Despite the name, behind the image of the city of Glupoza lies an entire country, namely Russia. Thus, in figurative form, Saltykov-Shchedrin reflects the most terrible aspects of the life of Russian society that required increased public attention. The main idea of the work is the inadmissibility of autocracy. And this is what unites the chapters of the work, which could become separate stories.
Shchedrin tells us the history of the city of Foolov, what happened in it for about a hundred years. Moreover, he focuses on the mayors, since it was they who expressed the vices of city government. In advance, even before the start of the main part of the work, an “inventory” of mayors is given. The word “inventory” is usually referred to things, so Shchedrin uses it deliberately, as if emphasizing the inanimateness of the mayors, who are the key images in each chapter.
The satirical means used by the author of the chronicle are varied. Taken together, the images of all the mayors create a single image of the autocratic ruler.
The essence of each of the mayors can be imagined even after a simple description of their appearance. For example, the tenacity and cruelty of Gloomy-Burcheev are expressed in his “wooden face, obviously never illuminated by a smile.” The more peaceful Pimple, on the contrary, “was rosy-cheeked, had scarlet and juicy lips,” “his gait was active and cheerful, his gesture was quick.”
Images are formed in the reader’s imagination with the help of such artistic techniques as hyperbole, metaphor, allegory, etc. Even facts of reality acquire fantastic features. Shchedrin deliberately uses this technique to enhance the feeling of an invisible connection with the true state of affairs in feudal Russia.
The work is written in the form of chronicles. Some parts, which, according to the author’s intention, are considered found documents, are written in heavy clerical language, and in the chronicler’s address to the reader there are colloquialisms, proverbs, and sayings. The confusion in dates and the anachronisms and allusions often made by the chronicler (for example, references to Herzen and Ogarev) enhance the comedy.
Shchedrin most fully introduces us to the mayor Ugryum-Burcheev. There is a clear analogy with reality here: the surname of the mayor is similar in sound to the surname of the famous reformer Arakcheev. In the description of Gloomy-Burcheev there is less comic, and more mystical, terrifying. Using satirical means, Shchedrin endowed him with a large number of the most “bright” vices. And it is no coincidence that the story ends with a description of the reign of this mayor. According to Shchedrin, “history has stopped flowing.”
The novel “The History of a City” is certainly an outstanding work; it is written in colorful, grotesque language and figuratively denounces the bureaucratic state. “History” has still not lost its relevance, because, unfortunately, we still meet people like Foolov’s mayors.
“History” itself is built by the creator in a deliberately illogical and inconsistent manner. The great satirist prefaced the main content with an appeal from the publisher (in the role of which he himself acts) and an appeal to the readers of the supposedly last Foolov archivist. The inventory of city governors, which supposedly gives the book a historiographical nature and a special meaning, consists of 21 names (from the pasta-traitor Clement to Major Interkhvat-Zalikhvatsky, who burned the gymnasium and abolished the sciences). In the “History” itself, attention to the people in charge is clearly unequal: some (Benevolensky, Brudasty, Wartkin, Gloomy-Burcheev) are devoted to many literary pages, others (Mikeladze, Du-Chario) were less fortunate. This can be seen in the structure of “History”; three introductory sections, one final Appendix (Supporting documents containing the city's thinking and legislative exercises) and a total of 5 main sections for the narration of the exploits of 21 rulers.
There has never been a city called “Fool” in the Russian Empire, no one has met such outlandish, implausible bosses (with a stuffed head, like Ivan Panteleevich Pryshch).
M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin showed himself to be a brilliant connoisseur of Aesopian language, putting it in a supposedly chronicle form (the chronicle of the city's successes covers about a century, and the years of rule are indicated, albeit approximately). This parody of presentation allowed the writer to talk about modernity and denounce officials without causing censorship interference or the wrath of his superiors. It’s not for nothing that Shchedrin himself called himself “a student of the censorship department.” Of course, the intelligent reader guessed the life around him behind Foolov’s ugly paintings. The power of Shchedrin’s satirical denunciation of the reactionary foundations on which Russian monarchical power rested was so powerful that the grotesque and fantastic images of the book were perceived as the most truthful depiction of life.
Consider, for example, the description of the causes of death of the mayors: Ferapontov was torn to pieces by dogs; Lamvrokakis is eaten by bedbugs; The cormorant is broken in half by the storm; Ferdyshchenko died from overeating; Ivanov - trying to comprehend the Senate Decree; Mikeladze - from exhaustion, etc.
In “History” Shchedrin skillfully uses satirical hyperbole: the facts of true reality take on fantastic shapes in him, which allows the satirist to most vividly reveal one or another side of the image. But the writer does not avoid realistic sketches. Thus, the fire in the Pushkarskaya settlement of the “straw city” is described very naturalistically: “one could see people swarming in the distance, and it seemed that they were unconsciously milling around in one place, and not rushing about in melancholy and despair. One could see scraps of lit straw, torn from the roofs by the whirlwind, circling in the air. Gradually, one after another, the wooden buildings were occupied and seemed to melt away.”
The chronicle of city government is written in a colorful, but also complex language. It also widely uses the stupid bureaucratic style: “let everyone bake pies on holidays, without forbidding themselves from such cookies on weekdays” (Charter on respectable baking of pies - performed by Benevolensky). There is also an old Slavic speech: “I want to tickle the Foolovites, who are dear to me, by showing the world their glorious deeds and the good root from which this famous tree grew and stole the whole earth with its branches.” There was a place and time for popular sayings: “But I’m telling you a word: it’s better... to sit at home with the truth than to bring trouble upon yourself” (Ferdyshchenko).
