Composition “The role of the episode in the poem. Composition: the general construction of the work

It is believed that, just like the plot of The Inspector General, the plot of Dead Souls was suggested to Gogol by Pushkin. There are two stories associated with the name of Pushkin and comparable to the plot of "Dead Souls". During his stay in Bessarabia (1820-1823), administrative abuses took place in Beidery: deaths were not registered here, and the names of the dead were transferred to other persons, fugitive peasants who flocked here from all over Russia; for this reason, the inhabitants of the town were called the "immortal society". Subsequently, while already in Odessa, Pushkin asked his Bessarabian acquaintance I.P. Liprandi: “Is there anything new in Bendery?” P. I. Bartenev wrote about another case related to Pushkin’s stay in Moscow in the notes to the memoirs of V. A. Sollogub: “In Moscow, Pushkin was on the run with a friend. There was also a certain P. (an old dandy). Pointing to him to Pushkin, a friend told about him how he bought up dead souls, pawned them and got a big profit<…>This was before 1826." Interestingly, this episode evoked a direct artistic reaction from Pushkin himself: “You could make a novel out of this,” he said among other things.

However, there is evidence that Gogol, regardless of Pushkin, had heard a lot about stories with dead souls. According to the story of a distant relative of the writer M. G. Anisimo-Yanovskaya, her uncle, a certain Kharlampy Petrovich Pivinsky, who lived 17 versts from Yanovshchina (another name for the Gogol Vasilievka estate) and was engaged in distillation, was frightened by rumors that such a trade would be allowed only to landowners, possessing no less than fifty souls. Pivinsky (who had only thirty souls) went to Poltava “and he paid a quitrent for his dead peasants, as if for the living ... And since his own, and with the dead, were far from fifty, he scored vodka in a cart and went in the neighbors and bought dead souls from them for this vodka ... ”Anisimo-Yanovskaya claims that“ the whole Mirgorod region knew this story.

Another episode, allegedly also known to Gogol, was reported by his classmate at the Nizhyn Gymnasium of Higher Sciences P. I. Martos in a letter to P. I. Bartenev: “As for Dead Souls, I can tell the following ... In Nizhyn<…>, at the gymnasium of higher sciences of Prince Bezborodko, there was a certain K‑ach, a Serb; of enormous growth, very handsome, with the longest mustaches, a terrible explorer, - somewhere he bought the land on which he is located - it is said in the deed of sale - 650 souls; the amount of land is not indicated, but the boundaries are definitive. … What happened? This land was a neglected cemetery. This very incident was told to Gogol abroad by Prince N. G. Repnin.

Here it is necessary, however, to make a reservation that Repnin, if he told Gogol this episode, then already abroad, when work on Dead Souls had already begun. But at the same time, it is known that abroad, in the process of writing the poem, Gogol continued to collect material and ask acquaintances about various “incidents” that “could happen when buying dead souls” (letter to V. A. Zhukovsky from Paris on November 12, 1836) . It is possible that he himself knew something about this scam since his high school days, since the said K-ch lived in Nizhyn. K-ch's tricks, moreover, anticipated Gogol's text with gloomy irony: the “explorer” did not indicate a wasteland or another piece of land as the place of residence of his wards, but a cemetery. This can be compared with Chichikov's ambiguous answer to the question of whether he needed an escort to escort the peasants: Chichikov "resolutely refused the escort, saying<…>that the peasants bought by him are of an excellently meek character ... "The similarity with the remark of General Betrishchev in the second volume is even more striking:" To give you dead souls? Yes, for such an invention, I give them to you with land, with housing! Take over the whole cemetery!”

With a completely everyday origin, the very formula “dead souls”, placed in the title of the work, was saturated with both literary and philosophical and religious themes. The actual everyday aspect of this formula was recorded by V. I. Dal in the first edition of “ explanatory dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language" (1863): "Dead souls, people who died in the interval of two national censuses, but who are listed on the payment of taxes, in person" (article "Soul"). However, in the religious and philosophical aspect, Gogol's formula was antithetical to the biblical concept of a "living soul" (cf.: "And the Lord God created man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his face the breath of life, and man became a living soul" - Bible, Genesis , 2, 7). In addition, the oxymoronic expression "dead soul" and its derivatives - "dead life", "living death" - have become widespread in Western European poetry since the Middle Ages; cf. also in the mystery of V. K. Kuchelbeker "Izhora": "To what I could be reasonable, // My dead soul does not believe"). In the poem, the formula "dead soul" - "dead souls" was refracted in many ways by Gogol, acquiring more and more new semantic nuances: dead souls - dead serfs, but also spiritually dead landowners and officials, buying up dead souls as an emblem of the deadness of the living. Ironically, the same formula was subsequently transferred to Gogol himself by V. V. Rozanov, who interpreted Gogol's inherent exaggeration as domination outer dead forms over the inner living content: “He called his main work “Dead Souls” and, beyond any foresight, expressed in this title the great secret of his work and, of course, of himself. He was a brilliant painter of external forms and depicting them, to which he alone was capable, gave by some magic such vitality, almost sculptural quality, that no one noticed how nothing in essence is hidden behind these forms, there is no soul, there is no one who I would wear them."

Genre originality Poems "Dead Souls"

In terms of genre, "Dead Souls" was conceived as a novel " high road". Thus, in a certain sense, they correlated with famous novel Cervantes' Don Quixote, which Pushkin also once pointed out to Gogol (a parallel that Gogol later insisted on in The Author's Confession). As M. Bakhtin wrote, “at the turn of the 16th–17th centuries. Don Quixote set out on the road to meet all of Spain on it, from the convict going to the galleys to the duke. Also, Pavel Ivanovich Chichikov "leaves on the road" to meet here, in Gogol's own words, "all Rus'" (from a letter to Pushkin on October 7, 1835). Thus, the genre characterology of Dead Souls as a travel novel is immediately outlined. At the same time, it is also predetermined from the very beginning that this journey will be of a special kind, namely the wandering of a rogue, which additionally adds "Dead Souls" to another genre tradition - a rogue novel, picaresque, widely spread in European literature(anonymous "Life of Lazarillo from Tormes", "Gille Blas" by Lesage, etc.). In Russian literature, the most prominent representative This genre before "Dead Souls" was the novel by V. T. Narezhny "Russian Zhilblaz, or the Adventures of Prince Gavrila Simonovich Chistyakov."

