The writing

A. I. Kuprin’s story “The Duel” is the pinnacle of creativity, his final work, in which he addresses the problem of the individual and society, their tragic disharmony. “Duel” is a politically topical work: the story itself does not say anything about the Russo-Japanese war, but contemporaries perceived it in the context of those events. Kuprin revealed the essence of the state of society that led to the explosion, in fact, pointed out the reasons that caused the defeat of the Russian army in the war with Japan.

Documentaryism in the "Duel" is obvious (the consonance of the names of the officers - the heroes of the story with those with whom Lieutenant Kuprin served in the 46th Dnieper Infantry Regiment, details of the biography of Romashov and the author himself). Kuprin said so: “The main character is me”, “Romashov is my double”. With all this, the work contained a broad generalizing meaning. The author's attention is drawn to the theme of life in Russia in the first decade of the 20th century. The depiction of the military environment was by no means an end in itself. Going from the local "army" theme, Kuprin raised problems that worried the whole society, they determined the moral pathos of the story: the fate of the people, the inherent value of the human personality, the awakening of its activity.

The name of the story is symbolic, the story became a duel between Kuprin himself and the tsarist army, autocratic orders, destroying people. This is a duel with lies, immorality, injustice. The decline of morality, the apology of war, robbery, and violence are especially hated by the humanist writer.

Kuprin shows what path he takes in search of the truth main character story Romashov. When the hero begins to see clearly, he comes to the conclusion about the self-worth of "I", the right to respect human dignity he recognizes not only in relation to himself, but also extends it to the soldiers. Before our eyes, Romashov is morally mature: “To beat a soldier is dishonorable. You cannot beat a person who cannot answer you, who does not have the right to raise his hand to his face in order to protect himself from a blow. He doesn't even dare to bow his head. That's shameful!" Romashov, who affirms: “The Khlebnikovs are my brothers,” who is aware of his spiritual kinship with the people, is making a huge step forward in his development. This is a completely different person: not the young dreamer we meet at the beginning of the story. However, Romashov dies. The author has brought his hero to such a point that, had he survived, it would have been necessary to open up some sort of distinct perspective of his future. And this was not clear to Kuprin himself.

Loving his hero, Kuprin mourns his death and clearly points to those who are guilty of this, speaks honestly and frankly, because he himself has often suffered cruelly from human indifference.

Is Shurochka Nikolaeva guilty of Romashov's death? To a greater extent, yes. Contrasting qualities are combined in her character. She is fierce and smart, beautiful and agile. High and low and rudely pragmatic intertwined in her. The whole trouble is that these negative qualities of Shurochka are hidden from Romashov for the time being. A pragmatic lady, unscrupulous in the means to achieve her goals, the cynical Shurochka removes Romashov as an obstacle in her path. She relies on her husband - albeit unloved, but she will make sure that he will help her achieve what she wants.

The position of the author helps to understand the image of Nazansky. This hero is no less complex and controversial than Shurochka. Deep understanding of reality, originality of thinking - and reflection, inertia, silence. However, for all the inconsistency of Nazansky's judgments, in his famous monologues, which determine the moral pathos of the story, the most important ideas for Kuprin are openly publicistically expressed. In the monologues of "Nazansky, two lines are outlined: sharp criticism of the autocracy and dreams of wonderful life.

The mass of officers shown by Kuprin in the story are people different in their own way. human qualities. Almost each of them has a minimum of "good" feelings, bizarrely mixed with cruelty, rudeness, indifference. These "good" feelings are distorted beyond recognition by caste military prejudices. Let the commander of the regiment Shulgovich, under his thunderous bourbon, hide his concern for the officers, or Lieutenant Colonel Rafalsky loves animals and devotes all his free and non-free time to collecting a rare domestic menagerie - they cannot bring any real relief, with all their desire. Officers are just an obedient instrument of inhuman statutory conventions.

Kuprin's biography was full of various events that gave the writer rich food for his literary works. The story "Duel" is rooted in that period of Kuprin's life, when he acquired the experience of a military man. The desire to serve in the army was passionate and romantic in his youth. Kuprin graduated from the cadet corps and the Moscow Alexander Military School. Over time, the service and the ostentatious, elegant side of being an officer turned into its wrong side: tediously monotonous classes in “literature” and practicing rifle techniques with soldiers dumbfounded by drill, drinking parties in a club and vulgar affairs with regimental harlots.

However, it was these years that made it possible for Kuprin to comprehensively study the provincial military life, as well as get acquainted with the impoverished life of the Belarusian outskirts, the Jewish town, with the mores of the “out of place” intelligentsia. The impressions of these years were, as it were, a reserve for many years to come (Kuprin learned the material for a number of stories and, first of all, the story "Duel" at the time of his officer service). Work on the story "Duel" in 1902-1905 was dictated by the desire to implement a long-conceived plan - "enough" for the tsarist army, this concentration of stupidity, ignorance and inhumanity.

All the events of the work take place against the backdrop of army life, never going beyond its scope. Perhaps this is done in order to emphasize the real need to at least think about the problems that are shown in the story. After all, the army is a stronghold of autocracy, and if there are shortcomings in it, then they must be strived to eliminate. Otherwise, all the importance and exemplary nature of the existing system is a bluff, an empty phrase, and there is no great power.

The main character Lieutenant Romashov will have to realize the whole horror of army reality. The choice of the author is not accidental, because Romashov is in many ways very close to Kuprin: both of them graduated from a military school and entered the army. From the very beginning of the story, the author abruptly immerses us in the atmosphere of army life, painting a picture of company exercises: working out the service at the post, some soldiers not understanding what is required of them (Khlebnikov, following the orders of the arrested person; Mukhamedzhinov, a Tatar who poorly understands Russian and , as a result, incorrectly fulfilling orders). It is not difficult to understand the reasons for this misunderstanding. Khlebnikov, a Russian soldier, simply does not have any education, and therefore for him everything uttered by Corporal Shapovalenko is nothing more than an empty phrase. In addition, the reason for such a misunderstanding is a sharp change in the situation: just as the author abruptly immerses us in this kind of situation, so many recruits had no idea about military affairs before, did not communicate with military people, everything is new to them: “ ... they still did not know how to separate jokes, examples from the real requirements of the service and fell into one or the other extreme. Mukha-medzhinov, on the other hand, does not understand anything because of his nationality, and this is also a big problem for the Russian army - they are trying to “bring everyone under the same brush”, without taking into account the characteristics of each people, which are, so to speak, innate and cannot be eliminated no training, especially shouting, physical punishment.

In general, the problem of assault appears very clearly in this story. This is the apotheosis social inequality. Of course, we must not forget that corporal punishment for soldiers was abolished only in 1905. But in this case, we are no longer talking about punishment, but about mockery: “Non-commissioned officers severely beat their subordinates for an insignificant mistake in literature, for a lost leg while marching, they beat them into blood, knocked out teeth, smashed eardrums with blows to the ear, knocked them to the ground with their fists." Will a person with a normal psyche behave like this? The moral world of everyone who enters the army changes radically and, as Romashov notes, is far from being better side. Even Captain Stelkovsky, commander of the fifth company, the best company in the regiment, an officer who always "possessed patient, cool-headed and confident perseverance," as it turned out, also beat soldiers (as an example, Romashov cites how Stelkovsky knocks out a soldier's teeth along with a horn, incorrect giving a signal to this very horn). In other words, it is not worth envying the fate of people like Stelkovsky.

Even less envy is the fate of ordinary soldiers. After all, they do not even have the elementary right to choose: “You cannot beat a person who cannot answer you, does not have the right to raise his hand to his face in order to protect himself from a blow. He doesn't even dare to bow his head. The soldiers must endure all this and cannot even complain, because they know perfectly well what will happen to them then.