The portrait gallery of Shchedrin’s “favorites” - Foolov’s mayors - is immediately and strongly remembered. One after another they pass before the reader, absurd and disgusting in their cruelty, stupidity, and malicious hatred of the people. Here are Brigadier Ferdyshchenko, who starved the Foolovites, and his successor Borodavkin, who burned thirty-three villages in order “with the help of these measures” to collect arrears of two rubles and a half, and Major Perekhuvat-Zalikhvatsky, who abolished science in the city, and Theophylact Benevolensky, possessed passion for writing laws (already on the benches of the seminary he wrote several wonderful laws, among which the most famous are the following: “let every man have a contrite heart,” “let every soul tremble,” “let every cricket know the pole corresponding to its rank”).
It is in the description of the main characters that M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin uses a wide variety of artistic means. Thus, the extreme cruelty of Gloomy-Burcheev is recorded “in a wooden face, obviously never illuminated by a smile,” with a “narrow and sloping forehead,” sunken eyes and developed jaws, ready to “crush or bite in half.” On the contrary, the liberal-minded Pimple, the mayor with a stuffed head, “was rosy-cheeked, had scarlet and juicy lips, from behind which a row of white teeth showed; His gait was active and cheerful, his gesture was quick.” External characteristics are similar to their psychological images: the ferocious Bruddety, aka Organchik, does not look like a native of France, the aristocrat Du-Chariot, having fun in pleasures and entertainment, but “Karamzin’s friend” Grust-tilov, distinguished by “tenderness and sensitivity heart”, is no less far from the “fantastic traveler foreman Ferdyshchenko...
The townspeople and people in “History” evoke an ambivalent feeling. On the one hand, according to the author himself, they are characterized by two things: “the usual Foolovian enthusiasm and the ordinary Foolovian frivolity.” It's scary to live in the city of Foolov. The book makes you laugh, but not funny, but bitter and gloomy. The writer himself said that he was counting “on arousing in the reader a bitter feeling, and not at all a cheerful disposition.” It’s scary for Foolov not only because it is ruled by limited officials, “appointed by the Russian government.” It is scary that the people endure their misfortunes meekly and patiently.
However, this silent, painful reproach of the writer did not at all mean mockery of the people. Shchedrin loved his contemporaries: “All my works,” he later wrote, “are full of sympathy.” The deep meaning of “The History of a City” lies not only in the images of the mayors, brilliant in their accusatory power, but also in that general characteristic of the Foolovites, which inevitably suggested the future awakening of the people suppressed by power. The great satirist calls for the inner life of Russian cities like Foolov to once break out and become bright and worthy of a person. It is no coincidence that the “historical” chronicle ends with the flight of the last mayor; Ug-ryum-Burcheev disappeared, “as if melting into air.” The powerful movement of the true history of mankind was unable to restrain the authorities for another century: “the river did not subside. As before, it flowed, breathed, gurgled and wriggled...”
It turns out that Shchedrin looked far ahead. He believed in the collapse of Foolov's system of life, in the victory of the ideals of reason, human dignity, democracy, progress, civilization. His works, including “The History of a City,” were predicted to have a great future. Turgenev compared Saltykov-Shchedrin with Swift, Gorky admitted that it was for this work that he “really fell in love” with the writer. And so it happened. Mikhail Evgrafovich Saltykov-Shchedrin has become one of the most read writers in our country and abroad.
Satirical techniques of Saltykov-Shchedrin: “The History of a City”, “Gentlemen Golovlevs”
M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin is one of the most famous literary satirists of the 19th century. The novel “The History of a City” is the pinnacle of his artistic creativity.
Despite the name, behind the image of the city of Foolov lies an entire country, namely Russia. Thus, in figurative form, Saltykov-Shchedrin reflects the most terrible aspects of the life of Russian society that required increased public attention. The main idea of the work is the inadmissibility of autocracy. And this is what unites the chapters of the work, which could become separate stories.
Shchedrin tells us the history of the city of Foolov, what happened in it for about a hundred years. Moreover, he focuses on the mayors, since it was they who expressed the vices of city government. In advance, even before the start of the main part of the work, an “inventory” of mayors is given. The word “inventory” is usually referred to things, so Shchedrin uses it deliberately, as if emphasizing the inanimateness of the mayors, who are the key images in each chapter.
The essence of each of the mayors can be imagined even after a simple description of their appearance. For example, the tenacity and cruelty of Gloomy-Burcheev are expressed in his “wooden face, obviously never illuminated by a smile.” The more peaceful Pimple, on the contrary, “was rosy-cheeked, had scarlet and juicy lips,” “his gait was active and cheerful, his gesture was quick.”
Images are formed in the reader’s imagination with the help of such artistic techniques as hyperbole, metaphor, allegory, etc. Even facts of reality acquire fantastic features. Shchedrin deliberately uses this technique to enhance the feeling of an invisible connection with the true state of affairs in feudal Russia.
The work is written in the form of chronicles. Some parts, which, according to the author’s intention, are considered found documents, are written in heavy clerical language, and in the chronicler’s address to the reader there are colloquialisms, proverbs, and sayings. The confusion in dates and the anachronisms and allusions often made by the chronicler (for example, references to Herzen and Ogarev) enhance the comedy.
Shchedrin most fully introduces us to the mayor Ugryum-Burcheev. There is a clear analogy with reality here: the surname of the mayor is similar in sound to the surname of the famous reformer Arakcheev. In the description of Gloomy-Burcheev there is less comic, and more mystical, terrifying. Using satirical means, Shchedrin endowed him with a large number of the most “bright” vices. And it is no coincidence that the story ends with a description of the reign of this mayor. According to Shchedrin, “history has stopped flowing.”
The novel “The History of a City” is certainly an outstanding work; it is written in colorful, grotesque language and figuratively denounces the bureaucratic state. “History” has still not lost its relevance, because, unfortunately, we still meet people like Foolov’s mayors.
In the final period of his work, M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin turns to the allegorical form of a fairy tale, where, describing everyday situations in “Aesopian language,” he ridicules the vices of the writer’s contemporary society.
