Vasily Shukshin village prose. Village prose

1. Introduction……………………………………………………………........….3
2. Village prose by V. Shukshin…………………………………….…….4-10
3. Conclusion……………………………………………………….……….….11
4. List of references used

Files: 1 file

1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………… ……........….3

2. Village prose by V. Shukshin…………………………………….…….4- 10

3. Conclusion…………………………………………………… ….……….….11

4. List of references………………………………..…..…… 12

Introduction.

Modern rural prose plays a big role in the literary process these days. This genre today rightfully occupies one of the leading places in terms of readability and popularity. The modern reader is concerned about the problems that are raised in novels of this genre. These are issues of morality, love of nature, good, kind attitude towards people and other problems that are so relevant today. Among modern writers who have written or are writing in the genre of village prose, the leading place is occupied by such writers as Viktor Petrovich Astafiev (“The Fish Tsar”, “The Shepherd and the Shepherdess”), Valentin Grigorievich Rasputin (“Live and Remember”, “Farewell to Matera” "), Vasily Makarovich Shukshin (“Village Residents”, “Lyubavins”, “I Came to Give You Freedom”) and others.

Vasily Makarovich Shukshin occupies a special place in this series. His unique creativity has attracted and will continue to attract hundreds of thousands of readers not only in our country, but also abroad. After all, it is rare to meet such a master of the folk word, such a sincere admirer of his native land as this outstanding writer was.

The heroes of Shukshin's books and films are people of the Soviet village, simple workers with unique characters, observant and sharp-tongued. One of his first heroes, Pashka Kolokolnikov (“There Lives Such a Guy”) is a village driver, in whose life “there is room for heroism.” Some of his heroes can be called eccentrics, people “not of this world” (the story “Microscope”, “Crank”). Other characters passed the difficult test of imprisonment (Yegor Prokudin, “Kalina Krasnaya”).

Shukshin’s works provide a laconic and succinct description of the Soviet village; his work is characterized by a deep knowledge of the language and details of everyday life; deep moral problems and universal human values ​​often come to the fore (the stories “The Hunt to Live”, “Space, the Nervous System and Shmata of Lard” )

Village prose by V. Shukshin.

Shukshin’s stories, thematically related to “village prose,” differed from its main stream in that the author’s attention was focused not so much on the foundations of folk morality, but on the complex psychological situations in which the heroes found themselves. The city both attracted Shukshin’s hero as a center of cultural life, and repelled him with its indifference to the fate of an individual. Shukshin felt this situation as a personal drama. “So it turned out for me by the age of forty,” he wrote, “that I am not completely urban, and no longer rural. A terribly uncomfortable position. It’s not even between two chairs, but rather like this: one foot on the shore, the other in the boat. And it’s impossible not to swim, and it’s kind of scary to swim...” Shukshin’s books, in the writer’s own words, became the “history of the soul” of a Russian person.

The main genre in which Shukshin worked was a short story, which was either a small psychologically accurate scene built on expressive dialogue, or several episodes from the life of the hero.

Shukshin wrote about the Russian peasant, about Russia, the Russian national character.

Main themes:

Ø Contrast between city and countryside;

Ø “Bright Souls”;

Ø Love;

Ø “Freaks”;

Ø The meaning of life;

Ø Peasant children;

Ø Russian peasant woman.

The above topics do not exhaust the entire thematic diversity of V. Shukshin’s “village” stories. In addition, many stories, being thematically diverse, can be attributed not to one, not to two, but to several topics.

Heroes of Shukshin

V. Shukshin’s first attempt to understand the destinies of the Russian peasantry at historical junctures was the novel “The Lyubavins.” It was about the early 20s of our century. But the main character, the main embodiment, the focus of the Russian national character for Shukshin was Stepan Razin. It is to him, his uprising, that Shukshin’s second and last novel “I came to give you freedom” is dedicated. It is difficult to say when Shukshin first became interested in Razin’s personality. But already in the collection “Rural Residents” a conversation about him begins. There was a moment when the writer realized that Stepan Razin, in some facets of his character, was absolutely modern, that he was the concentration of the national characteristics of the Russian people. And this, a precious discovery for himself, Shukshin wanted to convey to the reader. Today's people acutely feel how “the distance between modernity and history has shortened.” Writers, turning to the events of the past, study them from the perspective of people of the twentieth century, seek and find those moral and spiritual values ​​that are necessary in our time.

Shukshin called his heroes “strange people”, “unlucky people”. The name “eccentric” (based on the story of the same name, 1967) has taken root in the minds of readers and critics. It is the “eccentrics” who are the main characters of the stories collected by Shukshin into one of his best collections, “Characters.”

The heroes of the stories were usually villagers who in one way or another encountered the city, or, conversely, city dwellers who found themselves in the village. At the same time, a village person is most often naive, simple-minded, and friendly, but the city does not greet him kindly and quickly ends all his good impulses.

This situation is most clearly presented in the story “Weird” (1967). The main point of Shukshin’s worries is resentment for the village.

Shukshin does not idealize the village: he encounters quite a few quite repulsive types of the most peasant origin (for example, in the stories “Eternally Dissatisfied Yakovlev” (1974), “Cut the Cut,” “Strong Man” (1970) and others). Shukshin said that he felt like a person “who has one foot on the shore and the other in the boat.” And he added: “... this situation has its “advantages”... From comparisons, from all sorts of “here and there” and “here and there” thoughts involuntarily come not only about the “village” and the “city” - about Russia."

The Russian man in Shukshin’s stories is often latently dissatisfied with his life, he feels the onset of standardization of everything and everyone, dull and boring philistine averageness and instinctively tries to express his own individuality - often with strange actions. A certain Bronka Pupkov from the story “Pardon me, madam!” (1968) comes up with a whole fascinating story about how during the war he allegedly received a special task to kill Hitler himself, and what came of it. Let the whole village laugh and be indignant, but Bronka over and over again presents this story to visitors from the city - because then, at least for a moment, he himself can believe that he is a valuable person, because of whom the course of world history almost changed...

But Alyosha Beskonvoyny from the story of the same name (1973) wins for himself on the collective farm the right to a non-working Saturday, so that every time he can devote it entirely to... the bathhouse. For him, this bathing day becomes the main and favorite day of the week - because then he belongs only to himself, and not to the collective farm, not to the family - and alone with himself he can calmly indulge in memories, reflect on life, dream...

And someone invents a perpetual motion machine in their spare time (“Uporny”, 1973); someone - with their hard-earned money, earned through overtime work - buys a microscope and dreams of inventing a remedy against microbes (“Microscope”, 1969)... Why is it that rural residents so often no longer see the meaning of their existence in the earth, like their ancestors, why do they either leave for the cities (even though they have hard times there), or direct all their thoughts to the same microscopes and perpetual motion machines? Shukshin, although he once remarked: “We “plow” shallowly, we do not understand the importance of the owner of the land, a worker not by hire, but by conviction,” he usually does not analyze the socio-historical reasons for this situation. He, according to the same Anninsky’s definition, simply “exposes his confusion.”

Shukshin's stories are often based on the contrast between the external, everyday, and internal, spiritual content of life.

The life values ​​of Shukshin's heroes and their view of the world do not coincide with the philistine ones. Sometimes these heroes are funny and funny, sometimes they are tragic. “The most interesting thing for me,” wrote Shukshin, “is to explore the character of a non-dogmatic person, a person not trained in the science of behavior. Such a person is impulsive, gives in to impulses, and therefore is extremely natural. But he always has a reasonable soul...”

Shukshin does not try to aestheticize or idealize his eccentrics; he does not just show interest in the diversity of human characters, the complexity of human nature. Shukshin seems to be trying to justify, “legalize” behavior that seems strange and abnormal. His eccentrics carry within them both the spiritual dissatisfaction of the Soviet people and the eternal Russian national longing for the meaning of human life.

As a rule, Shukshin's heroes are losers. But their unluckiness, everyday failure is a kind of principle, a life position.

The hero of the story “The Freak” and his brother are not understood by their own wives and the people around them. Wanting to please his daughter-in-law, who dislikes him, Chudik paints a baby stroller, which angers the woman, who kicks him out of the house. An unassuming attempt to bring beauty into a house where anger and irritation live ends in yet another failure. But the ending of the story is interesting, when Chudik, who had traveled such a long way to his brother for two days of such a disastrous stay, returns to his native village: “Crank came home when it was raining in a steamy rain. The weirdo got off the bus, took off his new shoes, and ran along the warm wet ground - a suitcase in one hand, boots in the other. He jumped up and sang loudly: Poplars-a-a, poplars-a-a... At one end the sky had already cleared, turned blue, and the sun was close somewhere. And the rain thinned out, splashing in large drops into the puddles; Bubbles swelled and burst in them. In one place, Chudik slipped and almost fell. His name was Vasily Yegorych Knyazev. He was thirty-nine years old. He worked as a projectionist in the village. He loved detectives and dogs. As a child I dreamed of becoming a spy."

So much kindness, childishness, almost holy foolishness; how much simple joy of being there is in the hero of the story!