In addition to the fact that the rank and file are systematically beaten, they are also deprived of their livelihood: the small salary they receive, they give almost everything to their commander. And this very money is spent by gentlemen officers on all sorts of gatherings in bars with booze, dirty games (again, for money), besides, in the company of depraved women.

Having officially left the feudal system 40 years ago and put down for it great amount human lives, Russia at the beginning of the 20th century had a model of such a society in the army, where officers were exploiters-landlords, and ordinary soldiers were serf slaves. The military system is destroying itself from within. It does not sufficiently fulfill the function that is assigned to it.

Those who try to go against this system will face a very difficult fate. It is useless to fight such a "machine" alone, it "absorbs everyone and everything." Even attempts to comprehend what is happening plunge people into shock: Nazansky, who is constantly ill and went on a drinking binge (obviously, thereby trying to hide from reality), finally, the hero of the story Romashov himself. For him, every day the blatant facts of social injustice, all the ugliness of the system, become more and more noticeable. With his characteristic self-criticism, he also finds in himself the reasons for this state of affairs: he became part of the “machine”, mixed with this common gray mass of people who do not understand anything and lost people. Romashov tries to isolate himself from them: “He began to retire from the society of officers, dined for the most part at home, didn't go to the dances in the congregation at all, and stopped drinking." He "has definitely matured, has become older and more serious in recent days." Such “growing up” was not easy for him: he went through public conflict, the struggle with himself, he was even close to the thought of suicide (he clearly imagined the picture, which depicts his dead body and a crowd of people gathered around).

Analyzing the position of the Khlebnikovs in the Russian army, the way of life of officers and looking for ways out of this situation, Romashov comes to the conclusion that an army without war is absurd, and, therefore, in order for this monstrous phenomenon of “army” to not exist, and not to it must be that people understand the uselessness of war: “... Let's suppose tomorrow, let's say, this very second this thought came to everyone's mind: Russians, Germans, British, Japanese ... And now there is no more war, no officers and soldiers, everyone went home. I am also close to a similar thought: to solve such global problems in the army, in order to solve global problems in general, it is necessary that the majority of people understand the need for change, since small groups of people, and even more so a few, are unable to change the course of history.

Other writings on this work

A.I. Kuprin wrote the story The duel being already popular author. The former military man himself, the writer knew the officers firsthand. The story took about three years to complete. The reason for such a long period lies, apparently, in the immensity of the chosen topic.

The name of the duel has double value. The duel of the young officer Romashov with the unbearable oppressive reality of army life logically ends with a duel - a duel in which one opponent dies, and the second has long since died without noticing it.

The heroes of the story live in some terrible incomprehensible world. A world where people do not belong to themselves, where common sense is sacrificed to the provisions of military regulations, where relations between people are replaced by subordination. Where a minor mistake can lead to irreparable consequences. Where people, like zombies, walk along the same route, unable to wake up from the diabolical hypnosis. All Romashov's colleagues, officers, are only shadows of former people, from whom the army has eradicated all human feelings.

And in this ghostly virtual world, not knowing the rules of the game, Romashov is trying to resist the oppressive reality. And at first, he even seems to succeed. He starts human relations with colleagues, he is kind to his batman Gainan. He even has a real romance with his friend's wife Shurochka. However, gradually disturbing notes appear in the narrative, which little by little become more and more obvious. And finally, the reader begins to understand with horror that there is no way out of this hell and cannot be. That the millstones, grinding and grinding all living things, are inevitably approaching, and that this cup will not pass the hero.

The atmosphere is gradually heating up, the clouds are gathering over the hero. Romashov now and then finds himself in situations from which he comes out more and more lowered and depressed. The dressing given to him by the commander, a conversation with former lover his beloved - all these events gradually crush, oppress the hero, depriving him of the will to win. And the apotheosis is a wild quarrel with Shurochka's husband, which leads to a challenge to a duel.

The writer did not even include the duel scene in the story, there is no need for this. The result of the human life of the hero of the story is summed up in the language of a dry army report.

Preparation for the Unified State Examination and GIA: Composition Kuprin duel analysis "/ January 2016

Related essays:

Appearing during the Russo-Japanese War and in the context of the growth of the first Russian revolution, the work caused a huge public outcry, as it undermined one of the main foundations of the autocratic state - the inviolability of the military caste.
The problematics of "Duel" goes beyond the traditional military story. Kuprin also touches upon the question of the causes of social inequality of people, of possible ways of liberating a person from spiritual oppression, raises the problem of the relationship between the individual and society, the intelligentsia and the people.
The plot outline of the work is built on the ups and downs of the fate of an honest Russian officer, whom the conditions of army barracks life make one think about the wrong relationships between people. The feeling of spiritual decline haunts not only Romashov, but also Shurochka.
The juxtaposition of two heroes, who have two types of world outlook, is generally characteristic of Kuprin. Both heroes seek to find a way out of the impasse. At the same time, Romashov comes to the idea of ​​​​protesting against bourgeois prosperity and stagnation, and Shurochka adapts to it, despite outward ostentatious rejection. The author's attitude towards her is ambivalent, Romashov's "reckless nobility and noble lack of will" are closer to him. Kuprin even noted that he considers Romashov his double, and the story itself is largely autobiographical.
Romashov is a “natural person”, he instinctively resists injustice, but his protest is weak, his dreams and plans are easily destroyed, as they are immature and thoughtless, often naive. Romashov is close to Chekhov's heroes. But the emerging need for immediate action strengthens his will to active resistance. After meeting with the soldier Khlebnikov, "humiliated and insulted", a turning point occurs in Romashov's mind, he is shocked by the readiness of a person to commit suicide, in which he sees the only way out of a martyr's life. The sincerity of Khlebnikov's impulse especially clearly indicates to Romashov the stupidity and immaturity of his youthful fantasies, which aim only to prove something to others. Romashov is shocked by the strength of Khlebnikov's suffering, and it is precisely the desire to sympathize that makes the second lieutenant think about fate for the first time common people. However, Romashov's attitude towards Khlebnikov is contradictory: talk about humanity and justice bears the imprint of abstract humanism, Romashov's call for compassion is largely naive.
In The Duel A. I. Kuprin continues the traditions of L. N. Tolstoy’s psychological analysis: in addition to the protesting voice of the hero himself, who saw the injustice of a cruel and stupid life, the author’s accusatory voice (Nazansky’s monologues) is heard in the work. Kuprin uses Tolstoy's favorite trick - the substitution of the hero-reasoner for the protagonist. In "Duel" Nazansky is the bearer of social ethics. The image of Nazansky is ambiguous: his radical mood (critical monologues, romantic foreboding of a “radiant life”, foresight of future social upheavals, hatred of the way of life of the military caste, ability to appreciate high, pure love, to feel the beauty of life) conflicts with his own way of life. The only salvation from moral death is for the individualist Nazansky and for Romashov an escape from all social ties and obligations.