The satirical form became for M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin with the opportunity to speak freely about pressing problems of society. In the fairy tale “The Tale of How One Man Fed Two Generals” various satirical techniques are used: grotesque, irony, fantasy, allegory, sarcasm - to characterize the characters depicted and describe the situation in which the main characters of the fairy tale: two generals find themselves. The very landing of the generals on a desert island “at the behest of a pike, at my will” is grotesque. The writer’s assurance is fantastic that “the generals served all their lives in some kind of registry, were born there, raised and grew old, and therefore did not understand anything.” The writer also satirically depicted the appearance of the heroes: “they are in nightgowns, and an order hangs on their necks.” Saltykov-Shchedrin ridicules the basic inability of the generals to find food for themselves: both thought that “the rolls would be born in the same form as they are served with coffee in the morning.” Depicting the behavior of the characters, the writer uses sarcasm: “they began to slowly crawl towards each other and in the blink of an eye they became frantic. Shreds flew, squeals and groans were heard; the general, who was a teacher of calligraphy, bit off the order from his comrade and immediately swallowed it.” The heroes began to lose their human appearance, turning into hungry animals, and only the sight of real blood sobered them up.
Satirical techniques not only characterize artistic images, but also express the author’s attitude towards the depicted. The writer treats with irony the man who, frightened by the powers that be, “first climbed a tree and picked the generals ten of the ripest apples, and took one sour one for himself.” M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin ridicules the attitude of the generals to life: “They began to say that here they live on everything ready, but in St. Petersburg, meanwhile, their pensions keep accumulating and accumulating.”
Thus, using various satirical techniques, the allegorical form of “Aesopian language,” M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin expresses his own attitude to the relationship between people in power and the common people. The writer ridicules both the generals’ inability to cope with life and the peasant’s stupid fulfillment of all the masters’ whims.
"The Story of a City"- one of the central works of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. It was published in the journal Otechestvennye zapiski in 1869-1870 and caused a wide public outcry. The main means of satirical exposure of reality in the work are grotesque and hyperbole. IN genre-wise it is stylized as a historical chronicle. The image of the author-narrator is called in it “the last archivist-chronicler.”
M.E. writes with subtle irony. Saltykov-Shchedrin about how the faces of these mayors change with the change of a particular historical era: “So, for example, the mayors of Biron’s time are distinguished by their recklessness, the mayors of Potemkin’s time by their stewardship, and the mayors of Razumovsky’s time by unknown origins and knightly courage. All of them flog the townsfolk, but the first flog the townsfolk absolutely, the latter explain the reasons for their management by the requirements of civilization, the third want the townsfolk to rely on their courage in everything.” Thus, from the very beginning, a hierarchy is built and emphasized: higher spheres - local government - ordinary people. Their destinies mirror what is happening in areas of power: “in the first case, the inhabitants trembled unconsciously, in the second they trembled with the consciousness of their own benefit, in the third they rose to awe filled with trust.”
Issues
“The History of a City” exposes the imperfections of the social and political life of Russia. Unfortunately, Russia has rarely been blessed with good rulers. You can prove this by opening any history textbook. Saltykov Shchedrin, sincerely worried about the fate of his homeland, could not stay away from this problem. The work “The History of a City” became a unique solution. The central issue in this book is the power and political imperfection of the country, or rather one city of Foolov. Everything - the history of its founding, and the string of worthless autocrats, and the Foolov people themselves - are so ridiculous that it looks like some kind of farce. This would be a farce if it were not so similar to real life in Russia. “The Story of a City” is not just a political satire on the existing political system in this country, but fundamentally affects the very mentality of the people of the entire country.
So, the central problem of the work is the motive of power and political imperfection. In the city of Fupov, mayors are replaced one after another. Their fates are to some extent tragic, but at the same time grotesque. For example, Busty turned out to be a doll with an organ in its head, which uttered only two phrases: “I won’t tolerate it!” and “I’ll ruin you!”, and Ferdyshchenko forgets about his responsibilities when it comes to food, especially goose and boiled pork, which is why he dies from gluttony. Acne turns out to have a stuffed head, And Vanir dies from strain, trying to comprehend the meaning of the decree, Grustilov dying of melancholy... The end of the reign of each of them is sad, but funny. The mayors themselves do not inspire respect - someone is impenetrably stupid, someone is excessively cruel, liberal rulers are also not the best way out, since their innovations are not vitally necessary, but, at best, a tribute to fashion or an empty whim. For some completely incomprehensible reason, mayors do not think about the people, about what people need. There are many rulers, they are different creatures, but the result is the same - life gets neither better nor worse. And rulers become mayors more by misunderstanding than by necessity. Who was there among Foolov's bosses - a cook, a barber, a runaway Greek, minor army ranks, an orderly, state councilors and, finally, a scoundrel Gloomy Burcheev. And, what's most amazing, there was not a single mayor who had an idea of his responsibilities and the rights of the people A. For Foolov's mayors there was no clear concept of their own actions. As if they had nothing better to do, they replanted birch trees in the alley, introduced gymnasiums and sciences, abolished gymnasiums and sciences, introduced Provençal oil, mustard and bay leaves, collected arrears... and, in fact, that’s all. Their functions were limited to this.
The author emphasizes that the chronicler’s appearance is very real, which does not allow one to doubt his authenticity for a minute. M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin clearly indicates the boundaries of the period under consideration: from 1931 to 1825. The work includes “Address to the reader from the last archivist-chronicler.” To give a documentary character to this fragment of the narrative, the author places a footnote after the title stating that the address is conveyed exactly in the words of the chronicler himself. The publisher allowed himself only spelling corrections of the text in order to edit certain liberties in the spelling of words. The address begins with a conversation with the reader about whether there are worthy rulers and leaders in the history of our country: “ Is it possible that in every country there will be glorious Nero and Caligula, shining with valor, and only in our own country will we not find such??» Omniscient Publisher supplements this quote with a reference to poem by G.R. Derzhavina: “Caligula! Your horse in the Senate Could not shine, shining in gold: Good deeds shine!” This addition aims to emphasize the value scale: It is not gold that shines, but good deeds.. Gold in this case acts as a symbol of acquisitiveness, and good deeds are proclaimed as the true value of the world.