The plot of the story “Microscope” at first seems like a funny joke. Its hero, a simple carpenter Andrei Erin, buys a microscope, which he gets dearly: first he tells his wife that he lost money, and, having withstood an attack by a woman armed with a frying pan, he works overtime for a month; then he brings a microscope into the house, saying that this is a bonus for hard work. Having brought a microscope, he begins to study everything: water, soup, sweat - and finds microbes everywhere. His eldest son, a fifth-grader, is enthusiastically engaged in “research” with his father, and even his wife develops some respect for him (“You will, my dear, sleep with a scientist...” the hero tells her, suddenly turning from a silent “henpecked man” oppressed by his aggressive wife into the “noisy owner” in the house, and “Zoe Erina... was flattered that people in the village were talking about her husband, a scientist”).

Wanting to find some universal remedy to save the world from germs, this illiterate working man spends his free time not behind a bottle, but behind a microscope with his son, and both of them are absolutely happy. Suddenly the wife discovers the truth about the origin of the microscope. In order to avoid another collision with a frying pan, the hero runs away from home for the night, and upon returning, he learns from his son that his wife went to the city to sell a microscope to a thrift store in order to buy fur coats for her younger children. Of course, the hero understands that this is much more reasonable... But something happened to his soul. “It will sell. Yes... I need fur coats. Well, okay - fur coats, okay. Nothing... It is necessary, of course...” - with such unconvincing self-hypnosis of the hero the story ends, the plot and the hero of which no longer seem funny.

The story “The Resentment” begins with an ordinary everyday situation, but its importance is stated by the first line of the story: “Sashka Ermolaev was offended.” But the hero of the story does not behave like “normal people”: he does not “swallow” the insult in silence, does not cry it out to his loved ones, does not offend the offender in return, but tries to explain to people that they were wrong, tries to understand why they acted this way, and show them that it is not good to do this. As I. Zolotussky accurately noted, “Shukshin’s hero is always on guard...his own dignity, which is most dear to him”9. The strange general deafness, the unjustified aggressiveness of the “wall of people” gradually brings him to the state in which he can commit a crime, hammer his truth into the head of a person who cannot hear words. The question that torments the hero most of all: “What is going on with people?” Resentment forces him to “put down the very meaning of life,” and this is typical of Shukshin’s stories, in which everyday trifles grow to existentiality.

They are all very different - these people are the heroes of a great novel about Russia. They search, bang their heads against the wall, destroy and build churches, drink, shoot, sing for joy in the steamy rain, forgiving people for accidental and deliberate insults, caress children and dream of doing something significant. But the main thing is that they all break out of the framework of organized existence, in which “all people live the same way.”

Shukshin himself admitted: “I am most interested in exploring the character of a non-dogmatic person, a person not trained in the science of behavior. Such a person is impulsive, gives in to impulses, and therefore is extremely natural. But he always has a reasonable soul.” The writer's characters are truly impulsive and extremely natural. And they do this by virtue of internal moral concepts, perhaps not yet realized by themselves. They have a heightened reaction to the humiliation of man by man. This reaction takes on a variety of forms. Sometimes it leads to the most unexpected results.

Conclusion.

Vasily Makarovich can rightfully be called a “nugget” of the Altai land. He is like a precious stone that attracted people to him with his natural talent. He lived excitedly, as if he felt the cold breath of death behind him. And for half a century there has not been such an artist who burst into the human soul.

Vasily Shukshin managed to create a new image of the peasant in his prose. He is a man with a big soul, he is independent and a little eccentric. These qualities of Shukshin’s heroes captivate us when we read his works. “If we are strong and truly smart in anything, it is in a good deed,” said Vasily Shukshin. The work of the writer himself clearly proves this.

The genre of village prose in Russian literature (using the example of Shukshin’s work)

Story novel

comedy

hero

movies image

creativity

novel writer

Vasily Makarovich Shukshin was born in 1929, in the village of Srostki, Altai Territory. And through the entire life of the future writer, the beauty and severity of those places ran like a red thread. It is thanks to his small homeland

Shukshin learned to appreciate the land, the work of man on this land, and learned to understand the harsh prose of rural life. From the very beginning of his creative career, he discovered new ways in depicting a person. His heroes turned out to be unusual in their social status, life maturity, and moral experience. Having already become a fully mature young man, Shukshin goes to the center of Russia. In 1958, he made his film debut (“Two Fedoras”), as well as in literature (“A Story in a Cart”). In 1963, Shukshin released his first collection, “Rural Residents.” And in 1964, his film “There Lives a Guy Like This” was awarded the main prize at the Venice Film Festival. World fame comes to Shukshin. But he doesn't stop there. Years of intense and painstaking work follow. For example, in 1965 his novel “The Lyubavins” was published and at the same time the film “There Lives Such a Guy” appeared on the country’s screens. Just from this example alone one can judge with what dedication and intensity the artist worked.

Or maybe it’s haste, impatience? Or the desire to immediately establish oneself in literature on the most solid - “novel” - basis? This is certainly not the case. Shukshin wrote only two novels. And as Vasily Makarovich himself said, he was interested in one topic: the fate of the Russian peasantry. Shukshin managed to touch a nerve, penetrate our souls and make us ask in shock: “What is happening to us”? Shukshin did not spare himself, he was in a hurry to have time to tell the truth, and with this truth to bring people together. He was obsessed with one thought that he wanted to think out loud. And be understood! All the efforts of Shukshin, the creator, were aimed at this. He believed: “Art - so to speak, to be understood...” From his first steps in art, Shukshin explained, argued, proved and suffered when he was not understood. They tell him that the film “There Lives a Guy Like This” is a comedy. He is perplexed and writes an afterword to the film. A tricky question is thrown at him at a meeting with young scientists, he hesitates, and then sits down to write an article (“Monologue on the Stairs”).

Where did the writer get the material for his works? Everywhere, where people live. What kind of material is this, what characters? That material and those characters that have rarely entered the sphere of art before. And it was necessary for a great talent to emerge from the depths of the people, to tell the simple, strict truth about his fellow countrymen with love and respect. But this truth became a fact of art and aroused love and respect for the author himself. Shukshin's hero turned out to be not only unfamiliar, but also partly incomprehensible. Lovers of “distilled” prose demanded a “beautiful hero”, they demanded that the writer invent, so as not to disturb his own soul. The polarity of opinions and harshness of assessments arose, oddly enough, precisely because the hero was not fictional. And when the hero represents a real person, he cannot be only moral or only immoral. And when a hero is invented to please someone, there is complete immorality. Isn’t it from here, from a lack of understanding of Shukshin’s creative position, that creative errors in the perception of his heroes come from.

After all, what is striking about his heroes is the spontaneity of action, the logical unpredictability of their actions: they will either unexpectedly accomplish a feat, or suddenly escape from the camp three months before the end of their sentence.

Shukshin himself admitted: “I am most interested in exploring the character of a non-dogmatic person, a person not trained in the science of behavior. Such a person is impulsive, gives in to impulses, and therefore is extremely natural. But he always has a reasonable soul.” The writer's characters are truly impulsive and extremely natural. And they do this due to internal moral concepts, perhaps not yet realized by themselves. They have a heightened reaction to the humiliation of man by man. This reaction takes on a variety of forms. Sometimes it leads to the most unexpected results.

Seryoga Bezmenov was burned by the pain of his wife’s betrayal, and he cut off two of his fingers (“Fingerless”). A bespectacled man in a store was insulted by a boorish salesman, and for the first time in his life he got drunk and ended up in a sobering-up station (“And in the morning they woke up...”), etc., etc.

In such situations, Shukshin’s characters may even commit suicide (“Suraz”, “The wife saw off her husband to Paris”). No, they cannot stand insults, humiliation, resentment. They offended Sashka Ermolaev (“Resentment”), the “unbending” aunt-seller was rude. So what? Happens. But Shukshin’s hero will not endure, but will prove, explain, break through the wall of indifference. And...he grabs the hammer. Or he will leave the hospital, as Vanka Teplyashin did, as Shukshin did ("Klyauza"). A very natural reaction of a conscientious and kind person...

No, Shukshin does not idealize his strange, unlucky heroes. Idealization generally contradicts the art of a writer. But in each of them he finds something that is close to him. And now, it is no longer possible to make out who is calling to humanity there - the writer Shukshin or Vanka Teplyashin.

Shukshinsky’s hero, faced with a “narrow-minded gorilla,” can, in despair, grab a hammer himself in order to prove to the wrongdoer that he is right, and Shukshin himself can say: “Here you need to immediately hit him on the head with a stool - the only way to tell the boor that he did something wrong” ( "Borya") This is a purely “Shuksha” collision, when truth, conscience, honor cannot prove that they are who they are. And it’s so easy, so simple for a boor to reproach a conscientious person. And increasingly, the clashes between Shukshin’s heroes become dramatic for them. Shukshin was considered by many to be a comic, “joke” writer, but over the years the one-sidedness of this statement, as well as another - about the “compassionate lack of conflict” of Vasily Makarovich’s works, became more and more clearly revealed. The plot situations of Shukshin's stories are poignant. In the course of their development, comedic situations can be dramatized, and something comic is revealed in dramatic ones. With an enlarged depiction of unusual, exceptional circumstances, the situation suggests their possible explosion, a catastrophe, which, having broken out, breaks the usual course of life of the heroes. Most often, the actions of the heroes are determined by the strongest desire for happiness, for the establishment of justice (“In Autumn”).

