein essentially equates the concepts of conflict and themes of a work, arguing that “ common topic dramatic work - conflict, that is, a single action leading to confrontation.”

Thus, we can distinguish two main approaches to the theory of conflicts in a dramatic work. One part of the researchers believes that an external conflict, an open confrontation between several characters, becomes the main one in a dramatic work, while another part of the researchers believes that the main conflict can also be an internal conflict, which is caused not by the actions of the characters, but by factors that are beyond their will.

We will call a plot the system of events and actions contained in a work, its chain of events, and precisely in the sequence in which it is given to us in the work. The last remark is important, since quite often events are not told in chronological order, and the reader can find out what happened earlier later. If we take only the main, key episodes of the plot, which are absolutely necessary for its understanding, and arrange them in chronological order , then we get plot -

a plot outline or, as it is sometimes called, a “straightened plot.” The plot is the dynamic side artistic form , it implies movement, development, change. At the heart of any movement, as is known, lies a contradiction, which is the engine of development. The plot also has such an engine - This conflict - artistically significant contradiction . Conflict is one of those categories that seem to permeate the entire structure work of art . The conflict in the work exists on different levels . In the overwhelming majority of cases, the writer does not invent conflicts, but draws them from primary reality - this is how the conflict moves from life itself into the area of ​​thematic, problematic, pathos. This conflict on meaningful level (sometimes another term is used to designate it - “collision”). A meaningful conflict is embodied, as a rule, in the confrontation of characters and in the movement of the plot (at least, this happens in epic and dramatic works), although there are also extra-plot ways of realizing the conflict - for example, in Blok’s “The Stranger” the conflict between the everyday and the romantic is not expressed in terms of plot , and by compositional means - the opposition of images. But in this case we are interested in the conflict embodied in the plot. This is already -, embodying a meaningful conflict. Thus, in “Woe from Wit” by Griboedov, the meaningful conflict of two noble groups - the serf nobility and the Decembrist nobility - is embodied in the conflict between Chatsky and Famusov, Molchalin, Khlestova, Tugoukhovskaya, Zagoretsky and others. All this makes a rather abstract life conflict, dramatically neutral in itself, an exciting confrontation between living, concrete people who worry, get angry, laugh, worry, etc. The conflict becomes artistic and aesthetically significant only at the level of form.

At the formal level Several types of conflicts should be distinguished. Simplest - it is a conflict between individual characters and groups of characters. The example discussed above with “Woe from Wit” is a good illustration of this type of conflict; a similar conflict is present in “The Miserly Knight” and “ The captain's daughter" by Pushkin, in Shchedrin's "History of a City", Ostrovsky's "Warm Heart" and "Mad Money" and in many other works.

A more complex type of conflict is confrontation between the hero and the way of life, the individual and the environment(social, everyday, cultural, etc.). The difference from the first type is that the hero here is not opposed by anyone in particular; he does not have an opponent with whom he could fight, who could be defeated, thereby resolving the conflict. Thus, in Pushkin’s “Eugene Onegin,” the main character does not enter into any significant contradictions with any character, but the very stable forms of Russian social, everyday, cultural life oppose the needs of the hero, suppress him with everyday life, leading to disappointment, inaction, and “spleen.” "and boredom.

Finally, the third type of conflict is internal, psychological conflict, when the hero is at odds with himself, when it carries within itself certain contradictions, sometimes it contains incompatible principles. Such a conflict is typical, for example, of Dostoevsky’s “Crime and Punishment” and Tolstoy’s “Anna Karenina”.

It also happens that in a work we are faced with not one, but two or even all three types of conflicts. Thus, in Ostrovsky’s play “The Thunderstorm,” the external conflict between Katerina and Kabanikha is multiplied and deepened by an internal conflict: Katerina cannot live without love and freedom, but in her situation both are sins, and the consciousness of her own sinfulness puts the heroine in a truly hopeless situation. position.

To understand a particular work of art, it is very important to correctly determine the type of conflict. Above we gave an example with “A Hero of Our Time”, in which school literary criticism persistently looks for Pechorin’s conflict with the “water” society, instead of paying attention to a much more significant and universal one in the novel psychological conflict, which consists in irreconcilable ideas that exist in Pechorin’s mind: “there is predestination” and “there is no predestination.” As a result, the type of problem is incorrectly formulated, the character of the hero is terribly shallow, of the stories included in the novel, almost exclusively “Princess Mary” is studied, the character of the hero appears completely different from what he really is.

From another point of view, two types of conflicts can be distinguished.

One type - it's called local – assumes the fundamental possibility of resolution using active actions; It's usually the characters who take these actions as the story progresses. The second type of conflict is called substantial- depicts to us a persistently conflictual existence, and no real practical actions that could resolve this conflict are conceivable. Conventionally, this type of conflict can be called insoluble in a given period of time. Such, in particular, is the conflict of “Eugene Onegin” discussed above with its confrontation between personality and social order, which cannot be fundamentally resolved or removed by any active actions.