Moral and social problems in A. Kuprin's story "Duel"

Kuprin's biography was full of various events that gave the writer rich food for his literary works. The story "Duel" is rooted in that period of Kuprin's life, when he acquired the experience of a military man. The desire to serve in the army was passionate and romantic in his youth. Kuprin graduated from the cadet corps and the Moscow Alexander Military School. Over time, the service and the ostentatious, elegant side of being an officer turned into its wrong side: tediously monotonous classes in “literature” and practicing rifle techniques with soldiers dumbfounded by drill, booze in the club and vulgar intrigues with regimental whores. However, it was these years that made it possible for Kuprin to comprehensively study the provincial military life, as well as get acquainted with the impoverished life of the Belarusian outskirts, a Jewish town, with the mores of the “out of place” intelligentsia. The impressions of these years were, as it were, a reserve for many years to come (Kuprin learned the material for a number of stories and, first of all, the story "Duel" precisely at the time of his officer service). Work on the story "Duel" in 1902-1905 was dictated by the desire to implement a long-conceived plan - "enough" for the tsarist army, this concentration of stupidity, ignorance and inhumanity.
All the events of the work take place against the backdrop of army life, never going beyond its scope. Perhaps this is done in order to emphasize the real need to at least think about the problems that are shown in the story. After all, the army is a stronghold of autocracy, and if there are shortcomings in it, then they must be strived to eliminate. Otherwise, all the importance and exemplary nature of the existing system is a bluff, an empty phrase, and there is no great power.
The main character Lieutenant Romashov will have to realize the whole horror of army reality. The choice of the author is not accidental, because Romashov is in many ways very close to Kuprin: both of them graduated from a military school and entered the army. From the very beginning of the story, the author abruptly immerses us in the atmosphere of army life, painting a picture of company exercises: working out the service at the post, some soldiers not understanding what is required of them (Khlebnikov, following the orders of the arrested person; Mukhamedzhinov, a Tatar who poorly understands Russian and , as a result, incorrectly fulfilling orders). It is not difficult to understand the reasons for this misunderstanding. Khlebnikov, a Russian soldier, simply does not have any kind of education, and therefore for him everything uttered by Corporal Shapovalenko is nothing more than an empty phrase. In addition, the reason for such a misunderstanding is a sharp change in the situation: just as the author abruptly immerses us in this kind of situation, so many recruits had no idea about military affairs before, did not communicate with military people, everything is new to them: “ ... they still did not know how to separate jokes, examples from the real requirements of the service and fell into one or the other extreme. Mukha-medzhinov, on the other hand, does not understand anything because of his nationality, and this is also a big problem for the Russian army - they are trying to “bring everyone under the same brush”, without taking into account the characteristics of each people, which are, so to speak, innate and cannot be eliminated no training, especially shouting, physical punishment.
In general, the problem of assault appears very clearly in this story. This is the apotheosis of social inequality. Of course, we must not forget that corporal punishment for soldiers was abolished only in 1905. But in this case, we are no longer talking about punishment, but about mockery: “Non-commissioned officers brutally beat their subordinates for an insignificant mistake in literature, for losing a leg while marching, they beat them into blood, knocked out teeth, smashed eardrums with blows to the ear, knocked them to the ground with their fists." Will a person with a normal psyche behave like this? The moral world of everyone who enters the army changes radically and, as Romashov notes, not for the better. Even Captain Stelkovsky, commander of the fifth company, the best company in the regiment, an officer who always “possessed patient, cool-headed and confident perseverance,” as it turned out, also beat soldiers (as an example, Romashov cites how Stelkovsky knocks out a soldier’s teeth along with a horn, incorrect giving a signal to this very horn). In other words, it is not worth envying the fate of people like Stelkovsky.
Even less envy is the fate of ordinary soldiers. After all, they do not even have the elementary right to choose: “You cannot beat a person who cannot answer you, does not have the right to raise his hand to his face in order to protect himself from a blow. He doesn’t even dare to turn his head away.” The soldiers must endure all this and cannot even complain, because they know perfectly well what will happen to them then.
In addition to the fact that the rank and file are systematically beaten, they are also deprived of their livelihood: the small salary they receive, they give almost everything to their commander. And this very money is spent by gentlemen officers on all sorts of gatherings in bars with booze, dirty games (again, for money), besides, in the company of depraved women.
Having officially left the feudal system 40 years ago and laid down a huge number of human lives for this, Russia at the beginning of the 20th century had a model of such a society in the army, where the officers are the exploiters-landlords, and the ordinary soldiers are the slave-serfs. The military system is destroying itself from within. It does not sufficiently fulfill the function that is assigned to it.
Those who try to go against this system will face a very difficult fate. It is useless to fight such a “machine” alone, it “absorbs everyone and everything”. Even attempts to comprehend what is happening plunge people into shock: Nazansky, who is constantly ill and went on a drinking binge (obviously, thereby trying to hide from reality), finally, the hero of the story Romashov himself. For him, every day the blatant facts of social injustice, all the ugliness of the system, become more and more noticeable. With his characteristic self-criticism, he also finds in himself the reasons for this state of affairs: he became part of the “machine”, mixed up with this common gray mass of people who do not understand anything and are lost. Romashov tries to isolate himself from them: “He began to retire from the company of officers, dined mostly at home, did not go to dance evenings at all in the meeting and stopped drinking.” He "has definitely matured, grown older and more serious in recent days." Such “growing up” was not easy for him: he went through a social conflict, a struggle with himself, he even had the thought of suicide close to him (he clearly imagined a picture depicting his dead body and a crowd of people gathered around).
Analyzing the position of the Khlebnikovs in the Russian army, the way of life of officers and looking for ways out of this situation, Romashov comes to the conclusion that an army without war is absurd, and, therefore, in order for this monstrous phenomenon of “army” to not exist, and it must be necessary for people to understand the uselessness of war: “... Let's suppose tomorrow, let's say, this very second this thought came to everyone's mind: Russians, Germans, British, Japanese ... And now there is no more war, no officers and soldiers, everyone went home. I am also close to a similar thought: to solve such global problems in the army, to solve global problems in general, it is necessary that the majority of people understand the need for change, since small groups of people, and even more so a few, are unable to change the course of history.

The story of A.I. Kuprin "Duel" as a protest against depersonalization and spiritual emptiness

In Kuprin's "Duel" we are talking about a very conservative and stagnant social environment - the environment of regular Russian officers late XIX- the beginning of the twentieth century. The writer depicted the life of the officers of the regiment in a provincial outback. Here he used his own experience of military service as an army lieutenant in an infantry regiment in the Podolsk province. After the publication of “Duel”, answering the question of a correspondent of one of the newspapers, from where he knows army life so well, Kuprin readily explained: “How can I not know ... I myself went through this “school”, I was an army officer, battalion adjutant ... If it were not for the censorship conditions, I would not have had enough.” But even adjusted for censorship, the picture of morals in the fictional garrison of the M-sky regiment in the city turned out to be extremely gloomy. The main occupations of officers are drunkenness, drill, intrigue, flirting with the wives of colleagues. Everything that does not apply to military service, officers are not interested. The company commander, Captain Sliva, for example, in his entire life “has not read a single book and a single newspaper, except for the official part of the organ of the military ministry, the Russian Invalid newspaper.” The boredom of provincial life not only stupefies, but also embitters. The anger of the gentlemen is vented by the officers at the lower ranks, for any reason for no reason, rewarding them with poking, and on civilians ("shpaks"), over whom they scoff in every possible way. For one of the characters in the story, lieutenant Vetkin, even the great poet Pushkin is just "some kind of shpak." The officers of the regiment overwhelmingly got used to their life, "monotonous, like a fence, and gray, like a soldier's cloth." Their spiritual and cultural demands have long since atrophied.
Lieutenant Romashov, the protagonist of the story, has been serving for only his second year. And he is still trying to rise above the routine of army everyday life, to maintain at least some interests that go beyond military career. “Oh, what are we doing! - exclaims Romashov, - today we will get drunk drunk, tomorrow in the company - one, two, left, right, - in the evening we will drink again, and the day after tomorrow again in the company. Is it really all of life? Kuprin endowed Romashov with autobiographical features. The writer himself withstood the army strap for only four years, leaving the service after failing to enter the Academy General Staff. And he doomed his hero to an early death during an absurd duel. Honest and conscientious people like Romashov had little chance of remaining among army officers.
"Duel" was published in 1905, in the days of heavy defeats suffered by the Russian army in the war with Japan. Many contemporaries saw in Kuprin's story a true depiction of those vices of army life that led to the tragedy of Tsushima and Port Arthur. The official and conservative press accused the writer of slandering the army. However, the later failures of the Russian troops in the First World War - the revolutionary catastrophe of 1917. confirmed that Kuprin did not exaggerate at all. A deep gap between the officers and the mass of soldiers, the lack of education and spiritual callousness of the officers predetermined the subsequent collapse of the Russian army, which could not stand the ordeals of the world war.
However, not only the denunciation of army disorders worried the writer when he created "Duel". Kuprin also posed a more global problem of the origins of spiritual unfreedom. He forces Romashov to stand up for a soldier, the Tatar Sharafutdinov, for which the second lieutenant is even put under arrest. Romashov is gradually beginning to worry about the fate of the mass of soldiers, thousands of "downtrodden Khlebnikovs." However, he does not have time to understand why in the army even an educated person can easily turn into a stupid executor of any, even the most absurd, orders from his superiors. Kuprin himself denounced militarism from the position of a "natural person" who refuses to kill his own kind. The fact that Plum, and Romashov, and Vetkin, and Nikolaev, and hundreds and thousands of their subordinates, in the final analysis, by their profession are intended specifically for killing people, according to the writer, leaves an indelible imprint on their inner world, ^ makes defective in spiritually. It is no coincidence that one of the few positive heroes of the “Duel” Romashov dies in a duel from the bullet of a careerist Nikolaev, largely because he is mentally incapable of shooting a person. The intrigue of Nikolaev’s wife Shurochka, for the sake of her husband’s admission to the academy, in order to get the opportunity to enjoy the benefits of metropolitan life, ready to destroy even a second lieutenant who sympathizes with her, could only be successful because of Romashov’s inherent properties of a “natural person”. Kuprin considered the ability to breathe, feel, and think to be the main values ​​of the human personality. Another character of the “Duel” that is sympathetic to the writer is Nazansky, who among the majority of officers enjoys a reputation as an inveterate person and is about to leave the service due to illness, convinces
Romashova: “... Who is dearer and closer to you? Nobody! You are the king of the world... You are the god of all life. Everything you see, hear, feel belongs to you. Do what you want. Take whatever you like..." Nazansky, like Kuprin himself, dreamed of "a huge, new, radiant life." Of course, the army team, army discipline severely limit the individual in the manifestations of his individuality. However, in The Duel, Kuprin fell into anarchism to some extent. He did not then think about the question of how much freedom to do whatever you want and take whatever you like, for one, will practically limit the same freedom for other members of society. But in this case, the rights will inevitably come into conflict with each other. different people which will inevitably lead to a conflict of interests and the creation of various kinds of public institutions for their settlement, again limiting the freedom of individuals. Nevertheless, this obviously erroneous position of Kuprin's philosophy does not at all diminish the significance of the criticism contained in the "Duel" of the military order, which suppresses human nature and deforms the personalities of those who long years compelled to serve in the military.