Did Shukshin write about the cruel and gloomy property owners Lyubavins, the freedom-loving rebel Stepan Razin, old men and old women, did he talk about the breaking of the entryway, about the inevitable departure of a person and his farewell to all earthly people, did he stage films about Pashka Kogolnikov, Ivan Rastorguev, the Gromov brothers, Yegor Prokudin , he depicted his heroes against the backdrop of specific and generalized images - a river, a road, an endless expanse of arable land, a home, unknown graves. Shukshin understands this central image with comprehensive content, solving the cardinal problem: what is? What is the essence of his existence on Earth?

The study of the Russian national character, which has developed over the centuries, and the changes in it associated with the turbulent changes of the 20th century, constitutes the strong side of Shukshin’s work.

Gravity and attraction to the earth are the strongest feeling of the farmer. A figurative idea of ​​the greatness and power of the earth, the source of life, the guardians of time and the generations gone with it in art, born along with man. The earth is a poetically meaningful image in Shukshin’s art: the native house, the arable land, the steppe, the Motherland, the mother - the damp earth... Folk-figurative associations and perceptions create an integral system of national, historical and philosophical concepts: about the infinity of life and the goals of generations receding into the past, about Motherland, about spiritual ties. A comprehensive image of the earth - the Motherland - becomes the center of gravity of the entire content of Shukshin’s work: the main collisions, artistic concepts, moral and aesthetic ideals and poetics. The enrichment and renewal, even the complication of the original concepts of land and home in Shukshin’s work is quite natural. His worldview, life experience, heightened sense of homeland, artistic insight, born in a new era in the life of the people, determined such a unique prose.

V. Shukshin’s first attempt to understand the fate of the Russian peasantry at historical junctures was the novel “The Lyubavins.” It was about the early 20s of our century. But the main character, the main embodiment, the focus of the Russian national character for Shukshin was Stepan Razin. It is to him, his uprising, that Shukshin’s second and last novel, “I Came to Give You Freedom,” is dedicated. It is difficult to say when Shukshin first became interested in Razin’s personality. But already in the collection “Rural Residents” a conversation about him begins. There was a moment when the writer realized that Stepan Razin, in some facets of his character, was absolutely modern, that he was the concentration of the national characteristics of the Russian people. And Shukshin wanted to convey this precious discovery to the reader. Today's people acutely feel how “the distance between modernity and history has shortened.” Writers, turning to the events of the past, study them from the perspective of people of the 20th century, seek and find those moral and spiritual values ​​that are necessary in our time. Several years pass after finishing work on the novel “The Lyubavins,” and Shukshin tries to explore the processes taking place in the Russian peasantry at a new artistic level.

It was his dream to direct a film about Stepan Razin. He returned to her constantly. If we take into account the nature of Shukshin’s talent, inspired and nourished by living life, and take into account that he himself was going to play the role of Stepan Razin, then one could expect a new deep insight into the Russian national character from the film. One of Shukshin’s best books is called “Characters” - and this name itself emphasizes the writer’s passion for what was formed in certain historical conditions.

In stories written in recent years, there is increasingly a passionate, sincere author's voice addressed directly to the reader. Shukshin spoke about the most important, painful issues, revealing his artistic position. It was as if he felt that his heroes could not say everything, but they definitely had to say it. More and more “sudden”, “fictional” stories from Vasily Makarovich Shukshin himself appear. Such an open movement towards “unheard-of simplicity”, a kind of nakedness, is in the traditions of Russian literature. Here, in fact, it is no longer art, it is going beyond its limits, when the soul screams about its pain. Now stories are entirely the author's word. The interview is a naked revelation. And everywhere questions, questions, questions. The most important things about the meaning of life.

Art should teach goodness. Shukshin saw the most precious wealth in the ability of a pure human heart to do good. “If we are strong and truly smart in anything, it is in doing a good deed,” he said. Vasily Makarovich Shukshin lived with this, believed in it.

The originality of the heroes of village prose by Vasily Shukshin

Village prose occupies one of the main places in Russian literature. The key themes addressed in works of this genre should be called immortal. These include problems of morality and morality, love for native nature, a kind-hearted view of the world of people and other issues that are pressing at all times. The fundamental place among the writers of the second half of the 20th century is occupied by the works of Viktor Petrovich Astafiev ("The Fish Tsar", "The Shepherd and the Shepherdess"), Valentin Grigorievich Rasputin ("Live and Remember", "Farewell to Matera"), Vasily Makarovich Shukshin ("Rural residents”, “Lubavina”, “I came to give you freedom”) and others.

The originality of this writer is explained not only by his talent, but also by the fact that he told the simple truth about his fellow countrymen with love and respect. This is probably why Shukshin’s hero turned out to be not only unfamiliar, but also partly incomprehensible.

Shukshin did not invent his hero, he took him from life. That is why he is spontaneous, sometimes unpredictable: he will either unexpectedly accomplish a feat, or suddenly escape from the camp three months before the end of his term. Shukshin himself admitted: “The most interesting thing for me is to study the character of a person - not a dogmatist, a person not trained in the science of behavior. Such a person is impulsive, gives in to impulses, and, therefore, is extremely natural. But he always has a reasonable soul.” The writer's characters are truly impulsive and natural. They react sharply and sometimes unpredictably to the humiliation of man by man. Seryoga Bezmenov cut off two of his fingers when he learned about his wife’s infidelity (“Fingerless”). A bespectacled man was insulted in a store by a boorish salesman, and for the first time in his life he got drunk and ended up in a sobering-up station (“And in the morning they woke up...”). Shukshin’s heroes can even commit suicide (“Suraz”, “The wife saw off her husband to Paris”) because they cannot withstand insults, humiliation, and resentment. Most often, the actions of Shukshin’s heroes are determined by a strong desire for happiness, for the establishment of justice (“In Autumn”). Vasily Shukshin does not idealize his strange, “eccentric” heroes. But in each of them he finds something that is close to him.

Shukshin's village prose is distinguished by a deep study of the Russian national character, the character of the farmer. He shows that the main thing in him is the attraction to the earth. Shukshin says that for Russian people the land is both a source of life and a connection between generations; and home, and arable land, and steppe. This is that same small homeland with its rivers, roads, endless expanse of arable land...

For Shukshin, the main character who embodied the Russian national character was Stepan Razin. It is to him, his uprising, that Vasily Shukshin’s novel “I came to give you freedom” is dedicated. The writer believed that Stepan Razin was somehow close to modern Russian people, that his character was the embodiment of the national characteristics of our people. And Shukshin wanted to convey this important discovery to the reader.

The peasantry has long occupied the most important role in history in Russia. Not in terms of power, but in spirit - the peasantry was the driving force of Russian history. It was from the dark, ignorant peasants that Stenka Razin, and Emelyan Pugachev, and Ivan Bolotnikov came out; it was because of the peasants, or rather because of serfdom, that the cruel struggle took place, the victims of which were both the tsars and part of the outstanding Russian intelligentsia of the 19th century . Thanks to this, works covering this topic occupy a special place in the literature. Vasily Shukshin managed to create a new image of the peasant in his prose. He is a man with a big soul, he is independent and a little eccentric. These qualities of Shukshin’s heroes captivate us when we read his works. “If we are strong and truly smart in anything, it is in a good deed,” said Vasily Shukshin. The work of the writer himself clearly proves this.

The author tried to convey the experiences that Vitya’s mother experienced. And I think this is one of the most successful attempts. Life's tragedy turns into a story with deep ideological meaning. And the most striking moment, revealing the main idea of ​​the work, was the scene of the mother meeting her son in prison, when she comes to see him. “The mother had something else in her soul at that moment: she suddenly completely ceased to understand what was in the world - the police, the prosecutor, the court, the prison... Her child was sitting nearby, guilty, helpless... And who could take him away from her now, when does he need her, no one else? And really, he needs her. He sacredly honors his mother and will never let her be offended. But even before the meeting he becomes ashamed. Excruciatingly embarrassing. Sorry mother. He knew that she would come to him, break through all the laws - he was waiting for this and was afraid.” He himself was afraid of offending her.

It is simply fantastic to formulate real feelings, deep and bottomless, verbally. However, Shukshin uses a language understandable to the common man, a language that makes his works accessible to all categories of readers. In addition, the writer takes the side of the main characters, and here the central place in his works is occupied by the love of a mother, which defies any rules and laws, although challenging them is difficult and even unrealistic.
Prizes and awards:
1964 — There Lives a Guy (the film) was awarded first prize at the All-Union Film Festival in Leningrad and the main award at the XVI International Film Festival in Venice — “Golden Lion of St. Mark.”
1969 — State Prize of the RSFSR named after the Vasilyev brothers — For the feature film “Your Son and Brother”
1969 — Honored Artist of the RSFSR
1967 — By decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, Vasily Shukshin was awarded the Order of the Red Banner of Labor.
1971 - USSR State Prize - for his performance in the film by S. A. Gerasimov “By the Lake”
1974 — Kalina Krasnaya (film) — first prize at the All-Union Film Festival
1976 - Lenin Prize - for the totality of creativity (posthumously)

The main goal of the lesson: to reveal the concept of “village prose”; continue to develop text analysis skills (the ability to identify the issues and artistic features of works of “village prose”).

"eleven ????? ???? ?45-46 l????????????? ?????╗ ??????, ????????, ?????. ????? ???????.”

“VILLAGE PROSE”: ORIGINS, PROBLEMS, HEROES. HEROES OF SHUKSHINA.

