Secondary Heroes. Episodic and fantasy characters

“Woe from Wit” is the first Russian realistic comedy, in which we saw the life of Moscow in the 10-20s of the 19th century. Using one of the basic principles of realism - the principle of typification - the playwright created a gallery of images, each of which is typical of its time and class, but at the same time has individual, unique features.
A special role in comedy is given to off-stage and episodic characters, which are so widely represented in comedy. With their help, the spatial and temporal boundaries of comedy are expanding.
Griboyedov created vivid portraits, without which it is difficult to imagine the regulars of the English Club or the aristocratic salon. The author himself in one of his letters to a friend and writer Katenin wrote: "Portraits and only portraits are part of comedy and tragedy."
In a series of images of the old nobility, a portrait of Catherine's nobleman Maxim Petrovich occupies a special place. The head of the house, the official Famusov, presents this “nobleman in the event” as his ideal to follow and addresses him young generation in the face of Chatsky. For Famusov, it is important that his uncle received orders, “he ate on gold, a hundred people were for services, he always traveled in a train”, but the most important thing is that “a century at court”. Thus, a person in Famus society was valued according to what rank he occupied and on “what he ate”. That is why this society is fighting to keep everything the same. The main life principle was adherence to traditions, steadfastness of authorities, social superiority. A nobleman in Russia was protected by the very fact of his origin, and if he followed the traditions and foundations of his class, society, worshiped his ideals, then good prospects opened before him. career development and material well-being. The main thing is not to be a loser, like Repetilov, or a crazy man, like Zagoretsky, whom Chatsky described as follows: “Molchalin! Zagoretsky will not die in it!” Zagoretsky is everywhere, he knows a lot about members of society, he is a “master of service”: he gets tickets for the performance of Sofya, two blacks for Khlestova and her sister Praskovya. Molchalin also strives to please everyone, while following the precepts of his father “to please all people without exception”:
Who else will settle things peacefully like that!
There the pug will stroke in time,
There, just in time, a card will be inserted.
A small official seeks to make a career, take a certain place in society, become like Famusov.
Among the representatives of this society there are those who already have ranks, for example, Foma Fomich. “Under three ministers there was the head of the department,” Molchalin introduces him, to which Chatsky caustically remarks: “The most empty person from the most stupid.” Before us is a portrait of a man who has succeeded in life, in contrast to Repetilov, who “would climb into the ranks, but met failures.” He wanted to marry the daughter of Baron von Klotz, who “met in the ministers”, get a promotion and a good dowry, but nothing came of it. Repetilov is an unlucky person and society does not take him seriously.
With great respect and reverence, the Famus society treats the Frenchman from Bordeaux, who was going “to Russia, to the barbarians”, but arrived as if “to his province”, “he did not meet a sound of a Russian or a Russian face”. Chatsky is indignant at blind admiration for everything foreign. The English club depicted by Griboedov can also be called a “blind imitation”. A parody of secret meetings can also be considered the "most secret union", gathering on Thursdays, whose members say to themselves: "We make noise, brother, we make noise." To create the appearance of activity is typical for this society, as it is typical for Russia as a whole, which Gogol would later show in his immortal comedy The Government Inspector.
But another phenomenon characteristic of the Moscow nobility is the omnipotence of women. Take, for example, Platon Mikhailovich Gorich, “a husband-boy, a husband-servant”, who is completely and completely under the heel of his wife. He is not entirely satisfied with the fact that Natalya Dmitrievna gives him instructions, like a mother to an unreasonable child: “You opened your whole body and unbuttoned your vest! .. Fasten it up!”, but, nevertheless, he doesn’t say a word to her across.
The same state of affairs reigns in another family: Prince Tugoukhovsky does everything that and how his wife says: he goes to bow, invites guests to the house. By the way these representatives of the weaker sex manage their husbands, we can judge them as powerful women who will not cede their power to anyone and will defend the existing order to the last.
Famusov also characterizes other women, episodic characters: “Judges for everything, everywhere, there are no judges over them” - they can command an army, sit in the Senate - they can do everything. The Famus society, despite the existence of an emperor, lives in a state with female rule. The author introduces readers to no less important and significant ladies who occupy a high position in society - Princess Marya Aleksevna and Tatiana Yurievna. Therefore, Molchalin advises Chatsky to go to Tatyana Yuryevna, because “bureaucrats and officials are all her friends and all relatives.” And Famusov himself is very worried about “what Princess Marya Aleksevna will say.” For him, a government official, the court of the princess is more terrible, because her word is very significant in society. Also, many are afraid of Khlestova's trial, because her opinion is also public. In addition, she, like many other representatives Famus Society He loves to gossip very much. The Countess-granddaughter is an embittered gossip, since "a whole century in girls." She is unhappy with the fact that many people go abroad and get married there.
Natalya Dmitrievna greets the princesses in a thin voice, they kiss and examine each other from head to toe, trying to find flaws, which will be a reason for gossip. Gossip reigns in the society of Moscow bars. It is the gossip about Chatsky's madness, launched by his beloved Sophia, that makes the hero a social madman, dooms an intelligent person to exile.
Among the off-stage characters, one can single out not only representatives of the "past century", but also Chatsky's like-minded people. This is Skalozub's cousin, who is condemned by society for the fact that "the rank followed him: he suddenly left the service, began to read books in the village." He missed the opportunity to get a rank, and this is unacceptable from the point of view of the Famus society, besides, for them, “study is the plague.” Or Prince Fyodor, the nephew of Princess Tugoukhovskaya, - “he is a chemist, he is a botanist”, “runs away from women”, as well as professors of the Pedagogical Institute, “practicing splits and disbelief”.
It should also be said about Liza, a maid in the Famusov house. She has a practical mind, worldly wisdom. She gives apt descriptions of the heroes: “Like all Moscow ones, your father is like that,” she says to Sofya about Famusov, who is “famous for monastic ignorance” and is not averse to hitting Liza, and that one after Petrush’s heart. About Skalozub, Lisa has a low opinion: “Speechy, but not painfully cunning.” To Chatsky, she is more supportive: "Who is so sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp." Lisa is the second reasoner in the comedy, expressing the opinion of the author himself. The characteristics of the characters given by Lisa are additional touches to the portraits created by Griboyedov. It is also interesting that the author gives associative surnames to many heroes: Repetilov, Tugoukhovsky, Skalozub, Khlestova, Molchalin.
Thus, episodic and off-stage characters help to reveal the characters of the main characters, expand the spatial and temporal framework of the play, and also help create a picture of the life and customs of the life of the Moscow nobility in the 10-20s of the XIX century, contribute to a deeper disclosure of the conflict of the play - the clash of the “century present” with “the past century”.