The author and his characters in the story of A. I. Kuprin "Duel"

Critical image of the army society in the story of A. I. Kuprin "Duel"

The action of the story refers to the mid-90s of the XIX century. Contemporaries saw in it a condemnation of the army and the exposure of the officers. And this opinion will be confirmed in a few years by history itself, when the Russian army suffers a crushing defeat in the battles near Mukden, Lyaoliang, and Port Arthur. Why did this happen? It seems to me that “Duel” clearly and clearly answers the question posed. Can an army be combat-ready where an anti-human, corrupting and stupefying atmosphere reigns, where officers are at a loss when it is necessary to show resourcefulness, ingenuity and initiative, where soldiers are reduced to stupefaction by senseless drills, beatings and bullying?
“With the exception of a few ambitious and careerists, all officers served as a forced, unpleasant, repulsive corvée, yearning for it and not loving it. Junior officers, quite schoolboyish, were late for classes and slowly ran away from them if they knew that they would not get it for it ... At the same time, everyone was drinking heavily, both in the meeting and visiting each other ... the company commanders went about their service with the same disgust as the subaltern officers ... ”- we read. Indeed, the regimental life that Kuprin draws is absurd, gone and bleak. There are only two ways to escape from it: go to the reserve (and find yourself without a specialty and livelihood) or try to enter the academy and, after graduating from it, climb to a higher step on the military ladder, “make a career”. However, few are capable of this. The fate of the bulk of the officers is to pull an endless and tedious webbing with the prospect of retiring with a small pension.
The daily life of officers consisted of directing drill exercises, monitoring the study of “literature” (ie, military regulations) by soldiers, and attending an officer meeting. Drinking alone and in the company, cards, romance with other people's wives, traditional picnics and "beams", trips to the local brothel- that's all the entertainment available to officers. "Duel" reveals the dehumanization, spiritual devastation to which people are subjected in the conditions of army life, the refinement and vulgarization of these people. But sometimes they see clearly for a while, and these moments are terrible and tragic: ““ Occasionally, from time to time, the days of some kind of general, wholesale, ugly revelry came in the regiment. Perhaps this happened in those strange moments when people, accidentally connected with each other, but all together condemned to boring inactivity and senseless cruelty, suddenly saw in each other's eyes, far away, in a confused and oppressed consciousness, some mysterious spark of horror, longing and madness, and then calm , well-fed like that of breeding bulls, life seemed to be thrown out of its channel. " Some kind of collective madness began, people seemed to lose their human appearance. "On the way to the meeting, the officers behaved a lot. They stopped a passing Jew, called him and, tearing off his hat, "They drove the cab forward; then they threw this hat somewhere over the fence, on a tree. Bobetinsky beat the cabman. The rest sang loudly and shouted stupidly."
Army life, cruel and senseless, gives rise to peculiar “monsters”. These are degraded and stupid people, stagnant in prejudice - campaigners, vulgar philistines and moral freaks. One of them is Captain Plum. This is a stupid campaigner, a narrow-minded and rude person. “Everything that went beyond the order, charter and company, and that he contemptuously called nonsense and mandrake, certainly did not exist for him. Dragging a harsh service strap all his life, he did not read a single book or a single newspaper ... ”Although Plum is attentive to soldier needs, this quality is nullified by his cruelty:“ This sluggish, downcast-looking man was terribly severe with the soldiers and not only allowed the non-commissioned officers to fight, but he himself beat brutally, to the point of blood, to the point that the offender fell from his feet under his blows. Even more terrible is Captain Osadchy, who inspires “inhuman awe” to his subordinates. Even in his appearance there is something bestial, predatory. He is so cruel to the soldiers that every year someone in his company committed suicide.
What is the reason for such spiritual devastation, moral deformity? Kuprin answers this question through the mouth of Nazansky, one of the few positive characters in the story: “... so are all of them, even the best, most gentle of them, wonderful fathers and attentive husbands - they all become base, cowardly, evil in the service , stupid little animals. You will ask why? Yes, precisely because none of them believe in the service and reasonable purpose does not see this service”; “...for them, service is a complete disgust, a burden, a hated yoke.”
Escaping from the deadly boredom of army life, the officers are trying to come up with some kind of side occupation for themselves. For most, it is, of course, drinking and cards. Some are engaged in collecting and needlework. Lieutenant Colonel Rafalsky takes his soul away in his home menagerie, Captain Stelkovsky turned the corruption of young peasant women into a hobby.
What makes people rush into this pool, to devote themselves to military service? Kuprin believes that the ideas about the military that have developed in society are partly to blame for this. So, the main character of the story, lieutenant Romashov, trying to comprehend life phenomena, comes to the conclusion that “the world was divided into two unequal parts: one - smaller - officers, which is surrounded by honor, strength, power, the magical dignity of the uniform and, together with the uniform, for some reason and patented courage, and physical strength, and arrogant pride; the other - huge and impersonal - civilians, otherwise shpaks, shtafirs and hazel grouses; they were despised...” And the writer pronounces a sentence on military service, which, with its illusory prowess, was created by “cruel, shameful, all-human misunderstanding”.

