Moral images of V. Bykov's story "Sotnikov"

What feat did Sotnikov accomplish in Vasil Bykov's story and got the best answer

Answer from UNSHADED[guru]
On the first pages of the story, we see two fighters from one of the partisan detachments - Sotnikov and Rybak, who go on a mission on a frosty, windy night. They are instructed to get food for tired, exhausted comrades at all costs. But we see that the fighters are in an unequal position: Sotnikov goes on a mission with a severe cold. And to Rybak’s question why he didn’t refuse to go if he was sick, he answers: “Because he didn’t refuse, because others refused.” These words of Sotnikov tell us about his highly developed sense of duty, consciousness, courage, endurance.
In the course of the story, we see that the main characters are haunted by one failure after another. First, the farm turned out to be burned, where they hoped to get food. Secondly, Sotnikov was wounded in a shootout with the enemy. Such a detail is interesting - the author accompanies the external action with the internal action. This is especially noticeable in the development of the image of Rybak. At first, Rybak is a little dissatisfied with Sotnikov, his indisposition, which does not allow them to move fast enough. This slight discontent is replaced either by pity and sympathy, or by involuntary irritation. But Bykov shows the quite worthy behavior of Rybak, who helps Sotnikov to carry weapons, does not leave him alone when he cannot walk due to injury.
By nature, Rybak is by no means a traitor, much less a disguised enemy, but a normal person with his own strengths and weaknesses. Rybak is a strong and reliable guy who has a sense of brotherhood, camaraderie, and mutual assistance. But such is he in a normal combat situation. Left alone with the wounded Sotnikov, who is choking with a cough, among the snowdrifts, without food and in constant anxiety of being captured by the Nazis, Rybak breaks down. And when he is captured, a breakdown occurs in his soul. He wants to live. The fighter does not want to betray his homeland, he is trying to find a way out of the situation in which he finds himself. His conversation with Sotnikov after the interrogation is noteworthy:
“Listen,” Rybak whispered hotly after a pause. - You have to pretend to be quiet. You know, I was offered to the police, - somehow without wanting it, Rybak said. Sotnikov's eyelids twitched, and his eyes flashed with concealed, anxious attention. - That's how! So what - will you win? I won't run, don't be afraid. I will deal with them. “Look, you’re bargaining,” Sotnikov croaked caustically.”
Rybak agrees to serve as a policeman. He hopes to take advantage of this to run to his own. But Sotnikov was not mistaken, foreseeing that the powerful Nazi machine would destroy Rybak, that the cunning would turn into betrayal.
The ending of the story is very tragic: the former partisan, on the orders of the Nazis, executes his former comrade in the detachment. After that, the life of Rybak, previously such
dear to him, suddenly loses its meaning, turns out to be so unbearable that he thinks about suicide. But he fails to do this, as the policemen took off his belt. Such is “the insidious fate of a man who got lost in the war,” the author writes.

Answer from 3 answers[guru]

Composition-review on the story of V. Bykov "Sotnikov"

Life! We praise her greatness.

Live! - this is the good and happiness of people!

For him, for my happiness and yours.

Heroes gave their lives.

65 years have passed since the day when volleys of victorious salute sounded over Russian soil. But to this day, the memory of those famous and unknown heroes lives in the hearts of people who survived, despite the losses, death of loved ones, and won the victory in this terrible and cruel war. People still live in the memory of pain and grief for fathers and brothers, husbands and sons who did not return from the war. Books about the war, books designed to tell about the terrible fateful days of the Great Patriotic War, have become an eternal monument to the heroism of our people. This topic has entered the literature for a long time. Many writers themselves went through the difficult path of the war, becoming witnesses and participants in the great tragedy and great feat. Yes, many books have been written about the war. These are the works of Y. Bondarev and G. Baklanov, K. Vorobyov and S. Nikitin, and many others. The authors tried to understand and tell us, the readers, what those who stood up for their native land were like.

The most interesting for me were the stories of V. Bykov. "Obelisk", "Sotnikov", "Survive Until Dawn" are a kind of trilogy dedicated to the problem of a person's moral choice in tragic situations of war. In his story, V. Bykov depicts war and a man in war, depicts truthfully, without embellishment.

The story "Sotnikov" was written in 1970. The real heroes of the story never existed in reality, but the incident that formed the basis of this work happened in real life.