The linear construction of the novel, which was supposed by picaresque (a work whose content is funny adventures rogue), immediately gave the work an epic character: the author led his hero through “a chain of adventures and changes, in order to present at the same time a true picture of everything significant in the features and customs of the time he took” (this characteristic of “a lesser kind of epic”, given by Gogol already in the mid-40s in the "Educational Book of Literature for Russian Youth", was largely applicable to "Dead Souls"). And yet, the experience of the playwright was not in vain: it was he who made it possible for Gogol to do the almost impossible, to integrate a linear plot, seemingly the most remote from the dramatic principle, into a special “dramatic” whole. Again, according to Gogol’s own definition, the novel “flies like a drama, united by the lively interest of the main characters themselves, in which the characters are entangled and which, with a seething course, makes the characters themselves develop and reveal their characters more strongly and quickly, increasing enthusiasm.” So it is in Dead Souls - their purchase by Chichikov (the main incident), expressed in a plot in a chain of episodes (chapters), for the most part coinciding with the hero’s visit to one or another landowner, unites everyone actors common interest. It is no coincidence that Gogol builds many episodes of the book on parallels and on the repetition of actions, events, and even individual details: the reappearance of Korobochka, Nozdryov, Chichikov's symmetrical visit to various "city dignitaries" at the beginning and end of the book - all this creates the impression of a circular composition. The role of the catalyst of action that fear played in The Government Inspector is now played by gossip - "condensed lies", "the real substratum of the fantastic", where "everyone adds and applies a little, and the lie grows like a snowball, threatening to turn into a snow fall" . The circulation and growth of rumors - a technique inherited by Gogol from another great playwright, Griboyedov, additionally organizes the action, speeds up its pace, leading the action to a swift denouement in the finale: “Like a whirlwind, the hitherto dormant city shot up!”

In fact, the plan of "Dead Souls" was originally conceived by Gogol as a three-part combination of relatively independent, completed works. At the height of Gogol's work on the first volume, Dante begins to occupy him. In the first years of Gogol's life abroad, many factors contributed to this: meetings with V. A. Zhukovsky in Rome in 1838–1839, who at that time was fond of the author of The Divine Comedy; conversations with S.P. Shevyrev and reading his translations from Dante. Directly in the first volume of "Dead Souls", "The Divine Comedy" responded with a parodic reminiscence in the 7th chapter, in the scene of "completion of the bill of sale": Chichikov (Dante), a pilgrim through the underworld, with his temporary companion Manilov, with the help of a petty official (Virgil), find themselves on on the threshold of the "sanctuary" - the office of the chairman civil chamber, where the new guide - "Virgil" leaves the Gogol hero (in the "Divine Comedy" Virgil leaves Dante before ascension to Heavenly Paradise, where he, as a pagan, is forbidden to go).

But, apparently, the main impulse that Gogol received from reading The Divine Comedy was the idea to show the history of the human soul, passing through certain stages - from the state of sinfulness to enlightenment - a history that receives concrete embodiment in individual destiny central character. This gave a clearer outline to the three-part plan of "Dead Souls", which now, by analogy with the "Divine Comedy", began to be presented as the ascent of the human soul, passing through three stages on its way: "Hell", "Purgatory" and "Paradise".

This also led to a new genre comprehension of the book, which Gogol originally called a novel and which was now given the genre designation of a poem, which forced the reader to additionally correlate Gogol's book with Dante's, since the designation "sacred poem" (" poema sacra") also appears in Dante himself (“Paradise”, canto XXV, line 1) and also because at the beginning of the 19th century. in Russia, the "Divine Comedy" was steadily associated with the genre of the poem (the poem called the "Divine Comedy", for example, A.F. Merzlyakov in his "Brief outline of the theory of belles-lettres"; 1822), well known to Gogol. But, in addition to the Dante's association, Gogol's naming of "Dead Souls" as a poem also affected other meanings associated with this concept. First, most often "poem" was defined high degree artistic excellence; this meaning was assigned to this concept in Western European, in particular, German criticism (for example, in F. Schlegel's "Critical Fragments"). In these cases, the concept served not so much as a genre definition as an evaluative definition and could appear regardless of the genre (it was in this vein that Griboyedov wrote about Woe from Wit as a “stage poem”, V. G. Belinsky called Taras Bulba a “poem” ”, and N. I. Nadezhdin called all literature “an episode of a lofty, boundless poem, represented by the original life of the human race”).

However, in Gogol, in this designation, and this should also be borne in mind, there was also an element of polemic. The fact is that in terms of genre, a poem was considered a concept applicable only to poetic works - both small and large forms (“A poem can be called any work written in verse, with imitation of graceful nature,” wrote N. F. Ostolopov in Dictionary of ancient and new poetry”, and in this sense, the “Divine Comedy” more naturally fell under such a classification). In other cases, this concept acquired, as already mentioned, an evaluative meaning. Gogol, on the other hand, used the word "poem" in relation to a large prose form (which would initially be more natural to define as a novel) precisely as a direct designation of the genre, placing it on title page book (graphically, he additionally strengthened the meaning: on the title page created according to his drawing, the word "poem" dominated both the title and the author's surname). The definition of "Dead Souls" as a poem, writes Yu. V. Mann, came to Gogol along with the realization of their genre uniqueness. This uniqueness consisted, firstly, in that universal task, which overcame the one-sidedness of the comic and even more so satirical perspective of the book (“all Rus' will respond in it”), and, secondly, in its symbolic significance, since the book addressed the fundamental problems purpose of Russia and human existence.