Objective of the lessons: give an idea of ​​“village” prose; introduce the work of V. M. Shukshin (review).

Lesson equipment: portraits of writers; Possible fragments of the film “Kalina Krasnaya”, a computer presentation of the student.

Methodical techniques: lecture; analytical conversation.

During the classes.

Teacher's word.

The works that were landmarks during the “thaw” period became the impetus for the development of new directions in literature: “village prose,” “urban” or “intellectual” prose. These names are conventional, but they took root in criticism and among readers and formed a stable range of topics that was developed by writers in the 60-80s.

The focus of the “village writers” was the post-war village, impoverished and powerless (collective farmers until the early 60s did not even have their own passports and could not leave their “place of registration” without special permission). The writers themselves were mostly from the villages. The essence of this direction was the revival of traditional morality. It was in the vein of “village prose” that such great artists as Vasily Belov, Valentin Rasputin, Vasily Shukshin, Viktor Astafiev, Fyodor Abramov, Boris Mozhaev emerged. The culture of classical Russian prose is close to them, they restore the traditions of tale Russian speech, develop what was done by “Peasant Literature” of the 20s. The poetics of “village prose” was focused on searching for the deep foundations of people’s life, which were supposed to replace the discredited state ideology.

After the peasantry finally received passports and were able to independently choose their place of residence, a massive outflow of the population, especially young people, from rural areas to cities began. Half-empty or even completely deserted villages remained, where blatant mismanagement and almost universal drunkenness reigned among the remaining residents. What is the reason for such troubles? The “village writers” saw the answer to this question in the consequences of the war years, when the strength of the village was strained, in the “Lysenkoism” that disfigured the natural ways of farming. The main reason for de-peasantization stemmed from the “Great Turning Point” (“the turning point of the backbone of the Russian people”, as defined by A.I. Solzhenitsyn) - forced collectivization. “Village Prose” gave a picture of the life of the Russian peasantry in the 20th century, reflecting the main events that influenced their fate: the October Revolution and the Civil War, War Communism and the New Economic Policy, collectivization and famine, collective farm construction and industrialization, war and post-war deprivation, all kinds of experiments on agriculture and its current degradation. She continued the tradition of revealing the “Russian character” and created a number of types of “ordinary people”. These are Shukshin’s “eccentrics”, and Rasputin’s wise old women, and “Arkharovites” dangerous in their ignorance and vandalism, and Belov’s long-suffering Ivan Afrikanovich.

The bitter conclusion of the “village prose” was summed up by Viktor Astafiev: “We sang the last lament - about fifteen people were mourners for the former village. We sang her praises at the same time. As they say, we cried well, at a decent level, worthy of our history, our village, our peasantry. But it's over. Now there are pathetic imitations of books that were created twenty or thirty years ago. Those naive people who write about an already extinct village imitate. Literature must now break through the asphalt.”

One of the most talented writers who wrote about the people and problems of the village is Vasily Makarovich Shukshin.

Presentation by a pre-prepared student. Biography of V. M. Shukshin (computer presentation including family photographs, excerpts from films).

Vasily Shukshin was born in the small Altai village of Srostki. He did not remember his father, since shortly before the birth of his son he was repressed. For many years, Shukshin knew nothing about his fate and only shortly before his own death he saw his name on one of the lists of those executed. At that time, his father was only twenty-two years old.

The mother was left with two small children and soon remarried. The stepfather turned out to be a kind and loving person. However, he did not live with his wife and raise their children for long: a few years later the war began, his stepfather went to the front, and died in 1942.

Before graduating from school, Vasily Shukshin began working on a collective farm, and then went to work in Central Asia. For some time he studied at the Biysk Automotive College, but was drafted into the army and first served in Leningrad, where he completed a course for a young fighter in a training detachment, and then was sent to the Black Sea Fleet. The future writer spent two years in Sevastopol. He devoted all his free time to reading, because it was then that he decided to become a writer and actor. In deep secret, even from close friends, he began to write.

His naval service ended unexpectedly: Shukshin fell ill and was demobilized for health reasons. So, after a six-year absence, he again found himself in his home. Since doctors forbade him to engage in heavy physical work, Shukshin became a teacher in a rural school, and a little later its director.

Just at this time, his first articles and short stories appeared in the regional newspaper “Battle Cry”. But as Shukshin grew older, he understood more and more clearly that it was necessary to receive a more systematic and in-depth education, and in 1954 he went to Moscow to enter VGIK. There he was lucky again: he was accepted into the workshop of the famous director M. Romm. Shukshin graduated from the directing department of VGIK in 1960. Already from his third year, Shukshin began acting in films. In total, the actor starred in more than 20 films, moving from typical images of “people of the people” to vivid screen portraits of his contemporaries, people of principle and purpose. This is how Shukshin shows the virgin miner Stepan in the 1962 film “Alenka”, the director of the Chernykh plant in the film “By the Lake”, which was awarded the USSR State Prize. Other images performed by Shukshin became no less memorable - the peasant Ivan Rastorguev in the film “Stoves and Benches” and the soldier Lopatin in the film “They Fought for the Motherland.” And a year before that, Shukshin played perhaps his most poignant role - Yegor Prokudin in the film “Kalina Krasnaya”, which received the main prize at the International Film Festival in Moscow. The last image became a kind of result of the artist’s entire creative activity, since in it Shukshin managed to reveal the themes that constantly worried him, and above all the theme of moral duty, guilt and retribution. In 1958, the magazine “Smena” published Shukshin’s first story, “Rural Residents,” which gave the title to the collection that appeared a few years later. His heroes were people whom he knew well - residents of small villages, drivers, students. With barely noticeable irony, Shukshin talks about their difficult life. But even every minor incident becomes a reason for the author’s deep thoughts. The writer’s favorite heroes were the so-called “eccentrics” - people who retained the childlike spontaneity of their worldview. In 1964, Shukshin’s first big film, “There Lives a Guy,” was released, in which he was also a screenwriter, director and leading actor. She brought Shukshin international fame and was awarded the Golden Lion of St. Mark at the Venice Film Festival. The film attracted the attention of critics and viewers with its freshness, humor, and charming image of the young hero - the Altai driver Pashka Kolokolnikov. Continuing to work simultaneously in cinema and literature, Shukshin combines several professions: actor, director, writer. And they all turn out to be of equal importance to him; we can say that Shukshin’s writing and cinematic activities complement each other. He writes practically on the same topic, talking mainly about a simple rural resident, talented, unpretentious, a little impractical, who does not care about tomorrow, lives only with today's problems and does not fit into the world of technology and urbanization. At the same time, Shukshin managed to accurately reflect the social and social problems of his time, when intense changes were taking place in people's consciousness. Along with such famous writers as V. Belov and V. Rasputin, Shukshin entered the galaxy of so-called village writers who were concerned about how to preserve the traditional way of life as a system of moral values. The problems that emerged in his short stories and novellas are also reflected in Shukshin’s films. In 1966, the film “Your Son and Brother” was released, which was awarded the State Prize of the RSFSR; in 1970, another of his films on the same topic, “Strange People”, appeared, and two years later Shukshin made his famous film “Stoves and Benches” ", in which the intelligentsia, perhaps for the first time in recent years, discovered the moral world of the common man. In addition, in these films, Shukshin continued his social and psychological analysis of the processes that were going on in society at that time. Shukshin's film dramaturgy is closely connected with his prose; the characters of the stories often turned into scripts, always preserving folk colloquial speech, reliability and authenticity of situations, and the capacity of psychological characteristics. Shukshin's style as a director is characterized by laconic simplicity, clarity of expressive means combined with a poetic depiction of nature, and a special rhythm of editing. Outside of the realized script for the film about Stepan Razin, which was later reworked into the novel “I Came to Give You Freedom,” Shukshin tried to give a broader view of the problems that worried his people and turned to studying the character of the people’s leader, the causes and consequences of the “Russian rebellion.” Here Shukshin also retained a strong social orientation, and many read the hint of a possible rebellion against state power. Another, last film by Shukshin, based on his own film story, released three years earlier, “Kalina Krasnaya”, caused no less resonance, in which the writer told the tragic story of the former criminal Yegor Prokudin. In this film, Shukshin himself played the main role, and his beloved was Lydia Fedoseeva, his wife. Literary talent, acting talent and the desire to live in truth brought Vasily Shukshin in common with his friend Vladimir Vysotsky. Unfortunately, early death also brought them together. Shukshin’s last story and last film was “Kalina Krasnaya” (1974). He died on October 2, 1974 during the filming of S. Bondarchuk’s film “They Fought for the Motherland.” He was buried in Moscow at the Novodevichy cemetery.

In 1976, Shukshin was awarded the Lenin Prize for his work in cinema.

Conversation based on the stories of V. Shukshin.

What stories by V. Shukshin have you read?

What traditions did Shukshin continue in his work?

In the development of the short story genre, V. M. Shukshin was a successor to the traditions of A. P. Chekhov. The artistic purpose of depicting a chain of comic episodes occurring with the hero was to reveal his character. The main means of expression became, just as in Chekhov’s works, capacious emotionally charged detail and dramatization of the narrative using someone else’s speech in dialogues. The plot is built on reproducing the climactic, “most burning”, long-awaited moments when the hero is given the opportunity to fully demonstrate his “peculiarity”. The innovation of V. M. Shukshin is associated with an appeal to a special type - “eccentrics”, who cause rejection from others with their desire to live in accordance with their own ideas about goodness, beauty, and justice.

