Character system. A character (literary hero) is a character in a narrative work of art.
the organization of the characters in a literary work appears as a system of characters.
The character system should be viewed from two perspectives:
1. As a system of relationships between characters (struggle, clashes, etc.) - that is, from the point of view of the content of the work;
2. As the embodiment of the principle of composition and a means of characterizing the characters - that is, as the position of the author.
like any system, the character sphere is characterized through its constituent elements (characters) and structure (a relatively stable method = the law of connection of elements).
elements of the character sphere
the main ones are at the center of the plot, have independent characters and are directly related to all levels of the content of the work,
secondary - also quite actively involved in the plot, having their own character, but which receive less authorial attention; in some cases their function is to help reveal the images of the main characters,
episodic - appearing in one or two episodes of the plot, often without their own character and standing on the periphery of the author’s attention; their main function is to give impetus to the plot action at the right moment or to highlight certain features of the main and secondary characters).
In addition, there are also so-called off-stage characters about whom we're talking about, but they do not participate in the action (for example, in “Woe from Wit” by A. S. Griboyedov it is Princess Marya Alekseevna, whose opinion everyone is so afraid of, or Famusov’s uncle, a certain Maxim Petrovich).
for example, Defoe's novel Robinson Crusoe seems to be about the life of one person. However, the novel is densely populated. In Robinson's memories and dreams there live different persons (= off-stage characters): the father who warned his son against the sea; dead companions, with whose fate he often compares his own; the basket maker he watched as a child; a desirable companion - “a living person with whom I could talk.” The role of off-stage characters, seemingly mentioned in passing, is very important: after all, Robinson is both lonely and not alone on his island, since he personifies the total human experience, hard work and enterprise of his contemporaries and compatriots.
What parameters are used to determine the category of characters?
there are two of them. This:
– the degree of participation in the plot and, accordingly, the volume of text that this character is given;
– the degree of importance of a given character for revealing aspects of artistic content.
most often these parameters coincide. So, in “Fathers and Sons” of the bazaars, the main character in both respects, Pavel Petrovich, Nikolai Petrovich, Arkady, Odintsova are secondary characters in all respects, and Sitnikov or Kukshina are episodic.
example - " Captain's daughter» Pushkin.
“It would seem impossible to imagine a more episodic character than Empress Catherine: she seems to exist only to bring the rather complicated story of the main characters to a successful conclusion. But for the problems and the idea of the story, this is an image of paramount importance, because without it, the most important idea of the story - the idea of mercy - would not have received a semantic and compositional completion. Just as Pugachev, in his time, despite all the circumstances, had mercy on Grinev, so Catherine has mercy on him, although the circumstances of the case seem to point against him. Just as Grinev meets Pugachev as person to person, and only later does he turn into an autocrat, so Masha meets with Catherine, not suspecting that this is the empress in front of her, also like person to person. And if it weren’t for this image in the system of characters in the story, the composition would not be closed, and therefore, the idea of the human connection of all people, without distinction of classes and positions, would not sound artistically convincing, the idea that “giving alms” is one of the best manifestations of humanity spirit, and the solid foundation of human coexistence is not cruelty and violence, but kindness and mercy.”
and it also happens that the question of dividing characters into categories generally loses all meaningful meaning.
for example, in the composition “ dead souls“Episode characters differ from the main ones only quantitatively, and not qualitatively: in the volume of the image, but not in the degree of the author’s interest in them.
the number of characters in the poem is literally off the charts. Uncle Minyai and Uncle Mityai, son-in-law of Nozdryov Mizhuev, the boys begging Chichikov for alms at the hotel gates, and especially one of them, “a great hunter of getting on the heels,” and the captain of kisses, and a certain assessor Drobyazhkin, and Fetinya, a mistress of whipping feather beds, some lieutenant who had come from Ryazan, apparently a big hunter of boots, because he had already ordered four pairs and was constantly trying on the fifth, and further, further, further.
