Fairy tale "Selfless Hare". Fairy tale "Sane Hare"

The theme of denunciation of cowardice with the "Wise Minnow" is approached simultaneously with the written "Selfless Hare". These tales do not repeat, but complement each other in exposing the slave psychology, illuminating its different aspects.

The tale of the selfless hare is a vivid example of Shchedrin's crushing irony, exposing, on the one hand, the wolf habits of the enslavers, and, on the other, the blind obedience of their victims.

The tale begins with the fact that a hare was running not far from the wolf's lair, and the wolf saw him and shouted: “Hare! Stop, honey!" And the hare only added more pace. The wolf got angry, caught him, and said: “I sentence you to deprivation of the stomach by tearing it to pieces. And since now I am full, and my wolf is full ... then you sit here under this bush and wait in line. Or maybe ... ha ha ... I will have mercy on you! What is a hare? I wanted to run away, but as soon as he looked at the wolf's lair, "a hare's heart began to pound." The hare sat under a bush and lamented that he had so much left to live and his hare dreams would not come true: ! The bride's brother galloped up to him one night and began to persuade him to run away to the sick hare. More than ever, the hare began to lament about his life: “For what? How did he deserve his bitter fate? He lived openly; But no, the hare cannot even move from its place: “I can’t, the wolf didn’t order!”. And then a wolf and a she-wolf came out of the lair. The hares began to make excuses, convinced the wolf, moved the she-wolf to pity, and the predators allowed the hare to say goodbye to the bride, and leave her brother with the amanat.

A hare released on a visit “like an arrow from a bow” hurried to the bride, ran, went to the bathhouse, wrapped it, and ran back to the lair - to return by the specified date. The way back was hard for the hare: “He runs in the evening, runs in the middle of the night; his legs are cut with stones, his hair hangs in clumps from thorny branches on his sides, his eyes are clouded, bloody foam oozes from his mouth ... ". He after all "a word, you see, gave, and the hare to the word - the master". It seems that the hare is very noble, he only thinks about how not to let his friend down. But nobility towards the wolf stems from slavish obedience. Moreover, he realizes that the wolf can eat him, but at the same time he stubbornly harbors the illusion that "maybe the wolf will have mercy on me ... ha ha ... and have mercy!" This kind of slave psychology overpowers the instinct of self-preservation and is elevated to the level of nobility and virtue.

The title of the tale with surprising accuracy outlines its meaning, thanks to the oxymoron used by the satirist - the combination of opposite concepts. The word hare is always figuratively synonymous with cowardice. And the word selfless in combination with this synonym gives an unexpected effect. Selfless cowardice! This is the main conflict of the story. Saltykov-Shchedrin shows the reader the perversity of human properties in a society based on violence. The wolf praised the selfless hare, who remained true to his word, and issued him a mocking resolution: “... sit, for the time being ..., and later I will have mercy on you!”.

The wolf and the hare not only symbolize the hunter and the victim with all their corresponding qualities (the wolf is bloodthirsty, strong, despotic, angry, and the hare is cowardly, cowardly and weak). These images are filled with topical social content. Behind the image of the wolf, the exploitative regime is "hidden", and the hare is a layman who believes that a peaceful agreement with the autocracy is possible. The wolf enjoys the position of the ruler, the despot, the whole wolf family lives according to the “wolf” laws: both the cubs play with the victim, and the wolf, ready to devour the hare, pities him in her own way ...

However, the hare also lives according to the laws of the wolf. The Shchedrin Hare is not just cowardly and helpless, but cowardly. He refuses to resist in advance, going to the wolf's mouth and making it easier for him to solve the "food problem". The hare believed that the wolf had the right to take his life. The hare justifies all his actions and behavior with the words: “I can’t, the wolf didn’t order!”. He is accustomed to obey, he is a slave to obedience. Here the author's irony turns into caustic sarcasm, into deep contempt for the psychology of a slave.

A hare from Saltykov-Shchedrin’s fairy tale “The Sane Hare”, “although it was an ordinary hare, it was a clever one. And he reasoned so sensibly that it was just right for a donkey. Usually this hare sat under a bush and talked to himself, reasoned on various topics: “Everyone, he says, is given his own life to the beast. Wolf - wolf, lion - lion, hare - hare. Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with your life, no one asks you: live, that's all, ”or“ They eat us, eat, and we, hares, that year, we breed more ”, or“ These vile people, these wolves - this must be told the truth . All they have is robbery on their minds!” But one day he decided to flaunt his common sense in front of the hare. “The hare spoke and spoke,” and at that time the fox crawled up to him and let's play with him. The fox stretched out in the sun, ordered the hare to "sit closer and chat," and she "plays comedies in front of him."

Yes, the fox taunts the "sane" hare in order to eventually eat it. Both she and the hare understand this very well, but they cannot do anything. The fox is not even very hungry to eat a hare, but since "where is it seen that the foxes themselves let go of their dinner," then one has to obey the law willy-nilly. All the clever, justifying theories of the hare, the idea that he has completely mastered the regulation of wolf appetites, are shattered to smithereens on the cruel prose of life. It turns out that hares were created to be eaten, and not to create new laws. Convinced that wolves will not stop eating hares, the sensible "philosopher" developed a project for a more rational eating of hares - so that not all at once, but one by one. Saltykov-Shchedrin here ridicules attempts to theoretically justify slavish "hare" obedience and liberal ideas about adapting to a regime of violence.

The satirical sting of the tale of the "sane" hare is directed against petty reformism, cowardly and harmful populist liberalism, which was especially characteristic of the 80s.

The tale "The Sane Hare" and the tale "The Selfless Hare" preceding it, taken together, give an exhaustive satirical description of the "hare" psychology in both its practical and theoretical manifestations. In "The Selfless Hare" we are talking about the psychology of an irresponsible slave, and in "The Sane Hare" - about a perverted consciousness that has developed a servile tactic of adapting to a regime of violence. Therefore, the satirist treated the "sensible hare" more severely.

