The story of a little man in Russian literature. The image of a man of renaissance in literature. A. Pushkin "The Bronze Horseman"

"Little Man" is a literary character characteristic of the era of realism. Such a hero in works of art could be a petty official, a philistine, or even a poor nobleman. As a rule, its main feature is low social status... This image is found in the works of both domestic and foreign authors. The theme of the little man in Russian literature occupies a special position. After all, this image received a particularly vivid expression in the work of such writers as Pushkin, Dostoevsky, Gogol.

The great Russian poet and writer showed his readers a pure and unspoiled soul. Main character one of the works included in the cycle "Belkin's Tale", he knows how to rejoice, sympathize and suffer. However, the life of the Pushkin character was initially not easy.

With the words that everyone curses the station attendants, the famous story begins, without an analysis of which it is impossible to consider the topic "The Little Man in Russian Literature". Pushkin portrayed a calm and happy character in his work. Samson Vyrin remained a good-natured and good-natured person, despite many years of hard service. And only the separation from his daughter deprived him of his peace of mind. Samson can survive a hard life and thankless work, but he is not able to exist without the only close person in the world. The stationmaster dies of longing and loneliness. The theme of the little man in Russian literature is multifaceted. The hero of the story "The Stationmaster", perhaps like no other, is capable of evoking compassion in the reader.

Akaki Akakievich

A less attractive character is the hero of the story "The Overcoat". Gogol's character is a collective image. There are many like Bashmachkin. They are everywhere, but people do not notice them, because they do not know how to appreciate in a person his immortal soul. The topic of the little man in Russian literature is discussed from year to year at school literature lessons. Indeed, thanks to a careful reading of the story "The Overcoat", a young reader can take a different look at the people around him. The development of the theme of the little man in Russian literature began precisely with this semi-fabulous work. It is not for nothing that the great classic Dostoevsky once uttered the famous phrase: “We all left the Overcoat”.

Until the middle of the 20th century, the image of a little man was used by Russian and foreign writers. He is found not only in the works of Dostoevsky, but also in the books of Gerhart Hauptmann, Thomas Mann.

Maxim Maksimovich

The little man in Lermontov's work is outstanding personality suffering from inaction. The image of Maksim Maksimovich is first encountered in the story "Bela". Thanks to Lermontov, the theme of the little man in Russian literature began to serve as a literary device for a critical depiction of such vices of social society as kneeling and careerism.

Maxim Maksimovich is a nobleman. However, he belongs to an impoverished family, moreover, he does not have influential connections. Therefore, despite his age, he is still in the rank of staff captain. However, Lermontov portrayed the little man as not offended and humiliated. His hero knows what honor is. Maksim Maksimovich is a decent man and an old campaigner. In many ways, it resembles Pushkin's from the story "The Captain's Daughter".

Marmeladov

V small man pathetic and worthless. Marmeladov realizes his uselessness and uselessness. Telling Raskolnikov the story of his moral decline, he is hardly able to evoke sympathy. He says: “Poverty is not a vice. Poverty is a vice. " And these words seem to justify the weakness and impotence of Marmeladov.

In the novel "Crime and Punishment", the theme of the little man in Russian literature is especially developed. An essay based on Dostoevsky's work is a standard assignment in a literature lesson. But, regardless of what name this written task has, it is impossible to complete it without first compiling a description of Marmeladov and his daughter. At the same time, it should be understood that Sonya, although she is also a typical little person, differs significantly from other "humiliated and insulted". She is not able to change anything in her life. However, this fragile girl has tremendous spiritual wealth and inner beauty. Sonya is the personification of purity and mercy.

"Poor people"

This novel also deals with “little people”. Devushkin and Varvara Alekseevna are heroes whom Dostoevsky created with an eye on Gogol's "The Overcoat". However, the image and theme of the little man in Russian literature began precisely with the works of Pushkin. And they have a lot in common with Dostoevsky's novels. The story of the stationmaster is told by himself. "Little people" in Dostoevsky's novels are also inclined towards confession. They not only realize their insignificance, but also strive to comprehend its cause, act as philosophers. It is enough just to recall Devushkin's lengthy messages and Marmeladov's long monologue.

Tushin

The system of images in War and Peace is extremely complex. Tolstoy's characters are heroes from the highest aristocratic circle. There is little insignificant and pitiful in them. But why is the great epic novel remembered then, as the topic of the little man is discussed in Russian literature? An essay-reasoning is a task in which it is worth giving a description of such a hero as from the novel "War and Peace". At first glance, he is ridiculous and awkward. However, this impression is misleading. In battle, Tushin shows his courage and fearlessness.

In Tolstoy's huge work, this hero is allotted only a few pages. However, the theme of the little man in Russian literature of the 19th century is impossible without considering the image of Tushin. The characterization of this character is very important for understanding the views of the author himself.

Little people in Leskov's work

The theme of the little man in Russian literature of the 18-19th century is disclosed to the maximum. Leskov in his work also did not bypass her. However, his characters are significantly different from the image of a little man, which can be seen in Pushkin's stories and Dostoevsky's novels. Ivan Flyagin is a hero in appearance and soul. But this hero can be classified as "little people". First of all, because many trials fall to his lot, but he does not complain about fate and does not cry.

The image of a little man in Chekhov's stories

Such a hero is often found on the pages of the works of this writer. The image of the little man is especially vividly depicted in satirical stories. The petty official is a typical hero of Chekhov's works. In the story "Death of an Official" there is an image of a little man. Chervyakov is ruled by an inexplicable fear of his boss. Unlike the heroes of the story "The Overcoat", the character from Chekhov's story does not suffer from oppression and bullying on the part of colleagues and the boss. Chervyakov is killed by fear of higher ranks, eternal admiration for the authorities.

"Triumph of the winner"

Chekhov continued the theme of admiration for the authorities in this story. However, the little people in Triumph of the Winner are portrayed in a much more satirical light. A father, in order to procure a good position for his son, humiliates himself with ingratiating himself and gross flattery.

But it is not only the people who express them that are guilty of low thoughts and unworthy behavior. All this is the result of the order prevailing in the social and political order. Chervyakov would not have asked for forgiveness so zealously if he had not known about the possible consequences of the mistake.

In the works of Maxim Gorky

The play "At the Bottom" tells about the inhabitants of the shelter. Each of the characters in this work is a small person, deprived of the essentials for a normal life. He is not able to change anything. The only thing he has the right to do is to believe in the fables of the wanderer Luke. Compassion and warmth are what the heroes of the play "At the Bottom" need. The author encourages readers to be compassionate. And in this his views coincide with the point of view of Dostoevsky.

Yolkov

"Pomegranate Bracelet" is a story about the great love of a little man. Zheltkov once falls in love with married woman, and he remains true to this feeling until the last minutes of his life. There is an abyss between them. And the hero of the work "Garnet Bracelet" does not hope for a reciprocal feeling.

Yolkov has the characteristic features of a small person, not only because he occupies a low social position. He, like Bashmachkin and the stationmaster, is left alone with his pain. Feelings Zheltkov serve as the basis for jokes and ironic sketches of Prince Shein. Other heroes are able to assess the depth of suffering of the "little man" only after his death.

Karandyshev

The image of a little man has similarities with similar characters in the works of Dostoevsky and Chekhov. However, the humiliated Karandyshev in the play "Dowry" does not evoke either pity or sympathy. He strives with all his might to get into a society in which he is not expected. And for the insults that he endures for many years, he is ready to take revenge.