The person in V. Shukshin’s stories is often not satisfied with his life, he feels the onset of general standardization, boring philistine averageness and tries to express his own individuality, usually with somewhat standard actions. Such Shukshin heroes are called “freaks.”

What “weirdos” do you remember??

The hero of Shukshin’s early stories, which tell about “incidents from life,” is a simple person, like Pashka Kholmansky (“Cool Driver”), strange, kind, and often unlucky. The author admires an original man from the people, who knows how to work bravely and feel sincerely and innocently. Critic A. Makarov, reviewing the collection “There, Away” (1968), wrote about Shukshin: “He wants to awaken the reader’s interest in these people and their lives, to show how, in essence, kind and good a simple person living in an embrace with nature and physical labor, what an attractive life this is, incomparable with the city, in which a person deteriorates and becomes stale.”

Over time, the image of the hero becomes more complex, and the author’s attitude towards the heroes changes somewhat - from admiration to empathy, doubt, and philosophical reflection. Alyosha Beskonvoyny wins for himself on the collective farm the right to a non-working Saturday in order to devote it to the bathhouse. Only on this “bath” day can he belong to himself, can alone indulge in memories, reflections, and dreams. It reveals the ability to notice the beauty of existence in the small, in the ordinary details of everyday life. The very process of comprehending existence constitutes Alyosha’s main joy: “That’s why Alyosha loved Saturday: on Saturday he reflected, remembered, thought so much, like on no other day.”

The actions of Shukshin's heroes often turn out to be eccentricities. Sometimes it can be kind and harmless, like decorating a baby stroller with cranes, flowers, or ant grass (“Weirdo”), and it doesn’t cause problems for anyone except the hero himself. Sometimes eccentricities are not at all harmless. In the collection “Characters,” the writer’s warning against the strange, destructive possibilities that lurk in a strong nature that does not have a high goal was sounded for the first time.

“Stubborn” invents a perpetual motion machine in his spare time, another hero buys a microscope with saved money and dreams of inventing a remedy against microbes, some heroes philosophize, trying to outdo, “cut down” the “city people.” The desire to “cut off,” to be rude, to humiliate a person in order to rise above him (“Cut off”) is a consequence of unsatisfied pride and ignorance, which has dire consequences. Often, villagers no longer see the meaning of their existence in working on the land, like their ancestors, and either leave for the cities, or engage in the invention of “perpetual motion machines”, writing “stories” (“Raskas”), or, returning after “serving time”, they don’t know how to live in freedom now.

These are not “Cranks”, far from reality, living in an ideal world, but rather “Cranks”, living in reality, but striving for the ideal and not knowing where to look for it, what to do with the power accumulated in the soul.

What do Shukshin’s heroes think and reflect on?

Shukshin’s heroes are occupied with the “main” questions: “Why, one might ask, was life given to me?” (“Alone”), “Why was this overwhelming beauty given?” (“Countrymen”), “What kind of secret is there in her, should we feel sorry for her, for example, or can we die in peace - there’s nothing special left here?” (“Alyosha Beskonvoyny”). Often heroes are in a state of internal discord: “So what?” thought Maxim angrily. – It was also a hundred years ago. What's new? And it will always be like this... Why?” (“I believe”) The soul is filled with anxiety, it hurts because it vividly feels everything around it, trying to find the answer. Matvey Ryazantsev (Dumas) calls this condition an “illness,” but a “desired” illness—“without it, something is missing.”

What, according to Shukshin, is the “wisdom of life”?

Shukshin looks for sources of wisdom in the historical and everyday experience of the people, in the destinies of old people. For the old saddler Antipas (“Alone”), neither hunger nor need can suppress the eternal need for beauty. The chairman of the collective farm, Matvey Ryazantsev, lived a decent working life, but he still regrets some unfelt joys and sorrows (“Duma”). The letter of the old woman Kandaurova (“Letter”) is the result of a long peasant life, a wise teaching: “Well, work, work, but the man is not made of stone. Yes, if you pet him, he will do three times more. Any animal loves affection, and humans even more so.” One dream, one desire is repeated three times in the letter: “You live and be happy, and make others happy,” “She is my dear daughter, my soul hurts, I also want her to be happy in this world,” “At least I am happy for you.” " Old woman Kandaurova teaches the ability to feel the beauty of life, the ability to rejoice and please others, teaches spiritual sensitivity and affection. These are the highest values ​​that she came to through difficult experience.

Teacher's word.

The image of the old woman Kandaurova is one of many images of Shukshinsky mothers, embodying love, wisdom, dedication, merging into the image of the “earthly mother of God” (“At the Cemetery”). Let us recall the story “A Mother’s Heart,” in which a mother defends her unlucky son, her only joy, in front of the whole world; the story “Vanka Teplyashin”, where the hero, having ended up in the hospital, felt lonely, sad, and rejoiced like a child when he saw his mother: “What was his surprise, joy, when he suddenly saw his mother in this world below... Ah, you are dear, dear!” This is the voice of the author himself, who always writes about the Mother with great love, tenderness, gratitude and at the same time with a feeling of some guilt. Let us remember the scene of Yegor Prokudin’s meeting with his mother (if possible, watch footage from the film “Kalina Krasnaya”). The wisdom of the old woman Kandaurova is consistent with the space and peace in the world around her: “It was evening. Somewhere they were playing the accordion..."; “The accordion kept playing, playing well. And a softly unfamiliar female voice sang along with her”; “Lord,” thought the old woman, “it’s good, it’s good on earth, it’s good.” But the state of peace in Shukshin’s stories is unstable and short-lived, it is replaced by new anxieties, new reflections, new searches for harmony, and agreement with the eternal laws of life.

Analysis of the stories “Weirdo” and “Pardon me, madam!”

The story “Weirdo! (1967).

How do we see the main character of the story?

The hero of the story, the title of which became his nickname (“My wife called him “Weirdo.” Sometimes affectionately”), stands out from his environment. First of all, “something was constantly happening to him,” he “every now and then got involved in some kind of story.” These were not socially significant actions or adventurous adventures. "Chudi" suffered from minor incidents caused by his own oversights.

Give examples of such incidents and oversights.

Going to the Urals to visit his brother’s family, he dropped the money (“...fifty rubles, I have to work for half a month”) and, deciding that “there is no owner of the piece of paper,” he “lightly, cheerfully” joked for “those in line”: “You live well, citizens ! Here, for example, they don’t throw such pieces of paper around.” After that, he could not “overpower himself” to pick up the “damned piece of paper.”

Wanting to “do something nice” for his daughter-in-law who disliked him, Chudik painted his little nephew’s stroller so that it became “unrecognizable.” She, not understanding “folk art,” “made a noise” so much that he had to go home. In addition to this, other misunderstandings happen to the hero (a story about the “rude, tactless” behavior of a “drunk fool” from a village across the river, whom an “intelligent comrade” did not believe; the search for an artificial jaw of a “bald reader” of a newspaper on an airplane, which is why he even his bald head turned purple; an attempt to send a telegram to his wife, which the “stern, dry” telegraph operator had to completely correct), revealing the inconsistency of his ideas with the usual logic.

How do others react to his “antics”?

His desire to make life “more fun” is met with misunderstanding from those around him. Sometimes he “guesses” that the outcome will be the same as in the story with his daughter-in-law. Often “lost”, as in the case of a neighbor on a plane or with an “intelligent comrade” on a train - Chudik repeats the words of “a woman with painted lips”, who was “assented” by a man in a hat from a regional town, but for some reason he has them come out unconvincing. His dissatisfaction always turns towards himself (“He didn’t want this, he suffered...”, “A weirdo, killed by his insignificance...”, “Why am I like this?”), and not at life, which he is unable to change .

All these traits have no motivation; they are inherent in the hero from the very beginning, determining the originality of his personality. On the contrary, the profession reflects the internal desire to escape from reality (“He worked as a projectionist in the village”), and dreams are arbitrary and unrealizable (“Mountains of clouds below... fall into them, into the clouds, like cotton wool”). The hero’s nickname reveals not only his “eccentricity,” but also his desire for a miracle. In this regard, the characterization of reality as dull, evil everyday life is sharpened (“the daughter-in-law... asked evil...”, “I don’t understand; why did they become evil?”).

In relation to the outside world, a series of antitheses are built in which on the side of the hero (as opposed to “unfortunate incidents”, which are “bitter”, “painful”, “scary”) there are signs of the pure, simple-minded, creative nature of the “villager”. Chudik is “struck to the quick” by doubts that “in the village people are better, more pain-free,” “the air alone is worth it!.. it’s so fresh and fragrant, it smells of different herbs, different flowers...”, that it’s “warm... land" and freedom. From which his “trembling”, “quiet” voice sounds “loud”.

Why do we learn the name of the main character only at the end of the story?

The depiction of the hero’s individuality is combined with the author’s desire for generalization: his nickname is not accidental (name and age are mentioned last as an insignificant characteristic: “His name was Vasily Yegorych Knyazev. He was thirty-nine years old”): it expresses the originality of popular ideas about personality . “Freak” is a variation of the “stupid” essence of national nature, created using comic elements.