It happened in August 1944, when our troops broke through the defenses and surrounded the Germans. Among the prisoners was a man who had long been considered dead. Unable to withstand the terrible trials, he went to betrayal, went to it consciously. It seemed to him that this was only for a while, that at a convenient moment he would return to his own. But fate did not give him such an opportunity. Probably, for that it is a betrayal, so that there is no justification for it. Vasil Bykov recognized this man, and then wrote a story about him, in which he poses moral problems about the meaning of life, about the spiritual strength of a person who finds himself in a hopeless situation. The heroes face a choice - to die with dignity or to survive vilely.

Already at the very beginning of the story, an abyss is revealed between the characters. Rybak cannot understand in any way why the sick Sotnikov goes on a mission, because he had the opportunity to refuse. And "because he did not refuse, because others refused." This is what Rybak cannot understand, he cannot understand this, because he does not have that patriotic sense of duty, which is so necessary in war.

The exhausted Sotnikov is opposed by the energetic and resolute nature of Rybak. But how did it happen that it was Rybak who became a traitor. When he is captured, he is seized by panic fear, fear of death. Can we blame him for the fact that until the last moment he had the hope of surviving? After all, he did not want to be a traitor, did not want to betray his comrades, but only tried to deceive the Germans, but for some reason he betrayed, betrayed, without noticing it, ended up in a police camp. Nothing stopped him from betrayal. And what can we say about the fact that for the sake of his own salvation he is ready to sacrifice the lives of Peter and Demchikha, who has children left, Rybak is looking for benefits even in the death of a friend with whom he has gone through so much. Until the last moment, Sotnikov cannot believe in betrayal. “Of course, out of fear and hatred, people are capable of any betrayal, but Rybak, it seems, was not a traitor, just as he was not a coward. How many opportunities he had to defect to the police, and there were plenty of cases to get cold, but he behaved with dignity. At least not worse than others. And in the shootout with the police, Rybak does not leave his friend, something made him return to the wounded Sotnikov. But this is something, probably too little to retain human dignity.

In this story, we see not only a traitor, but also a man whose name, selfless feeling and courage cannot leave readers indifferent. If Rybak was only worried about how to save his own skin, then Sotnikov thinks about how "to meet his death, whatever it may be ... with soldierly dignity - this became the main goal of his last minutes." Not only Rybak wants to live, but also Sotnikov, but for him there are higher values: civic duty, human dignity. Faced with death, Sotnikov wants to save the people doomed with him to death, trying to take all the blame on himself. Probably, the most difficult and expensive thing in the war was to preserve humanity and conscience in oneself. It is rather difficult to predict the outcome of the story from the very beginning. Sometimes it seems that Rybak deserves more sympathy than Sotnikov. But gradually, in the unfolding events, we see how their characters are revealed in the actions of the heroes. Rybak's betrayal causes hatred and contempt. The feat of Sotnikov gives rise to admiration and pride in the heart.

In the story "Sotnikov" Vasil Bykov gives us a lesson in humanity, teaches us to be true to ourselves, our conscience, even in the most difficult and difficult situations in life. Grief, pride seize the reader when reading the story "Sotnikov". Thanks to the writer for his lesson.

Let's always remember our famous and unknown heroes who survived and won this terrible and cruel Great Patriotic War. They gave us happiness to live.

Almost all the works of Vasil Bykov tell about the Great Patriotic War. This is largely due to the fact that the writer himself went through it from beginning to end. He considers the events of the war primarily from a moral and philosophical point of view. Describing the behavior of people in inhuman conditions, Bykov makes us think about the origins of the inner strength that is inherent in the best of his heroes. In the story "Sotnikov", the writer convincingly shows that this power practically does not depend on the physical capabilities of a person and is entirely related to the realm of the spirit.

In the images of the main characters of the work, it seems to me, the features of two opposite types of personality are embodied. Finding themselves in a situation of moral choice, such people behave but in different ways: some commit betrayal in exchange for their miserable life; others show fortitude and courage, preferring to die with a clear conscience. Thus, in the story of Vasil Bykov, two partisans are opposed - Rybak and Sotnikov.

At first, Rybak seems to us to be a completely sincere person: he helps his sick comrade, shares his last grain with him, and does not get angry because of an unexpected burden. Rybak is kind in his own way. He was never able to kill the headman, although he believed that it was necessary to do so.