These two works are one of the few in the cycle of Shchedrin's fairy tales that end in a bloody denouement (also "Karas the Idealist", "The Wise Gudgeon"). With the death of the main characters of the fairy tales, Saltykov-Shchedrin emphasizes the tragedy of ignorance of the true ways of fighting evil, with a clear understanding of the need for such a struggle. In addition, these tales were influenced by the political situation in the country at that time - the ferocious government terror, the defeat of populism, the police persecution of the intelligentsia.

Comparing the fairy tales "The Selfless Hare" and "The Sane Hare" in artistic rather than ideological terms, one can also draw many parallels between them.

The plots of both fairy tales are based on folklore, the conversational speech of the characters is consonant. Saltykov-Shchedrin uses elements of living, folk speech that have already become classic. The satirist emphasizes the connection of these fairy tales with folklore with the help of numerals with non-numerical meanings (“far away kingdom”, “because of distant lands”), typical sayings and sayings (“the trail is cold”, “runs, the earth trembles”, “not in a fairy tale to say, not to describe with a pen”, “soon the fairy tale is told ...”, “don’t put your finger in your mouth”, “neither a stake, nor a yard”) and numerous constant epithets and vernacular (“presytehonka”, “a fox-slander”, “you squander” , “the other day”, “Oh, you, miserable, miserable!”, “hare life”, “make good”, “tasty morsel”, “bitter tears”, “great misfortunes”, etc.).

When reading the fairy tales of Saltykov-Shchedrin, it is always necessary to remember that the satirist wrote not about animals and about the relationship between predator and prey, but about people, covering them with animal masks. Similarly, in fairy tales about the "sensible" and "selfless" hares. The language favored by the author of Aesops gives the tales richness, richness of content and does not in the least make it difficult to understand all the meaning, ideas and morality that Saltykov-Shchedrin puts into them.

In both fairy tales, elements of reality are woven into fantastic, fairy-tale plots. The “sensible” hare daily studies “statistical tables published at the Ministry of Internal Affairs ...”, and they write about the “selfless” hare in the newspaper: “Here in the Moskovskie Vedomosti they write that hares do not have a soul, but steam - but out he's like ... flies away! The "sane" hare also tells the fox a little about real human life - about peasant labor, about market entertainment, about recruiting. The fairy tale about the “selfless” hare mentions events invented by the author, unreliable, but essentially real: “In one place it rained, so that the river, which the hare swam jokingly a day earlier, swelled and overflowed ten miles. In another place, King Andron declared war on King Nikita, and on the hare's very path the battle was in full swing. In the third place, cholera manifested itself - it was necessary to go around a whole quarantine chain of 100 miles ... ".

Saltykov-Shchedrin, in order to ridicule all the negative features of these hares, used the appropriate zoological masks. Since a coward, submissive and humble, then this is a hare. This mask the satirist puts on the cowardly inhabitants. And the formidable force that the hare is afraid of - the wolf or the fox - personifies the autocracy and the arbitrariness of royal power.

Evil, angry ridicule of slave psychology is one of the main tasks of Saltykov-Shchedrin's fairy tales. In the fairy tales "The Selfless Hare" and "The Sane Hare" the heroes are not noble idealists, but cowardly townsfolk, hoping for the kindness of predators. Hares do not doubt the right of the wolf and fox to take their lives, they consider it quite natural that the strong eat the weak, but they hope to touch the wolf's heart with their honesty and humility, and to speak to the fox and convince them of the correctness of their views. Predators are still predators.

Grotesque is a term that means a type of artistic imagery (image, style, genre) based on fantasy, laughter, hyperbole, a bizarre combination and contrast of something with something. In the genre of the grotesque, the ideological and artistic features of Shchedrin's satire were most clearly manifested: its political sharpness and purposefulness, the realism of its fantasy, the ruthlessness and depth of the grotesque, the sly sparkling humor.

"Tales" Shchedrin in miniature contain the problems and images of the entire work of the great satirist. If Shchedrin had written nothing apart from Tales, then they alone would have given him the right to immortality. Of the thirty-two tales of Shchedrin, twenty-nine were written by him in the last decade of his life (most from 1882 to 1886), and only three tales were created in 1869. Fairy tales, as it were, sum up the forty years of the writer's creative activity. Shchedrin often resorted to the fairy-tale genre in his work. There are also elements of fairy-tale fantasy in The History of a City, while the satirical novel Modern Idyll and the chronicle Abroad include completed fairy tales.

And it is no coincidence that Shchedrin's fairy tale genre flourished in the 1980s. It was during this period of rampant political reaction in Russia that the satirist had to look for a form that was most convenient for circumventing censorship and at the same time the closest, understandable to the common people. And the people understood the political acuteness of Shchedrin's generalized conclusions hidden behind Aesop's speech and zoological masks. The writer created a new, original genre of political fairy tale, which combines fantasy with real, topical political reality.

In Shchedrin's fairy tales, as in all of his work, two social forces confront each other: the working people and their exploiters. The people appear under the masks of kind and defenseless animals and birds (and often without a mask, under the name "man"), the exploiters - in the images of predators. The symbol of peasant Russia is the image of Konyaga - from the fairy tale of the same name. Konyaga is a peasant, a worker, a source of life for everyone. Thanks to him, bread grows in the vast fields of Russia, but he himself has no right to eat this bread. His destiny is eternal hard labor. “There is no end to the work! The whole meaning of his existence is exhausted by work ... ”- the satirist exclaims. Konyaga is tortured and beaten to the limit, but only he is able to liberate his native country. “From century to century, the formidable immovable bulk of the fields freezes, as if guarding a fairy-tale force in captivity. Who will free this force from captivity? Who will bring her into the world? This task fell to two creatures: the muzhik and Konyaga ... This tale is a hymn to the working people of Russia, and it is no coincidence that it had such a great influence on Shchedrin's contemporary democratic literature.