These figures do not give impetus to the plot action and do not characterize Messrs. Chichikov in any way. Moreover, the detailing of these figures is clearly excessive - let us remember the men who talked about manilovka and zamanilovka, Ivan Antonovich's jug's snout, the dog's wife, the daughter of the old foreman, who had threshing peas on her face at night, the late husband of the box, who loved that someone I would scratch his heels at night, but I couldn’t fall asleep without it.
however, this is not excess and certainly not the author’s inability to construct a plot. It is, on the contrary, thin compositional technique, with the help of which Gogol created a special installation. He showed not just images of individual people, but something broader and more significant - the image of a population, a people, a nation. Peace, finally.
almost the same composition of the character system is observed in Chekhov’s plays, and the matter is even more complicated: the main and minor characters it is impossible to distinguish even by the degree of participation in the plot and the volume of the image. With the help of this system, the Czechs show “a certain set of ordinary people, ordinary consciousness, among which there are no outstanding, extraordinary heroes, on whose images one can build a play, but for the most part they are nevertheless interesting and significant. To do this, it is necessary to show a multitude of equal characters, without singling out the main and minor ones; This is the only way that something common is revealed in them, namely, the drama of a failed life inherent in everyday consciousness, a life that has passed or is passing in vain, without meaning and even without pleasure” (c)
character sphere structure
How many characters are necessary and sufficient?
While working on “Three Sisters,” Chekhov sneered at himself: “I’m not writing a play, but some kind of confusion. A lot of characters“It’s possible that I’ll get lost and give up writing.” And upon completion he recalled: “It was terribly difficult to write “Three Sisters.” After all, there are three heroines, each should be like their own model, and all three are the general’s daughters!”
like the classic, where “red natives and natives (positive and countless hordes)” are introduced into the play “Citizen Jules Verne.” (Bulgakov. Crimson Island).
So, the number of characters.
To form a character system, at least two subjects are required.
as an option, there may be a split of the hero - Semyon Semenovich with glasses and without glasses (kharms, “cases”).
The maximum number of characters is not limited.
according to some estimates, in Tolstoy’s “War and Peace” there are about 600 characters, in Balzac’s “Human Comedy” - about 2,000 (for comparison, the population of a medieval Western European city was 1-3 thousand inhabitants).
the numbers are impressive.
and the immediate question is: can you create a work with a similar number of characters? No, it's easy to cram characters into a plot. But then you will have to manage them so that your thing does not look like a telephone directory.
characters are required to interact with each other.
some people succeed. For example, King’s multi-character things – “needful things”, “Armageddon” (another translation is “confrontation” the stand), “under the dome”
or a classic example - Homer, "Odyssey". Philologists have established more than 1,700 connections between the 342 characters in the poem. There is a connection between the characters if they meet in the story, talk to each other, quote each other’s words to a third character, or it is clear from the text that they know each other. The structure of the “odyssey” surprisingly resembles a social network - such as Facebook or Twitter. Is history repeating itself?))
So, the system of characters is the interconnections and relationships between the characters, that is, a concept related to the composition of the work.
The most important property of the character system is hierarchy.
We already talked about this here:
in most cases the character is at the intersection of the three rays.
the first is friends, associates (friendly relationships).
the second is enemies, ill-wishers (hostile relations).
third – other strangers (neutral relationships)
these three rays (and the people in them) create a strict hierarchical structure http://proza.ru/2013/12/17/1652
Let's continue the conversation.
“The plot in its formation is, first of all, the creation of a system of characters. An important stage is the establishment of the central figure and then the establishment of the remaining characters, who are located on a descending ladder around this figure” (G.A. Shengeli)
There are two types of connections between characters - according to the plot (thesis-antithesis) and according to the relationship of characters.
the simplest and most common case is the opposition of two images to each other.
Mozart and Salieri, Grinev and Shvabrin, Oblomov and Stolz, boy-kibalchish and boy-bad.
A slightly more complex case is when one character is opposed to all the others, as, for example, in Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit,” where even quantitative relationships are important: it was not for nothing that Griboyedov wrote that in his comedy “there are twenty-five fools for one smart person.”
“The characters in the work are grouped. The simplest case is the division of all characters into two camps: friends and enemies of the protagonist. In more complex works there may be several such groups, and each of these groups is connected by different relationships with other persons” (Tomashevsky B.V. poetics)
Thus, in Anna Karenina the main compositional grouping of characters follows the thematic principle stated at the beginning of the novel: “all happy families are similar to each other, each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.” Different families in the novel develop this theme in different ways.