Tasks and tests on the topic "Off-stage and episodic characters and their role in A. S. Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit""

• The role of soft and hard signs - Spelling of vowels and consonants in significant parts of the word Grade 4

Let's move on to more familiar material. When analyzing epic and dramatic works, much attention has to be paid to the composition of the system of characters, that is, the actors of the work (we emphasize that the analysis is not of the characters themselves, but of their mutual connections and relationships, that is, the composition). For the convenience of approaching this analysis, it is customary to distinguish between the main characters (who are in the center of the plot, have independent characters and are directly related to all levels of the content of the work), secondary ones (also quite actively participating in the plot, having their own character, but which receive less authorial attention; in in a number of cases, their function is to help reveal the images of the main characters) and episodic (appearing in one or two episodes of the plot, often without their own character and standing on the periphery of the author's attention; their main function is to give impetus to the plot action at the right time or set off certain other features of the main and secondary characters). It would seem that a very simple and convenient division, but meanwhile in practice it often causes bewilderment and some confusion. The fact is that the category of a character (main, secondary or episodic) can be determined by two different parameters. The first is the degree of participation in the plot and, accordingly, the amount of text that this character is given. The second is the degree of importance of this character for revealing the sides of the artistic content. It is easy to analyze in cases where these parameters coincide: for example, in Turgenev's novel "Fathers and Sons" Bazarov - main character in both respects, Pavel Petrovich, Nikolai Petrovich, Arkady, Odintsova are secondary characters in all respects, and Sitnikov or Kukshina are episodic. But it often happens that the parameters of the character do not match; most often in the event that a person who is secondary or episodic from the point of view of the plot bears a large content load. So, for example, an obviously secondary (and if we take his need for the development of the plot, it’s completely episodic) character in the novel What Is To Be Done? Rakhmetov turns out to be the most important, the main one from the point of view of the embodiment of the author's ideal (“salt of the salt of the earth”), which Chernyshevsky even specifically stipulates when talking with the “astute reader” that Rakhmetov did not appear on the pages of the novel in order to take part in the plot, but in order to satisfy the main requirement of artistry - the proportionality of the composition: after all, if the reader is not shown at least a glimpse of the author's ideal, " special person”, then he will be mistaken in assessing such heroes of the novel as Kirsanov, Lopukhov, Vera Pavlovna. Another example is from Pushkin's story " Captain's daughter". It would seem that it is impossible to imagine a more episodic image than Empress Catherine: it seems that she exists only in order to bring the rather complicated story of the main characters to a happy denouement. But for the problematics and the idea of ​​the story, this image is of paramount importance, because without it the most important idea of ​​the story, the idea of ​​mercy, would not have received a semantic and compositional completion. Just as Pugachev at one time, in spite of all circumstances, pardons Grinev, so Ekaterina pardons him, although the circumstances of the case seem to point against him. Just as Grinev meets Pugachev as a person with a person, and only later he turns into an autocrat, so Masha meets with Catherine, not suspecting that the empress is in front of her, also like a person with a person. And if this image had not been in the system of the characters of the story, the composition would not have been closed, and consequently, the idea of ​​the human connection of all people, without distinction of estates and positions, would not have sounded artistically convincing, the idea that “doing alms” is one of the best manifestations human spirit but the solid foundation of human community is not cruelty and violence, but kindness and mercy.
In some artistic systems, we encounter such an organization of the system of characters that the question of their division into main, secondary and episodic loses all substantive meaning, although in a number of cases there are differences between individual characters in terms of plot and volume of text. No wonder Gogol wrote about his comedy The Inspector General that “every hero is here; the course and course of the play produces a shock to the whole machine: not a single wheel should remain as rusty and out of business. Continuing the comparison of the wheels in the car with the characters in the play, Gogol notes that some characters can only formally prevail over others: “And in the car, some wheels move more noticeably and more strongly, they can only be called the main ones.”
The same principle in the composition of the system of characters is sustained by Gogol in the poem " Dead Souls”, meanwhile, do we notice all the people created by the writer in the analysis? In the orbit of our attention, first of all, Chichikov is the “main” character (the word “main” involuntarily has to be put in quotation marks, because, as it gradually turns out, he is no more important than all the others). Further, landowners, sometimes officials, and - if time permits - one or two images from among Plyushkin's "souls" fall into our field of vision. And this is unusually small compared to the crowd of people that inhabits the space Gogol's poem. The number of people in the poem is simply amazing, they are at every step, and before we get to know Chichikov, we have already seen “two Russian peasants”, without a name and external signs, who do not play any role in the plot, do not characterize Chichikov in any way and in general seems to be of no use. And then we will meet a great many such figures - they appear, flash and disappear without a trace: Uncle Minyay and Uncle Mityai, Nozdryov’s “son-in-law” Mizhuev, boys begging Chichikov at the gates of the hotel, and especially one of them, “big hunter to stand on the heel”, and the staff captain Kisses, and a certain assessor Drobyazhkin, and Fetinya, “an expert in fluffing feather beds”, “some lieutenant who came from Ryazan, a big, apparently, hunter for boots, because he has already ordered four pairs and constantly trying on the fifth ... "There is no way to list all or at least a significant part. And the most interesting thing in Gogol's system of "episodic" characters is that each of them is unforgettably individual, and yet none of them has any functions that are usual for this type of characters; they do not give impetus to the plot action and do not help to characterize the main characters. In addition, let's pay attention to the detail, the detail in the depiction of these characters, which is clearly excessive for a "passing", peripheral hero. By giving your characters a peculiar manner of behavior, a special speech person, a characteristic feature of a portrait, etc. Gogol creates a vivid and memorable image - let us recall at least the peasants who talked about Manilovka and Zamanilovka, Ivan Antonovich Kuvshinnoye snout, the wife of Sobakevich, the daughter of an old clerk, whose face "has been threshing peas at night", the late husband of Korobochka, who loved that someone I scratched his heels at night, but without this I couldn’t fall asleep in any way ...