The main themes of creativity ("Moloch", "Olesya", "Duel")

AI Kuprin, in his best works, reflected the existence of various classes of Russian society in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Continuing the humanistic traditions of Russian literature, especially L. N. Tolstoy and A. P. Chekhov, Kuprin was sensitive to modernity, to its topical issues. Kuprin's literary activity began at the time of his stay in the cadet corps. He writes poetry, where notes of despondency and melancholy sound, then heroic motives are heard (“Dreams”). In 1889, a graduate of the cadet school, Kuprin, published in the journal "Russian satirical sheet" short story, which is called "First Debut". For publishing the story without the permission of his superiors, Kuprin was arrested in the guardhouse.
After retiring and settling in Kyiv, the writer collaborates in Kyiv newspapers. An interesting literary phenomenon was a series of essays "Kyiv types". The images he created reflected the essential features of the motley urban philistine and people of the “bottom”, characteristic of all of Russia. There are images of a white-lining student, a landlady, a pious pilgrim, a fireman, a failed singer, a modernist artist, and slum dwellers.
Already in the 90s, based on the material of army life in the stories “Inquiry”, “Overnight”, the writer puts sharp moral issues. In the story “Inquiry”, the outrageous fact of punishment with rods of the Tatar soldier Mukhamet Baiguzin, who could not even understand why he was being punished, makes Lieutenant Kozlovsky feel in a new way the deadly, soulless atmosphere of the royal barracks and his role in the system of oppression. The conscience of the officer awakens, a feeling of spiritual connection with the driven soldier is born, dissatisfaction with his position and, as a result, an explosion of spontaneous discontent. In these stories, one can feel the influence of L. Tolstoy in matters of moral responsibility intelligentsia for the suffering and tragic fate of the people.
In the mid-1990s, a new theme, prompted by time, imperiously enters Kuprin's work. In the spring, he travels as a newspaper correspondent to the Donetsk Basin, where he gets acquainted with the working and living conditions of the workers. In 1896 he wrote a long story "Moloch". The story gives a picture of the life of a large capitalist factory, shows the miserable life of workers' settlements, spontaneous protests of workers. The writer showed all this through the perception of an intellectual. Engineer Bobrov painfully and sharply reacts to someone else's pain, to a manifestation of injustice. The hero compares capitalist progress, which creates factories and factories, with the monstrous idol Moloch, demanding human sacrifices. The concrete embodiment of Moloch in the story is the businessman Kvashnin, who does not disdain any means in order to make millions. At the same time, he is not averse to acting as politician and leader (“the future belongs to us”, “we are the salt of the earth”). Bobrov watches with disgust the scene of groveling before Kvashnin. Bobrov's fiancée Nina Zinenko becomes the subject of a deal with this businessman. The hero of the story is characterized by duality and hesitation. At the moment of a spontaneous outbreak of protest, the hero seeks to blow up the factory boilers and thereby avenge his own and others' suffering. But then the determination fades away, and he refuses to take revenge on the hated Moloch. The story ends with a story about a riot of workers, the burning of a factory, the flight of Kvashnin and the call of punishers to deal with the rebels.
In 1897, Kuprin served as the manager of the estate in the Rivne district. Here he closely approaches the peasants, which is reflected in his stories "Forest Wilderness", "Horse Thieves", "Silver Wolf". He writes a wonderful story "Olesya". Before us is the poetic image of the girl Olesya, who grew up in the hut of an old “sorceress”, outside the usual norms of a peasant family. Olesya's love for the intellectual Ivan Timofeevich, who accidentally drove into a remote forest village, is a free, simple and strong feeling, without looking back and obligations, among tall pines, painted with a crimson reflection of the dying dawn. The girl's story gets a tragic end, here they invade free life Olesya and the selfish calculations of village officials, and the superstitions of dark peasants. Beaten and ridiculed, Olesya is forced to flee from the forest nest.
Looking for strong man Kuprin sometimes poeticizes people of the social “bottom”. The horse thief Buzyga (“Horse thieves”) is bred as a powerful nature, the author gives him traits of generosity - Buzyga takes care of his boy Vasil. Stories about animals are amazing (“Emerald”, “ white poodle”, “Barbos and Kulka”, “Yu-yu” and others.) Often strong and beautiful animals become victims of money-grubbing, base human passions.
In 1899, Kuprin met Gorky in the Gorky magazine Knowledge, and in 1905 Kuprin's story The Duel was published. timeliness and public value work was that he truthfully and vividly showed the internal decomposition of the Russian army. The hero of the story "Duel" - a young lieutenant Romashov, unlike Bobrov ("Moloch"), is shown in the process of spiritual growth, gradual insight, liberation from power traditional concepts and representations of his circle. At the beginning of the story, despite his kindness, the hero naively divides everyone into “people of black and white bones”, thinking that he belongs to a special, higher caste. As false illusions dissipate, Romashov begins to reflect on the viciousness of the army order, on the injustice of all life. He has a feeling of loneliness, a passionate denial of the inhumanly dirty, wild life. The cruel Osadchy, the violent Bek-Agamalov, the dull Leshchenko, the dapper Bobeinsky, the army serviceman and the drunkard Plum - all these officers are shown as alien to the truth-seeker Romashov. In the conditions of arbitrariness and lack of rights, they lose not only the true idea of ​​honor, but also their human appearance. This is especially evident in their attitude towards the soldiers.
Passes in the story whole line episodes of soldier drill, lessons in “literature”, preparation for the review, when officers beat soldiers especially cruelly, tear eardrums, knock them to the ground with their fists, make people exhausted from the heat, twitched, “have fun”. In the story, the mass of soldiers is truthfully depicted, individual characters are shown, people of various nationalities with their own traditions. Among the soldiers are Russian Khlebnikov, Ukrainians Shevchuk, Boriychuk, Lithuanian Soltys, Cheremis Gainan, Tatars Mukhamettinov, Karafutdinov and many others. All of them - awkward peasants, workers, artisans - can hardly endure the separation from their native places and habitual work, the author especially singles out the images of the batman Gainan and the soldier Khlebnikov.
Khlebnikov, recently torn off the ground, organically does not perceive the army's "sciences", and therefore he has to bear the brunt of the position of a frightened soldier, defenseless against the rudeness of his superiors. The fate of the soldiers worries Romashov. He is not alone in this inner protest. A kind of philosopher and theorist, lieutenant colonel Kazansky sharply criticizes the order in the army, hates vulgarity and ignorance, dreams of freeing the human “I” from the fetters of a rotten society, he is against despotism and violence. Romashov knows that the soldiers are crushed by their own ignorance, and general slavery, and arbitrariness, and violence on the part of officers. The scene of Romashov's meeting with the tortured Khlebnikov, who was trying to throw himself under a train, and straight Talk Paustovsky rightly refers to “one of best scenes in Russian literature. The officer recognizes a friend in the soldier, forgetting about the caste barriers between them. Having sharply raised the question of the fate of Khlebnikov, Romashov dies, without finding an answer which way to go to liberation. His deadly duel with officer Nikolaev is, as it were, a consequence of the growing conflict between the hero and the military officer caste. The reason for the duel is connected with the hero's love for Alexandra Petrovna Nikolaeva - Shurochka. In order to ensure her husband's career, Shurochka suppresses the best human feelings in herself and asks Romashov not to shy away from the duel, because this will harm her husband, who wants to enter the academy. "Duel" became extremely popular in Russia and was soon translated into European languages.
Kuprin's excellent short story "Tambrinus" breathes with the atmosphere of revolutionary days. The theme of all-conquering art is intertwined here with the idea of ​​democracy, bold protest. little man”against the black forces of arbitrariness and reaction. Meek and cheerful Sasha to his outstanding talent violinist and sincerity attracts a diverse crowd of port loaders, fishermen, smugglers to the Odessa tavern. They enthusiastically greet melodies that reflect the scene of social moods and events - from the Russian-Japanese war to the revolution, when Sashkin's violin sounds with the cheerful rhythms of the Marseillaise. In the days of the onset of terror, Sashka challenges the disguised detectives and the Black Hundred "scoundrels in a hat", refusing to play the monarchical anthem at their request, openly denouncing them for murders and pogroms. Crippled by the tsarist secret police, he returns to his port friends to play for them on the outskirts of the deafeningly cheerful Chaban. Free creativity, power folk spirit, according to Kuprin, are invincible.
In emigration, in the works of A. I. Kuprin, sentimental embellishment of the past of Russia, the very past to which he had previously pronounced a sentence, begins to be found. Such, for example, is the autobiographical novel Juncker. Kuprin could no longer live without a homeland. He returns to Russia in 1937, but writes no more and soon dies.