Further in the work follows a discussion about man in general. The chronicler encourages the reader to look at his own person and decide what is more important in him: the head or the belly. And then judge those in power.
At the end of the address, Foolov is compared to Rome, this again emphasizes that we are not talking about any specific city, and about the model of society in general. Thus, the city of Foolov is a grotesque image of not only all of Russia, but also all power structures on a global scale, for Rome has been associated with the imperial city since ancient times, the same function is embodied by the mention of the Roman emperors Nero (37-68) and Caligula (12-68). 41) in the text of the work. For the same purpose, to expand the information field of the narrative, surnames are mentioned in the work Kostomarov, Pypin and Soloviev. Contemporaries had an idea of what views and positions were being discussed. N.I. Kostomarov - famous Russian historian, researcher of the socio-political and economic history of Russia and Ukraine, Ukrainian poet and fiction writer. A .N. Pypin (1833-1904) - Russian literary critic, ethnographer, academician of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, cousin of N.G. Chernyshevsky. B.C. Soloviev (1853-1900) - Russian philosopher, poet, publicist, literary critic of the late 19th - early 20th centuries.
Further, the chronicler assigns the action of the story to the era existence of tribal feuds . At the same time, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin uses his favorite compositional technique: the fairy-tale context is combined with the pages of real Russian history. All this creates a system of witty subtle hints that are understandable to a sophisticated reader.
Having come up with funny names for the fairy-tale tribes, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin immediately reveals to the reader their allegorical meaning when representatives of the tribe of blockheads begin to call each other by name (Ivashka, Peter). It becomes clear that we are talking specifically about Russian history.
Made up our minds bunglers find themselves a prince, and since the people themselves are stupid, they are looking for an unwise ruler. Finally, one (the third in a row, as is customary in Russian folk tales) "princely lordship" agreed to own this people. But with a condition. “And you will pay me many tributes,” the prince continued, “whoever brings a bright sheep, sign the sheep to me, and keep the bright one for yourself; Whoever happens to have a penny, break it in four: give one part to me, the other to me, the third to me again, and keep the fourth for yourself. When I go to war, you go too! And you don’t care about anything else!” Even foolish bunglers hung their heads from such speeches.
In this scene M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin convincingly shows that any power is based on the obedience of the people and brings them more troubles and problems than real help and support. It is no coincidence that the prince gives the bunglers a new name: “ And since you did not know how to live on your own and, being stupid, you yourself wished for bondage, then you will no longer be called blockheads, but Foolovites».
The experiences of deceived bunglers are expressed in folklore. It is symbolic that one of them sings a song on the way home “Don’t make noise, mother green oak tree!”
The prince sends his thieving governors one after another. A satirical inventory of city governors gives them an eloquent description, testifying to their business qualities.
Clementy p received a proper rank for his skillful preparation of pasta. Lamvrokanis he sold Greek soap, sponges and nuts. Marquis de Sanglot loved to sing obscene songs. One can list for a long time the so-called exploits of mayors. They did not stay in power for long and did nothing worthwhile for the city.
Techniques for satirical depiction of mayors
The publisher considered it necessary to present detailed biographies of the most prominent leaders. Here M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin resorts to N.V., already known from “Dead Souls.” Gogol's classical technique. Just as Gogol portrayed landowners, he presents to the readers a whole gallery of typical images of city governors.
The first of them depicted in the work of Dementy Varlamovich Brudasty by nickname Organ. In parallel with the story about any specific mayor M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin constantly paints a general picture of the actions of city authorities and the perception of these actions by the people.
So, for example, he mentions that the Foolovites for a long time remembered those bosses who flogged and collected arrears, but at the same time they always said something kind.
The organ struck everyone with the most severe severity. His favorite word was the cry: “I won’t tolerate it!” Further M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin says that at night he secretly came to the mayor of organ affairs master Baibakov. The secret is revealed suddenly at one of the receptions, when the best representatives come to see Brudasty " Foolov's intelligentsia" (this phrase itself contains oxymoron, which gives the story an ironic tone). That's where it happens with the mayor breakdown of the organ he used instead of a head. Only Brudasty allowed himself to portray an uncharacteristic friendly smile for him, when “... suddenly something inside him hissed and buzzed, and the longer his mysterious hissing lasted, the more and more his eyes spun and sparkled.” No less interesting is the reaction of the city's secular society to this incident. M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin emphasizes that our ancestors were not carried away by revolutionary ideas and anarchist sentiments. Therefore, they only sympathized with the city mayor.
In this fragment of the work, another grotesque move is used: the head, which is being taken to the mayor after repairs, suddenly begins to bite around the city and utters the word: “I’ll ruin it!” A special satirical effect is achieved in the final scene of the chapter, when two different mayors are brought to the rebellious Foolovites almost simultaneously. But people have become accustomed to not being greatly surprised by anything: “The impostors met and measured each other with their eyes. The crowd dispersed slowly and in silence.”
After this, anarchy begins in the city, as a result of which women seized power. These are the childless widow Iraida Lukinishna Paleologova, the adventurer Clementine de Bourbon, the Revel native Amalia Karlovna Shtokfish, Anelya Aloizievna Lyadokhovskaya, Dunka the fat-fisted one, Matryonka the nostril.
In the characteristics of these mayors one can discern subtle hints about the personalities of the reigning persons in Russian history: Catherine 2, Anna Ioannovna and other empresses. This is the most stylistically reduced chapter. M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin generously rewards mayors with offensive nicknames and offensive definitions(“thick-meat”, “thick-footed”, etc.) . Their entire reign boils down to chaos. The last two rulers generally resemble witches more than real people: “Both Dunka and Matryonka committed unspeakable outrages. They went out into the street and knocked the heads of passers-by with their fists, went alone to taverns and smashed them, caught young guys and hid them underground, ate babies, and cut out women’s breasts and ate them too.”