In the composition of Gogol's poem episodic characters differ from the main ones only quantitatively, and not qualitatively: in terms of the volume of the image, but not in terms of the degree of the author's interest in them, so that some Sysoi Pafnutevich or a completely unnamed mistress of a roadside tavern turn out to be no less interesting for the author than Chichikov or Plyushkin. And this already creates a special setting, a special meaningful meaning of the composition: before us are no longer images of individual people, but something broader and more significant - the image of the population, people, nation; peace, finally.
Almost the same composition of the system of characters is observed in Chekhov's plays, and here the matter is even more complicated: the main and secondary characters it is impossible to distinguish even by the degree of participation in the plot and the volume of the image. And here, the following composition has a close, but somewhat different than Gogol's meaningful meaning: Chekhov needs to show a certain set ordinary people, ordinary consciousness, among which there are no outstanding, outstanding heroes, on the images of which a play can be built, but for the most part they are nonetheless interesting and significant. For this, it is necessary to show a lot of equal characters, without singling out the main and secondary ones from them; only in this way is something in common revealed in them, namely, the drama of a life that has not taken place, a life that has passed or is passing in vain, without meaning and even without pleasure, inherent in everyday consciousness.
Quite complex compositional and semantic relationships can arise between the characters of the work. The simplest and most common case is the opposition of two images to each other. According to this principle of contrast, for example, the system of characters in Pushkin's Little Tragedies is built: Mozart - Salieri, Don Juan - Commander, Baron - his son, priest - Walsingam. A few more difficult case, when one character is opposed to all others, as, for example, in Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit", where even quantitative ratios are important: it was not for nothing that Griboedov wrote that in his comedy "twenty-five fools per one smart person." Much less often than opposition, the technique of a kind of “duality” is used, when the characters are compositionally united by similarity; Bobchinsky and Dobchinsky in Gogol can serve as a classic example.
Often, the compositional grouping of characters is carried out in accordance with the themes and problems that these characters embody. So, in Tolstoy's Anna Karenina, the main compositional grouping of characters is according to the thematic principle stated at the beginning of the novel: "All happy families are alike, each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way." Different families in the novel develop this theme in different ways. In the same way, in Turgenev's Fathers and Sons, in addition to the obvious opposition of Bazarov to almost all other characters, which is realized in the plot, there is another, more hidden and not embodied in the plot compositional principle, namely, the comparison by similarity of two groups of characters: on the one hand, these are Arkady and Nikolai Petrovich, on the other, Bazarov and his parents. In both cases, these characters embody the same problem - the problem of the relationship between generations. And Turgenev shows that, no matter what the individual people are, the problem remains essentially the same: it is an ardent love for children, for whom, in fact, the older generation lives, this is an inevitable misunderstanding, the desire of children to prove their “adulthood” and superiority, dramatic internal collisions as a result of this, and yet, in the end, the inevitable spiritual unity of generations.
It is especially interesting and useful to analyze the complex compositional relationships of the characters when they are not expressed in the plot: then hidden at first glance, but very significant compositional connections are established between the images, and besides, you begin to better understand the harmonic integrity in the construction of the work. What, let's say, is common between Napoleon and Helen; Kutuzov and Natasha? At first glance - nothing, these are characters from different storylines novel. But the fact of the matter is that different, seemingly absolutely separate lines are connected by strong compositional bonds, in particular, in the area of ​​the character system. And from this point of view, all the characters of the novel are divided into two groups: some live a natural life and embody the moral principles of love and spiritual self-improvement dear to Tolstoy; the life of others is unnatural, subordinate decoys, is fundamentally immoral and embodies the idea of ​​separating people, deeply hated by Tolstoy. In such a consideration, Natasha and Kutuzov, and Nikolai, and Marya Volkonskaya, and Pierre turn out to be interconnected, who at the same time are opposed to Napoleon, Helen, Anatole, Bergam, and others.
Even more complex and non-obvious compositional connections between the characters are established in Dostoevsky's novel Crime and Punishment. The character system is organized around the protagonist Raskolnikov; the rest of the characters are in complex relationships with him, and not only in the plot; and it is in extra-plot connections that the richness of the composition of the novel is revealed. First of all, Raskolnikov is compositionally connected with Sonya. In its own way life position they are opposed in the first place. But not only. They also have something in common, primarily in pain for a person and in suffering, which is why Sonya Raskolnikov understands so easily and immediately. In addition, as Raskolnikov himself emphasizes, they are both criminals, both murderers, only Sonya killed herself, and Raskolnikov killed the other. Here the comparison ends and the opposition begins again: for Dostoevsky, these two “murders” are not at all equivalent, moreover, they have a fundamentally opposite worldview meaning. And yet, both criminals, who are united by the gospel motif of sacrifice for humanity, the cross, redemption, it was not by chance that Dostoevsky emphasized the strange neighborhood of "a murderer and a harlot who came together to read an eternal book." So, Sonya is both the antipode and a kind of double of Raskolnikov. The rest of the characters are also organized around Raskolnikov on the same principle; it is, as it were, repeatedly reflected in its counterparts, but reflected with distortions, or incompletely. So, Razumikhin approaches Raskolnikov with his rationality and confidence that life can be arranged without God, relying only on oneself, but he is sharply opposed to him, since he does not accept the idea of ​​"blood according to conscience." Porfiry Petrovich is the antipode of Raskolnikov, but there is something Raskolnikov in him, because he understands the main character faster and better than anyone. Luzhin takes the practical part of Raskolnikov's theory of the right to crime, but completely emasculates all sublime meaning from it. In the "new currents" he sees only a justification for his boundless egoism, believing that the new morality gives him the sanction to try only for his own benefit, not stopping at any moral prohibitions. Luzhin reflects Raskolnikov's philosophy in a distorted mirror of cynicism, and Raskolnikov himself looks with disgust at Luzhin and his theory - thus, we have another double, another twin antipode. Svidrigailov, as is typical of an ironist, brings Raskolnikov's ideas to their logical conclusion, advising him to stop thinking about the welfare of mankind, about questions of "man and citizen". But, like everyone penetrated, Svidrigailov does not accept Raskolnikov's theory personally for himself, being skeptical of any philosophy. And Svidrigailov disgusts Raskolnikov; they again turn out to be mismatched twins, antipodal twins. Such a composition of the system of characters is caused by the need to raise and solve complex moral and philosophical questions, to consider the theory of the protagonist and its implementation in practice in a variety of applications and aspects. The composition here, therefore, works to reveal the problem.