Debunking the romance of military service (based on the story "Duel")

Alexander Ivanovich Kuprin is an honest and selfless artist, a patriot of Russia. In his critical works, the writer tried to show the "ulcers" of modern society for their fastest treatment. The story "Duel", published in 1905, at the height of the Russo-Japanese War, explained the reasons for the defeat of Russia in this war.
The writer, with pain and bitterness, shows the senseless drill and cruelty that reign in the tsarist army, and the army, as a result, which is incapable of combat, the decomposed officers, and the downtrodden soldiers.
Through the eyes of the hero of the story, Yuri Alekseevich Romashov, a picture of classes on the parade ground is given, when “... they overdo it, they pull a soldier, they torture him, zaturk, and at the review he will stand like a stump ...”
But the officers do not see any sense in the daily exhausting exercises on the parade ground, accompanied by the shouting and poking of the officers. Such activities give rise to only one desire - to finish them as soon as possible and forget in a drunken stupor.
Romashov's dreams of education, the academy are just fantasies that are not destined to turn into reality. “Nonsense! All life before me! Romashov thought, and, carried away by his thoughts, he walked more cheerfully and breathed more deeply. “Well, to spite them all, tomorrow morning I’ll sit down for books, get ready and enter the academy ... Labor! Oh, with hard work you can do whatever you want. Just take yourself in hand." What is simply feasible in dreams becomes unattainable in reality. Yuri Alekseevich is a fruitless dreamer, an idealist who will not lift a hand to achieve those wonderful plans that he endlessly builds in his imagination.
Love for Shurochka Nikolaeva - Alexandra Petrovna - is the only bright feeling of his gray and hopeless life in the garrison. Romashov understands that he is acting vilely, caring for the wife of a colleague, but this is stronger than him. Yuri Alekseevich, as usual, builds castles in the air and on the theme of “love”. But the more magnificent and unbridled his fantasy, the more insignificant the hero. Both he and the readers understand that the hero goes into the world of illusions because of helplessness and fear of life. He is not able to change his life, but only “goes with the flow”, tearing his soul with fruitless dreams. The hero is not devoid of nobility, compassion for the weak and humiliated soldiers. But this is the compassion of a "friend in misfortune" for the same as himself.
The drunken Kazansky explains to Romashov what he always knew and felt implicitly: “Why am I serving? ... Because I was told from childhood and now everyone around me says that the most important thing in life is to serve and be well-fed and well-dressed. And so I do things to which I have absolutely no soul, I fulfill orders for the sake of the animal fear of life, which sometimes seem cruel to me, and sometimes meaningless ... ”Nazansky calls the time of binge “the time of freedom.”
Loving Shurochka, Romashov understands that this love comes from hopelessness. This woman is capable of any meanness. For the sake of her ambitious goals, she stepped over Kazansky, over Romashov ... Who is next?
So gradually the story, written, it would seem, on an army theme, outgrows the narrow framework, affecting universal problems.
The democratic public and the critics, welcoming the “Duel”, sought first of all to reveal its revolutionary meaning. “The military estate is only a part of the huge bureaucratic estate that has flooded the Russian land...” When reading the story, “you begin to intensely feel the oppression of life around you and look for a way out of it,” wrote the Bulletin and Library of Self-Education for 1905. But the phenomenon of the story lies in the fact that it has not lost its significance even today, no matter how sad it may be to admit.

Russia in the works of A. I. Kuprin (based on the story "Duel")

The time when humanity enters new Age, especially sharply raises the question of the fate of Russia. At the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. this issue was hotly debated in all sectors of society. This could not but be reflected in the literature of that time, and therefore many writers paid attention to this topic. Kuprin's story "Duel" poses such burning questions to the reader.
The army is always associated with the concept of the Motherland, so Kuprin in the story depicted the life of an ordinary regiment through the eyes of the main character, Lieutenant Romashov. Duel came out in May 1905, just as the war with Japan was nearing its ignominious end. Thousands of soldiers died because of the mediocrity and stupidity of the generals, when the Pacific Fleet was completely defeated near Tsushima. And the work, in which Kuprin exposed the whole essence of army life, all its vices, caused a massive wave of anger.
The story leaves a deep impression on the reader. Almost all the officers in "Duel" are nonentities, dullards, drunkards, cowardly careerists and ignoramuses. The author shows the disgusting drinking bouts of officers, their whole life, mired in vulgarity. The army school of humiliation is especially vividly depicted, where, in the end, the officers vented all their failures and anger on the soldiers. The whole method of training in the regiment was based on punishment. This method was most clearly manifested at the review of the regiment. Describing this scene, Kuprin questions the combat effectiveness of the Russian army. In contrast, Kuprin brings in the fifth company of Captain Stelkovsky, showing how this vicious circle can be broken.
The image of Nazansky stands apart in the story - a drunken officer with an outstanding intellect and spiritual qualities. Nazansky opens our eyes to everything that happens. The army destroys all the good in a person, making him a complete nonentity. Nazansky says about this: “Everything that is talented, capable, becomes an inveterate drunkard.”
In "Duel" Kuprin expressed his opinion about why Russia lost the war, but the author expresses hope for the possibility of eradicating these torks. This is evidenced by the scene of wholesale drunkenness, in which there is a moment of universal insight - normal human feelings wake up in the officers, although, unfortunately, not for long. It's interesting that the story is still relevant.

The strength and weakness of the nature of Lieutenant Romashov (based on the story of A. I. Kuprin "Duel")