Plot elements. The conflict develops as the plot progresses. The stages of conflict development are called plot elements. This is the exposition, the plot, action development, climax and denouement. Should be paid Special attention that isolating these elements is advisable only in connection with the conflict. The fact is that in school there is often a simplified approach to defining plot elements, like: “the plot is when the action begins.” We emphasize that the decisive factor for determining the elements of the plot is the nature of the conflict at any given moment. So, exposition – This is the part of the work, usually the initial one, which precedes the plot. It usually introduces us to the characters, circumstances, place and time of action. There is no conflict yet in the exhibition. For example, in Chekhov’s “Death of an Official”: “One fine evening, an equally wonderful executor, Ivan Dmitrich Chervyakov, was sitting in the second row of chairs and looking through binoculars at The Bells of Corneville.” The exposition ends not at the moment when Chervyakov sneezed - there is nothing controversial in this yet - but when he saw that he had accidentally sprayed the general. This moment will be tie work, that is, the moment of occurrence or detection of a conflict. Followed by development of action, that is, a series of episodes in which the characters actively try to resolve the conflict(Chervyakov goes to apologize to the general), but he nevertheless becomes more and more acute and tense (the general becomes more and more ferocious from Chervyakov’s apologies, and this makes Chervyakov feel worse). An important feature in the mastery of plotting is to escalate the twists and turns in such a way as to prevent the possibility of a premature resolution of the conflict. Finally, the conflict reaches a point when the contradictions can no longer exist in their previous form and require immediate resolution; the conflict reaches its maximum development. According to the author’s plan, the greatest tension of the reader’s attention and interest usually falls on this same point. This - climax : after the general shouted at him and stamped his feet, “something came off in Chervyakov’s stomach.” Following the climax in close proximity to it (sometimes already in the next phrase or episode) follows interchange - the moment when the conflict exhausts itself, and the denouement can either resolve the conflict or clearly demonstrate its intractability:“Coming home automatically, without taking off his uniform, he lay down on the sofa and... died.”

It should be noted that the definition of plot elements in the text is, as a rule, of a formal and technical nature and is necessary in order to more accurately imagine the external structure of the plot.

In determining the elements of the plot, there may be various difficulties that need to be foreseen; This is especially true for large-scale works. Firstly, a work may have not one, but several storylines; for each of them, as a rule, there will be a different set of plot elements. Secondly, in a major work, as a rule, there is not one, but several climaxes, after each of which the conflict appears to be weakening and the action begins to decline slightly, and then again begins an upward movement towards the next climax. The climax in this case often represents an imaginary resolution of the conflict, after which the reader can take a breath, but then new events lead to further development of the plot, it turns out that the conflict is not resolved, etc. until a new climax. Finally, we must also keep in mind such cases when analysis of plot elements is either completely impossible, or, although formally possible, but practically and meaningfully does not make sense. And this depends on what type of plot we are dealing with.

Conflict is a clash, opposition, contradiction between characters, or characters and circumstances, or within character, underlying action. Regardless of whether the conflict is solvable or unresolvable, the conflict develops, determines further action, and its development constitutes the plot line in the work. On different conflicts different stories are being built. Completeness in the plot is also associated with the development of the conflict and its resolution. If the conflict is exhausted and completed, then the plot is complete and complete. There are two types of plots: dynamic (with local conflict) and adynamic (with substantive conflict).

The word “plot” denotes a chain of events recreated in a literary work, that is, the life of the characters in its spatio-temporal changes, in successive situations and circumstances. The events depicted by writers form the basis objective world works. The plot is the organizing principle of the dramatic, epic and lyric-epic genres. The events that make up the plot are related in different ways to the facts of reality that precede the appearance of the work. Components of a plot: motive, (connected motives, free motives, repeating or leitmotifs), exposition, plot, development of action, climax, denouement. In epic and lyrical poems these components can be arranged in any order, but in dramatic ones they follow strictly in order.

With all the variety of plots, their varieties can be classified into 2 main types: chronicle, i.e. events follow one after another; and concentric, i.e. events are connected not by a chronotopic connection, but by a cause-and-effect associative one, i.e. every previous event is the cause of the subsequent one. The plot is a set of events in their mutual internal connection. The plots in different works can be very similar to each other, but the plot is always uniquely individual. The plot always turns out to be richer than the plot, because the plot represents only factual information, and the plot implements subtextual information. The plot focuses only on the external events of the hero’s life. In addition to external events, the plot includes psychological condition the hero, his thoughts, subconscious impulses, i.e. any smallest changes in the hero himself and the environment.

The components of a plot can be considered events or motive. Conflict is a contradiction of interests. There are external conflicts that are based on a contradiction of interests between an individual and another person or society (love conflict, family conflict, social conflict, philosophical conflict). Another variety - internal conflicts, i.e., a contradiction of interests within the framework of one human consciousness. The contradiction of interests between the soul and the mind, between the innate acquired properties of a person, between the conscious and unconscious in a person. A private conflict is a contradiction that arises and unfolds in a separate episode of a work.