Reviews of contemporaries and critical controversy around "Dead Souls"

The poem was published in May 1842 under the title “The Adventures of Chichikov, or Dead Souls” (the title was changed under pressure from censorship, for the same reason “The Tale of Captain Kopeikin” was also thrown out of the poem). “For a long time we have not had such a movement as now on the occasion of Dead Souls,” wrote one of his contemporaries, recalling the controversy caused by the appearance of the book. Some critics accused Gogol of caricature and slandering reality. Others noted their high artistry and patriotism (the last definition belonged to Belinsky). The controversy reached a particular tension after the appearance of K. Aksakov's brochure “A few words about Gogol's poem: “The Adventures of Chichikov, or Dead Souls””, in which the idea of ​​the resurrection of the ancient epic in the poem was developed. Behind the idea of ​​epicness and focus on Homer was the assertion of the passionlessness of Gogol's writing, which is generally characteristic of the epic. First of all, Belinsky entered into a polemic with Aksakov. Gogol himself at that time went abroad, to Germany, and then to Rome, entrusting before that the publication of the first collection of his works to N. Ya. Prokopovich (published in 1842).

In Rome, he worked on the second volume of Dead Souls, begun as early as 1840. This work would continue intermittently for almost 12 years, that is, almost until Gogol's death. Contemporaries looked forward to the continuation of the poem, but instead of it, in 1847, “Selected passages from correspondence with friends” were published in St. Petersburg, the dual purpose of which (as Gogol formulated it for himself) was to explain why the second volume had not yet been written, and prepare readers for its subsequent perception. "Selected places" affirmed the idea of ​​spiritual life-building, the purpose of which would be the creation of an "ideal heavenly state". The latter, however, was tied to the real state bureaucratic machine. Serving the Russian monarch, public service acquired a religious significance from Gogol. Another problem posed by the book is the rethinking of the function of fiction, which has ceased to be "educational". Hence the demand for direct didactics and, at the same time, the renunciation of one's past creations.

In the "Preface" to "Selected Places" Gogol explicitly stated that his writings "led almost everyone astray about their real meaning." Actually, Gogol pinned all his hopes for clarifying the true meaning of his work precisely on the second volume of Dead Souls (according to Tarasenkov, Gogol said: “From it everyone could understand even what was unclear in my previous writings”). Another contemporary of Gogol, who in 1848 talked with him about Dead Souls, recalled: “... I ... asked him directly what exactly this poem should end with. He, thoughtfully, expressed difficulty in expressing this in detail. I objected that I only needed to know whether Pavel Ivanovich would come to life properly? Gogol, as if with joy, confirmed that this would certainly happen and that the Tsar himself would directly participate in his revival, and that the poem should end with Chichikov's first breath for a true lasting life. ... And what about Chichikov's other companions in Dead Souls? I asked Gogol: will they also be resurrected? “If they want to,” he replied with a smile. Actually, the very name of the poem ("dead souls") suggested the possibility of the opposite: the existence of "living" souls. The key to this should have been the resurrection of the protagonist for a new "wonderful" life, as well as the emergence of new, compared to the first volume, "positive" characters: exemplary landowners (Costanjoglo and Vasily Platonov), officials, heroes who could be perceived as alter ego the author himself (for example, Murazov) and about which we know from the five surviving chapters of draft editions.

On January 1, 1852, Gogol finally announces that the second volume is "completely finished." At the end of January, Father Matvey, Gogol's spiritual father, arrives in Moscow. The content of their conversations that took place these days remains unknown, but there is indirect evidence that it was Father Matvey who advised Gogol to burn some of the chapters of the poem, citing the harmful influence that they may have on readers. So, on the night of February 11-12, 1852, the white manuscript of the second volume was burned. Subsequently, Andrei Bely called the fate of Gogol "a terrible revenge", comparing his father Matvey with scary rider in the Carpathians: “... the earth made its own Terrible revenge. The face seen by Gogol did not save Gogol: this face became for him "rider in the Carpathians". Gogol ran away from him.

Gogol died on February 21, 1852 - ten days after the burning of the manuscript of the poem. On his tombstone, the words of the prophet Jeremiah were carved: "I will laugh at my bitter word."

Basic concepts

Romanticism, realism, fantasy, grotesque, story cycle, comedy, "mirage intrigue", poem as a genre, poem as an evaluative characteristic, small epic, picaresque novel, travel novel, tradition, satire, comic.

Questions and tasks for self-control

1. The originality of Gogol's satire. How do you understand the words of N. A. Nekrasov: “He preached love with a hostile word of denial ...” (poem “On the day of Gogol’s death” - “Blessed is the gentle poet”)? Give examples of Gogol's carnival imagery. What is the role of eschatological motifs in Gogol's artistic world?

2. What is Gogol's idea of ​​the Cosmos? What role do the images of the ladder and the world tree play in this representation? Symbolic images in the works of Gogol and their artistic significance. What is the novelty of N. V. Gogol's dramaturgy? Determine the role of the idea of ​​fear in the development of the action of his comedies. How does the content of the idea change from the first phenomenon to the last? How do you understand “mirage intrigue” (a terminological phrase by Yu. V. Mann)? What is the meaning of the "silent" scene in The Inspector General? Why main topic"Marriages" - an illusion?

3. The image of the city in the work of Gogol. Why does the writer not portray Moscow satirically? How does Gogol solve the problem of "man and environment"? The role of the shock motif in Petersburg stories. The theme of the "little man" in the work of Gogol.

4. The symbolic context of the title of the poem "Dead Souls". Indicate three levels of title semantics: what problematics corresponds to each of the levels?

5. What was the inner plot of Selected Places from Correspondence with Friends expressed in? What is the Gogol ideal human personality? What role does Gogol assign to art and religion in the awakening of the soul?

Literature

White A. Gogol's skill. M., 1996.+

Bocharov S. G. On the style of Gogol. In: The Theory of Literary Styles. Typology of stylistic development of modern times. M., 1976.+

Weisskopf Michael. Gogol's story. Morphology. Ideology. Context. M., 1993.

Vinogradov V.V. The evolution of Russian naturalism. Gogol and the "natural" school. Sketches about the style of Gogol. In his book: Selected Works. Poetics of Russian literature. M., 1976.+

Gippius V.V. Gogol's creative path // From Pushkin to Blok. M., L., 1966.+*

Gukovsky GA. Gogol's realism. M., 1959.+

Mann Yu.V. In search of a living soul. M., 1987.+

Mann Yu.V. The audacity of invention. Features of the artistic world of Gogol. M., 1985.+

Mann Yu. M. Poetics of Gogol. M., 1995.+

Mann Yuri. Gogol. Works and Days: 1809–1845. M., 2004

Markovich V. M. Petersburg stories by N. V. Gogol. L., 1989.+

Mashinsky S.I. Artistic world of Gogol. M., 1971.

