Moral problems in Russia to live well. Analysis of the poem "who lives well in Russia"

Introduction

The people are liberated, but are the people happy? This question, formulated in the poem "Elegy", Nekrasov asked repeatedly. In his final work “Who Lives Well in Russia”, the problem of happiness becomes the fundamental problem on which the plot of the poem is based.

Seven men from different villages (the names of these villages are Gorelovo, Neyolovo, etc. make it clear to the reader that they have never seen happiness) set off on a journey in search of happiness. In itself, the plot of searching for something is very common and is often found in fairy tales, as well as in hagiographic literature, which often described a long and dangerous journey to the Holy Land. As a result of such a search, the hero acquires a very valuable thing (remember the fabulous I-don't-know-what), or, in the case of pilgrims, grace. And what will the wanderers from Nekrasov's poem find? As you know, their search for a happy person will not be successful - either because the author did not have time to complete his poem to the end, or because, due to their spiritual immaturity, they are still not ready to see a truly happy person. To answer this question, let's look at how the problem of happiness is transformed in the poem "Who Lives Well in Russia".

Evolution of the concept of "happiness" in the minds of the main characters

"Peace, wealth, honor" - this formula of happiness, derived at the beginning of the poem by the priest, exhaustively describes the understanding of happiness not only for the priest. It conveys the original, superficial look at the happiness of wanderers. Peasants who have lived in poverty for many years cannot imagine happiness that would not be supported by material prosperity and universal respect. They form a list of possible lucky people according to their ideas: a priest, a boyar, a landowner, an official, a minister and a tsar. And, although Nekrasov did not have time to realize all his plans in the poem - the chapter where the wanderers would reach the tsar remained unwritten, but even two from this list - the priest and the landowner, turned out to be enough for the peasants to be disappointed in their initial view for luck.

The stories of the priest and the landowner, met by wanderers on the road, are quite similar to each other. In both, sadness resounds about the departed happy, satisfying times, when power and prosperity themselves went into their hands. Now, as shown in the poem, the landowners were taken away from everything that made up their usual way of life: land, obedient serfs, and in return they gave an unclear and even frightening covenant to work. And now the happiness that seemed unshakable dissipated like smoke, leaving only regrets in its place: "... the landowner sobbed."

After listening to these stories, the men leave their original plan - they begin to understand that real happiness lies in something else. On their way, they come across a peasant fair - a place where many peasants gather. The men decide to look for a happy one among them. The problematics of the poem “To whom it is good to live in Russia” is changing - it becomes important for wanderers to find not just an abstract happy, but a happy among the common people.

But none of the recipes for happiness offered by people at the fair - neither the fabulous harvest of turnips, nor the opportunity to eat bread to the full, nor the magical power, nor even the miraculous accident that made it possible to stay alive - does not convince our wanderers. They develop an understanding that happiness cannot depend on material things and the simple preservation of life. This is confirmed by the life story of Yermila Girin, told in the same place, at the fair. Yermil tried to always do the right thing, and in any position - burgomaster, scribe, and then miller - he enjoyed the love of the people. To some extent, he serves as a harbinger of another hero, Grisha Dobrosklonov, who also devoted his whole life to the service of the people. But what was the gratitude for the actions of Yermila? You should not consider him happy - they say to the peasants - Yermil is in prison for standing up for the peasants during the riot ...

The image of happiness as freedom in the poem

A simple peasant woman, Matryona Timofeevna, offers wanderers to look at the problem of happiness from the other side. Having told them the story of her life, full of hardships and troubles - only then was she happy, as a child she lived with her parents, - she adds:

"The keys to female happiness,
From our free will,
Abandoned, lost…”

Happiness is compared with a thing unattainable for peasants for a long time - a free will, i.e. freedom. Matryona obeyed all her life: her husband, his unkind family, the evil will of the landowners who killed her eldest son and wished to flog the youngest, the injustice because of which her husband was taken to the soldiers. She gets some joy in life only when she decides to rebel against this injustice and goes to ask for her husband. That's when Matryona finds peace of mind:

"Okay, easy.
Clear in the heart"

And this definition of happiness as freedom, apparently, is to the liking of the peasants, because already in the next chapter they indicate the goal of their journey as follows:

“We are looking, Uncle Vlas,
unworn province,
Not gutted volost,
Izbytkova village "

It can be seen that here in the first place is no longer "excess" - prosperity, but "unwashed", a sign of freedom. The men realized that they would have prosperity after they got the opportunity to independently manage their lives. And here Nekrasov raises another important moral problem - the problem of servility in the minds of a Russian person. Indeed, at the time of the creation of the poem, freedom - a decree on the abolition of serfdom - the peasants already had. But they have yet to learn how to live as free people. It is not for nothing that in the chapter “Last Child” many of the Vakhlachans so easily agree to play the role of imaginary serfs - this role is profitable, and, what is there to hide, it is familiar, not making you think about the future. Freedom in words has already been obtained, but the peasants are still standing in front of the landowner, having taken off their hats, and he graciously allows them to sit down (chapter "The Landowner"). The author shows how dangerous such pretense is - Agap, allegedly flogged to please the old prince, really dies in the morning, unable to bear the shame:

"The man is raw, special,
The head is inflexible…

Conclusion

So, as we can see, in the poem “To whom it is good to live in Russia”, the problem is quite complex and detailed and cannot be reduced in the final to a simple finding of a happy person. The main problem of the poem lies precisely in the fact that, as the journey of the peasants shows, the people are not yet ready to become happy, they do not see the right path. The consciousness of wanderers is gradually changing, and they become able to discern the essence of happiness behind its earthly components, but every person has to go through such a path. Therefore, instead of the lucky man at the end of the poem, the figure of the people's protector, Grisha Dobrosklonov, appears. He himself is not from the peasant, but from the clergy, which is why he so clearly sees the intangible component of happiness: free, educated, Russia that has risen from centuries of slavery. Grisha is unlikely to be happy on his own: fate is preparing for him "consumption and Siberia." But he embodies in the poem "To whom it is good to live in Russia" the happiness of the people, which has yet to come. Together with the voice of Grisha, singing joyful songs about free Russia, the convinced voice of Nekrasov himself is heard: when the peasants are freed not only in words, but also inwardly, then each person will be happy separately.

The above thoughts about happiness in Nekrasov's poem will be useful to 10th grade students when preparing an essay on the topic “The problem of happiness in the poem “Who lives well in Russia””.

Artwork test

For about fourteen years, from 1863 to 1876, the work of N.A. Nekrasov on the most significant work in his work - the poem "To whom in Russia it is good to live." Despite the fact that, unfortunately, the poem was never finished and only some of its chapters have come down to us, later arranged by textologists in chronological order, Nekrasov's work can rightfully be called an "encyclopedia of Russian life." In terms of the breadth of coverage of events, the detail of the depiction of characters, and the amazing artistic accuracy, it is not inferior to A.S. Pushkin.

In parallel with the depiction of folk life, the poem raises questions of morality, touches upon the ethical problems of the Russian peasantry and the entire Russian society of that time, since it is the people who always act as the bearer of moral norms and universal ethics in general.

The main idea of ​​the poem follows directly from its title: who in Russia can be considered a truly happy person?

One of the main categories of morality underlying the concept of national happiness, according to the author. Is fidelity to the duty to the Motherland, service to one's people. According to Nekrasov, those who fight for justice and "the happiness of their native corner" live well in Russia.

The peasants-heroes of the poem, looking for the "happy" one, do not find him either among the landowners, or among the priests, or among the peasants themselves. The poem depicts the only happy person - Grisha Dobrosklonov, who devoted his life to the struggle for people's happiness. Here the author expresses, in my opinion, an absolutely indisputable idea that one cannot be a true citizen of one's country without doing anything to improve the situation of the people, who are the strength and pride of the Fatherland.

True, Nekrasov's happiness is very relative: the "people's protector" Grisha "fate prepared ... consumption and Siberia." However, it is difficult to argue with the fact that fidelity to duty and a clear conscience are necessary conditions for true happiness.

In the poem, the problem of the moral decline of the Russian people is also acute, due to their horrific economic situation, they are placed in such conditions in which people lose their human dignity, turning into lackeys and drunkards. So, the stories of a lackey, the “beloved slave” of Prince Peremetyev, or the courtyard man of Prince Utyatin, the song “About an exemplary serf, Jacob the faithful” are a kind of parable, instructive examples of what spiritual servility, moral degradation led to serfdom of peasants, and before of all - courtyards, corrupted by personal dependence on the landowner. This is Nekrasov's reproach to the great and powerful people in their inner strength, resigned to the position of a slave.