In “Fathers and Sons”, in addition to the obvious and implemented in the plot contrasting Bazarov with all other characters, another, more hidden and not embodied in the plot, compositional principle is implemented, namely the comparison by similarity of two groups of characters: on the one hand, this is Arkady and Nikolai Petrovich, on the other - Bazarov and his parents. “In both cases, these characters embody the same problem - the problem of relationships between generations. Turgenev shows that, no matter what individual people are, the problem remains essentially the same: this is an ardent love for children, for whom, in fact, the older generation lives, this inevitable misunderstanding, the desire of children to prove their “maturity” and superiority, dramatic internal conflicts as a result of this, and yet, in the end, the inevitable spiritual unity of generations" (c)
There are also more complex compositional connections between characters.
an example is “crime and punishment.”
“the character system is organized around the main character Raskolnikov; the other characters are in complex relationships with him, and not only plot ones; and it is in extra-plot connections that the richness of the novel’s composition is revealed.
First of all, Raskolnikov is compositionally connected with Sonya. In their life position, they are primarily opposed. But not only. They also have something in common, primarily in pain for a person and in suffering, which is why Sonya Raskolnikova understands so easily and immediately. In addition, as the schismatic himself emphasizes, they are both criminals, both murderers, only Sonya killed herself, and the schismatics killed the other. Here the comparison ends and the contrast begins again: for Dostoevsky, these two “murders” are not at all equivalent; moreover, they have a fundamentally opposite ideological meaning. And yet, both are criminals who are united by the gospel motif of sacrifice for humanity, the cross, and atonement. It is no coincidence that Dostoevsky emphasized the strange juxtaposition of “a murderer and a harlot who came together to read the eternal book.” So, Sonya is both an antipode and a kind of double of Raskolnikov.
the remaining characters are also organized around Raskolnikov according to the same principle; it is, as it were, reflected many times in its counterparts, but reflected with distortions, or incompletely.
So, Razumikhin comes close to Raskolnikov with his rationality and confidence that life can be arranged without God, relying only on himself, but is sharply opposed to him, since he does not accept the idea of “blood according to conscience.”
Porfiry Petrovich is the antipode of Raskolnikov, but there is also something Raskolnikov in him, because he understands the main character faster and better than anyone else.
Luzhin takes practical part Raskolnikov’s theory about the right to crime, but completely emasculates all the sublime meaning from it. In “new trends” he sees only a justification for his boundless egoism, believing that the new morality gives him the sanction to try only for his own benefit, without stopping at any moral prohibitions. Luzhin reflects Raskolnikov’s philosophy in the distorting mirror of cynicism, and Raskolnikov himself looks with disgust at Luzhin and his theory - thus, we have before us another double, another antipodean twin.
Svidrigailov, as is typical of an ironist, brings Raskolnikov’s ideas to their logical conclusion, advising him to stop thinking about the good of humanity, about the issues of “man and citizen.” But, like everyone, Svidrigailov does not accept Raskolnikov’s theory for himself personally, being skeptical of any philosophy. And Svidrigailov disgusts Raskolnikov; they again turn out to be mismatched twins, antipodean twins.
such a composition of the character system is caused by the need to pose and resolve complex moral and philosophical questions, to consider the theory of the main character and its implementation in practice in a variety of applications and aspects. The composition here, therefore, works to reveal the problematic” (c) L.V. Chernets. Character system.
Lesson 5. An acute sense of the crisis of civilization
in the story by I. A. Bunin “Mr. from San Francisco”
The purpose of the lesson: reveal the philosophical content of Bunin's story.
Methodical techniques: analytical reading.
During the classes
I. Teacher's word
The First World War was already underway, and there was a crisis of civilization. Bunin addressed current problems, but not directly related to Russia, to current Russian reality. In the spring of 1910, I. A. Bunin visited France, Algeria, and Capri. In December 1910 - spring 1911. I was in Egypt and Ceylon. In the spring of 1912 he went to Capri again, and in the summer next year visited Trebizond, Constantinople, Bucharest and other European cities. From December 1913 he spent six months in Capri. The impressions from these travels were reflected in the stories and stories that made up the collections “Sukhodol” (1912), “John the Weeper” (1913), “The Cup of Life” (1915), “The Master from San Francisco” (1916).