An advanced person who takes his responsibilities seriously is named in the work of S.K. Dvoekurov. In the author’s understanding, it correlates with Peter the Great: “He alone introduced mead-making and brewing, and made the use of mustard and bay leaves compulsory,” and was “the founder of those bold innovators who, three-quarters of a century later, waged wars in the name of potatoes.” Main Dvoekurov's achievement was an attempt to establish an academy in Foolov. True, he did not achieve results in this field, but the desire to implement this plan in itself was already a progressive step compared to the activities of other mayors.
The next ruler is Peter Petrovich Ferdyshchenko He was simple and even liked to pepper his speech with the affectionate word “brother-sudarik.” However, in the seventh year of his reign, he fell in love with a suburban beauty Alena Osipovna. All nature has ceased to be favorable to the Foolovites: “ From the very spring of St. Nicholas, from the time the water began to enter low water, and right up to Ilyin’s day, not a drop of rain fell. The old-timers could not remember anything like this, and not without reason attributed this phenomenon to the brigadier’s fall from grace.”
When the pestilence spread throughout the city, it was found in it truth-loving Yevseich, who decided to talk to the foreman. However, he ordered that the old man be put on a prisoner's uniform, and so Yevseich disappeared, as if he had not existed in the world, disappeared without a trace, as only the “miners” of the Russian land can disappear.
Light is shed on the real plight of the population of the Russian Empire by the petition of the residents of the most unfortunate city of Foolov, in which they write that they are dying out, that they see the authorities around them as unskillful.
Stunning savagery and cruelty crowds in the scene when the residents of Foolov throw the unfortunate Alenka from the bell tower, accusing her of all mortal sins. The story with Alenka had barely time to be forgotten when the foreman found another hobby - shooter Domashka. All these episodes, in essence, show women's powerlessness and defenselessness in front of the voluptuous foreman.
The latest disaster to hit the city is fire on the eve of the feast of the Kazan Mother of God: two settlements burned down. The people perceived all this as another punishment for the sins of their foreman. The death of this mayor is symbolic. He drank too much and ate too much of the people's treat: “ After the second break (there was a pig in sour cream) he felt sick; however, he overcame himself and ate another goose with cabbage. After that, his mouth twisted. You could see how some administrative vein on his face trembled, trembled and trembled, and suddenly froze... The Foolovites jumped up from their seats in confusion and fear. It's over..."
The next city ruler turned out to be efficient and meticulous. Vasilisk Semenovich Wartkin, like a fly, flashed around the city, loved to shout and take everyone by surprise. It is symbolic that he slept with one eye open (a kind of hint to the “all-seeing eye” of autocracy). However, Wartkin's irrepressible energy is spent for other purposes: he builds castles in the sand. The Foolovians aptly call his way of life energy of inaction. Wartkin leads wars for enlightenment, the reasons for which are ridiculous (for example, the Foolovites’ refusal to plant Persian chamomile). Under his leadership, the tin soldiers, entering the settlement, begin to destroy the huts. It is noteworthy that the Foolovites always learned about the subject of the campaign only after its completion.
When he comes to power Mikoladze, champion of graceful manners, Foolovites grow fur and begin to suck their paws. But wars for education, on the contrary, make them dumber. Meanwhile, when education and legislative activity ceased, the Foolovites stopped sucking their paws, their fur faded without a trace, and soon they began to dance in circles. The laws spell out great poverty, and the inhabitants become obese. The “Charter of Respectable Pie Baking” convincingly shows how much stupidity is concentrated in legislative acts. It states, for example, that it is prohibited to make pies from mud, clay and building materials. As if a person of sound mind and good memory is capable of baking pies from this. In fact, this charter symbolically shows how deeply the state apparatus can intervene in the everyday life of every Russian. They are already giving him instructions on how to bake pies. Moreover, special recommendations are given regarding filling positions. Phrase " Everyone should use the filling according to their condition"testifies about a clearly defined social hierarchy in society. However, the passion for legislation also did not take root on Russian soil. Mayor Benevolensky was suspected of connections with Napoleon, accused of treason and sent “to the land where Makar did not drive the calves.”So, using the figurative expression of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin writes allegorically about exile. Contradictions in the artistic world of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, which is a caustic parody of the author’s contemporary reality, awaits the reader at every turn. So, during the reign of Lieutenant Colonel Pimple, the people in Foolov were completely spoiled because he preached liberalism on the board.
“But as freedom developed, its original enemy arose - analysis. With the increase in material well-being, leisure was acquired, and with the acquisition of leisure came the ability to explore and experience the nature of things. This always happens, but the Foolovites used this “newly discovered ability” not in order to strengthen their well-being, but in order to undermine it,” writes M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin.
Pimple became one of the most desirable rulers for the Foolovites. However, the local leader of the nobility, who was not distinguished by special qualities of mind and heart, but had a special stomach, one day, based on gastronomic imagination, mistook his head for stuffed. In the description of the death scene The pimple writer boldly resorts to the grotesque. In the final part of the chapter, the leader in a rage rushes at the mayor with a knife and, cutting off pieces of the head slice by slice, eats it completely.
Against the backdrop of grotesque scenes and ironic notes by M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin reveals to the reader his philosophy of history, in which the flow of life sometimes stops its natural flow and forms a whirlpool.
The most painful impression is made Gloomy-Burcheev. This a man with a wooden face that never smiled. His detailed portrait eloquently tells about the character of the hero: “Thick, comb-cut, pitch-black hair covers the conical skull and tightly, like a yarmulke, frames the narrow and sloping forehead. The eyes are gray, sunken, overshadowed by somewhat swollen eyelids; the look is clear, without hesitation; the nose is dry, descending from the forehead almost straight down; lips are thin, pale, covered with trimmed mustache stubble; the jaws are developed, but without an outstanding expression of carnivory, but with some inexplicable bouquet of readiness to crush or bite in half. The whole figure is lean with narrow shoulders raised upward, with an artificially protruded chest and long, muscular arms.”