The lyrical hero of Nekrasov actively protests against this slave psychology, calls the peasantry to self-consciousness, calls on the entire Russian people to free themselves from centuries of oppression and feel like a Citizen. The poet perceives the peasantry not as a faceless mass, but as a people-creator, he considered the people to be the real creator of human history.

However, the most terrible consequence of centuries of slavery, according to the author of the poem, is that many peasants are satisfied with their humiliated position, because they cannot imagine a different life for themselves, they cannot imagine how it is possible to exist in a different way. For example, the lackey Ipat, servile to his master, reverently and almost proudly tells how the master dipped him in the winter in an ice-hole and forced him to play the violin while standing in a flying sleigh. Kholui of Prince Peremetyev is proud of his "lordly" illness and the fact that "he licked the plates with the best French truffle."

Considering the perverted psychology of the peasants as a direct consequence of the autocratic serf system, Nekrasov also points to another product of serfdom - unrestrained drunkenness, which has become a real disaster for the Russian village.

For many men in the poem, the idea of ​​happiness comes down to vodka. Even in the fairy tale about the warbler, seven men-truth-seekers, when asked what they would like, answer: “If we only had bread ... but a bucket of vodka.” In the chapter "Rural Fair" wine flows like a river, there is a massive soldering of the people. The men return home drunk, where they become a real misfortune for their family. We see one such peasant, Vavilushka, who drank “up to a penny”, who laments that he cannot even buy goat shoes for his granddaughter.

Another moral problem that Nekrasov touches upon is the problem of sin. The poet sees the path to the salvation of the human soul in the atonement of sin. So do Girin, Savely, Kudeyar; not such is the elder Gleb. Burmister Yermil Girin, having sent the son of a lonely widow as a recruit, thereby saving his own brother from soldiering, atones for his guilt by serving the people, remains faithful to him even in a moment of mortal danger.

However, the most serious crime against the people is described in one of Grisha's songs: the village headman Gleb hides the news of emancipation from his peasants, thus leaving eight thousand people in the bondage of slavery. According to Nekrasov, nothing can atone for such a crime.

The reader of the Nekrasov poem has a feeling of acute bitterness and resentment for the ancestors, who hoped for better times, but were forced to live in “empty volosts” and “tightened provinces” more than a hundred years after the abolition of serfdom.

Revealing the essence of the concept of "people's happiness", the poet points out that the only true way to achieve it is the peasant revolution. The idea of ​​retribution for people's suffering is most clearly formulated in the ballad "On Two Great Sinners", which is a kind of ideological key to the entire poem. The robber Kudeyar throws off the "burden of sins" only when he kills Pan Glukhovsky, known for his atrocities. The murder of a villain, according to the author, is not a crime, but a feat worthy of a reward. Here Nekrasov's idea comes into conflict with Christian ethics. The poet conducts a hidden polemic with F.M. Dostoevsky, who argued the inadmissibility and impossibility of building a just society on blood, who believed that the very thought of murder is already a crime. And I can't help but agree with these statements! One of the most important Christian commandments says: "Thou shalt not kill!" After all, a person who takes the life of his own kind, thereby kills the person in himself, commits a grave crime before life itself, before God.

Therefore, justifying violence from the position of revolutionary democracy, the lyrical hero of Nekrasov calls Russia "to the ax" (in the words of Herzen), which, as we know, led to a revolution that turned into the worst sin for its perpetrators and the greatest disaster for our people.

1. Introduction. The poem "" is one of the most significant works of Nekrasov. The poet managed to develop a large-scale picture depicting the life of the simple Russian people. The search for happiness by peasants is a symbol of the centuries-old desire of the peasantry for a better life. The content of the poem is very tragic, but it ends with a solemn affirmation of the future revival of "Mother Russia".

2. History of creation. The idea to write a real epic dedicated to the common people came to Nekrasov in the late 1850s. After the abolition of serfdom, this plan began to be realized. In 1863 the poet gets to work. Separate parts of the poem were published as they were written in the journal Domestic Notes.