The story “The Gentleman from San Francisco” (originally titled “Death on Capri”) continued the tradition of L. N. Tolstoy, who depicted illness and death as the most important events that reveal true price personality (“Polikushka”, 1863; “The Death of Ivan Ilyich”, 1886; “The Master and the Worker”, 1895). Along with the philosophical line, Bunin’s story developed social issues associated with a critical attitude towards the lack of spirituality of bourgeois society and the rise of technical progress to the detriment of internal improvement.
Bunin does not accept bourgeois civilization as a whole. The pathos of the story lies in the feeling of the inevitability of the death of this world.
Plot is based on a description of an accident that unexpectedly interrupted the well-established life and plans of the hero, whose name “no one remembered.” He is one of those who, until the age of fifty-eight, “worked tirelessly” to become like the rich people “whom he once took as a model.”
II. Conversation based on the story
What images in the story have symbolic meaning?
(Firstly, the symbol of society is an ocean steamer with the significant name “Atlantis”, on which a nameless millionaire is sailing to Europe. Atlantis is a sunken legendary, mythical continent, a symbol of a lost civilization that could not resist the onslaught of the elements. Associations also arise with those who died in 19I2 year "Titanic". "The ocean that walked behind the walls" of the ship is a symbol of the elements, nature, opposing civilization.
The image of the captain, “a red-haired man of monstrous size and bulk, similar... to a huge idol and very rarely appearing in public from his mysterious chambers,” is also symbolic. The image of the title character is symbolic (reference: the title character is the one whose name is in the title of the work; he may not be the main character). The gentleman from San Francisco is the personification of a man of bourgeois civilization.)
To more clearly imagine the nature of the relationship between “Atlantis” and the ocean, you can use a “cinematic” technique: the “camera” first glides along the floors of the ship, demonstrating the rich decoration, details emphasizing the luxury, solidity, reliability of “Atlantis”, and then gradually “sails away” showing the enormity of the ship as a whole; moving further, the “camera” moves further and further away from the steamer until it becomes like a nutshell in a huge raging ocean that fills the entire space. (Let us remember the final scene of the movie “Solaris”, where the seemingly acquired father’s house turns out to be only imaginary, given to the hero by the power of the Ocean. If possible, you can show these shots in class).
What is the significance of the main setting of the story?
(The main action of the story takes place on the huge steamship of the famous Atlantis. The limited plot space allows us to focus on the mechanism of functioning of bourgeois civilization. It appears as a society divided into upper “floors” and “basements.” Upstairs, life goes on as in a “hotel with everyone amenities”, measuredly, calmly and idlely. There are “many” “passengers” who live “safely”, but there are much more - “a great multitude” - of those who work for them “in the cooks’, sculleries” and in the “underwater womb” - at the “gigantic fireboxes.”)
What technique does Bunin use to depict the division of society?
(The division has the character of an antithesis: relaxation, carefreeness, dancing and work, unbearable tension are opposed"; "the radiance... of the palace" and "the dark and sultry depths of the underworld"; "gentlemen" in tailcoats and tuxedos, ladies in "rich", " “delightful” “toilets” and “drenched in acrid, dirty sweat and naked to the waist, purple from the flames.” A picture of heaven and hell is gradually being built.)
How do “tops” and “bottoms” relate to each other?
(They are strangely connected with each other. “Good money” helps to get to the top, and they “fed and watered” those who, like “the gentleman from San Francisco,” were “quite generous” to people from the “underworld.” They served him from morning to evening, preventing his slightest desire, guarding his cleanliness and peace, carrying his things...".
Why is the main character deprived of a name?
(The hero is simply called “master,” because that is precisely his essence. At least he considers himself a master and revels in his position. He can afford to go “just for the sake of entertainment” “to the Old World for two whole years” can enjoy all the benefits guaranteed by his status, believes “in the care of all those who fed and watered him, served him from morning to evening, warned his slightest desire,” can contemptuously throw out to the ragamuffins through gritted teeth: “Go away! Via! ("Away!").)
(Describing the gentleman’s appearance, Bunin uses epithets that emphasize his wealth and his unnaturalness: “silver mustache”, “golden fillings” of teeth, “strong bald head”, compared to “old ivory”. There is nothing spiritual about the gentleman, his goal is becoming rich and reaping the benefits of this wealth came true, but this did not make him happier. The description of the gentleman from San Francisco is constantly accompanied by the author's irony.)