Nabokov V.V. Nikolay Gogol. New world, 1987, № 4.

Nikolaev D.P. Satire of Gogol. M., 1984.

Pereverzev V. F. Creativity Gogol. In his book: Gogol, Dostoevsky. Research. M., 1982.

Smirnova EA. Gogol's poem Dead Souls. L., 1987.

EichenbaumB.M. How the overcoat is made. In his book: On Prose. L., 1969.+

Chapter 5

The Literary Movement of the 1840s. V. G. Belinsky and " natural school»

Years of the 19th century in the domestic literary movement have become a time of breakthrough to new aesthetic horizons, a time of complex interaction of various ideological and artistic systems and types of author's consciousness with the dominance of the leading trend - the growth realistic beginnings in prose and poetry.

Literature is making a rapid evolution in an era not rich in major historical events, but marked by a deepening of social and cultural development. At the turn of the second and third decades of Nikolaev's reign, under the former conditions of serfdom and the persecution of free thought, tremendous spiritual work was being done in society, and social and literary thought was being sharpened. A. I. Herzen called that era the time of “external slavery and internal liberation”. The time has come for a spiritual take-off, heated philosophical, religious, historical and literary discussions. Sometimes they take the form of a sharp ideological and literary struggle.

Disputes between "Westerners" and "Slavophiles"

The question of the past, present and future of Russia, the ways of its development and its role in world history, in the human community divided the educated minority into Slavophiles and Westerners. Their dispute was set by the “Philosophical Letter” by P. Ya. Chaadaev, published in the Moscow journal “Telescope” in 1836, where the author, reflecting on the fate of the West and Russia, Catholicism and Orthodoxy, made negative conclusions about the historical fate Orthodox Russia. Chaadaev's ideas directly "awakened" two opposing public directions: Slavophiles and Westerners of the 40s could equally well consider him both their mentor and opponent.

Leading ideologists and publicists of Slavophilism in the 1940s: poet and philosopher A. S. Khomyakov, critic and publicist I. V. Kireevsky, his brother, P. V. Kireevsky, public figure Yu. F. Samarin, brothers K.S. and I. S. Aksakovs - children of the recognized writer Sergei Aksakov, also famous writers.

Russian Westernism of that time was represented by V. G. Belinsky; A. I. Herzen; his friend and colleague N. P. Ogarev; public figure, professor of Moscow University T. N. Granovsky; V. P. Botkin; P. V. Annenkov, who became the first biographer of Pushkin; writer and journalist I. I. Panaev.

Both Slavophiles and Westerners were true guardians of the Fatherland, they were united by dissatisfaction with the results of the cultural and historical development of Russia, a thirst for national self-consciousness. Both those and others spoke about the need to abolish serfdom, about civil rights and freedoms. Both those and others were in opposition to the tsarist bureaucracy (but not to the autocracy itself, in relation to which the positions of each of the participants in the movements were different). Slavophiles and Westernizers assessed the period of Moscow Rus and the reforms of Peter I, the bourgeois economic order of Europe and the patriarchal foundations of Russia in different ways. In the field of the discussed problems was the question of the purpose of art, of the artistry and nationality of literature.

Collections of circles of Herzen and Belinsky, literary salons and living rooms of private houses (P. Ya. Chaadaeva, D. N. Sverbeeva, A. P. Elagina and others), editorial offices of magazines (“Moskvityanin”, “Russian conversation”, on the one hand , and " Domestic notes”, “Contemporary” - on the other) - a lively polemic of ideological and literary opponents unfolded here, introducing the terms themselves into active speech circulation: Westernism and Slavophilism.

The title of Khomyakov's article "On the Old and the New" is symbolic, which marked the beginning in 1839 of the Slavophile trend as such. In the "former", "old" - in Russian legends and traditions of Orthodoxy and folk morality, which is free from "profit", self-interest, you need to look for the beginning of "true Orthodoxy." “These best instincts of the soul, educated and ennobled by Christianity, these memories of antiquity unknown, but secretly living in us, have produced all the good that we can be proud of.”

Tradition, "the succession of life" is the most necessary basis for its self-preservation, - wrote K. Aksakov. Therefore, it is natural that the Slavophils adore the centuries-old foundations of the monarchy, the Russian communal system, the Christian collective, and not individual forms life, up to "self-denial". Sobornost - this is how, since the time of the first Slavophiles, the special quality of Russian, Slavic brotherhood, Orthodox unity has been determined different layers society on the basis of selfless service to the "world", "community", "kind".

In art and literature, the Slavophils valued that which is original, in which the spiritual strength of the people “creates”. For Khomyakov, these were icons and church music, for K. Aksakov and Samarin - the work of N. V. Gogol, A. K. Tolstoy, V. I. Dahl. In "Dead Souls" K. Aksakov saw Homeric epicness - integrity, "strong", "eternal", "positive" principle associated with the Christian ideal. The "Russian art school", according to Khomyakov, was "a matter of life and death in the sense of moral and spiritual activity." The search for an “internal source of national enlightenment” inspired the Slavophiles themselves to their own creative research: they wrote poems and prose, K. Aksakov was the author of an experimental Russian grammar, Kireevsky published the original folklore texts he had collected.

Representatives of Westernism believed that Russia could achieve prosperity only through rapprochement with Europe; in the rapid growth of industry, in the affirmation of the civil rights of the individual, in the ideals of equality, in the development of science, in bourgeois progress, they saw the guarantee of Russia's greatness.

Of fundamental importance for Westerners was the problem of individual freedom, its independent development. Indicative in this sense is the fate of the writer and thinker A. I. Herzen. Being abroad at the end of the 40s, he sees the hopelessness of the political struggle in Russia and, not wanting to serve the Fatherland “in stocks”, makes a bitter and exceptionally courageous decision at that time: not to return to his homeland. It helped him to overcome civil timidity firm conviction: "in oneself ... respect one's freedom and honor it no less than in one's neighbor, as in the whole people, for only on the freedom of the person can the real will of the people grow." In London, Herzen and Ogarev founded a "free Russian printing house"; the mighty voice of Kolokol, a newspaper published already in the fifties and sixties, excited and enlightened distant compatriots. Herzen died in 1870 abroad, returning to his homeland with a free word. The epoch of the 1940s is extensively represented by Herzen in his famous book of memoirs Past and Thoughts (1852–1867), which is rightfully considered the pinnacle of the writer's work.