Lieutenant Romashov is the main protagonist of the story "Duel". In the work of A. I. Kuprin “Duel”
245 is the most significant work of the beginning of the century. In the story, the writer synthesized his observations on army life. He had repeatedly addressed this topic before, but in smaller works. Since Kuprin himself served in the regiment, the atmosphere recreated in the book reflects reality.
Kuprin said about his story: "The main character is me." Indeed, the biographies of the author and the hero have a lot in common. It can be assumed that Kuprin put some of his thoughts into the mouth of Romashov. However, the hero is an independent person.
The character of Romashov is shown in constant development, in dynamics. This distinguishes him from all the other heroes who “entered” the story with already fully developed characters, views, and concepts.
The story about the fate of the protagonist begins after he served in the regiment for a year and a half, since cardinal, significant changes began to occur with Romashov not from the very beginning of the service. When he first arrived at the garrison, he was overwhelmed by dreams of glory. Then for him officer and human honor were synonymous. The newly minted officer in his fantasies saw how he pacifies the rebellion, inspires soldiers to fight by his example, receives awards, but all this is just a figment of the imagination. In fact, he participates in daily drinking parties, plays cards, enters into a long and useless relationship with an insignificant woman. All this is done out of boredom, since in the garrison this is the only entertainment, and the service is monotonous and causes nothing but boredom.
Daydreaming and lack of will are features of Romashov's nature that immediately catch the eye. Take, for example, his habit of mentally talking about himself in the third person in some clichéd phrases, as if he were the hero of a novel. Then the author introduces us closer to the hero, and the reader learns that Romashov is characterized by warmth, gentleness, and compassion. However, all these wonderful qualities cannot always manifest themselves all because of the same weak will.
In Romashov's soul, there is a constant struggle between a man and an officer. It is changing before our eyes. Gradually, he expels caste prejudices from himself. He sees that all the officers are stupid, embittered, but at the same time they boast of the "honor of the uniform." They allow themselves to beat soldiers, and this happens every day. As a result, the rank and file turn into faceless, submissive slaves. Whether they are smart or stupid, whether they are workers or peasants, the army makes them indistinguishable from each other.
Romashov never had to raise his hand against the soldiers, taking advantage of his position and superiority. As a deeply impressionable nature, he cannot remain indifferent to what is happening around him. He learns to see a friend, a brother in a soldier. It is he who saves Private Khlebnikov from suicide.
A considerable influence on Romashov is exerted by his colleague Nazansky, a drunken officer-philosopher. Kuprin put into his mouth own ideas: about the freedom of the spirit, about a peaceful existence, about the need to fight against tsarism (the stronghold of which is the army). At the same time, Nazansky is slipping into the ideas of Nietzscheanism, into the glorification of individualism and the rejection of the collective. Thus, this drunken officer, although he conveys many of the ideas and moods of the author, at the same time serves as an example of the detrimental effect of officer life on an intelligent and promising person. It should be noted that in intellectual terms, Nazansky is much higher than Romashov, and he considers him his teacher.
Romashov absorbs Kazansky's ideas like a sponge free man. He thinks about it a lot. The turning point in Romashov's spiritual development was his internal monologue in defense of the Personality. Then he realizes not only his own, but also the individuality of each person individually. Seeing that the life of the army suppresses the Personality, the second lieutenant tries to look for the guilty, does not find, and even begins to grumble at God.
The fact that Romashov does not succumb to the influence of a destructive atmosphere is his strength. He has his own opinion, he internally protests.
The seeds sown by Nazansky germinate in Romashov's soul. All the time thinking about the order that prevails in the garrison, he comes to the idea of ​​the complete abolition of the army. As for the danger of a war, Romashov believes that all people on earth can simply agree on peace and the issue will disappear by itself. This only speaks of the complete detachment of the second lieutenant from earthly realities. He lives in his fantasies.
In the end, the hero comes to the only correct, in his opinion, conclusion. He wants to leave the service and devote himself either to science, or art, or physical labor. Who knows what would have happened to Lieutenant Romashov further, if not for the duel that interrupted all his dreams. He was sacrificed to the career of another officer. Romashov never managed to do anything, his life was tragically cut short at the beginning of the journey.
Kuprin presented the image of the main character of "Duel" very vividly, psychologically plausible. He did not idealize Romashov in the least, despite his obvious sympathy and sympathy, he did not ignore either his dignity or his shortcomings. Romashov is a weak person in himself, but strong in that he managed to resist the influence of the environment, not to subordinate his mind, thoughts, ideas to it. It's not his fault that it didn't lead to anything.
The image of Lieutenant Romashov is an undoubted achievement of the writer, this is one of his most memorable heroes, thanks to which “Duel” not only after its first edition, but to this day is loved by readers.

Appearing during the Russo-Japanese War and in the context of the growth of the first Russian revolution, the work caused a huge public outcry, since it shook one of the main foundations of the autocratic state - the inviolability of the military caste.

The problematics of "Duel" goes beyond the traditional military story. Kuprin also touches upon the question of the causes of social inequality of people, of possible ways of liberating a person from spiritual oppression, raises the problem of the relationship between the individual and society, the intelligentsia and the people.

The plot outline of the work is built on the ups and downs of the fate of an honest Russian officer, whom the conditions of army barracks life make one think about the wrong relationships between people. The feeling of spiritual decline haunts not only Romashov, but also Shurochka.

The juxtaposition of two heroes, who have two types of world outlook, is generally characteristic of Kuprin. Both heroes seek to find a way out of the impasse. At the same time, Romashov comes to the idea of ​​​​protesting against bourgeois prosperity and stagnation, and Shurochka adapts to it, despite outward ostentatious rejection. The author's attitude towards her is ambivalent, Romashov's "reckless nobility and noble lack of will" are closer to him. Kuprin even noted that he considers Romashov his double, and the story itself is largely autobiographical.

Romashov is a “natural person”, he instinctively resists injustice, but his protest is weak, his dreams and plans are easily destroyed, as they are immature and thoughtless, often naive. Romashov is close to Chekhov's heroes. But the emerging need for immediate action strengthens his will to active resistance. After meeting with the soldier Khlebnikov, "humiliated and insulted", a turning point occurs in Romashov's mind, he is shocked by the readiness of a person to commit suicide, in which he sees the only way out of a martyr's life. The sincerity of Khlebnikov's impulse especially clearly indicates to Romashov the stupidity and immaturity of his youthful fantasies, which aim only to prove something to others. Romashov is shocked by the strength of Khlebnikov's suffering, and it is precisely the desire to sympathize that makes the second lieutenant think for the first time about the fate of the common people. However, Romashov's attitude towards Khlebnikov is contradictory: talk about humanity and justice bears the imprint of abstract humanism, Romashov's call for compassion is largely naive.

In The Duel A. I. Kuprin continues the traditions of L. N. Tolstoy’s psychological analysis: in addition to the protesting voice of the hero himself, who saw the injustice of a cruel and stupid life, the author’s accusatory voice (Nazansky’s monologues) is heard in the work. Kuprin uses Tolstoy's favorite trick - the substitution technique for the protagonist of the hero-reasoner. In "Duel" Nazansky is the bearer of social ethics. Nazansky's image is ambiguous: his radical mood (critical monologues, romantic foreboding of a "radiant life", foresight of future social upheavals, hatred of the way of life of the military caste, the ability to appreciate high, pure love, to feel the beauty of life) conflicts with his own way of life. The only salvation from moral death is for the individualist Nazansky and for Romashov an escape from all social ties and obligations.

The action of the story refers to the mid-90s of the XIX century. Contemporaries saw in it a condemnation of the army and the exposure of the officers. And this opinion will be confirmed in a few years by history itself, when the Russian army suffers a crushing defeat in the battles near Mukden, Lyaoliang, and Port Arthur. Why did this happen? It seems to me that "" clearly and clearly answers the question posed. Can an army be combat-ready where an anti-human, corrupting and stupefying atmosphere reigns, where officers are at a loss when it is necessary to show resourcefulness, ingenuity and initiative, where soldiers are reduced to stupefaction by senseless drills, beatings and bullying?

“With the exception of a few ambitious and careerists, all officers served as a forced, unpleasant, disgusted corvee, yearning for it and not loving it. Junior officers, quite schoolboyish, were late for classes and slowly ran away from them if they knew that they would not get it for it ... At the same time, everyone was drinking heavily, both in the meeting and visiting each other ... the company commanders went about their service with the same disgust as the subaltern officers ... ”- we read. Indeed, the regimental life that Kuprin draws is absurd, gone and bleak. There are only two ways to get out of it: go to the reserve (and find yourself without a specialty and livelihood) or try to enter the academy and, after graduating from it, climb to a higher step on the military ladder, "make a career." However, few are capable of this. The fate of the bulk of the officers is to pull an endless and tedious webbing with the prospect of retiring with a small pension.

The daily life of officers consisted of directing drill exercises, monitoring the study of "literature" (i.e., military regulations) by soldiers, attending an officer's meeting. Drinking alone and in company, cards, romances with other people's wives, traditional picnics and "beams", trips to the local brothel - these are all the entertainments available to officers. "Duel" reveals the dehumanization, spiritual devastation that people undergo in the conditions of army life, the refinement and vulgarization of these people.