In the fairy tale "The Wild Landowner" Shchedrin, as it were, summarized his thoughts on the reform of the "liberation" of the peasants, contained in all his works of the 60s. Here he poses an unusually acute problem of the post-reform relations between the feudal nobility and the peasantry completely ruined by the reform: “A cattle will go to the watering place - the landowner shouts: my water! a chicken will wander out of the village - the landowner shouts: my land! And earth, and water, and air - all of it became! There was no torch for the peasant to light in the light, there was no more rod than to sweep the hut. So the peasants prayed with the whole world to the Lord God: - Lord! It’s easier for us to disappear even with small children than to suffer like this all our lives!”

This landowner, like the generals from the tale of two generals, had no idea about labor. Abandoned by his peasants, he immediately turns into a dirty and wild animal. He becomes a forest predator. And this life, in essence, is a continuation of his previous predatory existence. The savage landowner, like the generals, acquires the outward human appearance only after his peasants return. Scolding the wild landowner for his stupidity, the police officer tells him that without peasant "taxes and duties" the state "cannot exist", that without peasants everyone will die of hunger, "you cannot buy a piece of meat or a pound of bread in the market" and even money from there will be no sir. The people are the creators of wealth, and the ruling classes are only consumers of this wealth.

The raven-petitioner turns in turn to all the highest authorities of his state, begging to improve the unbearable life of the raven-men, but in response he hears only “cruel words” that they cannot do anything, because under the existing system, the law is on the side of the strong. “Whoever overcomes is right,” the hawk instructs. “Look around - everywhere there is discord, everywhere there is strife,” the kite echoes him. This is the "normal" state of a proprietary society. And although "the crow lives in society, like real men," it is powerless in this world of chaos and predation. The men are defenseless. “Everything is fired at them from all sides. Now the railway will shoot, then a new car, then a crop failure, then a new requisition. And they just know they turn over. How did it happen that Guboshlepov got the way, after that they lost a hryvnia in their wallet - how can a dark person understand this? * the laws of the world around them.

The carp from the fairy tale "Karas-idealist" is not a hypocrite, he is truly noble, pure in soul. His ideas as a socialist deserve deep respect, but the methods of their implementation are naive and ridiculous. Shchedrin, being himself a socialist by conviction, did not accept the theory of the utopian socialists, he considered it the fruit of an idealistic view of social reality, of the historical process. “I don’t believe... that struggle and strife were a normal law, under the influence of which everything living on earth is supposedly destined to develop. I believe in bloodless prosperity, I believe in harmony ... ”- the crucian ranted. It ended up that the pike swallowed it, and swallowed it mechanically: it was struck by the absurdity and strangeness of this sermon.

In other variations, the theory of the idealist crucian was reflected in the fairy tales "The Selfless Hare" and "The Sane Hare". Here, the heroes are not noble idealists, but cowardly townsfolk, hoping for the kindness of predators. Hares do not doubt the right of the wolf and fox to take their lives, they consider it quite natural that the strong eat the weak, but they hope to touch the wolf's heart with their honesty and humility. “Maybe the wolf… ha ha… will have mercy on me!” Predators are still predators. Zaitsev is not saved by the fact that they "did not allow revolutions, did not go out with weapons in their hands."

Shchedrin's wise gudgeon, the hero of the fairy tale of the same name, became the personification of the wingless and vulgar philistine. The meaning of life for this "enlightened, moderately liberal" coward was self-preservation, avoiding clashes, avoiding struggle. Therefore, the minnow lived to a ripe old age unharmed. But what a humiliating life it was! It all consisted of continuous trembling for its own skin. "He lived and trembled - that's all." This fairy tale, written during the years of political reaction in Russia, struck without a hitch at the liberals who grovel before the government because of their own skin, at the townsfolk hiding in their holes from the social struggle. For many years, the passionate words of the great democrat sunk into the souls of the thinking people of Russia: “Those who think that only those minnows can be considered worthy citizens who, mad with fear, sit in holes and tremble, believe incorrectly. No, these are not citizens, but at least useless minnows. Shchedrin also showed such "minnows" - inhabitants in the novel "Modern Idyll".

The Toptygins from the fairy tale “The Bear in the Voivodeship”, sent by the lion to the voivodeship, set the goal of their rule to commit as much “bloodshed” as possible. By this they aroused the anger of the people, and they suffered "the fate of all fur-bearing animals" - they were killed by the rebels. The same death from the people was accepted by the wolf from the fairy tale "Poor Wolf", which also "robbed day and night." In the fairy tale "The Eagle-Maecenas" a devastating parody of the king and the ruling classes is given. The eagle is the enemy of science, art, the protector of darkness and ignorance. He destroyed the nightingale for his free songs, literate woodpecker "dressed ... in shackles and imprisoned in a hollow forever", ruined the raven-muzhiks to the ground. It ended up that the ravens rebelled, "the whole herd took off and flew away", leaving the eagle to die of starvation. “Let this serve as a lesson to the eagles!” - the satirist concludes the tale meaningfully.

All of Shchedrin's tales were subjected to censorship and many alterations. Many of them were published in illegal publications abroad. The masks of the animal world could not hide the political content of Shchedrin's fairy tales. The transfer of human features - both psychological and political - to the animal world created a comic effect, clearly exposed the absurdity of the existing reality.

The fantasy of Shchedrin's fairy tales is real, carries a generalized political content. Eagles are "predatory, carnivorous...". They live “in alienation, in impregnable places, they are not engaged in hospitality, but they rob” - this is what the fairy tale about the medenat eagle says. And this immediately draws the typical circumstances of the life of the royal eagle and makes it clear that we are not talking about birds at all. And further, by combining the atmosphere of the bird world with things that are by no means bird-like, Shchedrin achieves high political pathos and caustic irony. There is also a fairy tale about the Toptygins, who came to the forest to “pacify their inner adversaries”. Do not obscure the political meaning of the beginnings and endings, taken from magical folk tales, the image of Baba Yaga, Leshy. They only create a comic effect. The discrepancy between form and content contributes here to a sharp exposure of the properties of the type or circumstance.