When does the hero begin to change and lose his self-confidence?
(“The gentleman” changes only in the face of death, it is no longer the gentleman from San Francisco that begins to appear in him - he was no longer there - but someone else.” Death makes him human: “his features began to become thinner, brighter... .” “Deceased”, “deceased”, “dead” - this is what the author now calls the hero. The attitude of those around him changes sharply: the corpse must be removed from the hotel so as not to spoil the mood of other guests, they cannot provide a coffin - only a box from - under soda (“soda” is also one of the signs of civilization), the servants, who were in awe of the living, mockingly laugh at the dead. At the end of the story, the “body of a dead old man from San Francisco” is mentioned, which returns “home, to the grave, to the shores of the New World. ", in the black hold. The power of the "master" turned out to be illusory.)
How is society shown in the story?
(The steamship - the latest technology - is a model of human society. Its holds and decks are the layers of this society. On the upper floors of the ship, which looks like “a huge hotel with all amenities,” the life of the rich, who have achieved complete “well-being,” flows measuredly. This life is designated with a long, vaguely personal sentence, taking up almost a page: “they got up early, ... drank coffee, chocolate, cocoa, ... sat in the baths, stimulating their appetite and good health, performed their daily toilets and went to their first breakfast...”. These sentences emphasize the impersonality and lack of individuality of those who consider themselves masters of life. Everything they do is unnatural: entertainment is needed only to artificially stimulate the appetite. “Travelers” do not hear the evil howl of a siren, foreshadowing death - it is drowned out by “the sounds of a beautiful string orchestra.”
The ship's passengers represent the nameless “cream” of society: “There was a certain great rich man among this brilliant crowd, ... there was a famous Spanish writer, there was a world-famous beauty, there was an elegant couple in love...” The couple pretended to be in love, were “hired by Lloyd to play at love.” for good money." This is an artificial swarm, flooded with light, warmth and music. And there is also hell.
The “underwater womb of the steamship” is like hell. There, “gigantic furnaces cackled dully, devouring piles of coal, with a roar thrown into them, drenched in acrid, dirty sweat and naked to the waist, people crimson from the flames.” Let us note the alarming coloring and threatening sound of this description.)
How is the conflict between man and nature resolved?
(Society only looks like a well-oiled machine. Nature, seeming like antiquity, a tarantella, serenades of wandering singers and... the love of young Neapolitan women, recalls the illusory nature of life in the “hotel”. It is “huge”, but around it is the “water desert” of the ocean and “cloudy sky.” Man’s eternal fear of the elements is drowned out by the sounds of the “string orchestra.” The siren “constantly calling” from hell, moaning “in mortal anguish” and “furious anger”, reminds of it, but “few others” hear it. they believe in the inviolability of their existence, protected by a “pagan idol” - the commander of the ship. The specificity of the description is combined with symbolism, which allows us to emphasize the philosophical nature of the conflict. The social gap between the rich and the poor is nothing compared to the abyss that separates man from nature and life from. non-existence.)
What is the role of the episodic characters in the story - Lorenzo and the Abruzzese highlanders?
(These characters appear at the end of the story and are in no way connected with its action. Lorenzo is “a tall old boatman, a carefree reveler and a handsome man,” probably the same age as the gentleman from San Francisco. Only a few lines are dedicated to him, but he is given a sonorous name, unlike from the title character. He is famous throughout Italy, more than once he served as a model for many painters. “With a regal demeanor,” he looks around, feeling truly “royal,” enjoying life, “drawing himself with his rags, a clay pipe and a red woolen beret lowered on him.” one ear.” The picturesque poor old man Lorenzo will live forever on the canvases of artists, but the rich old man from San Francisco was erased from life and forgotten before he could die.
The Abruzzese highlanders, like Lorenzo, personify the naturalness and joy of being. They live in harmony, in harmony with the world, with nature: “They walked - and the whole country, joyful, beautiful, sunny, stretched under them: and the rocky humps of the island, which almost all lay at their feet, and that fabulous blue, in which he floated, and the shining morning vapors over the sea to the east, under the dazzling sun...” The goat-skin bagpipes and the wooden foregrip of the Highlanders are contrasted with the “beautiful string orchestra” of the steamship. With their lively, artless music, the mountaineers give praise to the sun, the morning, “the immaculate intercessor of all those who suffer in this evil and wonderful world, and born from her womb in the cave of Bethlehem...” That's what it is true values life, in contrast to the brilliant, expensive, but artificial, imaginary values of the “masters.”)