Fear for his life first manifests itself in Rybak during a chase arranged by the police: at first he wanted to leave Sotnikov, justifying himself by the fact that he still couldn’t get out. “But what will he say in the forest? ”- it seems to me that it was this question that made Rybak return to his friend. At that moment, it was still important for him what others would think of him.

When they were found in Demchikha's attic, Rybak "wanted Sotnikov to be the first to rise." But he had no strength, he continued to lie. And Rybak got up first.

During the interrogation, frightened of torture, Rybak answered the truth, that is, he betrayed the detachment. When he was asked to serve Germany, "he suddenly felt free." Rybak not only agreed to join the police, but also helped to hang Sotnikov in order to confirm to the enemies that he was ready to serve them. He thought only of freedom, he hoped that he would escape, but after the execution he realized “that the escape was over, that with this liquidation he was tied up more reliably than with a belt chain. And although they were left alive, they were also liquidated in some respects.

Thinking about everything that had happened, Rybak "couldn't really understand how it happened and who was to blame... I really didn't want to be guilty myself." He justified himself by fighting for his life, that “it was Sotnikov who was to blame for his misfortune more than others ... he doesn’t care about everything in the loop on the arch, but what is it like for him, alive! ..”. The fisherman does not notice that his feverish attempts to whitewash himself are cowardly and illogical. At the end of the work, the author will say that what happened to this hero is “this is the insidious fate of a person who got lost in the war.”

The path of Sotnikov appears differently. From the very beginning, we guess in him a proud and stubborn person. He went to the task because "others refused." An inopportunely happened cold seemed to Sotnikov a trifle, although from further narration it becomes clear that he was seriously ill. Nevertheless, Sotnikov refused food and medicine offered to him by the headman's wife, because "he did not wish this aunt well and ... could not agree to her sympathy and help." Remembering how once the same simple woman had betrayed him to the police, he was suspicious of the goodwill shown to him in the elder's house.

Feeling the approach of the policemen, Sotnikov thought that, "... as long as he is alive, he will not let them near him." This man was not afraid of death, he was only "terrified of becoming a burden for others." And he was also “afraid that he might lose consciousness, and then the worst thing that he was most afraid of in this war would happen.” Sotnikov decided not to surrender alive. The fact that Rybak returned, he "attributed ... to the usual soldier's mutual assistance", but "would not have anything against Rybak's help, if it was addressed to someone else." He himself never wanted any support, it was "disgusting to his whole being."

During the interrogation, Sotnikov first of all tried to save Demchikha, who suffered because of him and Rybak, and already before the execution he unsuccessfully tried to take all the blame on himself. He spent the last effort in his life on meeting death "with soldierly dignity."

Sotnikov was a man who under no circumstances made a deal with his conscience, and he passed away with the knowledge that he had not stained his soul in any way. Until the last, the hero tried to help people who, as he believed, were in trouble because of him.

So, we have two completely opposite characters. For their better disclosure, the author often uses the internal monologues of the characters, through which, for example, Rybak's hesitation at the time of the persecution, Sotnikov's thoughts, going to his execution, are conveyed.

Characterizing the heroes, Bykov also uses episodes of their childhood. We learn that Sotnikov, as a child, swore to himself never to lie. I think that the father played a big role in the formation of this personality. It was he who brought up honesty, straightforwardness and stamina in his son.

The story of Vasil Bykov tells about the events that took place more than sixty years ago. However, to us, readers of the 21st century, it is interesting not only from a historical point of view. After all, the problems of honesty, conscience, justice and humanism are also facing our generation. How to be? What to be? How to keep human in yourself? Vasil Bykov's book"Sotnikov" helps us answer these difficult questions.