Katerina Kabanova also belongs to the category of small people. But these heroines are integral personalities, and therefore do not know how to adapt and dodge. Death for them becomes the only way out of the situation in which they find themselves due to the inertia of the social system.

The image of the little man in literature developed in the nineteenth century. However, in modern literature, he gave way to other heroes. As you know, many foreign authors were influenced by Russian literature. Proof of this is the works of XX writers, in which characters are often found reminiscent of Chekhov's and Gogol's heroes. An example is Thomas Mann's Little Herr Friedemann. The hero of this novel lives his short life imperceptibly and dies in the same way, from the indifference and cruelty of those around him.

In the center of Moscow. Jewelry workshop in the center of Moscow "Vzlate" welcomes you to its website! Our workshop offers a wide range of jewelry making, repairing and engraving services.

The image of a person in literature

Frankly speaking, for us, the Japanese, after the Second World War, or more precisely, after the October Revolution, Soviet Russia, although it remained geographically close, began to be perceived as a distant country.

The USSR is the closest country to Japan in terms of geographical location. Despite this, contacts between us are very limited and there is mutual mistrust.

At the same time, many Japanese are well acquainted with and love the works of Russian literature of the pre-revolutionary period. The editions of the complete works of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, which occupy one of the main places among the editions of the complete works of the world classics of literature in Japan, are periodically repeated. The reason for this love for the works of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky lies in the fact that the essence of humanism is especially deeply revealed in them.

Literature has a great influence on the formation of a person's character. Love for knowledge, for literature was brought up in me by my grandfather. After my grandfather's stories, I started reading. Among the well-known writers in the world, I love Tolstoy and Dostoevsky the most. These writers seem to complement each other.

I believe that the pursuit of humanism is the main feature of the ancient and modern literature, literature of the East and West. At the same time I think that characteristic feature Russian literature is, on the one hand, the depiction of such human virtues as love and compassion, inherent in the Russian person more than people of other nationalities, and on the other hand, the preaching of the fight against the disgusting traits of a person - anger, hostility, etc. that this deep essence of humanism is especially clearly revealed in the works of Dostoevsky The Brothers Karamazov and The Idiot.

The French writer André Siegfried wrote in his book "The Soul of Nations" that in Russian there is always something overly fantastic, resulting from the blurring of the line between opposite character traits. In Russian people in general, and even in every single Russian person, modesty and arrogance, idealism and cynicism, high morality and depravity coexist.

Perhaps, on my part, it is not entirely appropriate to quote such a harsh statement about Russian people, but I must note that when reading the works of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, I drew attention to this feature of Russian people. Moreover, their works suggest that it was thanks to these features that the emergence of outstanding works of these classics became possible, in which all attention is focused on the problems of human nature. These problems make us think about it today. In contrast, there are practically no works in Japanese literature in which the internal processes driving human actions would be revealed. It mainly depicts the beauty of nature, its endless changeability, the charm of harmony - man and nature, and at the same time the cruelty of everyday existence. At the same time, the thought is always carried out: the actions of a person are governed not by motives and desires, but by "business" and "reasons".

The actions of the heroes of works of Russian literature are driven by both positive and negative motives, they have the strength and energy of the titans. In comparison with Russian literature, Japanese literature as a whole is characterized by Weakness, which manifests itself in the fact that the actions of the heroes are controlled by ulterior motives or external conditions.

In Japanese literature, the actions of people are ultimately viewed only as a consequence of external causes and the work performed by a person. The ideal is seen in the fusion of man with nature. In Russian literature, at least in the works of the pre-revolutionary period, salvation is sought in monastic self-denial, in faith in God. After the revolution, the socialist ideals of defending the Motherland and serving the people came to literature.

The fact that in Japanese literature quite little is turned to the image of the tension of internal contradictions can be explained by the fact that Japanese society firmly binds each individual member of its ethical norms, therefore the severity of the contradictions that arise is manifested not so much within a person as in external relationships and personal disagreements with the world. In this sense, in modern world there is a weakening of ethical norms that restrain a person's actions. This process is manifested in the same way in all countries of the world, so that, apparently, all peoples will have a growing interest in the problems investigated by Russian literature.

I absolutely share your point of view that a person perceives the ideas of humanism largely through literature, that humanism is the main and most valuable basis, the essence of the best examples of literary and artistic creativity. You rightly noted that the most important feature of Russian literature is the disclosure of human images in all the complexity of troubled feelings - love, hatred, compassion ... And here we can agree with you that the deep essence of humanism is most vividly represented in the works of Dostoevsky and Tolstoy. The subtlety and complexity of human feelings, emotions, emotional impulses, as you note, are deeply hidden in The Brothers Karamazov and The Idiot. There is even a widespread opinion among Western writers that, they say, it is enough to get acquainted with only one "The Brothers Karamazov" in order to consider oneself an expert on the Russian character. It seems to me that this is not true. No matter how brilliant the work may be, it alone is not able to reveal absolutely all aspects of the human character, to penetrate all without exception, sometimes carefully hidden movements of his soul. And this applies not only to a Russian person, but also to representatives of any nation. After all, a person is a living being, he changes, develops, improves, by no means remaining something frozen, once and for all created - even if his image was created by a genius.

The spark of human emotions is carved by opposite charges in their collision, as in electricity, where there are positive and negative poles. I spoke about this only because you are referring to French writer Andre Siegfried, you notice that modesty and arrogance, idealism and cynicism, high morality and depravity coexist in every Russian person. But in potency it is present in all people, in every person, including the Japanese. It is another matter whether a person can overcome these negative traits hidden in his soul, and what he overcomes, and what becomes his moral and social image.

Totally agree with you. The Buddhist teaching, of which I am a follower, says that opposites coexist in a person. Therefore, I am not going to insist that this trait is a feature of the Russian people. Above, I quoted Siegfried's words simply because I wanted to show the basis of Russian literature, important feature which is the search for humanity.

Let's leave aside Siegfried with his "Soul of Nations" and look more broadly at this problem. Are there not enough vivid examples in history of how people who claimed to be a long memory of mankind publicly stood up for highly moral principles, but in fact were inveterate cynics, highly immoral personalities. Setting the goal to advance on the path of mutual understanding between our peoples through an exchange of views on various issues, we will not call a third party to judge, but turn to the best that has been achieved by the representatives of our nations over the long history of their existence.

The highest measure of humanism in Russian literature, and at the same time its expression, has invariably been citizenship. Soviet literature in its best images inherited these noble humanistic traditions of citizenship, strives to continue and develop them. And this is understandable: an artist who claims to serve the people cannot stay away from the acute problems that society, country, people live with. This is perfectly expressed in the lines: "You may not be a poet, but you must be a citizen." The poet's call sounded during the war years of the revolution, and now, when great changes are taking place in Soviet society, this call has in no way lost its mobilizing charge. Our society has entered qualitatively new stage development. We have to tackle socio-economic, scientific, technical and cultural tasks unprecedented in scale. And, of course, the place of the citizen-writer, as it has always been in the history of our country, is in the forefront.

And what does Rector Logunov personally know about Japanese literature? After the Meiji revolution in Japan, many translations of works of Russian literature were published. Do Russian people have the opportunity to get acquainted with Japanese literature?