"... Not revisionist dead souls,
and all these Nozdrevs, Sobakevichs and
all others are "dead souls".
A.I. Herzen

The plot of the poem "Dead Souls" by N.V. Gogol gave A.S. Pushkin, his best friend and teacher. In his work, Gogol decided to show Russia comprehensively, and first of all, feudal Russia. Chichikov, main character poems, wanders around the landlord estates of Russia and buys the dead in fact, but legally alive, that is, souls not deleted from the audit lists. To carry out his plans, Chichikov pays visits to landowners whose estates are located in the vicinity of the provincial city. So he gets to Sobakevich.

Everything in the estate of Sobakevich was done firmly and to the glory. The thick oak buildings seemed to have been built to last. The huts of the peasants were just as strong and solid. It can be seen that the peasants lived well. The owner's house was also built solidly and comfortably. Instead of four columns, there were only three, although this did not correspond to the architecture, but it was convenient for the owner. The cart rolled up to the porch - a guest came out of it. Sobakevich received him cordially and led him into the house. Sobakevich looked like a bear medium size. His face was as red as a red-hot nickel. The gait was also completely bearish. His name was even Mikhail Semenovich.

The decoration of Sobakevich's rooms is also interesting. He has all the furniture similar to the owner. Everything is done so firmly and rudely that every table or chair seems to want to say: "And I, too, Sobakevich." Portraits of mighty commanders hang on the walls. Among them, a portrait of Bagration was lost, which looks with a pitiful and humble look. There is not a single book in the whole house.

Sobakevich knows a lot about food. He has: there is a ram - give the whole ram, there is a goose - give the whole goose. Sobakevich's main occupation in life is food. He is a moral freak, a man without a soul. "It seemed that he either had no soul at all, or he had one, but not where it should be."

Sobakevich has a sober mind when we are talking about living. With him, everything is a commodity, an object of purchase and sale. He immediately understands that Chichikov needs dead souls, and he breaks the price for them as if they were alive. Sobakevich even in conversation begins to confuse the living and the dead. He speaks of the dead as of the living, he begins to praise everyone as a good worker, not noticing that he is talking about dead people. The Sobakeviches were staunch serf-owners, enemies of enlightenment, a firm support of the autocracy in Russia, the main force on which the autocratic-serf regime in Russia rested. In the image of Sobakevich, Gogol shows with great force the deadening influence on the soul of a person of a passion for gain, for accumulation. In Sobakevich, everything is focused on accumulation, the saturation of his own stomach, and the strengthening of his own well-being.

The poem "Dead Souls" is not named so by chance. Belinsky writes that the "dead souls" are the landlords and officials themselves. N.V. Gogol wanted to show how terrible it is when "dead souls" have exorbitant power and own hundreds of peasant souls, many of whom were more talented and smarter than their masters.

Year 2009, the bicentenary of the birth of Nikolai Vasilyevich. Disputes flared up around the name of the writer, the mysterious and mystical master of Russian literature. Ukraine, emphasizing that the Little Russian Sorochintsy, in which Gogol was born, belongs to the Ukrainian lands, declared Gogol a great Ukrainian writer. Russia, in turn, relying on the fact that Gogol wrote in Russian and from his youth until his death he lived in St. Petersburg and Moscow, speaks of Gogol as a great Russian writer.

And while these disputes are going on, in a small office of an ordinary apartment in one of the residential areas of Tbilisi, Georgian Zurab Kartveladze, a doctor with a diploma, a publicist, historian, culturologist, at the behest of the soul, reads Dead Souls. Outside the window is a vague, incomprehensible time, you need to puzzle over how to live, and he reads a textbook, immortal work of Russian classics.

Not just reading, searching. And he finds - traces of his Georgia, Georgian fragments in Gogol's work. And writes about what he found, rejoicing at the opportunity to make his modest contribution to the cultural treasury of the world.

“No matter how we get bogged down in everyday and essential things,” I thought then, “there will always be something that is higher than hourly needs. Something is OVER. Above profit, above material, above politics, above the national.” "Above", having no monetary equivalent, having only the value of knowledge, the value of novelty, the value of intellectual elegance and enduring beauty.

Site host Petr Zgonnikov

Zurab Kartveladze. About the Georgian episodes in Gogol's "Dead Souls"

In Gogol's famous work Dead Souls, there are two episodes from which it follows that Gogol was well aware of some subtle details of Georgian reality. But Gogol has never been to Georgia. In his youth, Nikolai Vasilyevich lived in Ukraine, then, all his adulthood- in Russia. But then where, from whom could he have this knowledge?

Let's look at the first snippet first. It has the following, very interesting description:

"... Our hero (Chichikov - Z.K.), sitting better on Georgian rug ( highlighted by me - Z.K. ) put a leather pillow behind his back.

Why did Gogol remember the Georgian rug when he sat down his hero? After all, at that time, as today, few people knew about the existence of Georgian carpets and rugs. If we talk about carpets that have a good reputation outside of Asia Minor, then everyone knows what then, what now, carpets are Persian and Turkish, but not Georgian at all. But then why does Gogol emphasize that the carpet was precisely Georgian?

To assert the Georgian origin of the rug, the writer had to have a good knowledge of the everyday culture of Georgia. Only a person who was well versed in the essence of Christian symbols and ornaments (they are not on Muslim carpets) and in the aesthetic and ethno-linguistic features of ties, flourishes and carpet patterns.

Let us leave this question for now and pass on to the second Georgian episode discovered by Gogol.

Describing those present at the governor's ball, Gogol writes:

"The galloping flew in all directions: the postmaster, the police captain, the lady with the blue feather, the lady with the white feather, Georgian prince Chipkhaikhilidzev (highlighted by me - Z.K.) , an official from St. Petersburg, an official from Moscow, the Frenchman Kuku, Perkhunovsky, Berebendovsky - everything got up and away we go.