But sometimes they see clearly for a while, and these moments are terrible and tragic: ““ Occasionally, from time to time, the days of some kind of general, wholesale, ugly revelry came in the regiment. Perhaps this happened in those strange moments when people, accidentally connected with each other, but all together condemned to boring inactivity and senseless cruelty, suddenly saw in each other's eyes, far away, in a confused and oppressed consciousness, some mysterious spark of horror, longing and madness, and then calm , well-fed like that of breeding bulls, life seemed to be thrown out of its channel. " Some kind of collective madness began, people seemed to lose their human appearance. "On the way to the meeting, the officers behaved a lot. They stopped a passing Jew, called him and, tearing off his hat, "They drove the cab forward; then they threw this hat somewhere over the fence, on a tree. Bobetinsky beat the cabman. The rest sang loudly and shouted stupidly."

Army life, cruel and senseless, gives rise to peculiar "monsters". These are people who have gone down and stupid, stagnant in prejudice - campaigners, vulgar philistines and moral freaks. One of them is Captain Plum. This is a stupid campaigner, a narrow-minded and rude person. “Everything that went beyond the limits of the order, charter and company, and that he contemptuously called nonsense and mandrake, certainly did not exist for him. Dragging all his life a harsh service strap, he did not read a single book and a single newspaper ... "

Although Plum is attentive to the needs of the soldiers, this quality is negated by his cruelty: “This sluggish, down-trodden-looking man was terribly harsh with the soldiers and not only allowed the non-commissioned officers to fight, but he himself beat cruelly, to the point of blood, to the point that the offender fell from his feet under his blows. Even more terrible is Captain Osadchy, who inspires "inhuman awe" to his subordinates. Even in his appearance there is something bestial, predatory. He is so cruel to the soldiers that every year someone in his company committed suicide.

What is the reason for such spiritual devastation, moral deformity? Kuprin answers this question through the mouth of Nazansky, one of the few positive characters in the story: “... so are all of them, even the best, most tender of them, wonderful fathers and attentive husbands - they all become base, cowardly, evil in the service , stupid little animals. You will ask why? Yes, precisely because none of them believes in service and does not see a reasonable goal of this service”; "... for them, service is a complete disgust, a burden, a hated yoke."

Escaping from the deadly boredom of army life, the officers are trying to come up with some kind of side occupation for themselves. For most, it is, of course, drinking and cards. Some are engaged in collecting and needlework. Lieutenant Colonel Rafalsky takes his soul away in his home menagerie, Captain Stelkovsky turned the corruption of young peasant women into a hobby.

What makes people rush into this pool, to devote themselves to military service? Kuprin believes that the ideas about the military that have developed in society are partly to blame for this. So, the main character of the story, lieutenant Romashov, trying to comprehend life phenomena, comes to the conclusion that “the world was divided into two unequal parts: one - the smaller one - the officers, which are surrounded by honor, strength, power, the magical dignity of the uniform and, together with the uniform, for some reason and patented courage, and physical strength, and arrogant pride; the other - huge and impersonal - civilians, otherwise shpaks, shtafirkas and hazel grouses; they were despised...” And the writer pronounces a sentence on military service, which, with its illusory prowess, was created by “a cruel, shameful, all-human misunderstanding.”

Question 5. The concept of personality in Kuprin's prose. The story "Duel". milestone in creative development artist was the story "Olesya" (1898). The search for social ideals led Kuprin to the study and depiction in the subsequent work of the "natural person" - a person who has departed from the system of social relations. The favorite heroes of the writer are the inhabitants of the wild corners of Russia, who have not been touched by the ugliness of modern social relations. These people are close to nature, they are natural in the movements of their hearts. Such is Olesya, whom the author admires. The spiritual richness of the heroine, poetry, depth of feelings the author draws as natural moral standard. Love for life in all its manifestations is one of the most important aspects in aesthetic position artist. This combination of the tragedy of life and the glorification of its poetic sides was expressed with particular force in the story "Duel" (1905). Its problems go far beyond the problems of a work from military life. In it, Kuprin talks about the causes of social inequality of people, about possible ways to free a person from spiritual oppression and inequality, about the relationship between the individual and society, about the relationship between the intelligentsia and the people. In the center of the story is the person's awareness of the world around him and his "I", spiritual awakening. Romashov's comprehension of army orders, their inhumane meaning is one of the aspects of his new outlook on life. Everything that is characteristic of youth - the dream of happiness, of love - is painfully aggravated in constant communication with limited, rude officers. The heart yearning for beauty "measures" reality according to its own internal laws. That is why a young person, inexperienced in life, finds the true truth about life and about a person accessible and open. Kuprin does not exaggerate the capabilities of his hero. The special charm and poetry of the story is that serious conclusions ripen with a pure, direct worldview of a “pure” nature. Romashov is subject to "a dreary feeling of his loneliness, being lost among strangers." He draws the beautiful in himself: in his feelings, in his memories. The desire to be free from these torments prompts the simplest desire: to rise to the heights of social status. But it is enough for Romashov to be alone with himself, as a new step towards self-knowledge is taken. He discovers his "I" and sees other people as countless "I" inhabiting the earth. The boundaries of spiritual life are expanding. But ambitious thoughts return to the hero more than once. Disappointment in them is inevitable. Romashov experiences a deep mental breakdown, the environment becomes unbearable for him. It is then that the depth of his own "I", his "new inner life" is revealed to him. This is one of the main areas of observation of Kuprin the artist, who inherited Tolstoy's deep psychologism. Hardships, sufferings awaken a personality, if it has not lost its ability to think and feel. Kuprin illuminated an almost elusive moment: the transition from frivolous youth to maturity. For Romashov, the idea is becoming clearer that there are only three proud vocations of a person: science, art and free physical labor. From this position, the protagonist understands the drama of his unworthy colleagues. The writer's humanistic, democratic position is also expressed in the fact that the artist's attention is attracted not by exceptional personalities, but by ordinary, ordinary people, soldiers and officers. The mental, spiritual interests of many of them are shallow and limited. Shurochka Nikolaeva, the wife of an officer, at first appears to Romashov as a kindred nature. Later it turns out that her ideal does not rise above the well-being of the bourgeoisie. And for the sake of her petty-bourgeois, selfish aspirations, she sacrifices both her feelings, and Romashov's love, and his life. Next to Romashov, officer Vasily Nazansky is depicted, as if the author's double, dreaming of a "radiant life", of new proud people. He puts love above everything in the world - a celebration of human experiences. With deep tenderness, reverently, he speaks of women. Kazansky hates those who make love a subject for vulgar operettas, for obscene cards, for vile anecdotes. He tells how Officer Dietz talks about women. Kazansky thinks that if the dogs understood human speech, then they would probably not listen to Dietz and would leave the room. Love is different, says Kazansky, Dietz's love and Dante's love. Love also needs a chosen one. The writer himself considered love to be the brightest human feeling, an invaluable gift that elevates a person. This is how love is depicted in the story "Garnet Bracelet" (1911). General Anosov, following many of the heroes of Kuprin, glorifies the great, true love. For him there is not only triumphant vulgarity, but also triumphant love. “You understand,” he says to Vera Nikolaevna, “the kind of love for which to accomplish any feat, give your life, go to torment, is not work at all, but pure joy. Love must be a tragedy. The greatest secret in the world. No comforts of life and compromises should touch her.” Such a real big love of all the heroes of the story, only one knew Zheltkov, an insignificant person, according to the aristocrats. “It so happened that I am not interested in anything in life, neither politics, nor science, nor philosophy, nor worries about the future happiness of people - for me all life lies only in you,” writes Zheltkov Vera Nikolaevna. The heroes of the story - husband, brother, sister, uncle of Vera Sheyna - are arguing about strong, selfless love. Vera's husband tells a "funny" story about a telegraph operator's "funny" love. The author reveals the familiar atmosphere of an aristocratic environment, where vulgarity is covered with a joke, fun. The tragic story of Zheltkov, his love, as he talks about it and how he expresses it, is presented by the author as an answer to the question, what is true love. Zheltkov passed away, having carried through his fate, and by his death having affirmed great, true love, triumphant over the vulgarity of human relations. Tolstoy spoke of Kuprin as a great talent, noting the depth and poetry of his works.