I am not a connoisseur of Japanese literature, but I have read a number of works translated into Russian, which, frankly, fell into my hands from the bookshelves of my children. In general, I must say that it is among our youth that, first of all, there is a great interest in Japanese literature, and this, in my opinion, is symbolic and significant. So, the most remembered, perhaps, Natsume Soseki and Akutagawa Ryunosuke... They helped me to imagine and understand the deep tragedy of the amazingly radical breakdown of consciousness that took place in the process of Europeanization of Japan after the opening of the country.

In post-war Japan, breaking again as an inevitable cleansing fire - cleansing from the crimes of militarism. I read Abe Kobo, Oe Kenzaburo - their works are known and loved by us. At first, the language of these writers demanded a lot of stress from me, because my generation was brought up on the realistic traditions of Russian classics. But gradually, upon careful reading, one of the most cruel tragedies of the 20th century appeared before me with my own eyes. The smooth and transparent surface of the beautiful pond described in Basho's poems, after Hiroshima, could not remain. The mirror cracked. In your works contemporary writers there is a heightened civic sense of belonging, a universal call is being made to prevent a catastrophe - the death of mankind. And this is understandable and expensive.

A citizen writer - be it in Japan or in the Soviet Union - cannot fail to realize the entire disastrous nature of the processes taking place in the modern world. This is the dominance of mass culture, the total “overorganization” of impersonal individuals, the dominance of the average person who has lost power over himself, this is the “production of consciousness”, “mass psychosis”, the fear of the unpredictability of events, the victim of which at any moment can become a person, this is, finally , the cult of violence. The disintegration of personality, the complete loss of his individuality by a person who exists in a society where a person is not a goal, but a means - is this not the ultimate situation ?! I think that it is precisely this direction of literature that most fully meets the concerns and concerns of contemporaries and at the same time serves not to disunite, but to solidify the people of the 20th century, thereby bringing together the entire humanistic literature of the world.

The best works of national literature, destined for the future, are always works that reflect the problems of their time, no matter what they say - about the present, past or future. At the same time, they must be deeply connected with the nourishing roots of the national culture - the artistic tradition of the people.

Exactly. For example, the Japanese literary tradition, which goes back to antiquity, indirectly expresses feelings through the description of natural phenomena, such as flowers, birds, wind, moon, etc. to fully understand what exactly, what kind of feeling the author wanted to convey.

From the works of your classics, translated into Russian, I have learned a lot of value. So, I always got the impression that the Japanese seem to suppress the emotional movements of their souls, restrain them, not allowing them to go outside. Maybe they do not allow themselves open spiritual manifestations due to many, both subjective and objective reasons. As I understand it, Japanese literature focuses not so much on the emotional depths of a person, not so much on the processes determined by the actions of people, as on the beauty of nature, the infinity of its changes. It would seem that this should have caused misunderstanding in me, as a representative of the Russian nation, traditionally brought up in Russian literature, addressed to the inner world of a person in an effort to reveal the subtlest movements of his soul. But this did not happen: reading the works of Japanese writers invariably gives rise to a precious feeling of a living and absolutely inseparable connection between man and nature as a part and a whole. And there is also, from my point of view, a very important mission of the writer - our contemporary: to do everything necessary so that in the frantic rhythm of modern existence human qualities are not lost - kindness, the ability to love, sincerity, all those features that characterize humanism.

Dostoevsky's words “Beauty will save the world” and Kawabata “If the Universe has one heart, then every heart is the Universe” is a search for harmony, external and internal balance - beauty.

The word with which Japanese writers address the world is a warning about a dead end that threatens the world, about the catastrophe of duality and disunity - between man and nature, East and West, fragmentation of consciousness and split human soul... In our time, it is more important than ever to remember: one thing - in everything and all in one, because the consequences of human deeds should always be highly moral.

For us living at the end of the 20th century, this feeling is especially important and necessary. Hence the understanding and acceptance of Japanese literature. Apparently, something similar is happening with the Japanese who love Russian literature. As far as I know, many Japanese, especially the older generation, are familiar with classical Russian literature, feel and understand it well. This means that the Japanese are not alien to the passions and emotions they encounter when reading Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Turgenev, Gogol, Chekhov, Gorky, Sholokhov ... I also heard that the Japanese love the music of Russian composers. Knowledge of culture promotes mutual understanding between representatives of different nations, the identification of what is in common, which is the basis for their rapprochement, and, consequently, for overcoming all kinds of disagreements.

I agree with you. As I said earlier, we, the Japanese, are very close to literature. pre-revolutionary Russia... As for post-revolutionary Russia, there is a feeling that we do not know it well enough. The works of Russian literature that the Japanese became acquainted with after the revolution were, first of all, the novels of Sholokhov. However, the number of their readers was significantly inferior to the number of readers of the works of Dostoevsky and Tolstoy.

Japan and the USSR are territorially close; they maintain extensive mutual contacts in matters of fishing, industrial development, trade relations, and cultural exchanges. However, it should be noted that human understanding is still lacking. I believe that in the current situation in the modern world, it is necessary to deepen mutual understanding between the two peoples, proceeding from the desire to cooperate with each other.

In general, humanity is developing towards the convergence of national cultures. This is undeniable. Process cultural integration has become especially stormy in recent decades due to the unprecedented development of the media, the intensification of cultural exchange, as well as due to the emergence of a number of urgent problems, the solution of which is unthinkable without the united efforts of all mankind. This cannot but contribute to the rapprochement of people, mutual recognition. identifying commonalities and differences. This is a long process, but already now, before our very eyes, it is yielding positive results.

In many countries, including Japan, there is a weakening or a kind of loosening of the traditional moral and ethical norms that governed human behavior. As I understand it, you see the possibility that such a process will lead to closer attention of literature and culture as a whole to the person, and, consequently, to the richest treasury of the human soul.

Quite right. Japanese literature has always tended to leave aside real social and political problems and delve into the world of sentimental experiences of the individual. But after the Second World War, attention to the real problems of politics and society has noticeably increased in Japanese literature. They are associated with the realization that indifference to problems real life ultimately gives rise to militarism. The leaders of this trend in the post-war period were the writers Oe and Abe.

I agree with you that man-centered literature is meant to play important role in the cultural processes of our time. And I would also like to say the following. In my opinion, the solution of the humanistic tasks facing mankind should be largely facilitated by the fact that Russian and Soviet literature, due to its peculiarities geographic location and history was able to absorb the richest cultural humanistic traditions of both the West and the East. It seems to me a kind of thread connecting the spiritual principles of the West and the East, which in history can only be compared with the "silk road". I would like to hope that the "Silk Road", which once connected people from different parts of the Earth, will now be a solid bridge connecting the humanistic aspirations of representatives of the most diverse cultural traditions. I would also like to believe that our dialogue with you will be a modest contribution to the construction of this bridge.

Kostareva Valeria

The topic of "superfluous person" in Russian literature .... Who is "superfluous person"? Is the use of this term appropriate? My student is trying to reason about this.

Download:

Preview:

Municipal budgetary educational institution medium comprehensive school №27

Images of "superfluous people" in Russian literature

Completed by the student: 10В class

Kostareva Lera

Supervisor: teacher of Russian language and literature

Masieva M.M.

Surgut, 2016

1. Introduction. Who is the "extra person"?

2. Eugene Onegin

3. Grigory Pechorin

4. Ilya Oblomov

5. Fyodor Lavretsky

6. Alexander Chatsky and Evgeny Bazarov

7. Conclusion

8. Literature

Introduction

Russian classic literature recognized all over the world. She is rich in many artistic discoveries. Many terms and concepts are inherent only in it and are unknown to world literature.