Part of "A Feast for the Whole World" was able to see the light after the death of the author. Unfortunately, Nekrasov did not have time to finish work on the poem. It was assumed that the wandering peasants would end their journey in St. Petersburg. In this way, they will be able to bypass all the supposed "happy people", not excluding the king.

3. The meaning of the name. The title of the poem has become a stable household phrase that carries the eternal Russian problem. As in the time of Nekrasov, so now, the Russian man remains dissatisfied with his position. Only in Russia could the proverb "It's good where we don't exist" appear. As a matter of fact, "to whom in Russia to live well" - a rhetorical question. It is unlikely that there are many people in our country who will answer that they are completely satisfied with their lives.

4. Genre Poem

5. Topic. The main theme of the poem is the unsuccessful search for people's happiness. Nekrasov somewhat departs from his selfless service to the common people, arguing that not a single estate can consider itself happy. A common misfortune unites all categories of society, which makes it possible to speak of a single Russian people.

6.Issues. The central problem of the poem is the eternal Russian grief and suffering arising from the backwardness and low level of development of the country. In this regard, the peasantry occupies a special position. Being the most downtrodden class, it nevertheless retains within itself healthy national forces. The poem touches upon the problem of the abolition of serfdom. This long-awaited act did not bring the expected happiness. Nekrasov owns the most famous phrase describing the essence of the abolition of serfdom: "The great chain has broken ... One end on the master, the other on the peasant! .."

7. Heroes. Roman, Demyan, Luka, Gubin brothers, Pakhom, Prov. 8. Plot and Composition The poem has a circular composition. A fragment is constantly repeated, explaining the journey of the seven men. The peasants drop everything they do and go in search of a happy man. Each character has their own version of this. Wanderers decide to meet with all the "candidates for happiness" and find out the whole truth.

The realist Nekrasov admits a fairy-tale element: the peasants receive a self-assembled tablecloth, allowing them to continue their journey without any problems. The first seven men meet the priest, in whose happiness Luka was sure. The clergyman "according to his conscience" tells the wanderers about his life. It follows from his story that the priests do not enjoy any special advantages. The well-being of the priests is only an apparent phenomenon for the laity. In fact, the life of a priest is no less difficult than that of other people.

The chapters "Country Fair" and "Drunk Night" are devoted to both the reckless and hard life of the common people. Simple fun is replaced by deep drunkenness. For centuries, alcohol has been one of the main troubles of a Russian person. But Nekrasov is far from a decisive condemnation. One of the characters explains the propensity to drunkenness in this way: "Great sadness will come, when we stop drinking! ..".

In the chapter "The Landowner" and the part "Last Child" Nekrasov describes the nobles who also suffered from the abolition of serfdom. For the peasants, their suffering seems far-fetched, but in fact, the breaking of the centuries-old way of life "hit" the landlords very hard. Many farms were ruined, and their owners could not adapt to the new conditions. The poet dwells in detail on the fate of a simple Russian woman in the part "Peasant Woman". She is considered lucky. However, from the story of the peasant woman, it becomes clear that her happiness lies not in gaining anything, but in getting rid of trouble.

Even in the chapter "Happy" Nekrasov shows that the peasants do not expect favors from fate. Their ultimate dream is to avoid danger. The soldier is happy because he is still alive; the stone-cutter is happy because he continues to have great strength, etc. In the part "A Feast for the Whole World", the author notes that the Russian peasant, despite all the troubles and sufferings, does not lose heart, referring to grief with irony. In this regard, the song "Merry" with the refrain "It is glorious for the people to live in Holy Russia!" is indicative. Nekrasov felt the approach of death and understood that he would not have time to finish the poem. Therefore, he hastily wrote the "Epilogue", where Grisha Dobrosklonov appears, dreaming of the freedom and welfare of the whole people. He was supposed to be the lucky man the wanderers are looking for.

9. What does the author teach. truly rooted for Russia. He saw all her shortcomings and sought to draw the attention of his contemporaries to them. The poem "To whom it is good to live in Russia" is one of the most elaborate works of the poet, which, according to the plan, was to present the whole tormented Russia at a glance. Even in an unfinished form, it sheds light on a number of purely Russian problems, the solution of which is long overdue.