Sometimes Shchedrin, having taken traditional fairy-tale images, does not even try to introduce them into a fairy-tale setting or use fairy-tale tricks. Through the lips of the heroes of the fairy tale, he directly sets out his idea of ​​social reality. Such, for example, is the fairy tale "Neighbors".

The language of Shchedrin's fairy tales is deeply folk, close to Russian folklore. The satirist uses not only traditional fairy tale tricks, images, but also proverbs, sayings, sayings (“If you don’t give a word, be strong, but if you give it, hold on!”, “There will be no two deaths, one cannot be avoided”, “Ears do not grow above the forehead” , “My hut on the edge”, “Simplicity is worse than theft”). The dialogue of the characters is colorful, the speech draws a specific social type: an imperious, rude eagle, a beautiful-hearted idealist crucian, an evil reactionary in a pinch, a hypocrite priest, a dissolute canary, a cowardly hare, etc.

The images of fairy tales came into use, became common nouns and live for many decades, and the universal types of objects of satire by Saltykov-Shchedrin are still found in our lives today, you just need to take a closer look at the surrounding reality and think.

Grotesque is a term that means a type of artistic imagery (image, style, genre) based on fantasy, laughter, hyperbole, a bizarre combination and contrast of something with something.

In the genre of the grotesque, the ideological and artistic features of Shchedrin's satire were most clearly manifested: its political sharpness and purposefulness, the realism of its fantasy, the ruthlessness and depth of the grotesque, the sly sparkling humor.

"Tales" Shchedrin in miniature contain the problems and images of the entire work of the great satirist. If Shchedrin wrote nothing apart from Tales, then they alone would give him the right to immortality. Of the thirty-two tales of Shchedrin, twenty-nine were written by him in the last decade of his life and, as it were, sum up the writer's forty years of creative activity.

Shchedrin often resorted to the fairy-tale genre in his work. Elements of fairy-tale fantasy are present in “The History of a City”, while the satirical novel “Modern Idyll” and the chronicle “Abroad” include completed fairy tales.

And it is no coincidence that the heyday of the fairy tale genre falls on Shchedrin in the 80s of the 19th century. It was during this period of rampant political reaction in Russia that the satirist had to look for a form that was most convenient for circumventing censorship and at the same time the closest, understandable to the common people. And the people understood the political acuteness of Shchedrin's generalized conclusions, hidden behind Aesop's speech and zoological masks. The writer created a new, original genre of political fairy tale, which combines fantasy with real, topical political reality.

In Shchedrin's fairy tales, as in all of his work, two social forces confront each other: the working people and their exploiters. The people appear under the masks of kind and defenseless animals and birds (and often without a mask, under the name "man"), the exploiters - in the images of predators. And this is already grotesque.

“And I, if you saw: a man is hanging outside the house, in a box on a rope, and smears paint on the wall, or walks on the roof like a fly - this is who I am!” - says the savior-man to the generals. Shchedrin laughs bitterly at the fact that the muzhik, by order of the generals, himself weaves a rope, with which they then tie him up. The man is honest, straightforward, kind, unusually quick-witted and smart. He can do everything: get food, sew clothes; he conquers the elemental forces of nature, jokingly swims across the “ocean-sea”. And the muzhik treats his enslavers with derision, without losing his self-esteem. The generals from the fairy tale “How one man fed two generals” look like miserable pygmies compared to the giant man. To depict them, the satirist uses completely different colors. They do not understand anything, they are dirty physically and spiritually, they are cowardly and helpless, greedy and stupid. If you are looking for animal masks, then the pig mask is just right for them.

In the fairy tale "The Wild Landowner" Shchedrin summarized his thoughts on the reform of the "liberation" of the peasants, contained in all his works of the 60s. Here he poses an unusually acute problem of the post-reform relations between the feudal nobility and the peasantry completely ruined by the reform: “A cattle will go to the watering place - the landowner shouts: my water! a chicken will wander out of the village - the landowner shouts: my land! And the earth, and water, and air - everything became his!”

This landowner, like the aforementioned generals, had no idea about labor. Abandoned by his peasants, he immediately turns into a dirty and wild animal, becomes a forest predator. And this life, in essence, is a continuation of his previous predatory existence. The savage landowner, like the generals, acquires the outward human appearance only after his peasants return. Scolding the wild landowner for his stupidity, the police chief tells him that the state cannot exist without peasant taxes and duties, that without peasants everyone will starve to death, you can’t buy a piece of meat or a pound of bread in the market, and the masters will have no money. The people are the creators of wealth, and the ruling classes are only consumers of this wealth.

The carp from the fairy tale “Karas-idealist” is not a hypocrite, he is truly noble, pure in soul. His ideas as a socialist deserve deep respect, but the methods of their implementation are naive and ridiculous. Shchedrin, being himself a socialist by conviction, did not accept the theory of the utopian socialists, he considered it the fruit of an idealistic view of social reality, of the historical process. “I don’t believe... that struggle and strife were a normal law, under the influence of which everything living on earth is supposedly destined to develop. I believe in bloodless prosperity, I believe in harmony…” - the crucian ranted.

In other variations, the idealistic crucian theory was reflected in the fairy tales “The Selfless Hare” and “The Sane Hare”. Here, the heroes are not noble idealists, but cowardly townsfolk, hoping for the kindness of predators. Hares do not doubt the right of the wolf and fox to take their lives, they consider it quite natural that the strong eat the weak, but they hope to touch the wolf's heart with their honesty and humility. “Maybe the wolf… haha… will have mercy on me!” Predators are still predators. Zaitsev is not saved by the fact that they "did not let revolutions in, they did not go out with weapons in their hands."