The story "Pardon me, madam!" (1968).

What is the genre of this story?

The genre is a story within a story.

What is the main character of the story?

The main character's character is full of inconsistencies. Even his name Bronislav, invented “out of a hangover” by a local priest, contradicts the simple Russian surname Pupkov. A descendant of the Cossacks, who “cut down the Biy-Katunsk fortress,” he is both “strong,” and “a well-cut man,” “a marksman...rare,” but these qualities do not find application in life. During the war, he did not have to show them in battles, since he “was a nurse at the front.” In everyday reality, the hero’s extraordinary nature is reflected in the fact that he “caused a lot of scandals,” fought “seriously,” “rushed around the village on his deafening motorbike” and disappeared with the “city people” in the taiga - he was “an expert in these matters,” “a hunter ... smart and lucky." In the eyes of others, these contradictions are “strange,” stupid, funny (“Like roll call in the army, so is laughter,” “They laugh, they laugh in their faces...”). He himself also usually “laughs”, “plays tricks” in front of people, and in his soul “he doesn’t harbor any grudges against anyone”, he lives “easy.” The inner “tragedy”, unprecedented in this “blue-eyed, smiling” man, becomes obvious only from his own story, a kind of confession in which what he wants is presented as what actually happened.

What is Pupkov’s story about and how do listeners perceive it?

Bronislav Pupkov's story is an obvious fiction, which is obvious both to his fellow villagers (“He... was called to the village council several times, they were embarrassed, they threatened to take action...”) and to casual listeners (“Are you serious?... Well, some kind of nonsense...” ). And he himself, having once again told the story he had invented “under the hood,” after that “was very worried, suffered, got angry, felt “guilty.” But every time it became a “holiday,” an event that he “looked forward to with great impatience,” which made “his heart ache sweetly in the morning.” The incident that Bronka Pupkov narrates (the assassination attempt on Hitler, where he played the main role) is confirmed by reliable details (a meeting with the major general in the “infirmary” ward, where the hero “brought one heavy lieutenant”, a “subscription” on non-disclosure of information about “special training”), psychological specifics (hatred of Hitler’s “fox face”; responsibility for the “Distant Motherland”). Not without fantastic details (two orderlies, “one with the rank of sergeant major”; “life” on “special training” with alcohol and “port”; an appeal to Hitler “in pure German”), which is reminiscent of the lies of Khlestakov, the hero “The Inspector General” by N.V. Gogol.

For what purpose, in your opinion, does Bronka tell her tale again and again?

The fable he created is a “distortion” of reality. In fact, he, a descendant of the Siberian Cossacks, who became not a hero, but a victim of history, has a pitiful fate: drunkenness, fights, cursing of his “ugly, thick-lipped” wife, working in the village council, “strange” smiles from fellow villagers about his fantasies. And yet the “solemn”, “most burning” moment of the story about the “attempt” comes again, and for several minutes he is immersed

into the “desired” atmosphere of achievement, “deeds”, not “deeds”. Then his usual proverb, which became the title of the story, takes on a different meaning, containing irony in relation to everyday life, which turns out to be unable to change the inner content of the individual.

View document contents
“Grade 11 Lesson No. 45 Village prose (review).”

Grade 11

Lesson #45. Village prose (review). Appeal to folklore traditions and popular consciousness as a way to resist the “deceptive” thaw.

Target: reveal the concept of “village prose”; continue to develop text analysis skills (the ability to identify the issues and artistic features of works of “village prose”).

During the classes

Introduction.

The term “village” prose, which appeared in the 60s, is still widely used. This is because works about the village created in the 60-70s by F. Abramov, V. Astafiev, V. Belov, E. Nosov, V. Rasputin, V. Shukshin and other writers occupy perhaps the most prominent place in Russian literature of this period. They are united not only by theme, but by a unity of outlook on life: its supports, meaning, nature of development.

Interest in folk life among those often called “villagers” was combined with the idea of ​​continuity, historical memory with fidelity to the traditions that underlie morality. The “village writers” considered it necessary to speak out in defense of the spirituality nourished by these traditions from the destructive influence of modern civilization.

In “village” prose, the life of the village is not simply depicted, but the most important problems of human existence are solved, among which problems of the relationship between man and nature, personal and collective consciousness occupy an important place. This prose raises an extremely acute question that was one of the most important at that time - the restructuring of human life caused by the mass migration from the village to the city.

Finally, writers belonging to this direction are distinguished by their attention and careful attitude to the riches of the Russian language, preserved in the “outback” and resisting today’s attempts to distort it and narrow its expressive capabilities.

Creation of a poster on the topic “Village Prose” (based on the work of one of the writers)

Group performance.

Discussion. Evaluation based on criteria.

Summing up the lesson.

What is unique about “village” prose? What do the writers united as the creators of this movement have in common?

What pages of novels and stories by F. Abramov, V. Rasputin, V. Astafiev, B. Mozhaev, V. Belov were written with love, sadness and anger?

Why did the man of the “hardworking soul” become the primary hero of “village” prose? Tell us about it. What worries him?

What questions do the heroes of Abramov, Rasputin, Astafiev, Mozhaev ask themselves and us, the readers?

Homework.

Reading the stories of V.M. Shukshin, determining their ideological and artistic originality

View document contents
“Grade 11 Lesson No. 45 Village prose. Its brightest representatives."

View document contents
"RM - Village Prose"

"VILLAGE" PROSE of the 60-80s

The concept of “village” prose appeared in the early 60s. This is one of the most fruitful directions in our domestic literature. It is represented by many original works: “Vladimir Country Roads” and “A Drop of Dew” by Vladimir Soloukhin, “A Habitual Business” and “Carpenter’s Stories” by Vasily Belov, “Matrenin’s Court” by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, “The Last Bow” by Viktor Astafiev, stories by Vasily Shukshin, Evgeny Nosov , stories by Valentin Rasputin and Vladimir Tendryakov, novels by Fyodor Abramov and Boris Mozhaev. The sons of peasants came to literature, each of them could say about themselves the very words that the poet Alexander Yashin wrote in the story “I Treat You to Rowan”: “I am the son of a peasant... Everything that happens on this land, on which I am not alone, concerns me he knocked out the path with his bare heels; in the fields that he still plowed with a plow, in the stubble that he walked with a scythe and where he threw hay into stacks.”

“I am proud that I came from the village,” said F. Abramov. V. Rasputin echoed him: “I grew up in the village. She fed me, and it’s my duty to tell about her.” Answering the question why he writes mainly about village people, V. Shukshin said: “I couldn’t talk about anything, knowing the village... I was brave here, I was as independent here as possible.” S. Zalygin wrote in “An Interview with Myself”: “I feel the roots of my nation right there - in the village, in the arable land, in our daily bread. Apparently, our generation is the last that saw with its own eyes the thousand-year-old way of life from which almost everyone came out of. If we don’t talk about him and his decisive alteration within a short period of time, who will say?”

Not only the memory of the heart nourished the theme of “small homeland”, “sweet homeland”, but also pain for its present, anxiety for its future. Exploring the reasons for the acute and problematic conversation about the village that literature had in the 60-70s, F. Abramov wrote: “The village is the depths of Russia, the soil on which our culture grew and flourished. At the same time, the scientific and technological revolution in which we live has affected the village very thoroughly. Technology has changed not only the type of farming, but also the very type of peasant... Together with the ancient way of life, the moral type is disappearing into oblivion. Traditional Russia is turning over the last pages of its thousand-year history. Interest in all these phenomena in literature is natural... Traditional crafts are disappearing, local features of peasant housing that have developed over centuries are disappearing... Language is suffering serious losses. The village has always spoken a richer language than the city, now this freshness is being leached, eroded..."

The village seemed to Shukshin, Rasputin, Belov, Astafiev, Abramov as the embodiment of the traditions of folk life - moral, everyday, aesthetic. In their books there is a noticeable need to look at everything connected with these traditions and what broke them.

“The usual thing” is the title of one of V. Belov’s stories. These words can define the internal theme of many works about the village: life as work, life in work is a common thing. Writers depict the traditional rhythms of peasant work, family worries and anxieties, everyday life and holidays. There are many lyrical landscapes in the books. Thus, in B. Mozhaev’s novel “Men and Women,” the description of the “unique in the world, fabulous flooded Oka meadows” with their “free variety of herbs” attracts attention: “Andrei Ivanovich loved the meadows. Where else in the world is there such a gift from God? So as not to plow and sow, but the time will come - the whole world will go out, as if on a holiday, in these soft manes and in front of each other, playfully with a scythe, alone in a week to spread fragrant hay for the whole winter of the cattle... Twenty-five! Thirty carts! If the grace of God was sent down to the Russian peasant, then here it is, here, spread out in front of him, in all directions - you can’t even see it with your eyes.”

In the main character of B. Mozhaev’s novel, the most intimate thing is revealed, what the writer associated with the concept of “call of the earth.” Through the poetry of peasant labor, he shows the natural course of a healthy life, comprehends the harmony of the inner world of a person living in harmony with nature, enjoying its beauty.

Here is another similar sketch - from F. Abramov’s novel “Two Winters and Three Summers”: “... Mentally talking with the children, guessing from their tracks how they walked, where they stopped, Anna did not even notice how she went out to Sinelga. And here it is, her holiday, her day, here it is, the hard-earned joy: the Pryaslina brigade at the reaping! Mikhail, Lisa, Peter, Grigory...