When it comes to surnames in "Dead Souls", it is necessary to take into account the following remark of Nikolai Vasilyevich himself:

"It is dangerous to name a fictitious surname. Whatever name you think up, it will certainly be found in some corner of our state, the blessing is great, someone who wears it will certainly be angry not with his stomach, but with death ..." Therefore, all of the above surnames are potentially fictitious by the author.

And in fact, the Georgians do not have the surname Chipkhaikhilidze (v). This surname is clearly artificial, invented by Gogol artistic purposes. One might think that the writer constructed this surname by slightly modifying the surnames of the Georgian princes Chavchavadze, Chalaganidze, Chkheidze, known in those days in Russia ... However, these surnames do not fit either the consonance or other parameters of proximity to the surname invented by Gogol.

But, mindful of the characters of the caricatured faces present at the ball, and in order for the Georgian prince to fit exactly into the appropriate company (given the writer’s wide gastronomic knowledge), we see that when divided into syllables, the surname Chipkhaikhilidze almost repeats the name of the famous Georgian dish chakhokhbili - "CHIPKHAIKHILI" and "CHAKHOKHBILI".

Giving the Georgian prince, his hero, a “gastronomic” surname, Gogol, together with other characteristics (making him a worthy representative of his own kind at the ball), paints a portrait of a frequenter of feasts, a glutton.

These episodes no doubt indicate that Gogol was well aware of life, ethnic and cultural characteristics Georgian people.

From what sources?

The writer had a close friendship with the family of Count Alexander Petrovich Tolstoy. The count's wife, Princess Anna Georgievna Bagrationi-Gruzinskaya, was the great-granddaughter of Bakar, son of the Georgian king Vakhtang VI.

Between Gogol and the married couple of Tolstoys, the warmest and closest relations developed. In one of his letters to Anna Georgievna, Gogol wrote: “I loved you sincerely, I loved you like a sister,

firstly, for your kindness, and secondly, for your sincere desire to do what is pleasing to God, to serve Him, to love Him, and to obey Him...”

Nikolai Vasilievich spent the last years of his life in the Tolstoy house on Nikitsky Boulevard in Moscow. The husband and wife, true believers, gave their friend two rooms on the first floor, surrounded the writer with care and attention.

“... here Gogol was looked after like a child, giving him complete freedom in everything,” the poet Nikolai Berg wrote in his memoirs. “He did not care about anything. Lunch, breakfast, tea, dinner were served where he ordered. His underwear was washed and put into chests of drawers by invisible spirits, unless they were also put on him by invisible spirits.In addition to the numerous servants at home, his own man, from Little Russia, named Semyon, served him in his rooms, a very young, meek and extremely devoted fellow. The silence in the wing was unusual.

The Tolstoy family had historical relics associated with Georgia, in particular, the house church, where, among other icons, there was an image of All the Saints of the Georgian Church. Nizhny Novgorod province. The Cross of St. Equal-to-the-Apostles Nina, the Enlightener of Georgia, was kept there for almost half a century. cathedral Sioni in Tbilisi).

In the Tolstoy house, of course, there were talks about Georgia, its history and culture, language and traditions, and Gogol, who lived in their house, no doubt took part in them. Indirect evidence of the writer's interest in the Caucasian (Georgian) theme can be one of the letters of Count A.P. Tolstoy to Gogol from Paris, dated August 5 (new style), 1847, in which he describes the state of affairs in the Caucasus.

Thus, we can safely assume that Princess Anna Georgievna of Georgia (Bagrationi) and her father, Prince George of Georgia (Bagrationi), were exactly the source from which Gogol drew his knowledge of Georgia and Georgian reality.

Zurab Kartveladze (Tbilisi)

Peter Zgonnikov.Anna and Alexander Tolstoy were in a spiritual marriage

While preparing an article by Zurab Kartveladze for publication, I wanted to learn more about the Tolstoy couple. And I came to a very puzzling discovery: Princess Anna Bagrationi and Alexander Tolstoy were blood relatives! Princess Anna Georgievna was a great-granddaughteroh Bakar, son of the Georgian king Vakhtang VI, Count Alexander Tolstoy - great-grandson of George, another son of Tsar Vakhtang VI.

Four cousins ​​brother and sister!

And how could one not be puzzled if Christian morality categorically forbids marriages between blood relatives up to the 8th generation, and Anna Georgievna and Alexander Petrovich were believers.

So much so that Alexander Petrovich wore chains under his clothes *, rigorously, to the smallest detail, observed fasts and even refused vegetable oil for weeks. He generously did good, and did it out of the demands of the soul, without trumpeting about his deeds, on the contrary, setting, first of all, the strictest condition: that the name of the donor should not be disclosed.

Anna Georgievna was no less religious. She preferred spiritual literature to secular literature, her reference book was “Words and Speeches of the Right Reverend Jacob, Archbishop of Nizhny Novgorod and Arzamas”, sermons from which Gogol, who lived in recent years with the Tolstoy spouses, read her daily sermons. She was extremely strict with herself, avoided excesses, strictly observed church and Christian regulations, shunned society, for which she received the name "eccentric".

How could Alexander Petrovich and Anna Georgievna, people of such strict Christian convictions, agree to a blood marriage contrary to their faith?Contemporaries asked this question.

In her youth, Anna Georgievna experienced a severe mental shock.

A girl of rare beauty, one of the most enviable brides of her time, she fell in love with a peasant youth, the son of a peasant Andrei Medvedev. The father did everything to separate the lovers - and achieved his goal. (And nowadays, a rare girl in the Caucasus will go against the will of her father, what can we say about that time).

The lovers were forced to accept, but vowed to renounce secular life and devote himself to monasticism. Andrey, having become a monk, eventually became the rector of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra (in 1998 he was canonized as a saint, as

locally venerated saint). Anna went to the monastery, but, according to one version, she did not have time to take the tonsure, her father almost took her home by force. Others write that she remained in the monastery, but suffered so much that the abbess, taking pity on the unfortunate woman, advised her father to take the girl home.

At home, Anna led a secluded life, spending time in fasting and prayer. She probably would have ended her earthly days alone, if her father had not interfered in her fate again. Years passed, the prince grew old and began to fear that with his death his daughter would be left completely alone, without male help and guardianship. He tried to marry her - she objected. The prince insisted, expressed dissatisfaction, and Anna surrendered herself to the will of her father, rather, I think, in order to free him from torment and anxiety.