Shchedrin's wise gudgeon, the hero of the fairy tale of the same name, became the personification of the wingless and vulgar philistine. The meaning of life for this “enlightened, moderately liberal” coward was self-preservation, avoiding clashes, avoiding struggle. Therefore, the minnow lived to a ripe old age unharmed. But what a humiliating life it was! It all consisted of continuous trembling for its own skin. "He lived and trembled - that's all." This fairy tale, written during the years of political reaction in Russia, struck without a hitch at the liberals who grovel before the government because of their own skin, at the townsfolk hiding in their holes from the social struggle.

The Toptygins from the fairy tale “The Bear in the Voivodeship”, sent by the lion to the voivodeship, set the goal of their rule to commit as much “bloodshed” as possible. By this they aroused the anger of the people, and they suffered the “fate of all fur-bearing animals” - they were killed by the rebels. The same death from the people was accepted by the wolf from the fairy tale “Poor Wolf”, which also “robbed day and night”. In the fairy tale “The Eagle-Patron”, a devastating parody of the king and the ruling classes is given. The eagle is the enemy of science, art, the protector of darkness and ignorance. He destroyed the nightingale for his free songs, literate the woodpecker “dressed up., in shackles and imprisoned in a hollow forever”, ruined the male crows to the ground. . “Let this serve as a lesson to the eagles!” - the satirist concludes the tale meaningfully.

All Shchedrin's fairy tales were subjected to censorship persecution and alterations. Many of them were published in illegal publications abroad. The masks of the animal world could not hide the political content of Shchedrin's fairy tales. The transfer of human traits - psychological and political - to the animal world created a comic effect, clearly exposed the absurdity of the existing reality.

The images of fairy tales came into use, became common nouns and live for many decades, and the universal types of objects of satire by Saltykov-Shchedrin are still found in our lives today, you just need to take a closer look at the surrounding reality and think.

9. Humanism of F.M. Dostoevsky's novel "Crime and Punishment"

« The willful murder of even the last of people, the most malicious of people, is not allowed by the spiritual nature of man ... The eternal law came into its own, and he (Raskolnikov) fell under his power. Christ did not come to break, but to fulfill the law... Not so did those who were truly great and ingenious, who performed great deeds for all mankind. They did not consider themselves superhumans, to whom everything is permitted, and therefore they could give a lot to the “human” (N. Berdyaev).

Dostoevsky, by his own admission, was worried about the fate of "nine-tenths of humanity", morally humiliated, socially disadvantaged in the conditions of the contemporary bourgeois system. "Crime and Punishment" is a novel that reproduces pictures of the social suffering of the urban poor. Extreme poverty is characterized by "nowhere else to go". The image of poverty constantly varies throughout the novel. This is the fate of Katerina Ivanovna, who remained after the death of her husband with three young children. This is the fate of Mar-meladov himself. The tragedy of a father forced to accept the fall of his daughter. The fate of Sonya, who committed a "feat of crime" over herself for the love of her loved ones. The torment of children growing up in a dirty corner, next to a drunken father and a dying, irritated mother, in an atmosphere of constant quarrels.

Is it permissible for the sake of the happiness of the majority to destroy the “unnecessary” minority. Dostoevsky answers with all the artistic content of the novel: no - and consistently refutes Raskolnikov's theory: if one person arrogates to himself the right to physically destroy an unnecessary minority for the sake of the happiness of the majority, then "simple arithmetic" will not work: apart from the old money-lender, Raskolnikov also kills Lizaveta - that the most humiliated and insulted, for the sake of which, as he tries to convince himself, the ax was raised.

If Raskolnikov and those like him take on such a high mission - the defenders of the humiliated and insulted, then they must inevitably consider themselves extraordinary people, to whom everything is allowed, that is, they must inevitably end with contempt for the very humiliated and insulted whom they defend.

If you allow yourself "blood according to your conscience", then you will inevitably turn into Svidrigailov. Svidri Gailov is the same Raskolnikov, but already completely “corrected” from all prejudices. Svid-rigailov blocks all paths leading not only to repentance, but even to a purely official surrender to Raskolnikov. And it is no coincidence that only after the suicide of Svidrigailov, Raskolnikov makes this confession.

The most important role in the novel is played by the image of Sonya Marmeladova. Active love for one's neighbor, the ability to respond to someone else's pain (especially deeply manifested in the scene of Raskolnikov's confession to the murder) make the image of Sonya ideal. It is from the standpoint of this ideal that the verdict is pronounced in the novel. For Sonya, all people have the same right to life. No one can achieve happiness, his own or someone else's, through crime. Sonya, according to Dostoevsky, embodies the people's principle: patience and humility, boundless love for a person.

Only love saves and reunites a fallen person with God. The power of love is such that it can contribute to the salvation of even such an unrepentant sinner as Raskolnikov.

The religion of love and self-sacrifice acquires exceptional and decisive significance in Dostoevsky's Christianity. The idea of ​​the inviolability of any human person plays a major role in understanding the ideological meaning of the novel. In the image of Raskolnikov, Dostoevsky executes the denial of the intrinsic value of the human person and shows that any person, including the disgusting old money-lender, is sacred and inviolable, and in this respect people are equal.

Raskolnikov's protest is associated with acute pity for the poor, suffering and helpless.

10. The theme of the family in Leo Tolstoy's novel "War and Peace"

The idea of ​​the spiritual foundations of nepotism as an external form of unity between people received special expression in the epilogue of the novel "War and Peace". In the family, as it were, the opposition between spouses is removed, in communication between them, the limitations of loving souls are complemented. Such is the family of Marya Bolkonskaya and Nikolai Rostov, where such opposite principles of the Rostovs and Bolkonskys are combined in a higher synthesis. Wonderful is the feeling of “proud love” of Nikolai for Countess Marya, based on surprise “before her sincerity, before that sublime, moral world, almost inaccessible to him, in which his wife always lived.” And touching is Marya's submissive, tender love "for this man who will never understand everything that she understands, and as if from this she loved him even more, with a hint of passionate tenderness."