In literary criticism, as in any other science, there are various classifications. Many of them are literary heroes. So, in Russian literature, for example, the "Turgenev type of girl" is distinguished, etc. But the most famous and interesting, provocative the largest number disputes by a group of heroes are, probably, " extra people". This term is most often applied to literary heroes of the 19th century.
Who is the "extra person"? This is a well-educated, intelligent, talented and extremely gifted hero who, due to various reasons (both external and internal), could not realize himself, his capabilities. The “superfluous person” seeks the meaning of life, the goal, but does not find it. Therefore, he spends himself on small things in life, on entertainment, on passions, but does not feel satisfaction from this. Often the life of a "superfluous person" ends tragically: he dies or dies in the prime of life.

Lonely, rejected by society, or himself rejected this society, the "superfluous person" was not a figment of the imagination of Russian writers of the XIX century, he was seen by them as a painful phenomenon of the spiritual life of Russian society, caused by the crisis of the social system. The personal fates of the heroes, who are usually called "superfluous people", reflected the drama of the progressive nobility

The most famous "superfluous people" in Russian literature are Eugene Onegin from the novel by A.S. Pushkin's "Eugene Onegin" and Grigory Alexandrovich Pechorin from the novel by M.Yu. Lermontov's "A Hero of Our Time". But the gallery of "extra people" is quite extensive. Here are Chatsky from Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit", and Fyodor Lavretsky from Turgenev's novel "Noble Nest" and many others.

Purpose of this study: to provide a rationale for the appropriateness or inappropriateness of the use of the term "extra people"

Tasks:

Trace the development of the image of the "superfluous person" in Russian literature of the 19th century;

Expand the role of "extra people" in specific works;

Find out the meaning of these characters for Russian literature;

In my work, I tried to answer the questions:

Who is the "superfluous person"?

Is it necessary, is it useful to the world?

Subject of research: images of "superfluous people" in Russian literature

Object of research: works of Russian writers of the 19th century

I believe that the relevance of this topic is undeniable. The great works of Russian classics not only teach us about life. They make you think, feel, empathize. They help to understand the meaning and purpose of human life. They are not only relevant now, they are immortal. No matter how much has been written about the authors, heroes, there are no answers. There are only eternal questions of being. The so-called "superfluous people" have raised more than one generation of people, pushing by their own example to the eternal search for truth, the realization of their place in life.

Eugene Onegin

Evgeny Onegin from the novel of the same name by A.S. Pushkin. According to its potential, Onegin is one of the best people of its time.

He grew up and was brought up according to all the rules of "good taste". Onegin shone in the light. He led a bohemian lifestyle: balls, walks along Nevsky Prospect, visiting theaters. His pastime was no different from the life of the "golden youth" of that time. But Onegin got tired of all this very quickly. He got bored both at balls and in the theater: "No, early feelings in him cooled down, He was bored with the noise of the light ...". This is the first touch to the portrait of the "superfluous person". The hero began to feel superfluous in high society. He becomes alien to everything that has surrounded him for so long.
Onegin is trying to engage in some useful activity ("yawning, took up the pen"). But the lordly perception and lack of habit to work played a role. The hero does not complete any of his undertakings. In the village, he is trying to take up the arrangement of the life of the peasants. But, having carried out one reform, he safely abandons this occupation. And here Onegin turns out to be superfluous, unadapted to life.
Superfluous Evgeniy Onegin and in love. At the beginning of the novel, he is incapable of love, and at the end he is rejected, despite the hero's spiritual rebirth. Onegin himself admits that "in love he is disabled", unable to experience deep feelings... When he finally realizes that Tatyana is his happiness, she cannot reciprocate with the hero.
After a duel with Lensky, in a depressed state, Onegin leaves the village and begins to wander around Russia. In these travels, the hero overestimates his life, his actions, his attitude to the surrounding reality. But the author does not tell us that Onegin began to engage in some useful activity, became happy. The final of "Eugene Onegin" remains open. We can only guess about the fate of the hero.
V.G. Belinsky wrote that Pushkin was able to grasp the "essence of life" in his novel. His hero is the first true national character. The work "Eugene Onegin" itself is deeply original and has enduring hysterical and artistic value. His hero is a typical Russian character.
Onegin's main trouble is the separation from life. He is smart, observant, unhypocritical, has enormous inclinations. But his whole life is suffering. And society itself, the very structure of life, doomed him to this suffering. Eugene is one of many a typical representative of his society, of his time. A hero like him - Pechorin - is placed in the same conditions.

Grigory Pechorin

The next representative of the type of "extra people" is Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin from the novel by M.Yu. Lermontov's "A Hero of Our Time".
Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin is a representative of his era, or rather, the best part of the noble intelligentsia of the 20s of the 19th century. But he also cannot find himself, his place in life. Initially, Grigory Alexandrovich was endowed with great abilities. He is smart, educated, talented. Throughout the novel, we observe the life, thoughts, feelings of this hero. He vaguely senses that the social life with its empty amusements does not suit him. But Pechorin does not realize what he wants from life, what he wants to do.
Most of all, boredom prevents this hero from living. He fights her as best he can. One of the main entertainments for Grigory Alexandrovich is love affairs. But not a single woman can give meaning to Pechorin's life. The only woman the hero really appreciates is Vera. But even with her, Pechorin cannot be happy, because he is afraid to love, does not know how to do this (like Eugene Onegin).
Grigory Aleksandrovich is prone to introspection, much more thought than Onegin. Pechorin analyzes his inner world. He tries to find the cause of his misery, the aimlessness of life. The hero fails to come to any comforting conclusion. In empty amusements, he squandered all his strength, his soul. Now he does not have the strength for strong emotions, experiences, for an interest in life. In the end, the hero dies following his own predictions.
To all people with whom the fate of the hero confronts, he brings misfortune, violating the moral laws of society. He cannot find a place for himself anywhere, to use his remarkable powers and abilities, therefore Pechorin is superfluous everywhere, wherever fate throws him.
In the image of Pechorin, Belinsky saw a truthful and fearless reflection of the tragedy of his generation, the generation of progressive people of the 40s. A man of extraordinary fortitude, proud and courageous, Pechorin wastes his energy in vain, in cruel amusements and in petty intrigues. Pechorin is a victim of the social system that could only suppress and cripple all the best, the most advanced and the strong.
V.G. Belinsky ardently defended the image of Pechorin against the attacks of reactionary criticism and argued that this image embodied the critical spirit of "our century." Defending Pechorin, Belinsky emphasized that "our century" abhorred "hypocrisy." He speaks loudly about his sins, but is not proud of them; reveals his bloody wounds, and does not hide them under the beggarly rags of pretense. He realized that the consciousness of his sinfulness is the first step to salvation.. Belinsky writes that in their essence Onegin and Pechorin are one and the same person, but each has chosen a different path in its own case. Onegin chose the path of apathy, and Pechorin chose the path of action. But in the end, both lead to suffering.

Ilya Oblomov

The next link that continues the gallery of "superfluous people" is the hero of the novel by I. A. Goncharov, Ilya Ilyich Oblomov - a kind, gentle, kind-hearted person who is able to feel a feeling of love and friendship, but is not able to step over himself - get off the couch, do some activities and even settle their own affairs.