At the age of 35, she marries ... with her brother in the fourth generation. The choice cannot be called accidental: Anna marries, firstly, for a brother, for a man whom she has known for decades (that is, she could have married a long time ago, but did not marry), secondly, for a deeply religious person, and thirdly, contrary to the absolute religious taboo.

But it comes out.

This paradoxical step can have one, it seems to me, explanation: there was no marriage in its usual sense. It was a marriage union, concluded for the sake of calming the restless father and to comply with the accepted norms of the social environment.

Anna agreed to such a marriage out of necessity, Alexander - out of compassion for the suffering, with the unsuccessful, broken fate sister.They could reconcile their spiritual values ​​with the requirements of life and society in one way: by excluding from the sphere of their cohabitation physical layer communication.

There is little doubt in my mind that this was the case.Contemporaries who knew Anna Georgievna and Alexander Petrovich well guessed the formal nature of their marriage. It is no coincidence that the maid of honor of the Imperial Court Smirnova-Rosset, recalling Anna Georgievna, wrote: “For 35 years she married A.P. Tolstoy. He obeyed his eccentric and lived with her Like a brother…".

"Like a brother" is my emphasis.

P.S. To what Zurab Kartveladze wrote above, it is probably worth adding that Gogol’s knowledge of the nuances of Georgian reality was influenced not only by Anna Georgievna Gruzinskaya, a descendant of the Georgian royal family of Bagrationi (and, possibly, her father), but also by Alexander Petrovich Tolstoy, the same descendant royal family of Bagrationi, like Anna.

Peter Zgonnikov, website host

* Chains - different kind iron chains, stripes, rings worn by Christian ascetics on their naked bodies to humble the flesh.

Photos via Google

ESSAY

The role of the episode in the poem by N.V. Gogol
"Dead Souls"
"Chichikov at Nozdryov"

History of creation :

Nikolai Vasilievich Gogol worked on the poem "Dead Souls" abroad. The first volume was published in 1841. The writer planned to write a poem in three parts. His task in this work was to show Rossi from the negative side, as he himself said - “from one side”.

This poem shows a separate landowner Chichikov, Russian society, Russian people, economy (landlords' economy).

The title "Dead Souls" has a double meaning, I think. On the one hand, N.V. Gogol included in the name the souls of the dead peasants, about whom so much is said in the poem. On the other hand, these are the "Dead Souls" of the landowners. The writer showed here all the callousness, the emptiness of the soul, the emptiness of life, all the ignorance of the landowners.

The story about Captain Kopeikin shows the attitude of officials towards common people, the fact that the state does not respect people who gave their health, and in many cases their lives for it; that the state for which they fought in the war of 1812 does not fulfill its promises, does not care about these people.

There are many episodes in this poem. They, I think, can be divided even into groups. One group is the episodes of Chichikov's visits to the landowners. I think this group is the most important in the poem. I want to describe, perhaps even comment on, one episode from this group - this is the episode when Chichikov visits the landowner Nozdryov. The action took place in the fourth chapter.

Chichikov, after visiting Korobochka, stopped by the tavern for lunch and to give the horses a rest. He asked the hostess of the tavern about the landlords, and, as usual, Chichikov began to ask the hostess about the family, about life. When he was talking, eating at the same time, the sound of the wheels of the approaching carriage was heard. Nozdryov and his companion, son-in-law Mezhuev, got out of the britzka.

Then we went to the office. There they had a quarrel because of the unwillingness of our hero to play cards. Before the quarrel, Chichikov offered to buy "dead souls" from Nozdryov. Nozdryov began to set his own conditions, but Chichikov did not accept any of them.

Chichikov was left alone after the conversation.

The next day they began to play checkers on the condition: if our hero wins, then his souls, if he loses, then “no, and there is no trial.” The author characterizes Nozdryov as follows: “He was of medium height, a very well-built fellow, with full, pleasant cheeks, teeth as white as snow, and whiskers black as pitch. He was fresh, like blood with straw; health seemed to spurt from his face.”

Nodrev joined our hero, told about the fair, that he was blown to smithereens there. Then Chichikov, Nozdryov, and son-in-law Mezhuev went to Nozdryova. After supper, son-in-law Mezhuev left. Chichikov and Nozdryov, as usual, began to “cheat”. Chichikov noticed this and was indignant, after which a quarrel ensued, they began to wave their hands at each other. Nozdryov called his servants Pavlusha and Porfiry and began to shout to them: “Beat him, beat him!” Chichikov turned pale, his soul "went into his heels." And if it weren’t for the police captain, who entered the room to announce to Nozdryov that he was in custody regarding the infliction of personal insult with rods in a drunken state on the landowner Maximov; to be our hero severely crippled. While the captain was announcing the notice to Nozdryov, Chichikov quickly took his hat, went downstairs, got into the britzka and ordered Selifan to drive the horses at full speed.

I think the theme of this episode was to show, characterize the person who played not last role in the life of our hero. In my opinion,
N.V. Gogol also wanted to show with this episode all the “recklessness” of the young landowners, among whom was Nozdryov. Here the writer showed how young landowners like Nozdryov, and in principle, like all landowners, do nothing else, how they “stagger” around balls and fairs, play cards, drink “godlessly”, think only about themselves and how to salt others.

Episode Role :

This episode played a big role in the poem, Nozdryov, annoyed by Chichikov during the time when he came to him, betrayed him at the governor's ball. But Chichikov was saved by the fact that everyone knew Nozdryov as a liar, a hypocrite, a bully, so his words were perceived as “nonsense of a madman”, as a joke, as a lie, whatever, but not as the truth.

While reading this episode, my impressions changed from beginning to end. At the beginning of the episode, the actions were not very interesting for me: this is when Chichikov met Nozdryov, as they were driving to his house. Then, little by little, I began to resent Nozdryov's boorish behavior - this is when, after dinner, Chichikov offered to buy "dead souls" from him, and Nozdryov began to wonder why he needed this. All Chichikov's attempts to hang noodles on Nozdryov's ears were stopped by him. Nozdryov said that Chichikov was a big swindler and that if he were his boss, he would hang him on the first tree. While reading, I was outraged by this behavior of Nozdryov in relation to Chichikov, after all, Chichikov is his guest.