What image is a general image of the insignificance and perishability of earthly wealth and glory?
(This is also an unnamed image, in which one recognizes the once powerful Roman emperor Tiberius, who last years lived his life in Capri. Many “come to look at the remains of the stone house where he lived.” “Humanity will forever remember him,” but this is the glory of Herostratus: “a man who was unspeakably vile in satisfying his lust and for some reason had power over millions of people, inflicting cruelties on them beyond all measure.” In the word “for some reason” there is an exposure of fictitious power and pride; time puts everything in its place: it gives immortality to the true and plunges the false into oblivion.)
III. Teacher's word
The story gradually develops the theme of the end of the existing world order, the inevitability of the death of a soulless and spiritual civilization. It is contained in the epigraph, which was removed by Bunin only in the last edition in 1951: “Woe to you, Babylon, strong city!” This biblical phrase, reminiscent of Belshazzar's feast before the fall of the Chaldean kingdom, sounds like a harbinger of great catastrophes to come. The mention in the text of Vesuvius, the eruption of which destroyed Pompeii, reinforces the ominous prediction. An acute sense of the crisis of a civilization doomed to oblivion is coupled with philosophical reflections on life, man, death and immortality.
IV. Analysis of story composition and conflict
Material for teachers
Composition The story has a circular character. The hero's journey begins in San Francisco and ends with a return "home, to the grave, to the shores of the New World." The “middle” of the story - a visit to the “Old World” - in addition to the specific one, also has a generalized meaning. " New person", returning to history, reassesses his place in the world. The heroes’ arrival in Naples and Capri opens up the opportunity to include in the text the author’s descriptions of a “wonderful,” “joyful, beautiful, sunny” country, the beauty of which “the human word is powerless to express,” and philosophical digressions conditioned by Italian impressions.
The climax is the scene of “unexpectedly and rudely falling” on the “master” of death in the “smallest, worst, most damp and cold” but least “lower corridor”.
This event, only by coincidence of circumstances, was perceived as a “terrible incident” (“if it weren’t for the German in the reading room” who burst out of there “screaming”, the owner would have been able to “calm down... with hasty assurances that it was so, a trifle..."). The unexpected departure into oblivion in the context of the story is perceived as the highest moment of the collision of the illusory and the true, when nature “roughly” proves its omnipotence. But people continue their “carefree”, crazy existence, quickly returning to peace and quiet.” They cannot be awakened to life not only by the example of one of their contemporaries, but even by the memory of what happened “two thousand years ago” during the time of Tiberius, who lived “on one of the steepest slopes” of Capri, who was the Roman emperor during the life of Jesus Christ.
Conflict The story goes far beyond the scope of a particular case, and therefore its denouement is connected with reflections on the fate of not just one hero, but all past and future passengers of Atlantis. Doomed to a “hard” path of overcoming “darkness, ocean, blizzard”, locked in a “hellish” social machine, humanity is suppressed by the conditions of its earthly life. Only the naive and simple, like children, have access to the joy of joining “the eternal and blissful abodes.” In the story, the image of “two Abruzzese highlanders” appears, baring their heads in front of a plaster statue of the “unvicious intercessor of all those who suffer,” remembering her “blessed son,” who brought the “beautiful” beginning of good into the “evil” world. The master of the earthly world remained the devil, watching “from the rocky gates of two worlds” the actions of the “New Man with an old heart.” What will humanity choose, where will humanity go, will it be able to defeat the evil inclination within itself - this is a question to which the story gives a “suppressing... soul” answer. But the denouement becomes problematic, since the finale affirms the idea of a Man whose “pride” turns him into the third force of the world. A symbol of this is the ship’s path through time and the elements: “The blizzard beat in its rigging and wide-necked pipes, white with snow, but it was steadfast, firm, majestic and terrible.”