So why is such an intelligent and educated person unwilling to work? The answer is simple: Ilya Ilyich, just like Onegin and Pechorin, does not see the meaning and purpose of such work, such a life. “This unresolved question, this unsatisfied doubt depletes forces, ruins activity; a person gives up, and he gives up work, not seeing his goal, ”- wrote Pisarev.

Ilya Ilyich Oblomov is a weak-willed, sluggish, apathetic nature, cut off from real life: "Lying ... was his normal state." And this feature is the first thing that distinguishes him from Pushkin's and, especially, Lermontov's heroes.

The life of Goncharov's character is rosy dreams on a soft sofa. Slippers and a bathrobe are integral companions of Oblomov's existence and bright, precise artistic details that reveal Oblomov's inner essence and outer way of life. Living in a fictional world, fenced off by dusty curtains from reality, the hero devotes his time to building unrealizable plans, brings nothing to the end. Any of his undertakings comprehends the fate of the book, which Oblomov had been reading for several years on one page.

The main plot line in the novel is the relationship between Oblomov and Olga Ilyinskaya. It is here that the hero is revealed to us from the best side, his most cherished corners of the soul are revealed. But, alas, in the end he acts like the characters already familiar to us: Pechorin and Onegin. Oblomov decides to break off relations with Olga for her own good;

They all leave their beloved women, not wanting to hurt them.

Reading the novel, you involuntarily ask yourself: why is everyone so attracted to Oblomov? It is obvious that each of the heroes finds in him a particle of goodness, purity, revelation - all that is so lacking in people.

Goncharov in his novel showed different types of people, they all passed in front of Oblomov. The author showed us that Ilya Ilyich has no place in this life, just like Onegin and Pechorin.

The famous article by N. A. Dobrolyubov "What is Oblomovism?" (1859) appeared immediately after the novel and, in the minds of many readers, seemed to grow together with it. Ilya Ilyich, Dobrolyubov argued, was a victim of that common noble intellectuals' inability to be active, the unity of word and deed, which were generated by their "external position" of landowners who live off forced labor. “It is clear,” the critic wrote, “that Oblomov is not a stupid, apathetic nature, without aspirations and feelings, but a person who is looking for something, thinking about something. But the vile habit of receiving satisfaction of his desires not from his own efforts, but from others, - developed in him an apathetic immobility and plunged him into a miserable state of moral slavery. "

The main reason for the defeat of the hero of "Oblomov", according to Dobrolyubov, was not in himself and not in the tragic laws of love, but in "Oblomovism" as a moral and psychological consequence of serfdom, which condemns the noble hero to flabbiness and apostasy while trying to embody his ideals in a life.

Fyodor Lavretsky

This hero of the novel "Noble Nest" by IS Turgenev continues the gallery of "superfluous people". Fyodor Ivanovich Lavretsky. - a deep, intelligent and truly decent person, driven by the desire for self-improvement, the search for a useful cause in which he could apply his mind and talent. Passionately loving Russia and realizing the need for rapprochement with the people, he dreams of useful activities. But his activity is limited only to some rearrangements in the estate, and he finds no use for his powers. All his activities are limited to words. He only talks about business, without getting down to it. Therefore, "school" literary criticism usually refers him to the type of "superfluous person." The uniqueness of Lavretsky's nature is emphasized by the comparison with other characters in the novel. His genuine love for Russia is contrasted with the condescending disdain shown by the secular lion Panshin. Lavretsky's friend, Mikhalevich, calls him a bobak, who has been lying all his life and is just going to work. This suggests a parallel with another classic type of Russian literature - Oblomov I.A. Goncharova.

The most important role in revealing the image of Lavretsky is played by his relationship with the heroine of the novel, Liza Kalitina. They feel the community of their views, understand that "they both love and do not love the same thing." Lavretsky's love for Liza is the moment of his spiritual rebirth, which came upon his return to Russia. The tragic denouement of love - the sudden return of his wife, whom he considered dead - is not an accident. The hero sees in this a retribution for his indifference to public duty, for the idle life of his grandfathers and great-grandfathers. Gradually, a moral turning point occurs in the hero: previously indifferent to religion, he comes to the idea of ​​Christian humility. In the epilogue of the novel, the hero appears older. Lavretsky is not ashamed of the past, but he also does not expect anything from the future. “Hello, lonely old age! Burn out, useless life! " he says.

The ending of the novel is very important, which is a kind of result. life quests Lavretsky. After all, his welcoming words at the end of the novel to unknown young forces mean not only the hero's refusal of personal happiness (his connection with Lisa is impossible) of her very possibilities, but also sound like a blessing to people, faith in a person. The finale also defines the entire inconsistency of Lavretsky and makes him "an extra man."

Alexander Chatsky and Evgeny Bazarov

The problem of "superfluous" people in society is reflected in the works of many Russian writers. For some of the heroes, researchers still "break spears". Can Chatsky and Bazarov be referred to as "superfluous people"? And is it necessary to do this? If we proceed from the definition of the term "extra people", then, probably, yes. After all, these heroes are also rejected by society (Chatsky) and are not sure that he needs (Bazarov).

In the comedy A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit" the image of the main character - Alexander Chatsky - is the image of an advanced man of the 10-20s of the XIX century, who, in his convictions and views, is close to the future Decembrists. In accordance with moral principles Decembrists, a person should perceive the problems of society as his own, have an active civil position, which is noted in the behavior of Chatsky. He expresses his opinion on various issues, coming into conflict with many representatives of the Moscow nobility.

First of all, Chatsky himself is noticeably different from all the other heroes of the comedy. He is an educated person with an analytical mindset; he is eloquent, gifted with imaginative thinking, which raises him above the inertia and ignorance of the Moscow nobility. Chatsky's clash with Moscow society occurs on many issues: this is the attitude to serfdom, to public service, to domestic science and culture, to education, national traditions and language. For example, Chatsky says that "I would be glad to serve - it is sickening to serve." This means that for the sake of his career he will not humiliate himself, flatter his superiors, humiliate himself. He would like to serve "business, not persons" and does not want to seek entertainment if he is busy with business.

Let us compare Chatsky, the hero of Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit," with the image of an extra person.
Seeing vices Famus society Rejecting his inert foundations, mercilessly denouncing respect for rank, patronage prevailing in service circles, stupid imitation of French fashion, lack of real education, Chatsky turns out to be an outcast among the counts Khryumins, Khlestovs and Zagoretsky. He is considered “strange”, and in the end he is even recognized as a madman. So Griboyedov's hero enters, like superfluous people, into conflict with the imperfect world around him. But if the latter only suffer and do nothing, then “in the embittered; thoughts of "Chatsky" a healthy urge to work is heard ... ". "He feels what he is dissatisfied with," because his ideal of life is quite definite: "freedom from all chains of slavery, which are bound to society." Chatsky's active opposition to those “whose hostility to a free life is irreconcilable” allows us to believe that he knows ways to change life in society. In addition, Griboyedov's hero, having traveled a long way of searching, having traveled for three years, acquires a goal in life - “to serve the cause”, “without demanding either a job or a promotion,” “to put a mind hungry for knowledge into science”. The hero's desire is to benefit the fatherland, to serve the good of society, which is what he strives for.
Thus, Chatsky is undoubtedly a representative of an advanced society, people who do not want to put up with survivals, reactionary orders and are actively fighting them. Superfluous people, unable to find a worthy occupation, self-realization, do not adhere to either conservatives or revolutionary-minded circles, keeping in their souls disappointment in life and wasting unclaimed talents.
The image of Chatsky has caused numerous controversies in criticism. IA Goncharov considered the hero Griboyedov "a sincere and ardent figure" superior to Onegin and Pechorin.
Belinsky assessed Chatsky in a completely different way, considering this image almost farcical: “... What kind of deep man is Chatsky? This is just a screamer, a phrase-monger, an ideal jester, profaning everything that is sacred about which he speaks. ... This is the new Don Quixote, a boy on a stick on horseback, who imagines that he is sitting on a horse ... Chatsky's drama is a storm in a glass of water. " Pushkin assessed this image in about the same way.
Chatsky did nothing, but he spoke, and for this he was declared insane. The old world fights against the free speech of Chatsky, using slander. Chatsky's struggle with accusatory words corresponds to that early period of the Decembrist movement, when they believed that much could be achieved by words, and were limited to oral statements.
"Chatsky is broken by the amount of old power, inflicting a mortal blow on it with the quality of fresh power," - this is how I.A.Goncharov defined the importance of Chatsky.