Character - a kind of artistic image, the subject of action, experience, expression in the work. Characters + plot - the basis objective world. Most of the time, the character is human. But! Non-human characters are carriers of moral qualities.

Character (an artistic image that embodies a given character with varying degrees of aesthetic perfection) vs character (socially significant features that manifest themselves quite clearly in the behavior and mentality of people). The number of characters and characters usually does not match. There are people who have no character.

Type is a higher degree of generalization than character. When evaluating character, its national, universal significance is important. The means of revealing the character are the components of the objective world. Characters are judged from an aesthetic point of view - how fully they express character.

Off-stage heroes - economy of means of the image; borrowed characters.

The character sphere includes 1) individuals 2) group images (seven temporarily obligated men) 3) collective heroes (crowd).

The system of characters is made up of constituent elements (characters) and structure (a relatively stable way of connecting elements). This or that image receives the status of a character precisely as an element of the system. At least two entities are required to form a system. The most important property of the structure is hierarchy.

The connection between the characters: plot vs the relationship of characters. Most often, the plot roles of the characters correspond to their significance as characters. Secondary characters - set off the various properties of the main troubled hero.

The creative concept creates the unity of the compositions.

Off-stage image vs bifurcation, transformation - a commemoration of various beginnings in a person. The non-participation of the character in the main action is needed as a symbol, a reasoner.

The study of the character as a character.

Characters in lyrics - people - objects of perception of the lyrical subject. Pospelov: the character exists in those works where the object of lyrical meditation is a separate personality, embodying the characteristic of social life, possessing individual traits. A broader concept is any person who has fallen into the zone of perception of the subject. Lyrics - character and characterless. The character in the lyrics is revealed through the attitude of the lyrical subject. The most important way to create characters is nominations: primary (names, nicknames, pronouns) and secondary (qualities, signs). In the lyrics, the importance of nominations-pronouns increases. Characters rarely appear in lyrics - there are few means for disclosure. But there are character systems.

Copyright Contest -K2
An artistic creation must be fully prepared in the soul of the artist before he takes up the pen ... He must first see faces in front of him, from mutual relations which his drama or story is formed ...

V.G. Belinsky

As you know, the composition of a literary work includes elements:
- arrangement of images-characters and grouping of other images;
- plot composition
- composition of non-plot elements;
- ways of narration (from the author, from the narrator, from the hero; in the form of an oral story, in the form of diaries, letters)
- composition of details (details of the situation, behavior);
- speech composition (stylistic devices).

In this article, we will talk about the character system

1. Character system: elements and structure
2. Elements of the character sphere
Categories of characters - main, secondary, episodic, off-stage
Parameters for defining the category of characters
3. The structure of the character sphere
Number of characters
Hierarchy of the character system
Connections between characters - opposition, grouping by thematic principle, juxtaposition
4. Resume

CHARACTER SYSTEM

Character ( literary hero) - this is actor story artwork.
The organization of characters in a literary and artistic work appears as a system of characters.

The character system should be viewed from two perspectives:
1. as a system of relationships between characters (struggle, clashes, etc.) - that is, from the point of view of the content of the work;
2. as the embodiment of the principle of composition and a means of characterizing the characters - that is, as the position of the author.

Like any system, the character sphere is characterized through its constituent ELEMENTS (characters) and STRUCTURE (relatively stable method = the law of connection of elements).