In the center of Nekrasov's poem "Who Lives Well in Russia" is an image of the life of post-reform Russia. Nekrasov worked on the poem for 20 years, collecting material for it "word by word". It unusually broadly embraces the folk life of Russia at that time. Nekrasov sought to portray in the poem representatives of all social strata - from a poor peasant to a king. But, unfortunately, the poem was never finished. This was prevented by the death of the author. The main question of the work is clearly posed already in the title of the poem - who in Russia has a good life? This question is about happiness, well-being, about the human lot, fate. The thought of the painful fate of the peasant, of the peasant ruin runs through the whole poem. The position of the peasantry is clearly illustrated by the name of the places where the truth-telling peasants come from: Terpigorev district, Pustoporozhnaya volost, villages: Zaplatovo, Dyryavino, Razutovo, Znobishino, Gorelovo, Neelovo. Asking the question of finding a happy, prosperous person in Russia, the truth-seeking peasants set off on their way. They meet different people. The most memorable, original personalities are the peasant woman Matrena Timofeevna, the hero Savely, Ermil Girin, Agap Petrov, Yakim Nagoi. Despite the misfortunes that haunted them, they retained spiritual nobility, humanity, the ability to do good and self-sacrifice. Nekrasov's work is full of pictures of people's grief. The poet is very concerned about the fate of the peasant woman. Her share is shown by Nekrasov in the fate of Matryona Timofeevna Korchagina:

Matrena Timofeevna

stubborn woman,

Wide and dense

Thirty-eight years old.

Beautiful: gray hair,

The eyes are large, stern,

Eyelashes are the richest

Stern and swarthy

She has a white shirt on

Yes, the sundress is short,

Yes, a sickle over the shoulder ...

Matryona Timofeevna has to go through a lot: overwork, and hunger, and the humiliation of her husband's relatives, and the death of her first-born ... It is clear that all these trials changed Matryona Timofeevna. She says to herself like this: “I have a downcast head, I wear an angry heart ...”, and compares a woman’s fate with three loops of white, red and black silk. She concludes her reflections with a bitter conclusion: “You have not started a business - look for a happy woman among the women!” Speaking of the bitter fate of women, Nekrasov never ceases to admire the amazing spiritual qualities of a Russian woman, her will, self-esteem, pride, not crushed by the hardest conditions of life.

A special place in the poem is given to the image of the peasant Saveliy, the “hero of the Holy Russian”, “the hero of the homespun”, which personifies the gigantic strength and stamina of the people, the motivation of the rebellious spirit in him. In the episode of the rebellion, when the peasants, who had been holding back their hatred for years, led by Savely, push the landowner Vogel into the pit, not only the strength of the people's anger, but also the long-suffering of the people, the lack of organization of their protest is shown with remarkable clarity. Saveliy is endowed with the features of the legendary heroes of Russian epics - heroes. About Savelia, Matrena Timofeevna tells the wanderers: “There was also a lucky man.” Saveliy's happiness lies in love of freedom, in understanding the need for an active struggle of the people, who can achieve a “free”, happy life only through active resistance and action.

Based on the moral ideals of the people, relying on the experience of the liberation struggle, the poet creates images of “new people” - people from the peasant environment who became fighters for the happiness of the poor. Such is Yermil Girin. He earned honor and love with strict truth, intelligence and kindness. But the fate of Yermila was not always favorable and kind to him. He ended up in prison when the “Frightened province, Terpigorev district, Nedykhanyev district, the village of Stolbnyaki” rebelled. The suppressors of the rebellion, knowing that the people would listen to Yermila, called him to exhort the rebellious peasants. But Girin, being the defender of the peasants, does not call them to humility, for which he is punished.

In his work, the author shows not only strong-willed and strong peasants, but also those whose hearts could not resist the corrupting influence of slavery. In the chapter "Last Child" we see the lackey Ipat, who does not even want to hear about the will. He recalls his “prince”, and calls himself “the last slave”. Nekrasov gives Ipat a well-aimed and malicious assessment: “sensitive lackey”. We see the same slave in the image of Jacob the faithful, an exemplary serf:

Only Jacob had joy

Grooming the master, cherishing, appeasing ...