Evgeny Bazarov

Can Bazarov be called a "superfluous" person?

Evgeny Bazarov, probably to a lesser extent than Onegin or Pechorin, belongs to the category of "superfluous people", however, he also cannot fulfill himself in this life. He is afraid to think about the future, because he does not see himself in it.
Bazarov lives for one day, which makes even his scientific pursuits meaningless. Adhering to the ideas of nihilism, rejecting everything old, he nevertheless does not even have an idea of ​​what will subsequently be formed in the cleared place, hoping for the manifestation of the will of other people. Naturally, scientific experiments Bazarova gets bored pretty soon, since activities devoid of purpose quickly come to naught. Returning home to his parents, Eugene stops doing research and falls into a deep depression.
His tragedy lies in the fact that he, who considers himself to some extent a superman, suddenly discovers that nothing human is alien to him either. Nevertheless, Russia could not do without such people at all times. Despite his views, Bazarov cannot be accused of lack of education, intelligence or discernment. He, remaining a materialist, nevertheless, with setting the right goals, could bring many benefits to society, for example, heal people or discover new physical laws. In addition, violently opposing prejudices, he encouraged the people around him to move forward in their development, to look at some things in a new way.

So, it can be seen that in some places the image of Bazarov fits into the concept of “extra people”. Therefore, in part, this can be called Bazarov, given that the "extra man" is practically equated with the "hero of his time." But all this is very controversial issue... We cannot say that he wasted his life.He knew where to apply his powers. He lived in the name of a lofty goal. Therefore, it is difficult to say whether this Eugene is "superfluous". Everyone has their own opinion on this matter.

DI. Pisarev notes a certain bias of the author in relation to Bazarov, says that in a number of cases Turgenev feels an involuntary antipathy to his hero, to the direction of his thoughts. But the general conclusion about the novel does not boil down to this. Dmitry Ivanovich perceives the author's critical attitude to Bazarov as a merit, since from the outside the merits and demerits are more visible, and criticism will be more fruitful than servile adoration. The tragedy of Bazarov, according to Pisarev, consists in the fact that in reality there are no favorable conditions for the present case, and therefore the author, unable to show how Bazarov lives and acts, showed how he dies.

Conclusion

All the heroes: Onegin, Pechorin, Oblomov, Lavretsky and Chatsky are similar in many ways. They are of noble origin, naturally endowed with remarkable abilities. They are brilliant gentlemen, secular dandies, breaking women's hearts (Oblomov will probably be an exception). But for them this is more a matter of habit than a true need. In their hearts, the heroes feel that they do not need it at all. They vaguely want something real, sincere. And they all want to find applications for their great opportunities. Each of the heroes strives for this in their own way. Onegin is more active (he tried to write, manage the village, traveled). Pechorin is more inclined to reflection and introspection. Therefore, we know much more about the inner world of Grigory Alexandrovich than about the psychology of Onegin. But if we can still hope for the revival of Eugene Onegin, then Pechorin's life ends tragically (he dies of illness on the way), however, Oblomov also leaves no hope.
Each hero, despite his success with women, does not find happiness in love. This is largely due to the fact that they are great egoists. Often the feelings of other people mean nothing to Onegin and Pechorin. For both heroes, it costs nothing to destroy the world of others who love them, people, trample their lives and destinies.
Pechorin, Onegin, Oblomov and Lavretsky are similar in many ways, differ in many ways. But their main common feature- this is the inability of the heroes to realize themselves in their time. Therefore they are all unhappy. Having great inner strength, they could not benefit either themselves, or the people around them, or their country. This is their fault, their misfortune, their tragedy ...

Does the world need "extra people"? Are they helpful? It is difficult to give an absolutely correct answer to this question; one can only reason. On the one hand, it seems to me not. At least I thought so at one time. If a person cannot find himself in life, then his life is meaningless. Then why waste space and consume oxygen? Make way for others. This is the first thing that comes to mind when you start thinking. It seems that the answer to the question lies on the surface, but it is not. The more I worked on this topic. the more my views changed.

A person cannot be superfluous, since he is unique by nature. Each of us does not come to this world for nothing. Nothing happens just like that, everything has a meaning and explanation. If you think about it, each person can make someone happy by his very existence, and if he brings happiness to this world, then he is no longer useless.

Such people balance the world. With their inconsistency, indecision, slowness (like Oblomov) or, conversely, throwing, searching for themselves, searching for the meaning and purpose of their life (like Pechorin), they excite others, make them think, reconsider their view of their surroundings. After all, if everyone was confident in their desires and goals, then it is not known what would become of the world. No person comes to this world aimlessly. Everyone leaves their mark on the hearts and minds of someone. There are no unnecessary lives.

The topic of "extra" people is relevant to this day. There have always been people who have not found a place in the world, and our time is no exception. On the contrary, I think that just now not everyone can decide on goals and desires. Such people were and will always be, and this is not bad, it just happened. Such people need help, many of them could become great, if not for the coincidence of circumstances, sometimes tragic.

Thus, we can conclude that every person who comes into this world is needed, and the term "extra people" is not fair.

Literature

1. Babaev E.G. The works of A.S. Pushkin. - M., 1988
2. Batuto A.I. Turgenev is a novelist. - L., 1972
3. Ilyin E.N. Russian literature: recommendations for schoolchildren and applicants, "SCHOOL-PRESS". M., 1994
4. Krasovsky V.E. History of Russian Literature of the 19th Century, "OLMA-PRESS". M., 2001
5. Literature. Reference materials. Book for students. M., 1990
6. Makogonenko G.P. Lermontov and Pushkin. M., 1987
7. Monakhova O.P. Russian literature of the XIX century, "OLMA-PRESS". M., 1999
8. Fomichev S.A. Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit": Commentary. - M., 1983
9. Shamrey L.V., Rusova N.Yu. From allegory to iambic. Terminological dictionary-thesaurus on literary criticism. - N. Novgorod, 1993

10.http: //www.litra.ru/composition/download/coid/00380171214394190279
11. http://lithelper.com/p_Lishnie_lyudi_v_romane_I__S__Turgeneva_Otci_i_deti
12.http: //www.litra.ru/composition/get/coid/00039301184864115790/

Bogachek A., Shiryaeva E.