She got used to Mikhail - from the age of fourteen she has been mowing for a man, and now there are no mowers equal to him in all of Pekashin. And Lizka also does the swathing - you’ll be jealous. Not into her, not into her mother, into Grandma Matryona, they say, with a catch. But small, small! Both with scythes, both hitting the grass with their scythes, both with grass falling under their scythes... Lord, did she ever think that she would see such a miracle!”

Writers have a keen sense of the deep culture of the people. Reflecting on his spiritual experience, V. Belov emphasizes in the book “Lad”: “Working beautifully is not only easier, but also more enjoyable. Talent and work are inseparable.” And again: “For the soul, for the memory, it was necessary to build a house with carvings, or a temple on the mountain, or to weave such lace that would take the breath away and light up the eyes of a distant great-great-granddaughter. Because man does not live by bread alone.”

This truth is professed by the best heroes of Belov and Rasputin, Shukshin and Astafiev, Mozhaev and Abramov.

In their works, it is necessary to note the pictures of the brutal devastation of the village, first during collectivization (“Eves” by V. Belov, “Men and Women” by B. Mozhaev), then during the war years (“Brothers and Sisters” by F. Abramov), during the post-war hard times (“Two Winters and Three Summers” by F. Abramov, “Matrenin’s Dvor” by A. Solzhenitsyn, “Business as Usual” by V. Belov).

The writers showed the imperfection and disorder of the heroes' daily life, the injustice perpetrated against them, their complete defenselessness, which could not but lead to the extinction of the Russian village. “There is neither subtracting nor adding here. This is how it was on earth,” A. Tvardovsky will say about this. The “information for thought” contained in the “Appendix” to Nezavisimaya Gazeta (1998, No. 7) is eloquent: “In Timonikha, the native village of the writer Vasily Belov, the last man, Faust Stepanovich Tsvetkov, died. Not a single man, not a single horse. Three old women."

And a little earlier, Novy Mir published Boris Ekimov’s bitter, difficult reflection “At the Crossroads” with dire forecasts: “The poor collective farms are already eating up tomorrow and the day after tomorrow, condemning to even greater poverty those who will live on this land after them... Degradation of the peasant worse than soil degradation. And she is there.”

Such phenomena made it possible to talk about “Russia, which we lost.” So the “village” prose, which began with the poeticization of childhood and nature, ended with the consciousness of a great loss. It is no coincidence that the motif of “farewell”, “last bow”, reflected in the titles of the works (“Farewell to Matera”, “The Last Term” by V. Rasputin, “The Last Bow” by V. Astafiev, “The Last Sorrow”, “The Last Old Man of the Village” "F. Abramov), and in the main plot situations of the works, and in the premonitions of the heroes. F. Abramov often said that Russia says goodbye to the village as to its mother.

View document contents
"RM - Criteria for assessment"

"Village Prose (2)"

No writer can ignore village problems. These are national problems, to be honest.

Vasily Belov

• gave a comprehensive picture of life

Russian peasantry in the twentieth century, reflecting all the main events,

had a direct impact on his fate:

October revolution and civil war, war communism and NEP,

collectivization and famine, collective farm construction and forced

industrialization, war and post-war deprivations, all kinds of

experiments on agriculture and its current degradation...

• presented the reader with different, sometimes very dissimilar

according to the way of life, Russian lands: Russian North

(for example, Abramov, Belov, Yashin), central regions of the country

(Mozhaev, Alekseev), southern regions and Cossack territories (Nosov, Likhonosov),

Siberia (Rasputin, Shukshin, Akulov)...

• created a number of types in the literature that give an understanding of

that there is a Russian character and that same “mysterious Russian soul.”

These are the famous Shukshin “eccentrics”, and the wise Rasputin old women,

and his own dangerous “Arkharovites”, and Belov’s long-suffering Ivan

Afrikanovich, and the fighting Mozhaevsky Kuzkin, nicknamed Alive...

A. Yashin, V. Tendryakov, F. Abramov, V. Belov, V. Rasputin, B. Mozhaev, V. Shukshin, E. Nosov, I. Akulov, M. Alekseev, V. Lichutin, V. Likhonosov, B. Ekimov...

V. Ovechkin, E. Dorosh, K. Bukovsky, Y. Chernichenko,

A. Strelyany

The focus of this literature was the post-war village - poor and powerless (it is worth remembering that collective farmers, for example, until the early 60s did not even have their own passports and could not leave their “place of registration” without special permission from their superiors). A truthful depiction of such reality in A. Yashin’s stories “Levers” (1956)

and “Vologda Wedding” (1962), the stories “Around and Around” (1963) by F. Abramov, “Mayfly - a Short Century” (1965) by V. Tendryakov, “From the Life of Fyodor Kuzkin” (1966) by B. Mozhaev and in other similar works presented a striking contrast with the varnished socialist realist literature of that time and sometimes provoked angry critical attacks.

After the peasantry finally received passports and were able

choose your own place of residence

and types of activities, a massive outflow of population began

from rural areas to cities; This was especially true for the so-called Non-Chernozem Zone. There remained half-empty, or even completely depopulated villages, where blatant collective and state farm mismanagement and almost general drunkenness among the remaining residents reigned... What are the reasons for such troubles? In attempts to find an answer to these questions, the authors returned their memories to the war years, when the strength of the village was strained (F. Abramov’s novels “Brothers and Sisters” and “Two Winters and Three Summers” (1958 and 1968, respectively), V. Tendryakov’s story “Three bag of weedy wheat” (1973) and others), and touched upon such a disastrous phenomenon in agronomic science as “Lysenkoism”, which flourished for many years of ill memory (the stories of B. Mozhaev “A Day without End and Without End”, 1972, V. Tendryakov’s “Death” ”, 1968), or dealt with even more distant historical periods - for example, S. Zalygin’s novel about the civil war “Salty Pad” (1968) or V. Belov’s book “Lad. Essays on folk aesthetics” (1981), dedicated to the life of the pre-revolutionary community of the North...

However, the most important reason for the de-peasantization of man on earth

stemmed from the “Great Turning Point” (“the breaking of the backbone of the Russian people”,

according to Solzhenitsyn’s definition), that is, violent

collectivization of 1929-1933. And country writers

were well aware of this, but before the abolition of censorship they were

it is extremely difficult to convey to the reader all or at least

part of the truth about this most tragic period. Nevertheless

Several of these works were still able to go into print,

dedicated to the village just before the start of collectivization

and during its first stage. It was a story

S. Zalygina “On the Irtysh” (1964), novels by B. Mozhaev “Men and Women”,

V. Belova “Eves” (both 1976), I. Akulova “Kasyan Ostudny”

(1978). During perestroika and glasnost were finally published

“unacceptable” manuscripts previously lying on the tables:

second part of “Men and Women” by Mozhaev,

“ The year of the great turning point” by Belov (both 1987),

Tendryakov’s stories “Bread for the Dog” and “A Pair of Bays” (1988)

Fedor Alexandrovich Abramov

(1920--1983)

He dedicated all his work to his native northern village. Abramov’s main brainchild was a tetralogy telling about the large Pryaslin family and the life of their distant village of Pekashin. The action of the first novel, “Brothers and Sisters” (1958), covers the spring and summer of 1942; the second - “Two Winters and Three Summers” (1968) - the period from the beginning of 1945 to the summer of 1948; the events of the third - “Crossroads” (1973) - take place in 1951. If the first novel is dedicated to the “women’s war in the rear,” then the second and third, respectively, are no less, if not more, difficult post-war years in the countryside, reminiscent of the era of military communism, where hunger, intense and almost free labor, fear and arrests reign , - despite the fact that the main incentive (“Everything for the front, everything for victory”), which helped people somehow come to terms with reality, is no longer present. Subsequently, to this trilogy, which received the USSR State Prize in 1975, the novel “Home” (1978) was added, where the village of Pekashino is shown in a different, “stagnant” era. The collective farm has been transformed into an unprofitable one, the peasants do not hide their disinterest in the results of labor (“Before, people were tormented by work, now people are tormented by work”).

Vasily Ivanovich

Belov

(born 1932)

One of Belov’s first works, the story “A Habitual Thing” (1966), became a notable phenomenon of village prose. The hero of the story, Ivan Afrikanovich Drynov, is a collective farmer with many children, a kind and patient man, who takes his poverty and lack of rights as a given (“Life is life”). His only attempt to improve his situation by leaving for the city to earn money ends in a hasty return back - because he is unable to change the place and habitual way of his life, his village, his collective farm. As the critic Yu. Seleznev noted, “Ivan Afrikanovich is active as an individual when he is in a team, and his personality is revealed through the collective; he can be defined as a collective personality, as opposed to an autonomous personality.” (The latter, perhaps, was represented by the “obstinate” Kuzkin from B. Mozhaev’s story “Alive,” published in the same year as “Business as Usual.”)