M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, commenting on this portrait, emphasizes that we have before us the purest type of idiot. His style of government could only be compared with the random cutting of trees in a dense forest, when a person waves it right and left and steadily walks wherever his eyes look.
In a day in memory of the apostles Peter and Paul the mayor ordered people to destroy their homes. However, this was only the beginning of Napoleonic plans for Ugryum-Burcheev. He began sorting people into families, taking into account their height and physique. After six or two months, no stone remained from the city. Gloomy-Burcheev tried to create his own sea, but the river refused to obey, tearing down dam after dam. The city of Glupov was renamed Nepreklonsk, and the holidays differed from everyday life only in that instead of labor worries, intensive marching was ordered. Meetings were held even at night. In addition to this, spies were appointed. The end of the hero is also symbolic: he instantly disappeared, as if he had melted into thin air.
The very unhurried, drawn-out style of narration in the work of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin shows the insolubility of Russian problems, and satirical scenes emphasize their severity: rulers are replaced one after another, and the people remain in the same poverty, in the same lack of rights, in the same hopelessness.
Grotesque
Satire, irony
Allegory
Forms of folklore: fairy tales, proverbs, sayings...
Real + fantasy
Techniques of satirical depiction in the novel “The History of a City” by M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin
Despite the name, behind the image of the city of Glupoza lies an entire country, namely Russia. Thus, in figurative form, Saltykov-Shchedrin reflects the most terrible aspects of the life of Russian society that required increased public attention. The main idea of the work is the inadmissibility of autocracy. And this is what unites the chapters of the work, which could become separate stories.Shchedrin tells us the history of the city of Foolov, what happened in it for about a hundred years. Moreover, he focuses on the mayors, since it was they who expressed the vices of city government. In advance, even before the start of the main part of the work, an “inventory” of mayors is given. The word “inventory” is usually referred to things, so Shchedrin uses it deliberately, as if emphasizing the inanimateness of the mayors, who are the key images in each chapter.
The essence of each of the mayors can be imagined even after a simple description of their appearance. For example, the tenacity and cruelty of Gloomy-Burcheev are expressed in his “wooden face, obviously never illuminated by a smile.” The more peaceful Pimple, on the contrary, “was rosy-cheeked, had scarlet and juicy lips,” “his gait was active and cheerful, his gesture was quick.”
Images are formed in the reader’s imagination with the help of such artistic techniques as hyperbole, metaphor, allegory, etc. Even facts of reality acquire fantastic features. Shchedrin deliberately uses this technique to enhance the feeling of an invisible connection with the true state of affairs in feudal Russia.
The work is written in the form of chronicles. Some parts, which, according to the author’s intention, are considered found documents, are written in heavy clerical language, and in the chronicler’s address to the reader there are colloquialisms, proverbs, and sayings. The confusion in dates and the anachronisms and allusions often made by the chronicler (for example, references to Herzen and Ogarev) enhance the comedy.
Shchedrin most fully introduces us to the mayor Ugryum-Burcheev. There is a clear analogy with reality here: the surname of the mayor is similar in sound to the surname of the famous reformer Arakcheev. In the description of Gloomy-Burcheev there is less comic, and more mystical, terrifying. Using satirical means, Shchedrin endowed him with a large number of the most “bright” vices. And it is no coincidence that the story ends with a description of the reign of this mayor. According to Shchedrin, “history has stopped flowing.”
The novel “The History of a City” is certainly an outstanding work; it is written in colorful, grotesque language and figuratively denounces the bureaucratic state. “History” has still not lost its relevance, because, unfortunately, we still meet people like Foolov’s mayors.
“History” itself is built by the creator in a deliberately illogical and inconsistent manner. The great satirist prefaced the main content with an appeal from the publisher (in the role of which he himself acts) and an appeal to the readers of the supposedly last Foolov archivist. The inventory of city governors, which supposedly gives the book a historiographical nature and a special meaning, consists of 21 names (from the pasta-traitor Clement to Major Interkhvat-Zalikhvatsky, who burned the gymnasium and abolished the sciences). In the “History” itself, attention to the people in charge is clearly unequal: some (Benevolensky, Brudasty, Wartkin, Gloomy-Burcheev) are devoted to many literary pages, others (Mikeladze, Du-Chario) were less fortunate. This can be seen in the structure of “History”; three introductory sections, one final Appendix (Supporting documents containing the city's thinking and legislative exercises) and a total of 5 main sections for the narration of the exploits of 21 rulers.
There has never been a city called “Fool” in the Russian Empire, no one has met such outlandish, implausible bosses (with a stuffed head, like Ivan Panteleevich Pryshch).
M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin showed himself to be a brilliant connoisseur of Aesopian language, putting it in a supposedly chronicle form (the chronicle of the city's successes covers about a century, and the years of rule are indicated, albeit approximately). This parody of presentation allowed the writer to talk about modernity and denounce officials without causing censorship interference or the wrath of his superiors. It’s not for nothing that Shchedrin himself called himself “a student of the censorship department.” Of course, the intelligent reader guessed the life around him behind Foolov’s ugly paintings. The power of Shchedrin’s satirical denunciation of the reactionary foundations on which Russian monarchical power rested was so powerful that the grotesque and fantastic images of the book were perceived as the most truthful depiction of life.
Consider, for example, the description of the causes of death of the mayors: Ferapontov was torn to pieces by dogs; Lamvrokakis is eaten by bedbugs; The cormorant is broken in half by the storm; Ferdyshchenko died from overeating; Ivanov - trying to comprehend the Senate Decree; Mikeladze - from exhaustion, etc.