The project "The image of the" little man "in the literature of the 19-20 century."

Download:

Preview:

MBOU "Oranzhereininskaya secondary school"

Project on the theme: "The image of the" little man "in literature XIX- early XX centuries "

Completed by pupils of 10 "B" class

Bogachek Alexandra

Shiryaeva Ekaterina

Teacher

Mikhailova O.E.

2011-2012 academic year.

Plan:

"Little Man" is a literary hero of the era of realism.

"Little man" - a little man from the people ... became ... a hero of Russian literature.

From Pushkin's Samson Vyrin to Gogol's Akaki Akakievich.

Contempt for the "little man" in the works of A.P. Chekhov.

A talented and selfless "little man" in the work of NS Leskov.

Conclusion.

Used Books.

Target : Show the diversity of ideas about the "little man" of the writers of the XIX - early XX centuries.

Tasks : 1) study the works of writers of the XIX - early XX centuries;

3) draw conclusions.

The definition of "little man" is applied to the category of literary heroes of the era of realism, usually occupying a rather low place in the social hierarchy: a petty official, a bourgeoisie, or even a poor nobleman. The image of the "little man" turned out to be all the more relevant the more democratic literature became. The very concept of "little man", most likely, was introduced by Belinsky (article 1840 "Woe from Wit"). The topic of the "little man" is raised by many writers. She has always been relevant, because her task is to reflect life common man with all her experiences, problems, troubles and little joys. The writer takes the hard work of showing and explaining life ordinary people... “The little man is the representative of the whole nation. And each writer represents him in his own way.

The image of a little man has been known for a long time - thanks, for example, to such mastodons as A.S. Pushkin and N.V. Gogol or A.P. Chekhov and N.S. Leskov - and inexhaustible.

N.V. Gogol was one of the first to speak openly and loudly about the tragedy of the “little man,” crushed, humiliated, and therefore miserable.

True, the palm in this belongs to Pushkin; his Samson Vyrin from “The Stationmaster” opens a gallery of “little people”. But Vyrin's tragedy is reduced to a personal tragedy, its causes lie in the relationship of the station supervisor's family - father and daughter - and have the character of morality, or rather immorality on the part of Dunya, the superintendent's daughter. For her father, she was the meaning of life, the “sun” with which a lonely, elderly person was warm and comfortable.

Gogol, while remaining true to traditions critical realism introducing into it his own Gogol motives, he showed the tragedy of the “little man” in Russia much more broadly; the writer "realized and showed the danger of degradation of a society in which cruelty and indifference of people to each other are increasing more and more."

And the pinnacle of this villainy was Gogol's Akaki Akakievich Bashmachkin from the story "The Overcoat", his name became a symbol of the "little man" who feels bad in this strange world of clerical pleasures, lies and "blatant" indifference.

It often happens in life that cruel and heartless people who humiliate and insult the dignity of other people often look more pitiful and insignificant than their victims. The same impression of spiritual scantiness and weakness from the offenders of the petty official Akaki Akakievich Bashmachkin remains with us after reading Gogol's story "The Overcoat". Akaki Akakievich is a real "little man". Why? First, he is at one of the lowest rungs of the hierarchical ladder. His place in society is invisible at all. Secondly, the world of his spiritual life and human interests is extremely narrowed, impoverished, limited. Gogol himself characterized his hero as poor, ordinary, insignificant and inconspicuous. In life, he is assigned the insignificant role of a copyist of documents of one of the departments. Brought up in an atmosphere of unquestioning obedience and execution of orders from his superiors, Akaki Akakievich Bashmachkin was not used to thinking about the content and meaning of his work. Therefore, when he is offered tasks that require the manifestation of elementary ingenuity, he begins to worry, worry, and in the end comes to the conclusion: "No, better let me rewrite something." Bashmachkin's spiritual life is also limited. Collecting money for a new overcoat becomes for him the meaning of his whole life, filling it with happiness, waiting for the fulfillment of his cherished desire. The theft of a new overcoat, acquired through such deprivation and suffering, becomes a truly catastrophe for him. The people around him laughed at his misfortune, and no one helped him. The "significant person" shouted at him so much that poor Akaky Akakievich lost consciousness. Almost no one noticed his death. Despite the uniqueness of the image created by the writer, he, Bashmachkin, does not look lonely in the minds of the readers, and we imagine that there were a great many of the same humiliated people who shared the lot of Akaky Akakievich. Gogol was the first to talk about the tragedy of the "little man", respect for whom depended not on his spiritual qualities, not on education and intelligence, but on his position in society. The writer compassionately showed the injustice and despotism of society in relation to the "little man" and for the first time urged this society to pay attention to the inconspicuous, pitiful and ridiculous, as it seemed at first glance, people. It is not their fault that they are not very smart, and sometimes they are not at all smart, but they do no harm to anyone, and this is very important. So why then laugh at them? Maybe they cannot be treated with great respect, but you cannot offend them. They, like everyone else, have the right to a dignified life, to the opportunity to feel like full people.

"The little man" is constantly found on the pages of A. Chekhov's works. This is the main hero of his work. Chekhov's attitude towards such people is especially vividly manifested in his satirical stories. And the attitude is unambiguous. In the story "The Death of an Official," "the little man" Ivan Dmitrievich Chervyakov constantly and obsessively apologizes to General Brizzhalov for accidentally splashing him when he sneezed. "I sprayed it!" Thought Chervyakov. "Not my boss, a stranger, but still awkward. I have to apologize." The key word in this thought is "boss". Probably, Chervyakov would not endlessly apologize to an ordinary person. Ivan Dmitrievich has a fear of his superiors, and this fear turns into flattery and deprives him of self-respect. A person comes to the point that he allows himself to be trampled into the mud, moreover, he himself helps to do this. We must pay tribute to the general, he treats our hero very politely. But the common man is not used to such treatment. Therefore, Ivan Dmitrievich thinks that he was ignored and comes to ask for forgiveness for several days in a row. Brizzhalov gets tired of this, and he finally shouts at Chervyakov. "-Go out !! - suddenly barked blue and shaking general."

“What, sir?” Asked Tchervyakov in a whisper, gleaming with horror.

Go away!! the general repeated, stamping his feet.

Something came off in Chervyakov's stomach. Seeing nothing, hearing nothing, he backed up to the door, went out into the street and trudged off ... Coming mechanically home, without taking off his uniform, he lay down on the sofa and ... died. For a more complete disclosure of the image of his hero, Chekhov used a “speaking” surname. Yes, Ivan Dmitrievich is small, pathetic like a worm, you can crush him without effort, and most importantly, he is just as unpleasant.

In the story "The Triumph of the Winner" Chekhov presents us with a story in which a father and son humiliate themselves before the boss so that the son could get a position.

"The boss told me and, apparently, wanted to seem witty. I don't know if he said anything funny, but I just remember that my father pushed me in the side every minute and said:

Laugh! ...