ELEMENTS OF CHARACTER SPHERE

There are the following CATEGORIES OF CHARACTERS:

MAIN - are in the center of the plot, have independent characters and are directly related to all levels of the content of the work,

SECONDARY - also quite actively participating in the plot, having their own character, but which receive less author's attention; in some cases, their function is to help reveal the images of the main characters,

EPISODIC - appearing in one or two episodes of the plot, often not having their own character and standing on the periphery of the author's attention; their main function is to give an impetus to the plot action at the right time or to set off certain features of the main and secondary characters).

In addition, there are also so-called. EXTERNAL characters in question, but they do not participate in the action (for example, in A. S. Griboyedov's Woe from Wit, this is Princess Marya Alekseevna, whose opinions everyone is so afraid of, or Uncle Famusova, a certain Maxim Petrovich).
For example, Defoe's novel "Robinson Crusoe" seems to be about the life of one person. However, the novel is densely populated. Robinson's memories and dreams are filled with different faces (= off-stage characters): a father who warned his son against the sea; dead companions, with whose fate he often compares his own; the basket-maker, whose work he observed as a child; the desired comrade is "a living person with whom I could talk." The role of non-stage characters, as if casually mentioned, is very important: after all, Robinson on his island is both alone and not alone, since he personifies the combined human experience, diligence and enterprise of his contemporaries and compatriots.

What PARAMETERS determine the category of characters?

There are two of them. It:
- the degree of participation in the plot and, accordingly, the amount of text that this character is given;
- the degree of importance of this character for revealing the sides of the artistic content.

Most often, these parameters coincide. So, in "Fathers and Sons" Bazarov is the main character in both respects, Pavel Petrovich, Nikolai Petrovich, Arkady, Odintsova are secondary characters in all respects, and Sitnikov or Kukshina are episodic.

An example is Pushkin's The Captain's Daughter.
“It would seem that it is impossible to imagine a more episodic image than Empress Catherine: it seems that she exists only in order to bring the rather intricate story of the main characters to a happy denouement. But for the problematics and the idea of ​​the story, this image is of paramount importance, because without it the most important idea of ​​the story, the idea of ​​mercy, would not have received a semantic and compositional completion. Just as Pugachev at one time, in spite of all circumstances, pardons Grinev, so Ekaterina pardons him, although the circumstances of the case seem to point against him. Just as Grinev meets Pugachev as a person with a person, and only later he turns into an autocrat, so Masha meets with Catherine, not suspecting that the empress is in front of her, also like a person with a person. And had it not been for this image in the system of characters in the story, the composition would not have been closed, and consequently, the idea of ​​the human connection of all people, without distinction of estates and positions, would not have sounded artistically convincing, the idea that “doing alms” is one of the best manifestations of human spirit, but a solid foundation of human community - not cruelty and violence, but kindness and mercy "(c)

And it also happens that the question of dividing characters into categories generally loses all meaningful meaning.

For example, in the composition dead souls» episodic characters differ from the main ones only quantitatively, not qualitatively: in terms of the volume of the image, but not in terms of the degree of the author's interest in them.
The number of characters in the poem literally rolls over. Uncle Minyai and Uncle Mityai, Nozdrev’s son-in-law Mizhuev, the boys begging Chichikov at the gates of the hotel, and especially one of them, “a great hunter to stand on the heels”, and staff captain Kisses, and a certain assessor Drobyazhkin, and Fetinya, a master of whipping featherbeds, some lieutenant who came from Ryazan, a big, apparently, hunter for boots, because he had already ordered four pairs and was constantly trying on the fifth, and further, further, further.
These figures do not give impetus to the plot action and in no way characterize GG - Chichikov. Moreover, the detailing of these figures is clearly excessive - let us recall the men who talked about Manilovka and Zamanilovka, Ivan Antonovich Kuvshinnoye snout, the wife of Sobakevich, the daughter of an old clerk, whose face was threshing peas at night, the late husband of Korobochka, who loved someone sometimes I scratched his heels at night, but without this I couldn’t fall asleep at all.
However, this is not an excess and certainly not the author's inability to build a plot. It is, on the contrary, thin compositional technique, with the help of which Gogol created a special installation. He showed not just images of individual people, but something broader and more significant - the image of the population, the people, the nation. Peace, finally.

Almost the same composition of the system of characters is observed in Chekhov's plays, and the matter is even more complicated: the main and secondary characters cannot be distinguished even by the degree of participation in the plot and the volume of the image. With the help of this system, Chekhov shows “a certain multitude of ordinary people, ordinary consciousness, among which there are no outstanding, outstanding heroes, on whose images one can build a play, but for the most part they are nonetheless interesting and significant. For this, it is necessary to show a lot of equal characters, without singling out the main and secondary ones from them; only in this way is something in common revealed in them, namely, the drama of a failed life, inherent in everyday consciousness, a life that has passed or is passing in vain, without meaning and even without pleasure "(c)

STRUCTURE OF THE CHARACTER SPHERE

How many characters are needed and enough?

While working on The Three Sisters, Chekhov sneered at himself: “I am not writing a play, but some kind of confusion. There are many characters - it is possible that I will go astray and quit writing. And at the end he recalled: “It was terribly difficult to write“ Three Sisters ”. After all, there are three heroines, each should be on her own model, and all three are the general's daughters!

Every author is faced with the problem - are all the characters obligatory? Are there redundant ones among them? And what to do if you want to write a mass scene, but there is no desire to produce Persians?
Like a classic, where “red natives and natives (positive and countless hordes)” are introduced into the play “citizen Jules Verne”. (Bulgakov. Crimson Island).