In the epilogue of War and Peace, a new family gathers under the roof of the Lysogorsky house, uniting in the past heterogeneous Rostov, Bolkon, and through Pierre Bezukhov also Karatay principles. “As in a real family, several completely different worlds lived together in the Bald Mountain house, which, each holding its own peculiarity and making concessions to one another, merged into one harmonious whole. Every event that happened in the house was equally - joyful or sad - important for all these worlds; but each world had completely its own, independent of the others, reasons to rejoice or grieve at any event.

This new family did not come about by accident. It was the result of the nationwide unity of people, born of the Patriotic War. Thus, in the epilogue, the connection between the general course of history and individual, intimate relationships between people is affirmed in a new way. The year 1812, which gave Russia a new, higher level of human communication, removed many class barriers and restrictions, led to the emergence of more complex and broad family worlds. The keepers of family foundations are women - Natasha and Marya. Between them there is a strong, spiritual union.

Rostov. The writer is especially sympathetic to the patriarchal Rostov family, whose behavior manifests a high nobility of feelings, kindness (even rare generosity), naturalness, closeness to the people, moral purity and integrity. The yard servants of the Rostovs - Tikhon, Prokofy, Praskovya Savvishna - are devoted to their masters, feel like a single family with them, show understanding and show attention to the lordly interests.

Bolkonsky. The old prince represents the color of the nobility of the era of Catherine II. He is characterized by true patriotism, breadth of political outlook, understanding of the true interests of Russia, and indomitable energy. Andrey and Marya are advanced, educated people who are looking for new ways in modern life.

The Kuragin family brings only troubles and misfortunes to the peaceful "nests" of the Rostovs and Bolkonskys.

Under Borodin, on the Raevsky battery, where Pierre ends up, one feels "common to everyone, like a family revival." “The soldiers ... mentally accepted Pierre into their family, appropriated and gave him a nickname. “Our master” they called him and they affectionately laughed about him among themselves.

So the feeling of the family, which in peaceful life is sacredly cherished by Rostovs close to the people, will turn out to be historically significant during the Patriotic War of 1812.

11. Patriotic theme in the novel "War and Peace"

In extreme situations, in moments of great upheavals and global changes, a person will definitely prove himself, show his inner essence, certain qualities of his nature. In Tolstoy's novel "War and Peace" someone utters loud words, engages in noisy activities or useless fuss, someone experiences a simple and natural feeling of "the need for sacrifice and suffering in the consciousness of a common misfortune." The first only think of themselves as patriots and loudly shout about love for the Fatherland, the second - patriots in fact - give their lives in the name of a common victory.

In the first case, we are dealing with false patriotism, repulsive with its falseness, selfishness and hypocrisy. This is how secular nobles behave at a dinner in honor of Bagration; when reading poems about the war, "everyone stood up, feeling that dinner was more important than poetry." A false patriotic atmosphere reigns in the salon of Anna Pavlovna Scherer, Helen Bezukhova and in other Petersburg salons: “...calm, luxurious, preoccupied only with ghosts, reflections of life, Petersburg life went on in the old way; and because of the course of this life, great efforts had to be made to realize the danger and the difficult situation in which the Russian people found themselves. There were the same exits, balls, the same French theater, the same interests of the courts, the same interests of service and intrigue. This circle of people was far from understanding the all-Russian problems, from understanding the great misfortune and the need of the people in this war. The world continued to live by its own interests, and even in the moment of a nationwide disaster, greed, nomination, and service reign here.

False patriotism is also shown by Count Rastopchin, who puts up stupid "posters" around Moscow, urges the inhabitants of the city not to leave the capital, and then, fleeing the people's wrath, deliberately sends the innocent son of the merchant Vereshchagin to death.

The false patriot is represented in the novel by Berg, who, in a moment of general confusion, is looking for an opportunity to profit and is preoccupied with buying a wardrobe and a toilet "with an English secret." It doesn’t even occur to him that now it’s a shame to think about chiffonierochkas. Such is Drubetskoy, who, like other staff officers, thinks about awards and promotions, wants to "arrange for himself the best position, especially the position of adjutant with an important person, which seemed to him especially tempting in the army." It is probably no coincidence that on the eve of the Battle of Borodino, Pierre notices this greedy excitement on the faces of the officers, he mentally compares it with "another expression of excitement", "which spoke of not personal issues, but general ones, issues of life and death."

What "other" people are we talking about? These are the faces of ordinary Russian peasants, dressed in soldier's overcoats, for whom the feeling of the Motherland is sacred and inalienable. True patriots in Tushin's battery fight even without cover. Yes, and Tushin himself "did not experience the slightest unpleasant feeling of fear, and the thought that he might be killed or hurt painfully did not cross his mind." The living, vital feeling of the Motherland makes the soldiers resist the enemy with unthinkable stamina. The merchant Ferapontov, who gives his property for plunder when leaving Smolensk, is also, of course, a patriot. "Drag everything, guys, don't leave it to the French!" he shouts to the Russian soldiers.

Pierre Bezukhov gives his money, sells the estate to equip the regiment. A sense of concern for the fate of his country, participation in the common grief makes him, a wealthy aristocrat, go into the thick of the Battle of Borodino.

True patriots were also those who left Moscow, not wanting to submit to Napoleon. They were convinced: "It was impossible to be under the control of the French." They "simply and truly" did "that great work that saved Russia."

Petya Rostov rushes to the front, because "the Fatherland is in danger." And his sister Natasha releases carts for the wounded, although without family property she will remain a dowry.

True patriots in Tolstoy's novel do not think about themselves, they feel the need for their own contribution and even sacrifice, but they do not expect rewards for this, because they carry in their souls a genuine holy sense of the Motherland.