All his life he forgave the master of insults, bullying, but when Mr. Polivanov handed over the nephew of his faithful servant to the soldiers, coveting his bride, Yakov could not stand it and took revenge on the master with his own death.

It turns out that even morally deformed slaves, driven to the extreme, are able to protest. The whole poem is imbued with a sense of the inevitable and imminent death of a system based on slavish obedience.

The approach of this death is especially clearly felt in the last part of the poem - “A Feast for the Whole World”. The author's hopes are associated with the image of an intellectual from the people of Grigory Dobrosklonov. Nekrasov did not have time to complete this part, but nevertheless the image of Grigory turned out to be holistic and strong. Grisha is a typical raznochinets, the son of a laborer and a half-destitute deacon. He chooses the path of conscious revolutionary struggle, which seems to him the only possible way for the people to gain freedom and happiness. Grisha's happiness lies in the struggle for a happy future for the people, for "every peasant to live freely and cheerfully in all of holy Russia." In the image of Grigory Dobrosklonov, Nekrasov presented to readers the typical character traits of an advanced man of his time.

In his epic poem, Nekrasov poses the most important ethical problems: about the meaning of life, about conscience, about truth, about duty, about happiness. One of these problems follows directly from the question formulated in the title of the poem. What does it mean to "live well"? What is true happiness?

The heroes of the poem understand happiness in different ways. From the point of view of the priest, this is “peace, wealth, honor.” According to the landowner, happiness is an idle, well-fed, cheerful life, unlimited power. On the road leading to wealth, career, power, “a huge, greedy crowd goes to the temptation.” But the poet despises such happiness. It does not attract truth-seekers either. They see a different path, a different happiness. The happy life of the people for the poet is inseparable from the idea of ​​free labor. A man is happy when he is not bound by slavery.

The abolition of serfdom in 1861 caused a wave of controversy in Russian society. ON THE. Nekrasov also responded to the debate "for" and "against" the reform with his poem "Who Lives Well in Russia", which tells about the fate of the peasantry in the new Russia.

The history of the creation of the poem

Nekrasov conceived the poem back in the 1850s, when he wanted to tell about everything that he knew about the life of a simple Russian backgammon - about the life of the peasantry. The poet began to work thoroughly on the work in 1863. Death prevented Nekrasov from finishing the poem, 4 parts and a prologue were published.

For a long time, researchers of the writer's work could not decide in what order the chapters of the poem should be printed, since Nekrasov did not have time to indicate their order. K. Chukovsky, having thoroughly studied the personal notes of the author, allowed such an order as is known to the modern reader.

Genre of the work

“Who should live well in Russia” is attributed to various genres - a travel poem, a Russian Odyssey, a protocol of the all-Russian peasantry. The author gave his own definition of the genre of the work, in my opinion, the most accurate is the epic poem.

The epic reflects the life of an entire nation at a turning point in its existence - wars, epidemics, and so on. Nekrasov shows events through the eyes of the people, uses the means of the folk language to make them more expressive.

There are many heroes in the poem, they do not hold together separate chapters, but logically connect the plot into one whole.

The problems of the poem

The story of the life of the Russian peasantry covers a wide range of biography. Men in search of happiness travel around Russia in search of happiness, get acquainted with various people: a priest, a landowner, beggars, drunken jokers. Festivities, fairs, rural festivities, the burden of labor, death and birth - nothing escaped the poet's gaze.

The protagonist of the poem is not identified. Seven traveling peasants, Grisha Dobrosklonov - most of all stands out among the rest of the heroes. However, the main character of the work is the people.

The poem reflects the numerous problems of the Russian people. This is the problem of happiness, the problem of drunkenness and moral decay, sinfulness, freedom, rebellion and tolerance, the clash of the old and the new, the difficult fate of Russian women.

Happiness is understood by the characters in different ways. The most important thing for the author is the embodiment of happiness in the understanding of Grisha Dobrosklonov. From here grows the main idea of ​​the poem - true happiness is real only for a person who thinks about the welfare of the people.

Conclusion

Although the work is unfinished, it is considered integral and self-sufficient in terms of the expression of the author's main idea and his author's position. The problems of the poem are relevant to this day, the poem is interesting to the modern reader, who is attracted by the pattern of events in the history and worldview of the Russian people.