… - So, so! - whispered dad. - Well done! He looks at you and laughs ... It's good; maybe he really will give you the place of clerk assistant! "

And again we are faced with the admiration of the superiors. And again it is self-humiliation and flattery. People are ready to please their boss in order to achieve their insignificant goal. It does not even occur to them to remember that there is a simple human dignity that should not be lost in any case. A.P. Chekhov wanted all people to be beautiful and free. "Everything in a person should be beautiful: face, clothes, soul, and thoughts." So Anton Pavlovich thought, therefore, ridiculing a primitive person in his stories, he called for self-improvement. Chekhov hated self-humiliation, eternal servitude and admiration for officials. Gorky said about Chekhov: "His enemy was vulgarity, and he fought against it all his life." Yes, he fought her with his works, he bequeathed to us "drop by drop to squeeze a slave out of himself." Perhaps such a vile way of life of his "little people", their low thoughts and unworthy behavior are the result of not only personal character traits, but also their social position and the order of the existing political system. After all, Chervyakov would not apologize so zealously and live in eternal fear of officials, if he were not afraid of the consequences. The characters in the stories "Chameleon", "Fat and Thin", "Man in a Case" and many others possess the same unpleasant qualities of character.

Anton Pavlovich believed that a person should have a goal to achieve which he will strive for, and if it does not exist or it is very small and insignificant, then the person becomes just as small and insignificant. A person must work and love - these are two things that play the main role in the life of any person: small and not small.

Nikolai Semenovich Leskov's "little man" is a completely different person than his predecessors .. In order to understand this, let us compare the heroes of three works of this writer: Levsha, Ivan Severyanovich Flyagin and Katerina Izmailova. All these three characters - strong personalities, and everyone is talented in their own way. But all the energy of Katerina Izmailova is aimed at arranging personal happiness in any way. In achieving her goals, she goes on a crime. And therefore this type of character is rejected by Leskov. He sympathizes with her only when she turns out to be cruelly devoted to her beloved.

Lefty - talented person of the people, caring for their homeland more than the king and courtiers. But he is ruined by a vice, so familiar to the Russian people - drunkenness and the state's unwillingness to help its subjects. He could have done without this help if he had strong man... But a strong person cannot be a drinking person. Therefore, for Leskov, this is not the hero who needs to be preferred.

Among the heroes belonging to the category of "little people", Leskov singles out Ivan Severyanovich Flyagin. Leskov's hero is a hero in appearance and spirit. "He was a man of enormous stature, with a swarthy open face and thick wavy hair of a lead color: his gray cast so strangely ... in the full sense of the word, a hero, and, moreover, a typical, simple-minded, kind Russian hero, reminiscent of grandfather Ilya Muromets ... But with all this good innocence, not much observation was needed to see in him a person who saw a lot and, as they say, "experienced." behaved boldly, self-confident, although without unpleasant looseness, and began to speak in a pleasant bass with a habit. " He is strong not only physically but also spiritually. Flyagin's life is an endless test. He is strong in spirit, and this allows him to overcome such difficult vicissitudes of life. He was on the verge of death, he saved people, he himself was in flight. But in all these tests he improved. Flyagin, at first vaguely, and then more and more consciously, strives for heroic service to the Motherland, this becomes the spiritual need of the hero. In this he sees the meaning of life. Flagin's inherent kindness initially, the desire to help the sufferer eventually becomes a conscious need to love his neighbor as himself. This is a simple man with his own merits and demerits, gradually eradicating these defects and coming to an understanding of God. Leskov portrays his hero as a strong and brave man with a huge heart and a big soul. Flyagin does not complain about fate, does not cry. Leskov, describing Ivan Severyanovich, makes the reader proud of his people, for his country. Flyagin is not humiliated before the mighty of the world this, like the heroes of Chekhov, does not get drunk because of his bankruptcy, like Marmeladov in Dostoevsky's, does not sink "to the bottom" of life, like the characters of Gorky, does not wish anyone harm, does not want to humiliate anyone, does not wait for help from others, does not sit idly arms. This is a person who realizes himself as a person, a real person, ready to defend his rights and the rights of other people, does not lose his self-esteem and is confident that a person can do anything.

III.

The concept of the "little man" changed throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries. Each writer also had his own personal views on this hero.

You can find common ground in the views of different writers. For example, writers of the first half of the 19th century (Pushkin, Lermontov, Gogol) treat the "little man" with sympathy. Griboyedov stands apart, who looks at this hero in a different way, which brings his views closer to those of Chekhov and partially Ostrovsky. Here the concept of vulgarity and self-abasement comes to the fore. In the minds of L. Tolstoy, N. Leskov, A. Kuprin, a "little man" is a talented, selfless person. Such a variety of views of writers depends on the peculiarities of their worldview and on the variety of human types that surrounds us in real life.

Used Books:

1. Gogol N.V. Collected works in 4 volumes. Publishing house "Education", M. 1979

2. Pushkin A.S. “The stories of I.P. Belkin. Dubrovsky, The Queen of Spades". Publishing house "Astrel, AST" 2004

3. Chekhov A.P. Stories. Publishing house "AST". 2010 r.

4. Leskov NS All works by Nikolai Leskov. 2011 r.

5. Gukovsky G.A. Gogol's realism - M., 1959

Type of "common man"

The origin of the “common man” type was sentimentalism with its concept of the extra-class value of a person. V romantic literature The "common man" personifies the "immaculate nature." Pushkin's Circassian ("Prisoner of the Caucasus"), Lermontov's Georgian ("Mtsyri") embody the idea of ​​harmony between the world and man, which the rebellious hero has lost in his soul. In realistic literature, the image of the "common man" reflects the idea of ​​an ordered life based on the laws of patriarchal life.

N. Strakhov called Pushkin's story "The Captain's Daughter" a family chronicle. Pushkin does not idealize "simple Russian families" that preserve "the habits of the deep olden times." The author also shows the serf character traits of Andrei Petrovich Grinev, does not hide the cruelty of Captain Mironov, who is ready to torture a Bashkir. But the focus of the author's attention is completely different: in the world of the Grinevs and Mironovs, he finds, first of all, what, speaking about “ Captain's daughter", Gogol clearly indicated:" The simple greatness of ordinary people. " These people are attentive to each other, live by conscience, and are faithful to a sense of duty. They do not crave magnificent achievements, personal glory, but are able to act decisively and courageously in extreme circumstances. These Pushkin's characters are attractive and strong in that they live in the world of Russian traditions and customs, basically folk.

From this series of Pushkin's heroes, threads stretch to a great variety of characters in subsequent Russian literature. These are Lermontov's Maxim Maksimych, the old-world landowners of Gogol, the Rostovs in Leo Tolstoy's, Leskov's "righteous". This type literary hero differently called in literary criticism. Since it is impossible to designate clear social criteria, it is rather a psychological type: these images are not carriers of the main idea of ​​the text, all the author's attention is not focused on them. An exception is Gogol's story "Old World Landowners". V. Ye. Khalizev calls such characters “supertypes”. Similar images, according to the researcher, were present in various artistic aesthetics. E. V. Khalizev calls a complex of stable qualities: “This is, first of all, a person's rootedness in a close reality with its joys and sorrows, with communication skills and everyday affairs. Life appears as the maintenance of a certain order and harmony - both in the soul of this named person and around him. "

A. Grigoriev called such heroes "humble", opposed them to "predatory", "proud and passionate" characters. Then the concepts of "ordinary person", "eccentric" appear. M. Bakhtin ranked them as "social and everyday heroes" not endowed with ideological sound. The type of “common man” cannot exhaust its capabilities, since it is a reflection of the world of an ordinary person, but it will constantly transform depending on the priorities of aesthetic theories. So, in the literature of existentialism, this main image was the artist's challenge to the inhuman world. The heroes Camus, Kafka, Sartre lose their names, merging with the crowd of indifferent, become "outsiders" for others and for themselves.