In “History” Shchedrin skillfully uses satirical hyperbole: the facts of true reality take on fantastic shapes in him, which allows the satirist to most vividly reveal one or another side of the image. But the writer does not avoid realistic sketches. Thus, the fire in the Pushkarskaya settlement of the “straw city” is described very naturalistically: “one could see people swarming in the distance, and it seemed that they were unconsciously milling around in one place, and not rushing about in melancholy and despair. One could see scraps of lit straw, torn from the roofs by the whirlwind, circling in the air. Gradually, one after another, the wooden buildings were occupied and seemed to melt away.”
The chronicle of city government is written in a colorful, but also complex language. It also widely uses the stupid bureaucratic style: “let everyone bake pies on holidays, without forbidding themselves from such cookies on weekdays” (Charter on respectable baking of pies - performed by Benevolensky). There is also an old Slavic speech: “I want to tickle the Foolovites, who are dear to me, by showing the world their glorious deeds and the good root from which this famous tree grew and stole the whole earth with its branches.” There was a place and time for popular sayings: “But I’m telling you a word: it’s better... to sit at home with the truth than to bring trouble upon yourself” (Ferdyshchenko).
The portrait gallery of Shchedrin’s “favorites” - Foolov’s mayors - is immediately and strongly remembered. One after another they pass before the reader, absurd and disgusting in their cruelty, stupidity, and malicious hatred of the people. Here are Brigadier Ferdyshchenko, who starved the Foolovites, and his successor Borodavkin, who burned thirty-three villages in order “with the help of these measures” to collect arrears of two rubles and a half, and Major Perekhuvat-Zalikhvatsky, who abolished science in the city, and Theophylact Benevolensky, possessed passion for writing laws (already on the benches of the seminary he wrote several wonderful laws, among which the most famous are the following: “let every man have a contrite heart,” “let every soul tremble,” “let every cricket know the pole corresponding to its rank”).
It is in the description of the main characters that M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin uses a wide variety of artistic means. Thus, the extreme cruelty of Gloomy-Burcheev is recorded “in a wooden face, obviously never illuminated by a smile,” with a “narrow and sloping forehead,” sunken eyes and developed jaws, ready to “crush or bite in half.” On the contrary, the liberal-minded Pimple, the mayor with a stuffed head, “was rosy-cheeked, had scarlet and juicy lips, from behind which a row of white teeth showed; His gait was active and cheerful, his gesture was quick.” External characteristics are similar to their psychological images: the ferocious Bruddety, aka Organchik, does not look like a native of France, the aristocrat Du-Chariot, having fun in pleasures and entertainment, but “Karamzin’s friend” Grust-tilov, distinguished by “tenderness and sensitivity heart”, is no less far from the “fantastic traveler foreman Ferdyshchenko...
The townspeople and people in “History” evoke an ambivalent feeling. On the one hand, according to the author himself, they are characterized by two things: “the usual Foolovian enthusiasm and the ordinary Foolovian frivolity.” It's scary to live in the city of Foolov. The book makes you laugh, but not funny, but bitter and gloomy. The writer himself said that he was counting “on arousing in the reader a bitter feeling, and not at all a cheerful disposition.” It’s scary for Foolov not only because it is ruled by limited officials, “appointed by the Russian government.” It is scary that the people endure their misfortunes meekly and patiently.
However, this silent, painful reproach of the writer did not at all mean mockery of the people. Shchedrin loved his contemporaries: “All my works,” he later wrote, “are full of sympathy.” The deep meaning of “The History of a City” lies not only in the images of the mayors, brilliant in their accusatory power, but also in that general characteristic of the Foolovites, which inevitably suggested the future awakening of the people suppressed by power. The great satirist calls for the inner life of Russian cities like Foolov to once break out and become bright and worthy of a person. It is no coincidence that the “historical” chronicle ends with the flight of the last mayor; Ug-ryum-Burcheev disappeared, “as if melting into air.” The powerful movement of the true history of mankind was unable to restrain the authorities for another century: “the river did not subside. As before, it flowed, breathed, gurgled and wriggled...” It turns out that Shchedrin was looking far ahead. He believed in the collapse of Foolov's system of life, in the victory of the ideals of reason, human dignity, democracy, progress, civilization. His works, including “The History of a City,” were predicted to have a great future. Turgenev compared Saltykov-Shchedrin with Swift, Gorky admitted that it was for this work that he “really fell in love” with the writer. And so it happened. Mikhail Evgrafovich Saltykov-Shchedrin has become one of the most read writers in our country and abroad.
The History of a City" is one of the central works of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. It was published in the journal Otechestvennye zapiski in 1869-1870 and caused a wide public outcry. The main means of satirical exposure of reality in the work are grotesque and hyperbole. In terms of genre, it is stylized as a historical chronicle. The image of the author-narrator is called in it “the last archivist-chronicler.”
M.E. writes with subtle irony. Saltykov-Shchedrin about how the faces of these mayors change with the change of a particular historical era: “So, for example, the mayors of Biron’s time are distinguished by their recklessness, the mayors of Potemkin’s time by their stewardship, and the mayors of Razumovsky’s time by unknown origins and knightly courage. All of them flog the townsfolk, but the first flog the townsfolk absolutely, the latter explain the reasons for their management by the requirements of civilization, the third want the townsfolk to rely on their courage in everything.” Thus, from the very beginning, a hierarchy is built and emphasized: higher spheres - local government - ordinary people. Their destinies mirror what is happening in areas of power: “in the first case, the inhabitants trembled unconsciously, in the second they trembled with the consciousness of their own benefit, in the third they rose to awe filled with trust.”
Issues
“The History of a City” exposes the imperfections of the social and political life of Russia. Unfortunately, Russia has rarely been blessed with good rulers. You can prove this by opening any history textbook. Saltykov Shchedrin, sincerely worried about the fate of his homeland, could not stay away from this problem. The work “The History of a City” became a unique solution. The central issue in this book is the power and political imperfection of the country, or rather one city of Foolov. Everything - the history of its founding, the string of worthless autocrats, and the people of Foolov themselves - are so ridiculous that it looks like some kind of farce. This would be a farce if it were not so similar to real life in Russia. “The Story of a City” is not just a political satire on the existing political system in this country, but fundamentally affects the very mentality of the people of the entire country.