Artistic originality the story is associated with the interweaving of epic and lyrical beginnings. On the one hand, in full accordance with the realistic principles of depicting the hero in his relationships with the environment, on the basis of social and everyday specifics, a type is created, the reminiscent background for which, first of all, are images of “dead souls” (N.V. Gogol. “The Dead” souls”, 1842), At the same time, just like in Gogol, thanks to the author’s assessment, expressed in lyrical digressions, the problems deepen, the conflict acquires a philosophical character.
2. Prepare to review the stories, think about their problems and linguistic and figurative features.
Additional material for teachers 1
The melody of death begins to sound latently from the very first pages of the work, gradually becoming the leading motive. At first, death is extremely aestheticized and picturesque: in Monte Carlo, one of the activities of rich idlers is “shooting pigeons, which soar very beautifully and perch over the emerald lawn, against the backdrop of a sea the color of forget-me-nots, and immediately hit the ground with white lumps.” (Bunin is generally characterized by the aestheticization of things that are usually unsightly, which should rather frighten than attract the observer - well, who else but him could write about “slightly powdered, delicate pink pimples near the lips and between the shoulder blades” on the daughter of a gentleman from San Francisco, compare the whites of the eyes of blacks with “flaky hard balls” or call it young man in a narrow tailcoat with long tails “handsome, like a huge leech!”) Then a hint of death appears in a verbal portrait of the crown prince of one of the Asian states, sweet and pleasant in general person, whose mustache, however, “saw like a dead man’s,” and the skin on his face was “as if stretched.” And the people on the ship are choking in “mortal melancholy,” promising evil, and the museums are cold and “deadly pure,” and the ocean is moving with “mourning mountains of silver foam” and hums like a “funeral mass.”
Lesson lessons development By Russian literature XIX century. 10 Class. 1st half of the year. - M.: Vako, 2003. 4. Zolotareva I.V., Mikhailova T.I. Lesson lessons development By Russian literature ...
In addition to the main characters, it also includes secondary characters who play an equally important role in the play.
With the replicas of the minor characters, Ostrovsky draws a background that speaks about the state of the main characters and draws the reality around them. From their words you can learn a lot about the morals of Kalinov, its past and aggressive rejection of everything new, about the requirements that are presented to the residents of Kalinov, their way of life, dramas and characters.
In the remarks that lead us to the image of Katerina and her monologue-characterization, a modest young beautiful woman, about which no one can say anything bad. Only the attentive Varvara discerned her reaction to Boris and pushed her to betray her, not seeing anything bad in it and not at all tormented by a feeling of guilt towards her brother. Most likely, Katerina would never have decided to cheat, but her daughter-in-law simply hands her the key, knowing that she will not be able to resist. In the person of Varvara, we have proof that in Kabanikha’s house there is no love between loved ones, and everyone is only interested in him personal life, its benefits.
Her lover, Ivan Kudryash, also does not experience love. He can cheat on Varvara simply out of a desire to spoil the Dikiy, and would do this if his daughters were older. For Varvara and Kudryash, their meetings are an opportunity to satisfy bodily needs, to mutual pleasure. Animal lust is the obvious norm of the night Kalinov. The example of their couple shows the bulk of Kalinov’s youth, the same generation that is not interested in anything other than their personal needs.
TO to the younger generation The married Tikhon and the unmarried Boris also apply, but they are different. This is rather an exception to the general rule.
Tikhon represents that part of the youth that is suppressed by their elders and is completely dependent on them. It is unlikely that he has ever behaved like his sister; he is more decent - and therefore unhappy. He cannot pretend to be subdued like his sister - he is truly subdued, his mother broke him. For him, it’s a pleasure to get drunk to death when there is no constant control in the person of his mother.
Boris is different because he did not grow up in Kalinov, and his late mother is a noblewoman. His father left Kalinov and was happy until he died, leaving the children orphans. Boris saw a different life. However, due to younger sister, he is ready for self-sacrifice - he is in the service of his uncle, dreaming that someday Dikoy will give them part of the inheritance left by his grandmother. In Kalinov there is no entertainment, no outlet - and he fell in love. This is really falling in love, not animal lust. His example shows Kalinov’s poor relatives forced to live with rich merchants.