Essay text:

War is an occasion to talk about a good and a bad person.
V. Bykov
Vasil Bykov is a representative of that literature about the Great Patriotic War, which later received the definition of literature of lieutenants, that is, literature whose representative himself fought, sat in the trenches, saw a feat in the everyday work of a soldier. That is why in Bykov's prose one can clearly see Tolstoy's traditions of depicting war as an event unnatural to human nature.
In addition, V. Bykov was always sure that it is the war that helps to reveal the essence of each person, since the main problem becomes the self-consciousness of a person in the face of death.
In the story Sotnikov, V. Bykov contrasted two ordinary Soviet people: Sotnikov and Rybak. Not a German and a Russian, but two Russian soldiers. And, if Sotnikov passes with honor through difficult trials and accepts death without renouncing his beliefs, then Rybak, facing death, changes his beliefs in fear, betrays his Motherland, saves his life, which after betrayal loses all meaning. He practically becomes an enemy. He goes to the world of policemen, in which personal well-being becomes paramount, and fear for his life makes him kill and betray.
Perhaps, something vile, but hidden, was implicitly laid in Rybak, but in the face of death, a person became what he really is. What an amazing reincarnation is happening with this man. At first, the strong and quick-witted Rybak seemed more prepared for the task than the frail, sick Sotnikov. However, if Rybak, who has managed to find some way out all his life, is inwardly ready to commit a crime, then Sotnikov remains true to human duty until his last breath.
In the story of V. Bykov, everyone took his place among the victims and executioners. And all, except Rybak, went their deadly path to the end. The weakness of Rybak, his irrepressible thirst for the continuation of life was felt by the same traitor policeman and, almost without hesitation, stunned Rybak point-blank: Let's save life. You will serve Greater Germany. Rybak has not yet agreed to go to the police, but he has already been spared from torture. Rybak did not want to die and blurted out something to the investigator. Sotnikov, during the poke, lost consciousness, but did not say anything.
It is at this moment that ordinary actions begin to pass into the category of a feat. And although the true interpretation of the word feat is a heroic, selfless deed, Sotnikov accomplishes precisely the feat, choosing death and denying betrayal. Sotnikov seemed to have come to terms with death. Of course, he would like to die in battle, but now that it has become impossible for him, the only thing left for him was to decide on his attitude towards the people who were nearby. That is why, before the execution, Sotnikov declares to the investigator: I am a partisan, the rest have nothing to do with it.
In the last minutes of life, Sotnikov is unexpected; but he loses his former confidence in the right to demand certain norms of behavior from others. Inwardly, he is ready to forgive even Rybak. Nor did he seek the sympathy of the Sotnikov from the crowd surrounding the place of execution.
Is it possible to consider Sotnikov a hero if he did not have time to fire a single shot? V. Bykov was able to show in a new way and, most importantly, to prove that a person can accomplish a feat not only physically, but also spiritually. It is the sphere of spirituality that predominates in Sotnikov, who had a dream before his death about himself, a child and a father, who told him: There was fire, and there was the highest justice in the world. Justice is not on earth, but in heaven. And then Sotnikov realized that it was in his power to leave the world in good conscience, and this was the highest reward that life gave him.
It was in this episode that V. Bykov succeeded in elucidating the concept of a feat in a new way, recalling that the main thing is whether a person has retained a person in himself.
The story of V. Bykov Sotnikov became one of the first works about the war, which dealt with the theme of betrayal, elevated to an absolutely new moral category. The fact is that the writer makes it possible to interpret Rybak's offense as an act of a soldier who goes to any lengths to save his life and continue the fight against enemies. After all, the author himself repeatedly emphasized: ... Most often I am not talking about heroes and not about heroism possible on their part. I think I'm looking wider. I'm just talking about a person. About the possibility for him to preserve his dignity even in the most terrible situation. If there is a chance to win.
If not, hold out. And win, if not physically, but spiritually.

The rights to the essay "The feat of a man in the war (according to the story of V. Bykov Sotnikov)" belong to its author. When citing material, it is necessary to indicate a hyperlink to

The newest period in the work of V. Bykov was revealed by his remarkable work "Sotnikov" - the deepest of the works about the war, not only by the author himself, but also in all Soviet multinational literature. "Sotnikov" is firmly connected with the previous stories of the writer. Still famous critics A. Adamovich, Naumova, Lazarev noticed the connection of "Sotnikov" with the "Kruglyansky Bridge".

Sotnikov has an inhuman choice: "It is better to die as a man than to live as a beast." About the idea of ​​Sotnikov, V. Bykov wrote: “First of all, and mainly, I was interested in two moral problems that can be formulated as follows: “What is a person in the face of the destructive force of inhuman circumstances? What is he capable of when he has exhausted his ability to protect life to the end and it is impossible to prevent death?" Both front-line soldiers and partisans alike remember these questions from their combat experience, when they had to be solved not mentally, but practically, at the cost of blood, putting at stake life. But no one wanted to lose their one and therefore dear life. And only the need to remain human to the end forced them to go to death. At the same time, there were people who tried to combine the incompatible: to save life and sin against humanity, which turned out to be in a tragic situation incredibly difficult, if not completely hopeless.