Creativity M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, a famous writer of the second half of the 19th century, is extremely diverse. He wrote novels, essays, stories, articles, fairy tales. It was in the fairy tale genre that the features of the writer's satire were most clearly manifested: its political sharpness, the depth of the grotesque, and subtle humor. Saltykov-Shchedrin wrote a lot of fairy tales in the 80s. At that time, there was a cruel censorship oppression in the country. Therefore, to combat social and human vices, the writer uses allegory.

In fairy tales, Saltykov-Shchedrin denounces ignorant landowners and rulers, shows a talented, but submissive people. The satire on the layman, resigned to political reaction, living in his little world of petty worries, is deployed in fairy tales about fish and hares: “The Selfless Hare”, “The Sane Hare”, “The Wise Gudgeon”, “Karas-Idealist” and others.

In the center of the most famous fairy tale - "The Wise Gudgeon" - is the fate of a cowardly inhabitant, a person deprived of a public outlook, with petty-bourgeois demands. In the work, the writer poses important philosophical problems: what is the meaning of life and the purpose of a person.

The tale is distinguished by a harmonious composition. In a small work, the author managed to trace the path of the hero from birth to death. The fairy tale has a limited circle of characters: the gudgeon himself and his father, whose precepts the son regularly fulfilled. Allegories help the writer not only to deceive censorship, but also to create a vivid negative image. The author in the tale denounces the cowardice, mental limitations, life failure of the layman. Saltykov-Shchedrin ascribes human properties to fish and at the same time shows that "fish" features are inherent in man. After all, the popular proverb accurately says: silent as a fish.

The fairy tale "The Wise Minnow" is connected with reality. To do this, the author combines fabulous speech with modern concepts. Thus, Shchedrin uses the usual fairy-tale opening: "Once upon a time there was a scribbler"; common fairy-tale turns: “neither in a fairy tale to say, nor to describe with a pen”, “began to live and live”; folk expressions "mind chamber", "out of nowhere"; vernacular "haunted life", "destroy", etc. And next to these words, they sound completely different, of a different style, of a different, real time: “to live life”, “did exercise at night”, “it is recommended”, “the life process completes”. Such a combination of folklore motifs, fantasy with real, topical reality allowed Saltykov-Shchedrin to create a new, original genre of political fairy tale. This special form helped the writer to increase the scale of the artistic image, to give the satire on the petty layman a huge scope, to create a real symbol of a cowardly person.

The fate of a law-abiding official is guessed in the fate of the minnow, it is no coincidence that the author “lets slip”: the minnow “does not keep servants”, “does not play cards, does not drink wine, does not smoke tobacco, does not chase red girls”. But what a humiliating life this is for a “moderately liberal” minnow who is afraid of everything: afraid of pike, afraid of being hit in the ear. The entire biography of the minnow comes down to a brief formula: "He lived - trembled, and died - trembled." This expression has become an aphorism. The author argues that it is impossible to have such insignificant goals. The rhetorical questions contain an accusation to those who do not truly live, but only “spread their lives ... protect”: “What were his joys? who did he comfort? who gave good advice? to whom did he say a kind word? who sheltered, warmed, protected? who heard about it? who remembers its existence? If you answer these questions, it becomes clear what ideals each person should strive for. Minnow considered himself wise, the author called his fairy tale that way. But there is an irony hidden behind this title. Shchedrin speaks harshly about the worthlessness and uselessness of the man in the street trembling for himself. The writer "forces" the gudgeon to die ingloriously. In the final rhetorical question, a devastating, sarcastic sentence is heard: “Most likely, he himself died, because what sweetness is it for a pike to swallow an ailing, dying scribbler, and besides, a wise one?”

In other versions, the everyday theory of the “wise minnow” was reflected in the fairy tales “The Selfless Hare” and “The Sane Hare”. Here the heroes are the same ordinary cowards, hoping for the kindness of predators, "masters of life." The hero of the fairy tale "The Sane Hare" preaches practical wisdom: "live, that's all." He believes that "every cricket should know its hearth" and that "ears do not grow above the forehead."

The hare from the fairy tale "The Selfless Hare" has the same slave morality. This “detailed” layman had one goal in life: “he counted on getting married, bought a samovar, dreamed of drinking tea and sugar with a young hare ...” The author tells with devastating irony about the mundane requests of a “moderately accurate” hare. Saltykov-Shchedrin makes a direct allusion to people who profess the principles of complete non-intervention in the course of public life. However, no one can hide from problems, dangers, adversities in their closed little world. So the hare fell into the paws of the wolf. He did not fight, but resigned himself to his fate: to wait until the predator gets hungry and deigns to eat it. The hare is only bitter and offended that he is doomed to death for his righteous life: “For what? How did he deserve his bitter fate? He lived openly, did not start revolutions, did not go out with weapons in his hands ... ”Saltykov-Shchedrin boldly switches the action from the world of animals to the world of human relations. In the allegorical images of a hare and a wolf, small and large officials, the persecuted and the persecutor are guessed.

A hare, a cowardly inhabitant, is not saved by his good intentions, law-abiding. The hare does not doubt the wolf's right to take his life, he considers it quite natural that the strong eat the weak, but he hopes to touch the wolf's heart with his honesty and humility: "Maybe the wolf will have mercy on me ... ha ha ... and have mercy!" The hare is paralyzed by fear, afraid to get out of submission. He has the opportunity to escape, but "the wolf did not order" him, and he patiently waits for favors.

The story is filled with comic situations. So, the wolf agreed to “let go of the oblique on a visit” to the bride, and left another hare as a hostage. The protagonist managed to escape to the distant kingdom in a day, go to the bathhouse, get married and return to the lair of the wolf. The hare on the road showed miracles of endurance. He turned out to have remarkable strength, will: “How many times his heart wanted to burst, so he took power over his heart ...” Oblique sacrificed himself only in order to again be at the mercy of the wolf. The author, with frank mockery, calls the hare "selfless." The discrepancy between the capabilities of a hare (for example, he shouted like a hundred thousand hares together) and what he spends himself on helps to expose the slavish obedience of the layman.