Using the example of Kuligin, a self-taught mechanic trying to create a perpetuum mobile, inventors of small towns are shown who are forced to constantly ask for money to develop inventions, and receive insults and humiliating refusals, and even swearing. He's trying to bring progress to the city, but he's the only one doing it. The rest are happy with everything, or they have resigned themselves to fate. This is the only positive minor character plays, but he too resigned himself to fate. He is unable to fight the Wild One. The desire to create and create for the people is not even paid. But it is with his help that Ostrovsky condemns “ dark kingdom" He sees the beauty of the Volga, Kalinov, nature, the approaching thunderstorm - which no one but him sees. And it is he who, giving Katerina’s corpse, utters words of condemnation to the “dark kingdom.”
In contrast to him, the “professional” wanderer Feklusha settled down well. She doesn’t bring anything new, but she knows very well what those with whom she expects to have a delicious meal want to hear. Change is from the devil, who trades in big cities, confusing people. All new creations are also from the devil - exactly what fully corresponds to Kabanikha’s personal opinion. In Kalinov, assenting to Kabanikha, Feklusha will always be full, and food and comfort are the only things she is not indifferent to.
Not the least role is played by the half-crazed lady, about whom it was known that she sinned a lot in her youth, and in her old age she became fixated on this topic. “Sin” and “beauty” are two inseparable concepts for her. Beauty has disappeared - and the meaning of life has disappeared; this, of course, becomes God's punishment for sins. On this basis, the lady goes crazy and immediately begins to denounce him when she sees the beautiful face. But she gives the impression of an angel of retribution to the impressionable Katerina, although most of God’s terrible punishment for her act was invented by him herself.
Without the secondary characters, “The Thunderstorm” could not have been so emotionally and meaningfully rich. With thoughtful remarks, like brushstrokes, the author creates full picture the hopeless life of the dark, patriarchal Kalinov, which can lead to death of any soul who dreams of flight. That’s why people “don’t fly” there. Or they fly, but for a matter of seconds, in free fall.
Probably, calling these characters extra-plot, episodic is not entirely correct. Yes, they appear sporadically, at first glance they serve as a background to the overall plot structure, they serve, like Boris, as a piece of furniture. But their role is very important; without them, the entire work could crumble, like a house that does not have connecting reinforcements crumbles.
This same Boris is so alien to the atmosphere of the town that without him, an analysis of this atmosphere would be tasteless, just as unsalted food is tasteless. He is a kind of seasoning that sharpens the perception of the main thing, so that one cannot agree with Dobrolyubov, because Boris, aware of his foreignness, is very important, although literary analysis is included in the group of episodic characters.
Another interesting image is Varvara, whose very name encodes barbaric principles and pagan habits. She is a kind of “antonym” of Katerina. But if you think about the role of Feklusha, using the decoding of the symbolism of names necessary when considering Ostrovsky’s plays, then her name, translated as divine, fully corresponds to the image of the wanderer. And her friend Glasha (sweet) really loves listening to Feklushina’s “sweet” stories.
Most of Ostrovsky’s contemporaries saw the basis of “The Thunderstorm” in everyday conflict. Is it so? Is this really trivial? love drama, a typical triangle between Katerina, Boris and Tikhon, in which they should all be active characters? Frankly speaking, such an interpretation seems too petty for such a playwright. high level. Isn’t it more logical to evaluate the play as a tragedy in which the action takes place in Katerina’s soul, and all the other characters are episodic, outside the plot?
Then their task of creating an atmosphere of patriarchy, of that conservatism, which many sociologists considered the salvation of society, was carried out brilliantly. Against their bleak backdrop, Katerina’s internal tragedy unfolds, and her death highlights the failure of the conservatives.
Then the role of Kabanikha, which at first glance is secondary, is even more clearly visible. Marfa Ignatievna has a lot in common with Katerina. She believes in “equivalent exchange” with God, she is the same maximalist, but she is short-circuited in Old Believer rituals. And, frankly, it is not Kabanikha’s cruelty that destroys Katerina, but Tikhon’s compassion.
In the dialogues with Kabanikha, the role of Feklusha grows; she is, as it were, a preacher of the old, patriarchal, although in herself, in her essence, she is a cunning parasite who knows how to speak “tasty” for her own good.
The functions of Varvara, Kudryash and Shapkin in the play can be combined. All of them are pagans in their souls, that is, people who are opposite to Katerina’s worldview. They played their role in the beginning of the drama and became the background that shaded her actions.