Boris Andreevich

Mozhaev

(1923--1996)

His first prose works were created on the basis of local material and were dedicated not to the village, not to a person on earth, but, rather, to a person in the forest: their heroes most often were hunters, loggers, builders of taiga villages, business executives... These are the stories “In the Forester’s Hut ”, “Duck Hunting” (both 1954), “Ingani” (1955), “Three” (1956) and others, as well as a number of stories published under the general title “Far Eastern Stories” (1959), - “ Sanya”, “Onled”, “Thinkomer”... Mozhaev raised the problems of barbaric treatment of the taiga under the existing economic mechanisms, which not only destroy nature, but often ruin people’s destinies. The latter is especially clearly shown in “Tonkomer”, where the main character, rebelling against the criminal logging regime, not only - contrary to the then socialist realist tradition - does not win, but, on the contrary, loses everything: work, health, housing , turning into a homeless person...

Evgeniy Ivanovich

Nosov

(born 1925)

U Nosov, a descendant of both worker and peasant families, lacks the notorious opposition between the “righteous” village and the “wrong” city. At the same time, he is concerned about the problem of a person who, of his own free will or by force of circumstances, leaves the village for the sake of the city, when as a result, according to the poet’s famous formulation, “the city did not come out of us, and the village was lost forever.”

People who remain in their native places, who cannot imagine another life for themselves, no matter how hard it is for them, are described by Nosov with the warmest feelings: “Temple of Aphrodite” (1967), “The meadow fescue rustles” (1966), “On Saturday afternoon rainy...” (1968) and many other works.

Vasily Makarovich

Shukshin

(1929--1974)

The heroes of the stories were usually villagers who in one way or another encountered the city, or, conversely, city dwellers who found themselves in the village. At the same time, a village person is most often naive, simple-minded, and friendly, but the city does not greet him kindly and quickly ends all his good impulses.

Valentin Grigorievich

Rasputin

(born 1937)

The first work that brought him fame was the story “Money for Maria” (1967). This is a story about how a village saleswoman, solely due to her trading inexperience, discovers a large shortage that urgently needs to be compensated for in three days; Most residents shy away from helping their fellow villager in trouble, despite their seemingly sympathetic attitude towards her...

Man on the border of life and death is a topic that especially interests Rasputin. Two heroines of his stories - old Anna from “The Last Term” (1970) and Daria from “Farewell to Matera” (1976) - are preparing to meet their death calmly, with dignity, with the awareness of fulfilled earthly duty.

View presentation content
"Village Prose"

“Village prose”: origins, problems, heroes. Heroes of V. Shukshin

Material for literature lesson in 11th grade

The essence of the movement was the revival of traditional morality. It was in this vein of “village prose” that such writers as

Vasily Belov

Fedor Abramov

Valentin Rasputin

Victor Astafiev

• October Revolution and Civil War;
• War communism and NEP;
• Collectivization and famine;
• Collective farm construction and industrialization;
• War and post-war hardships;
• All kinds of experiments on agriculture;
• Degradation.

Village prose by V. Shukshin
In Russian literature, the genre of village prose is noticeably different from all other genres. What is the reason for this difference? You can talk about this for an extremely long time, but still not come to a final conclusion. This happens because the scope of this genre may not fit within the description of rural life. This genre can also include works that describe the relationship between people in the city and the countryside, and even works in which the main character is not a villager at all, but in spirit and idea these works are nothing more than village prose.

There are very few works of this type in foreign literature. There are significantly more of them in our country. This situation is explained not only by the peculiarities of the formation of states and regions, their national and economic specifics, but also by the character, “portrait” of each people inhabiting a given area. In the countries of Western Europe, the peasantry played an insignificant role, and all national life was in full swing in the cities. In Russia, since ancient times, the peasantry occupied the most important role in history. Not in terms of power (on the contrary, the peasants were the most powerless), but in spirit - the peasantry was and, probably, remains the driving force of Russian history to this day. It was from the dark, ignorant peasants that Stenka Razin, and Emelyan Pugachev, and Ivan Bolotnikov came out; it was because of the peasants, or rather because of serfdom, that that cruel struggle took place, the victims of which were tsars, poets, and part of the outstanding Russian intelligentsia of the 19th century. Thanks to this, works covering this topic occupy a special place in the literature.

Modern rural prose plays a big role in the literary process these days. This genre today rightfully occupies one of the leading places in terms of readability and popularity. The modern reader is concerned about the problems that are raised in novels of this genre. These are issues of morality, love of nature, good, kind attitude towards people and other problems that are so relevant today. Among modern writers who have written or are writing in the genre of village prose, the leading place is occupied by such writers as Viktor Petrovich ("The Fish Tsar", "The Shepherd and the Shepherdess"), Valentin Grigorievich Rasputin ("Live and Remember", "Farewell to Matera" ), Vasily Makarovich Shukshin ("Village Residents", "Lyubavins", "I Came to Give You Freedom") and others.

Vasily Makarovich Shukshin occupies a special place in this series. His unique creativity has attracted and will continue to attract hundreds of thousands of readers not only in our country, but also abroad. After all, it is rare to meet such a master of the folk word, such a sincere admirer of his native land as this outstanding writer was.

Vasily Makarovich Shukshin was born in 1929, in the village of Srostki, Altai Territory. And through the entire life of the future writer, the beauty and severity of those places ran like a red thread. It is thanks to his small homeland

Shukshin learned to appreciate the land, the work of man on this land, and learned to understand the harsh prose of rural life. From the very beginning of his creative career, he discovered new ways in depicting a person. His heroes turned out to be unusual in their social status, life maturity, and moral experience. Having already become a fully mature young man, Shukshin goes to the center of Russia. In 1958, he made his debut in cinema ("Two Fedoras"), as well as in literature ("A Story in a Cart"). In 1963, Shukshin released his first collection, “Rural Residents.” And in 1964, his film “There Lives a Guy Like This” was awarded the main prize at the Venice Film Festival. World fame comes to Shukshin. But he doesn't stop there. Years of intense and painstaking work follow. For example, in 1965 his novel “The Lyubavins” was published and at the same time the film “There Lives Such a Guy” appeared on the country’s screens. Just from this example alone one can judge with what dedication and intensity the artist worked.

Or maybe it’s haste, impatience? Or the desire to immediately establish oneself in literature on the most solid - “novel” - basis? This is certainly not the case. Shukshin wrote only two novels. And as Vasily Makarovich himself said, he was interested in one topic: the fate of the Russian peasantry. Shukshin managed to touch a nerve, penetrate our souls and make us ask in shock: “What is happening to us”? Shukshin did not spare himself, he was in a hurry to have time to tell the truth, and with this truth to bring people together. He was obsessed with one thought that he wanted to think out loud. And be understood! All the efforts of Shukshin, the creator, were aimed at this. He believed: “Art - so to speak, to be understood...” From his first steps in art, Shukshin explained, argued, proved and suffered when he was not understood. They tell him that the film “There Lives a Guy Like This” is a comedy. He is perplexed and writes an afterword to the film. At a meeting with young scientists, a tricky question is thrown at him, he hesitates, and then sits down to write an article (“Monologue on the Stairs”).

Where did the writer get the material for his works? Everywhere, where people live. What kind of material is this, what characters? That material and those characters that have rarely entered the sphere of art before. And it was necessary for a great talent to emerge from the depths of the people, to tell the simple, strict truth about his fellow countrymen with love and respect. But this truth became a fact of art and aroused love and respect for the author himself. Shukshin's hero turned out to be not only unfamiliar, but also partly incomprehensible. Lovers of “distilled” prose demanded a “beautiful hero”, they demanded that the writer invent, so as not to disturb his own soul. The polarity of opinions and harshness of assessments arose, oddly enough, precisely because the hero was not fictional. And when the hero represents a real person, he cannot be only moral or only immoral. And when a hero is invented to please someone, there is complete immorality. Isn’t it from here, from a lack of understanding of Shukshin’s creative position, that creative errors in the perception of his heroes come from. After all, what is striking about his heroes is the spontaneity of action, the logical unpredictability of their actions: they will either unexpectedly accomplish a feat, or suddenly escape from the camp three months before the end of their sentence.

Shukshin himself admitted: “I am most interested in exploring the character of a non-dogmatic person, a person not grounded in the science of behavior. Such a person is impulsive, gives in to impulses, and therefore is extremely natural. But he always has a reasonable soul.” The writer's characters are truly impulsive and extremely natural. And they do this due to internal moral concepts, perhaps not yet realized by themselves. They have a heightened reaction to the humiliation of man by man. This reaction takes on a variety of forms. Sometimes it leads to the most unexpected results.

Seryoga Bezmenov was burned by the pain of his wife’s betrayal, and he cut off two of his fingers (“Fingerless”).

A bespectacled guy in a store was insulted by a boorish salesman, and for the first time in his life he got drunk and ended up in a sobering-up station (“And in the morning they woke up...”), etc., etc.

In such situations, Shukshin’s characters may even commit suicide (“Suraz”, “The wife saw off her husband to Paris”). No, they cannot stand insults, humiliation, resentment. They offended Sashka Ermolaev ("Resentment"), the "inflexible" aunt-seller was rude. So what? Happens. But Shukshin’s hero will not endure, but will prove, explain, break through the wall of indifference. And...he grabs the hammer. Or he will leave the hospital, as Vanka Teplyashin did, as Shukshin did ("Klyauza"). A very natural reaction of a conscientious and kind person...

No, Shukshin does not idealize his strange, unlucky heroes. Idealization generally contradicts the art of a writer. But in each of them he finds something that is close to him. And now, it is no longer possible to make out who is calling to humanity there - the writer Shukshin or Vanka Teplyashin.