So, the central problem of the work is the motive of power and political imperfection. In the city of Fupov, mayors are replaced one after another. Their fates are to some extent tragic, but at the same time grotesque. For example, Busty turned out to be a doll with an organ in its head, which uttered only two phrases: “I won’t tolerate it!” and “I’ll ruin you!”, and Ferdyshchenko forgets about his responsibilities when it comes to food, especially goose and boiled pork, which is why he dies from gluttony. Acne turns out to have a stuffed head, And Vanir dies from strain, trying to comprehend the meaning of the decree, Grustilov dying of melancholy... The end of the reign of each of them is sad, but funny. The mayors themselves do not inspire respect - someone is impenetrably stupid, someone is excessively cruel, liberal rulers are also not the best way out, since their innovations are not vitally necessary, but, at best, a tribute to fashion or an empty whim. For some completely incomprehensible reason, mayors do not think about the people, about what people need. There are many rulers, they are different creatures, but the result is the same - life gets neither better nor worse. And rulers become mayors more by misunderstanding than by necessity. Who was there among Foolov's bosses - a cook, a barber, a runaway Greek, minor army ranks, an orderly, state councilors and, finally, a scoundrel Gloomy Burcheev. And, what's most amazing, there was not a single mayor who had an idea of his responsibilities and the rights of the people A. For Foolov's mayors there was no clear concept of their own actions. As if they had nothing better to do, they replanted birch trees in the alley, introduced gymnasiums and sciences, abolished gymnasiums and sciences, introduced Provençal oil, mustard and bay leaves, collected arrears... and, in fact, that’s all. Their functions were limited to this.
The author emphasizes that the chronicler’s appearance is very real, which does not allow one to doubt his authenticity for a minute. M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin clearly indicates the boundaries of the period under consideration: from 1931 to 1825. The work includes “Address to the reader from the last archivist-chronicler.” To give a documentary character to this fragment of the narrative, the author places a footnote after the title stating that the address is conveyed exactly in the words of the chronicler himself. The publisher allowed himself only spelling corrections of the text in order to edit certain liberties in the spelling of words. The address begins with a conversation with the reader about whether there are worthy rulers and leaders in the history of our country: “ Is it possible that in every country there will be glorious Nero and Caligula, shining with valor, and only in our own country will we not find such??» Omniscient Publisher supplements this quote with a reference to poem by G.R. Derzhavina: “Caligula! Your horse in the Senate Could not shine, shining in gold: Good deeds shine!” This addition aims to emphasize the value scale: It is not gold that shines, but good deeds.. Gold in this case acts as a symbol of acquisitiveness, and good deeds are proclaimed as the true value of the world.
Further in the work follows a discussion about man in general. The chronicler encourages the reader to look at his own person and decide what is more important in him: the head or the belly. And then judge those in power.
At the end of the address, Foolov is compared to Rome, this again emphasizes that we are not talking about any specific city, and about the model of society in general. Thus, the city of Foolov is a grotesque image of not only all of Russia, but also all power structures on a global scale, for Rome has been associated with the imperial city since ancient times, the same function is embodied by the mention of the Roman emperors Nero (37-68) and Caligula (12-68). 41) in the text of the work. For the same purpose, to expand the information field of the narrative, surnames are mentioned in the work Kostomarov, Pypin and Soloviev. Contemporaries had an idea of what views and positions were being discussed. N.I. Kostomarov - famous Russian historian, researcher of the socio-political and economic history of Russia and Ukraine, Ukrainian poet and fiction writer. A .N. Pypin (1833-1904) - Russian literary critic, ethnographer, academician of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, cousin of N.G. Chernyshevsky. B.C. Soloviev (1853-1900) - Russian philosopher, poet, publicist, literary critic of the late 19th - early 20th centuries.
Further, the chronicler assigns the action of the story to the era existence of tribal feuds . At the same time, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin uses his favorite compositional technique: the fairy-tale context is combined with the pages of real Russian history. All this creates a system of witty subtle hints that are understandable to a sophisticated reader.
Having come up with funny names for the fairy-tale tribes, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin immediately reveals to the reader their allegorical meaning when representatives of the tribe of blockheads begin to call each other by name (Ivashka, Peter). It becomes clear that we are talking specifically about Russian history.
Made up our minds bunglers find themselves a prince, and since the people themselves are stupid, they are looking for an unwise ruler. Finally, one (the third in a row, as is customary in Russian folk tales) "princely lordship" agreed to own this people. But with a condition. “And you will pay me many tributes,” the prince continued, “whoever brings a bright sheep, sign the sheep to me, and keep the bright one for yourself; Whoever happens to have a penny, break it in four: give one part to me, the other to me, the third to me again, and keep the fourth for yourself. When I go to war, you go too! And you don’t care about anything else!” Even foolish bunglers hung their heads from such speeches.
In this scene M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin convincingly shows that any power is based on the obedience of the people and brings them more troubles and problems than real help and support. It is no coincidence that the prince gives the bunglers a new name: “ And since you did not know how to live on your own and, being stupid, you yourself wished for bondage, then you will no longer be called blockheads, but Foolovites».
The experiences of deceived bunglers are expressed in folklore. It is symbolic that one of them sings a song on the way home “Don’t make noise, mother green oak tree!”
The prince sends his thieving governors one after another. A satirical inventory of city governors gives them an eloquent description, testifying to their business qualities.
Clementy p received a proper rank for his skillful preparation of pasta. Lamvrokanis he sold Greek soap, sponges and nuts. Marquis de Sanglot loved to sing obscene songs. One can list for a long time the so-called exploits of mayors. They did not stay in power for long and did nothing worthwhile for the city.