So, NUMBER OF CHARACTERS.

At least two subjects are needed to form a system of characters.
As an option - there may be a split of the hero - Semyon Semenovich with glasses and without glasses (Kharms, "Cases").

The maximum number of characters is not limited.
According to some estimates, there are about 600 characters in Tolstoy's "War and Peace", in " human comedy» Balzac - about 2,000. (For comparison, the population of a medieval Western European city was 1-3 thousand inhabitants).
The numbers are impressive.
And immediately the question is - can you create a work with a similar number of characters? No, stuffing characters into a story is easy. But then you have to manage them - so that your thing does not look like a telephone directory.

CHARACTERS MUST INTERACT WITH EACH OTHER.

Some succeed. For example, King's multi-character items are Needful Things, Armageddon (another translation is The Stand), Under the Dome.

Or classic example- Homer, The Odyssey. Philologists have established more than 1,700 connections between 342 characters in the poem. There is a connection between the characters if, according to the plot, they meet, talk to each other, quote each other's words to a third character, or it is clear from the text that they are familiar. The structure of the Odyssey surprisingly resembles social network Like Facebook or Twitter. Is history repeating itself?

So, the system of characters is the interconnections and relations between the Persians, that is, a concept related to the composition of the work.

The most important property of the character system is HIERARCHY.
We have already talked about this here:

In most cases, the character is at the point where the three rays intersect.
The first is friends, associates (friendly relations).
The second is enemies, ill-wishers (hostile relations).
Third - other strangers (neutral relations)
These three rays (and the people in them) create a strict hierarchical structure.

We continue the conversation.

“The plot in its formation is, first of all, the creation of a system of characters. An important milestone is the establishment of the central figure and then the establishment of the rest of the characters, who are located around this figure on a descending ladder ”(G.A. Shengeli)

The simplest and most common case is the OPPOSITE of two images to each other.
Mozart and Salieri, Grinev and Shvabrin, Oblomov and Stolz, Malchish-Kibalchish and Malchish-Plokhish.

A somewhat more complicated case, when one character is opposed to all others, as, for example, in Griboedov's comedy Woe from Wit, where even quantitative ratios are important: it was not for nothing that Griboedov wrote that in his comedy "twenty-five fools for one smart person."

“The characters are grouped in the work. The simplest case is the division of all actors into two camps: friends and enemies of the protagonist. In more complex works, there may be several such groups, and each of these groups is connected by various relationships with other persons ”(Tomashevsky B.V. Poetics)

So, in Anna Karenina, the main compositional grouping of characters is according to the thematic principle stated at the beginning of the novel: “All happy families are alike, each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.” Different families in the novel develop this theme in different ways.

In Fathers and Sons, in addition to the opposition of Bazarov to all other characters that is obvious and realized in the plot, another, more hidden and not embodied in the plot, compositional principle is carried out, namely, the comparison of the similarity of two groups of characters: on the one hand, this is Arkady and Nikolai Petrovich, on the other - Bazarov and his parents. “In both cases, these characters embody the same problem - the problem of the relationship between generations. Turgenev shows that, no matter what the individual people may be, the problem remains essentially the same: it is an ardent love for children, for whom, in fact, the older generation lives, this is an inevitable misunderstanding, the desire of children to prove their “adulthood” and superiority, dramatic internal conflicts as a result of this, and yet, in the end, the inevitable spiritual unity of generations "(c)

There are also more complex compositional connections between the characters.

An example is "Crime and Punishment".
“The character system is organized around the main character Raskolnikov; the rest of the characters are in complex relationships with him, and not only in the plot; and it is in extra-plot connections that the richness of the composition of the novel is revealed.
First of all, Raskolnikov is compositionally connected with Sonya. In their life position, they are primarily opposed. But not only. They also have something in common, primarily in pain for a person and in suffering, which is why Sonya Raskolnikov understands so easily and immediately. In addition, as Raskolnikov himself emphasizes, they are both criminals, both murderers, only Sonya killed herself, and Raskolnikov killed the other. Here the comparison ends and the opposition begins again: for Dostoevsky, these two “murders” are not at all equivalent, moreover, they have a fundamentally opposite worldview meaning. And yet, both criminals, who are united by the gospel motif of sacrifice for humanity, the cross, redemption, it is not by chance that Dostoevsky emphasized the strange neighborhood of “a murderer and a harlot who came together to read eternal book". So, Sonya is both the antipode and a kind of double of Raskolnikov.

The rest of the characters are also organized around Raskolnikov on the same principle; it is, as it were, repeatedly reflected in its counterparts, but reflected with distortions, or incompletely.
So, Razumikhin approaches Raskolnikov with his rationality and confidence that life can be arranged without God, relying only on oneself, but he is sharply opposed to him, since he does not accept the idea of ​​"blood according to conscience."

Porfiry Petrovich is the antipode of Raskolnikov, but there is something Raskolnikov in him, because he understands the main character faster and better than anyone.

Luzhin takes the practical part of Raskolnikov's theory of the right to crime, but completely emasculates all sublime meaning from it. In the "new currents" he sees only a justification for his boundless egoism, believing that the new morality gives him the sanction to try only for his own benefit, not stopping at any moral prohibitions. Luzhin reflects Raskolnikov's philosophy in a distorted mirror of cynicism, and Raskolnikov himself looks with disgust at Luzhin and his theory - thus, we have another double, another twin antipode.