In many ways, Sotnikov is an ordinary war worker. He is actually one of the ordinary representatives of the multi-million army. Sotnikov is by nature not a hero at all, and when he dies, it is primarily because his moral basis in such circumstances does not allow him to do otherwise, to look for another end. Sotnikov's incredulity, even cruelty towards people is noticeable. Only by the end of the work Sotnikov overcomes his straightforwardness, becomes much higher.

Sotnikov's feat, which has, above all, a moral, spiritual meaning, lies precisely in this: humanity, high spirituality, which, as an unconditional cost, necessarily includes devotion to the Motherland, and Sotnikov defends it to the very end, to the last breath, confirming the ideals death itself. "For me, Sotnikov is a hero. Yes, he did not defeat the enemy, but he remained a man in the most inhuman situation." As a feat, his steadfastness is also considered by those few dozen people who were witnesses of his last minutes.

Sotnikov, too, "was sometimes afraid for his life, when he could easily and unnoticed die in battle." "Coming out of the battle alive, he concealed in himself a quiet joy that the bullet had passed him." All this was humanly understandable and natural. It is known that Sotnikov, like other heroes of V. Bykov, knew how to fight the enemy "until the last minute." In the partisans, he ceased to be afraid of death. It was important for him to live when he was an army commander. Having been captured by the Nazis, he thinks of death with weapons in his hands as a great luxury. Here he almost envied the thousands of those lucky ones who found their end on numerous battlefields.

Before hanging, Sotnikov reappears hatred of death, very natural for a person, unwillingness to say goodbye to life. Sotnikov wanted to laugh before his death, but he finally chuckled with his exhausted, pathetic smile. Going to his death, Sotnikov is not so much thinking about himself as he is preoccupied with "doing something for others." And also, so that death is not dirty.

Rybak is a former guerrilla comrade and now a traitor. Rybak in the first sections is shown to us as a good partisan, who behaves in a completely comradely way with Sotnikov, thinks about other partisans. In the army, Rybak, thanks to his quickness, rose from a private to the position of foreman. In a word, he is a very good person, if you take him at the household level, in ordinary, human circumstances. We can say that there is no price for him. But the fact is that the war made its cruel demands, very often offered inhuman ones. The fisherman understood this and tried to hold on. When he got into a shootout with Sotnikov, and then, when it calmed down for a while, he sighs with relief, thinking that everything is over, that Sotnikov is dead. This means that it was not the pain for his death that arose in Rybak in the first place, but a feeling of relief caused by the fact that in this case it is definitely not necessary to take risks yourself again.

The author connects the betrayal with the insignificance of Rybak's moral and ethical ideas, with the insufficient development of his spiritual world. He turned out to have very little human, spiritual potential; he did not have enough moral height to be not only a good partisan, but also to endure to the end in difficult circumstances. The fisherman could not pay such a price for his life, because it was more important for him to survive, no matter what. Bykov wrote: “The fisherman is also not a scoundrel by nature: if the circumstances had turned out differently, perhaps a completely different side of his character would have manifested itself, and he would have appeared before people in a different light. But the inexorable force of military situations forced everyone to make the most decisive choice in human life - better to die or stay to live vilely. And each one chose his own." Spiritual deafness does not allow him to understand the depth of his fall. It is only at the end that he sees, irremediably belatedly, that in some cases surviving is no better than dying. In captivity, Rybak begins to cautiously approach the policemen, trick them and get out. And it rolls, rolls down, more and more losing humanity in itself, surrendering one position after another. Already inexorably sliding into the abyss of betrayal, Rybak all the time reassures himself that this is not the end, that he can still fool the policemen.

Bykov depicts Sotnikov's latest action: "Before the punishment, he knocks out a stand from under his feet in order to prevent Rybak, who betrayed him, from doing it." Sotnikov would very much like Rybak, who has not yet stained his hands with anyone's blood, to have the opportunity to come to his senses, not to lose his own soul completely and irrevocably. The nationwide ethics of philanthropic decency constantly made strict demands, in particular, categorically condemned betrayal, which entailed the death of innocent people.