Plot (from French - chain) - a chain of events in life literary characters, in the spatiotemporal changes of their literary life, in various circumstances. This is how an event series of a work arises, which is directly related to the figurative structure formed in it. The plot is the organizing principle of the dramatic, epic, lyric-epic genres. Less significant in lyrical genre, but the lyrics may contain so-called plot poems, which is typical for the work of Nekrasov and Gumilyov. A significant contribution to this branch of literary criticism was made by the works of such scientists as Veselovsky “Staging Plots”, O. Freudenberg “Staging Plots and Genres”, the Russian formal school, which strictly began to distinguish between plot and plot. “We will call the set of events in their mutual internal connection a plot; the artistically constructed distribution of events in a work will be called a plot” (B. Tomashevsky). Later, Shklovsky says it more simply: “The plot is what is told, the plot is how it is told.” Shklovsky also introduces the concept wandering plot: events that make up the plot over many centuries, which were taken by the authors from mythological works, from previous years and thus changed and modified. The French scientist Lyotard calculated that there are 36 plots. Borrowing plots was considered normal for many centuries. This was actively used by classicist writers in their work; Goethe recommended that writers take on subjects that had already been worked on previously. Shakespeare took many of his plots from mythology. In the 19th century with the development of critical realism the situation changes. The prototypicality of the plot points appears. Dostoevsky stood out with his attention to real events reality. The events that make up the plot can relate to each other in different ways, both in antiquity and in its revived aesthetics of classicism - preference was given to integral event action. These kinds of plots are called concentric or centripetal. This goes back to the poetry of Aristotle, to his discussion of tragedy. Also distinguished newsreels(Homer’s “Odyssey”), that is, there is no clear cause-and-effect relationship between the events, they are related to each other only in the time of action. At the level of the event series, they are called multilinear: the author is interested in the widest possible, branched picture of reality (“Anna Kar” by Tolstoy). As part of a literary work, the plot performs important functions:

1) the plot movement determines the structure, the framework of the work, that is, it gives integrity.

2) plot movement gives the author the opportunity to more fully and vividly present the image of his hero. It usually manifested itself in actions and actions. Therefore, the so-called action-packed work has been adopted, in the center of which the hero actually commits some extraordinary actions. Characteristic of adventurous, picaresque novels.

There are 2 types of plot conflicts:

1) conflicts in which there are local and transitory contradictions.

2) at the heart of the plot, conflicts are stable, they are called eternal. In literature, plots of the 1st type are most fully represented, i.e. an event occurs, the action of which accelerates, its peak is present, and this action is necessarily resolved. The role of chance invented by the author is great here. Already at the beginning of the 20th century. Hegel in “Aesthetics” points out that at the center of any literary work there is some kind of conflict. V. Propp in the works “Historical Roots fairy tale", "Morphology of a Fairy Tale" offers the so-called function of the protagonist and builds 3 important elements of the development of events:

1) they are connected with another initial deficiency present in the hero’s life and somehow intentionally make up for this deficiency. As a rule, wealth and a beautiful bride are important motives (“The Master and Margarita” by Bulgakov).

2) almost always there is some kind of confrontation between the hero. Propp proposes a so-called “protagonist” and an anti-hero - an “antagonist” who prevents the hero from making up for the deficiency.

3) the hero eventually makes up for this deficiency and plot completeness arises. A happy ending in a fairy tale is required. This is a necessary component of the “harmonizing” life of the central characters, which in the literature of modern times is called the fictional principle. In traditional stories, goodness is not always required. In Shakespeare's Macbeth, evil is punished, but this also corresponds to the most ancient human ideas about the normal world order. You can also highlight this significant one. The role of this kind of plots is as their entertaining beginning, therefore it is no coincidence that the works of Dumas and J. Verne will always be interesting. In new times in artistic arts the 2nd plot model began to be used. It is not related to the identification of local, randomly arising conflicts, but is related to persistent conflicts that seem impossible to resolve within the framework of a single life situation. These conflicts are usually called substantive. They do not have clear beginnings and endings, they are constantly present in the lives of the heroes, and are a kind of background for the entire series of events. For example, Chekhov's dramaturgy, which is defined as the dramaturgy of mood. In the 20th century B. Shaw does a lot to develop Chekhov's idea. He comes up with a drama-opera and points out that conflict plays are outdated, that it is necessary to rely not on external action, but on the discussions that arise between the characters turned to auditorium. In his opinion, without a subject of dispute there is no real drama. Also, this kind of plot model is present in Dante’s “Divine Comedy” - we are talking about a hero who does not just exist in his sinful state and is trying to get out of it. Dostoevsky used the phrase “last questions” when talking about insoluble eternal conflicts. He referred to Cervantes’ “Don Quixote,” pointing out how absolutely wonderfully the noble hero is confronted by the force of the things of life, that this cannot in any way be resolved. These two models of plots in modern times are developing in parallel, can cooperate with each other, coexist in one process or another. From the point of view of interaction with the reader, the terminology of M. Bakhtin is used: 1 calls it monological, 2 calls it dialogical. They have one thing in common: both models need to be designed through a figurative structure. Characters are identified who act, are in some kind of relationship with people and the world around them, and have consciousness and subconsciousness. If this is not the case, plotless prose arises, which is close to stream-of-consciousness literature and the new French novel.