Svidrigailov, as is typical of an ironist, brings Raskolnikov's ideas to their logical conclusion, advising him to stop thinking about the welfare of mankind, about questions of "man and citizen". But, like everyone penetrated, Svidrigailov does not accept Raskolnikov's theory personally for himself, being skeptical of any philosophy. And Svidrigailov disgusts Raskolnikov; they again turn out to be mismatched twins, antipodal twins.

Such a composition of the system of characters is caused by the need to raise and solve complex moral and philosophical questions, to consider the theory of the protagonist and its implementation in practice in a variety of applications and aspects. The composition here, therefore, works to reveal the problematics ”(c) L.V. Chernets. Character system.

The system of characters is the interconnections and relations between the Persians, that is, the concept related to the composition of the work.

The system of characters reveals the content of the works, but - it itself is one of the sides of their composition.

The compositional grouping of characters is carried out in accordance with the THEMES and PROBLEMS that these characters embody.

The main characters, those whose fate attracted the writer's special attention, are called heroes. Other characters are divided into secondary, auxiliary and random or situational. In this case, the following complications are possible: minor characters can, while attracting the attention of the reader, at the same time attract his sympathy or dissympathy; in the first case, the author usually seeks to put limits on the interest of the reader. (c) G.A. Shengeli.

There are two types of RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN CHARACTERS - according to the plot (thesis-antithesis) and according to the ratio of characters.

© Copyright: Copyright Contest -K2, 2014
Publication Certificate No. 214010101267
discussion

The concept of a character

In literature, the term "character" is used to refer to the image of a person who participates in the events of a work of art.

Let's compare various interpretations this term.

The term "character" is taken from French and is of Latin origin. The word "persona" was used to refer to the mask worn by the actor, and later - the face depicted in the work of art.

In the same sense as "character" in modern literary criticism, the phrases "character" and "literary hero" are often used.

N.D. Tamarchenko in literary encyclopedia terms and concepts defines the term "character" as well as "literary hero":

“A literary hero is a character in literary work, And also the bearer of a point of view on reality, on oneself and other characters.

The concept of "character" is broader than the concept of "image".

A character is any character in a work, therefore it is wrong to use this concept to replace the concepts of “image” or “ lyrical hero". But we note that in relation to the secondary persons of the work, we can only use this concept. Sometimes you can come across this definition: a character is a person who does not influence the event, is not important in revealing the main problems and ideological conflicts.

Character (French personage, from Latin persona - personality, person) - a character, as well as one of the basic elements of the subjective structure of a literary work, along with the author - the creator of the narrator (or narrator). P. is a secondary literary subject (P. and the narrator / narrator are created by the author - the primary speech subject), his word (remarks, dialogues, monologues) is the subject of the image for the narrator or narrator.

Character (from lat. persona - person, personality) - the protagonist of the drama, novel, story and other works of art. The term is more often used for secondary actors.

Character (French personage, from Latin persona, face mask), usually the same as a literary hero. In literary criticism, the term "P." is used in a narrower, but not always the same sense, which is often revealed only in the context.

Character - any character (or allegorical figure) of a literary work, regardless of its significance in the narrative and personal qualities.

Character (from the French personage - personality, person) - the protagonist of a work of art. As a rule, the character takes an active part in the development of actions, but the author or one of the literary heroes can also talk about him. Characters are main and secondary. In some works, the focus is on one character (“A Hero of Our Time”), in others, the writer’s attention is drawn to whole line characters ("War and Peace").

Character (from lat. persona - person, face, mask) - a type of artistic image, the subject of action, experiences, statements in the work. In the same meaning in modern literary criticism, the phrases literary hero, character are used (mainly in drama, where the list of characters traditionally follows the title of the play).

literary character is, in essence, a series of successive appearances of one person within a given text. Throughout one text, the hero can be found in a variety of forms.

A character is a protagonist of a drama, novel, short story and other works of art. The term "P." often used in relation to minor characters.

Under the character, in the strict sense of this term, one should understand a kind of artistic image of the character, endowed with external and internal individuality. A common synonymous series: character and character complements the no less popular phrase literary hero.

In epic and dramatic works, human individuals are depicted with their inherent behavior and appearance. understanding of the world. These individuals are usually called either characters, or actors, or heroes of the work, or, finally, characters.

A character is a kind of artistic image, the subject of an action. This term in a certain context can be replaced by the concepts of "actor" or "literary hero", but in a strict theoretical sense, these are different terms. This interchangeability is explained by the fact that in Latin the word "character" means an actor playing a role in a mask, expressing a certain type of character, therefore, literally a character.

The terms "character", "character", "hero", "character" are divorced in all the works of scientists.

The word "character" refers to the object of artistic knowledge: the embodiment in human individuality of the general, essential, socially determined properties of a number of people.

The word "hero" is unsuccessful in relation to characters in which negative traits predominate ... The expression "actor" does not look convincing when applied to characters who manifest themselves in actions less than in emotional perception of the environment and reflections on what they saw.

The hero is one of the central characters in a literary work, active in incidents that are essential for the development of the action, focusing the reader's attention on himself.

The phrase "literary hero" arose in ancient times under the influence of ancient Greek mythology. In myths, along with gods and titans, there were so-called heroes, descendants of mixed marriages, demigods, half-humans. Gradually, the status of the protagonist decreased, but they continued, obeying tradition, to call him a hero, and if such a character was at the very bottom of the social ladder: Bashmachkin, Plyushkin. But, obviously, it is embarrassing to call someone who lacks heroic traits a hero.

Choosing the optimal terminological option, we prefer to call images of people endowed with high positive content “heroes”, and “characters” or “actors” (usually in dramatic work) - the rest. The last two terms are neutral, do not carry an inappropriate evaluative beginning.