So, the inhabitants in the fairy tales of Saltykov-Shchedrin - "fish" and "hares" - do not have human dignity, mind. The author denounces their cowardice, helplessness, stupidity. They kowtow before the mighty of the world, hide in their holes or under the bushes, they are afraid of social struggle and want only one thing: to save their “hateful life”.

The work of the great Russian satirist M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin is a significant phenomenon, generated by special historical conditions in Russia in the 50s-80s of the XIX century.

A writer, a revolutionary democrat, Shchedrin is a vivid representative of the sociological trend in Russian realism and, at the same time, a deep psychologist, in the nature of his creative method, different from the great writers-psychologists of his day. In the 80s, a book of fairy tales was created, since with the help of fairy tales it was easier to convey revolutionary ideas to the people, to reveal the class struggle in Russia in the second half of the 19th century, in the era of the formation of the bourgeois system. The Aesopian language helps the writer in this, with the help of which he disguises his true Intentions and feelings, as well as his heroes, so as not to attract the attention of censorship. In the early work of Saltykov-Shchedrin, there are fabulous images of "zoological assimilation." In the "Provincial essays", for example, sturgeon and piskari act; the provincial aristocrats manifest the properties of either a kite or a toothy pike, and in the expression of their faces one can guess "that she will remain without objection." Therefore, the writer explores in fairy tales the types of social behavior shown by time.

He ridicules all kinds of adaptations, hopes, unrealizable hopes dictated by the instinct of self-preservation or naivety. Neither the dedication of a hare sitting under a bush according to the "wolf's resolution", nor the wisdom of a squeaker hiding in a hole, save from death. What better way, it seems, has adapted to the policy of "hedgehogs" dried vobla.

“Now I have no extra thoughts, no extra feelings, no extra conscience - nothing like that will happen,” she rejoiced. But according to the logic of the time, “vague, unfaithful and cruel”, the vobla was also “gobbled up”, since “it turned from a triumphant into a suspect, from a well-intentioned one into a liberal”. Shchedrin ridiculed the liberals especially mercilessly. In letters of this time, the writer often likened the liberal to an animal. “... If only one liberal pig expressed sympathy! ”- he wrote about the closure of Otechestvennye Zapiski. "There is no animal more cowardly than the Russian liberal."

And in the artistic world of fairy tales, indeed, there was no animal equal in meanness to a liberal. It was important for Shchedrin to name the social phenomenon he hated in his own language and to stigmatize him for all time (“liberal”). The writer treated his fairy-tale characters in different ways. His laughter, both angry and bitter, is inseparable from the understanding of the suffering of a person doomed to "stare his forehead at the wall and freeze in this position." But with all the sympathy, for example, for the idealist carp and his ideas, Shchedrin took a sober look at life.

By the fate of his fairy tale characters, he showed that the refusal to fight for the right to life, any concession, reconciliation with the reaction is tantamount to the spiritual and physical death of the human race. Intelligibly and artistically convincing, he inspired the reader that the autocracy, like a hero born of Baba Yaga, was rotten from the inside and it was pointless to expect help or protection from him (“Bogatyr”). Moreover, the activities of the tsarist administrators are invariably reduced to "atrocities." "Atrocities" can be "shameful", "brilliant", "natural", but they remain "atrocities" and are due not to the personal qualities of the "Toptygins", but to the principle of autocratic power, hostile to the people, disastrous for the spiritual and moral development of the nation as a whole ( "Bear in the Voivodeship"). Let the wolf once let go of the lamb, let some lady donate “chunks of bread” to the victims of the fire, and the eagle “forgave the mouse”.

But “why, however, did the eagle “forgive” the mouse? She ran across the road on her business, and he saw, swooped in, crumpled and ... forgave! Why did he "forgive" the mouse, and not the mouse "forgave" him? - the satirist directly puts the question. Such is the “anciently established” order, in which “wolves skin hares, and kites and owls pluck crows”, bears ruin the peasants, and “bribe-takers” rob them (“Toy business people”), idle talk, and horses sweat persons are working (“Konyaga”); Ivan the Rich even on weekdays eats cabbage soup “with slaughter”, and Ivan Poor and on holidays - “with empty” (“Neighbors”). It is impossible to correct or soften this order, just as it is impossible to change the predatory nature of a pike or a wolf.

The pike, unwillingly, “swallowed the crucian”. And the wolf is not “so cruel” of his own free will, but because his complexion is tricky: he cannot eat anything but meat.

And in order to get meat food, he cannot act otherwise than to deprive a living being of life. In a word, he undertakes to commit villainy, robbery. Predators are subject to destruction, Shchedrin's fairy tales simply do not suggest any other way out. The personification of the wingless and vulgar philistine was Shchedrin's wise scribbler - the hero of the fairy tale of the same name. The meaning of the life of this "enlightened, moderately liberal" coward was self-preservation, avoiding the struggle.

Therefore, the scribbler lived unharmed to a ripe old age. But what a miserable life it was! It all consisted of continuous trembling for its own skin. He lived and trembled - that's all.

This fairy tale, written during the years of political reaction in Russia, hit the liberals, who kowtowed before the government because of their own skins, and the townsfolk who hid in their holes from the social struggle without a miss. For many years, the passionate words of the great democrat sunk into the souls of the thinking people of Russia: “Those who think that only those scribblers can be considered worthy are wrong. my citizens, who, mad with fear, sit in holes and tremble. No, these are not citizens, but at least useless scribblers. The fantasy of Shchedrin's fairy tales is real, carries a generalized political content.

Eagles are "predatory, carnivorous...". They live "in alienation, in impregnable places, they are not engaged in hospitality, but they rob" - this is how it is said in the fairy tale about the eagle-philanthropist.

And this immediately draws the typical circumstances of the life of the royal eagle and makes it clear that we are talking about birds. And further, by combining the atmosphere of the bird world with things that are by no means bird-like, Shchedrin achieves a comic effect and caustic irony.