Speaking of this concept, we must consider the content of the character's image. In each image-character there is a single and a common. According to the degree of generalization, artistic images can be divided into individual, characteristic, typical.

Individual images are original, unique. With their help, the writer strives to emphasize the exceptional features of the hero.

A characteristic image - already generalizes. Nm contains features inherent in many people of a certain era and a certain social stratum.

A typical image is the highest level characteristic image. In a typical image, the most significant and indicative features and qualities of people of a certain era, belonging to a particular social group, nation, are collected, concentrated. The universal content of image-types makes their names common nouns far beyond the environment and era that gave rise to them.

Consider the character system.

The artistic form of the work is made up of individual images. Their sequence and interaction with each other - important point, without which it is impossible to understand either the shades of artistic content or the originality of the form that embodies it.

Like any system, the character sphere of a work is characterized through its constituent elements (characters) and structure - “a relatively stable way (law) of connecting elements” .

The system of characters is the correlation of all characters in a work of art, their classification: main and secondary, male and female, episodic, off-stage (in dramatic work). The characters, as a rule, are connected by the course of the events depicted, the artistic logic of the author, and form a complete system. An analysis of this correlation, understanding the features of building a system of characters help to understand the artistic intent of the author.

The character system is a certain ratio of characters. There are three types of characters:

main

secondary

episodic

The main characters are in the center of the plot, so the main attention of the reader is directed to them; have independent characters, are directly related to all levels of the content of the work.

Secondary characters are quite actively involved in the plot, have their own character, but they receive less authorial attention; in some cases, their function is to help reveal the images of the main characters. They help express the idea of ​​the work.

Episodic characters appear in several episodes of the plot, often do not have their own character, stand on the periphery of the author's attention; their main function is to give an impetus to the plot action at the right time or to set off certain aspects of the main and secondary characters.

The character system is a strict hierarchical structure. Heroes tend to be differentiated based on their artistic value(values). They are separated by the degree of author's attention (or the frequency of the image), the ontological purpose and the functions they perform. Traditionally, main, secondary and episodic heroes are distinguished.

The main characters, those whose fate attracted the writer's special attention, are called heroes. Other characters are divided into secondary, auxiliary and random or situational. "In this case, the following complications are possible: secondary characters can, attracting the reader's attention, at the same time attract his sympathy or dissympathy; in the first case, the author usually seeks to put limits on the interest of the reader.

In general, regarding the classification of characters, we can talk about the well-known polyphony research literature, the use of terms in most cases is determined individual approach researcher. So stand out" central character, whose psychology and point of view on events is revealed by the author, "the centralizing role of the main character" is noted, as well as "side characters" and "secondary characters". In the system of structural analysis, Yu.M. Lotman distinguishes "two groups of characters: mobile and immobile", i.e. "actors and the conditions and circumstances of the action".

The main characters are always "in sight", always in the center of the work. They have a strong character and strong will. And that is why they actively master and transform artistic reality: they predetermine events, perform actions, conduct dialogues. The main characters are characterized by a well-remembered appearance, a clear value orientation. Sometimes they express the main, generalizing idea of ​​creation; become the "mouthpiece" of the author.

The number of characters in the center of a literary narrative can be different. I.A. Bunin in "The Life of Arseniev" we see only one main character. In the Old Russian "The Tale of Peter and Fevronia" in the center there are two characters. In the novel by J. London "The Hearts of Three" there are already three main characters.

Secondary characters are grouped around the main characters, participating in the struggle on one side or the other ( the most important property structures - hierarchy). At the same time, the variety of specific characters in archaic plot genres lends itself to classification.

Secondary characters are next to the main characters, but somewhat behind them, in the background artistic image. The heroes of the second row, as a rule, are the parents, relatives, friends, acquaintances, colleagues of the heroes of the first row. Characters and portraits of secondary characters are rarely detailed; rather - appear dotted. These heroes help the main ones to “open up”, ensure the development of the action.

To understand the main problematic hero (heroes), secondary characters can play a large role, shading the various properties of his character; as a result, a whole system of parallels and contrasts arises, dissimilarities in the similar and similarities in the dissimilar.

episodic heroes are on the periphery of the world of work. They do not quite have characters and act as passive executors of the author's will. Their functions are purely official. They appear in only one selected episode, which is why they are called episodic. Such are the servants and messengers in ancient literature, janitors, drivers, casual acquaintances in literature XIX century.

Secondary, episodic characters, to whom the author pays much less attention than the central figures, in most cases play an auxiliary role ... The role of secondary characters is often reduced to the function of a “spring”, setting the plot mechanism in motion.

But it often happens that the parameters of a character do not match, most often in cases where a minor or episodic person, from the point of view of the plot, carries a large content load.

Complex compositional and semantic relationships can arise between the characters of the work: the opposition of two images to each other, one character is opposed to all others, the characters are united by similarity.

The characters in a real work of fiction make up a complete system. They are somehow "linked" to each other not only by the course of the events depicted, but also, ultimately, by the logic of the writer's artistic thinking. The system of characters reveals the content of the works, but it itself is one of the sides of their composition.

The character is the protagonist of a work of art with its inherent behavior, appearance, world outlook.

In the same sense as "character" in modern literary criticism, the phrases "character" and "literary hero" are often used. But the concept of "character" is neutral and does not contain an evaluative function.

According to the degree of generalization, artistic images are divided into individual, characteristic, typical.

AT works of art a special system is formed between the characters. The character system is a strict hierarchical structure.

The character system is a certain ratio of characters.

There are three types of characters:

main

secondary

episodic

By the degree of participation in the plot and, accordingly, the amount of text that this character is given

By the degree of importance of this character for revealing the sides of the artistic content.