There were a lot of events in this episode, but I have impressions about these actions.

Artistic details :

First, let's see how the author describes the tavern: “A darkened, narrow, hospitable wooden canopy on carved wooden posts, similar to old church candlesticks; the tavern was something like a Russian hut, somewhat big size, carved patterned cornices made of fresh wood around the windows and under the roof sharply and vividly dazzled its dark walls; jugs of flowers were painted on the shutters; narrow wooden staircase, wide vestibule. The interior of the tavern: a frost-covered samovar, scraped walls, a three-corner cupboard with teapots and cups in the corner, gilded porcelain testicles in front of images hanging on blue and red ribbons, a recently drenched cat, a mirror showing four eyes instead of two, and some kind of face instead of cake; finally, fragrant herbs and carnations stuck in bunches near the images, dried up to such an extent that those who wanted to sniff them only sneezed, and nothing more.

Let's move on to the description of Nozdryov's household: in the house in the middle of the dining room there were wooden goats. There were two mares in the stable, one dappled gray, the other kaurai, a bay stallion, empty stalls; a pond, a water mill, where there was not enough fluff; forge. Nozdryov’s office: “There were no traces of books or paper in it, only sabers and two guns hung.” This suggests that Nozdryov was not interested in anything, did not take care of his household, everything was running.

The hero's inner world in this episode:

Let's pay attention to the inner world of our hero in this episode. Here Chichikov at some points did not know what to answer Nozdryov to his annoying questions. It is in such moments when Nozdryov asked him: “Why do you need them (dead souls)?”

In this episode, Chichikov, I think, felt embarrassed because of the boorish behavior of Nozdryov: he takes offense at him, since the pride of our hero was affected. After Chichikov quarreled with Nozdryov after dinner because he did not play cards with him, he remained in the most unfavorable mood. The author describes his thoughts and feelings in this way: “He was internally annoyed with himself for having stopped by and wasted his time. But he scolded himself even more for having spoken to Nozdryov about the matter, acted imprudently, like a child, like a fool: for the matter was not at all of the kind to be entrusted to Nozdryov. Nozdryov - man - rubbish, Nozdryov can lie, add, dissolve the rumor and the devil knows what gossip, not good, not good. "I'm just a fool," he said to himself.

I think that in this episode Chichikov behaved tolerantly, restrained, despite the boorish behavior of Nozdryov. But this is understandable, because our hero wants to achieve his goal at any cost.

In my opinion, the author wanted to show with this episode that not everything in life is as simple as one would like. That if everything went well with Korobochka, then everything went very abnormally with Nozdryov - in life there are both white and black stripes.

I also think that this episode teaches us that we need to know a person very well, to study him carefully before trusting. After all, what happened with Chichikov: he trusted Nozdryov about the “dead souls”, and Nozdryov betrayed him, telling everyone about this case.

But I repeat, Chichikov was saved by the fact that everyone considers Nozdryov a liar, no one believed him. Such luck may not happen in life.

It should be noted that the episode of the collision of the crews is divided into two micro-themes. One of them is the appearance of a crowd of onlookers and "helpers" from neighboring village, the other - Chichikov's thoughts, caused by a meeting with a young stranger. Both of these themes have both an external, superficial layer, directly related to the characters of the poem, and a deep layer, bringing to the scale of the author's thoughts about Russia and its people.

So, the clash occurs suddenly, when Chichikov silently sends curses to Nozdryov, thinking that he could have disappeared from the world in his estate, if not for the appearance of the police captain. Selifan is busy with the same thing, angry that Nozdryov did not give the horses oats, even the horses, and they were not in a good mood. A collision - and a strange coachman, not embarrassed by the presence of ladies in the carriage, scolds Selifan: “Oh, you are such a swindler; because I shouted out loud: turn right, crow! Are you drunk? Selifan, being, according to the author's characterization, a truly Russian person who does not like to admit his mistake, is not inferior to his “colleague”: “Why are you jumping like that? Did he put his eyes in the tavern, or what?” Attempts to free the entangled horses do not lead to success, the scolding of the coachmen, the screech of the whips are heard, but the horses stand still. They stand until the men gathered around them and took an ardent part in breeding horses. A real whirlwind begins: Uncle Mityai, Uncle Minyay and a certain Andryushka take turns sitting on the root, then on the harness, the rest of the men shout out advice in unison and in the end they help only by tormenting both the horses and the coachman, and he drives them away, breeds horses, and the chaise leaves.

The entire episode is accompanied not so much by the author's reasoning as by hints that the collision is not just a fiction needed to amuse the reader. Here the motive of the crowd is connected, in many respects a thoughtless collective action, as if relieving each of its individual participants from responsibility, the motive of boredom that prevails in Russian villages: “... such a spectacle for a peasant is a real blessing, it’s the same as newspapers or a club for a German”, intertwined with the motive some kind of childishness, spontaneity, characteristic of a Russian person.

Our main character was also distracted from his thoughts about Nozdryov, but not so much by the collision itself, but by the fact that in another carriage next to the old woman he saw a young woman with golden hair, with a sweet fresh face. But, as we already know, our hero lacks a romantic component: the age is no longer the same, and the inherent practicality makes him consider any young woman from the point of view of her suitability for the role of wife, not just for him, but in general. Therefore, Chichikov does not stand, "staring senselessly into the distance," and dreaming of meeting a young charmer, but busily remarks to himself: "Glorious grandmother!" And here the author gives Chichikov reflections on a problem, perhaps less relevant for modern girls, but almost the main one for young graduates of boarding houses and institutes of that time. This is the problem of education carried out by mothers and aunts, aimed at the formation of "correct" behavior in the world: "with whom, and how, and how much you need to talk, how to look at." Education, instilling stiffness and leading to the choice of "lies" as a line of life behavior. This topic, the theme of predestined secular fate 19th women c., the theme of the need to comply with the "expressed instructions" and the sole purpose of seeing marriage, are devoted to many stories of that time. And Chichikov himself, despite the fact that the girl is completely unknown to him, considers her not at all as an independent person, but as "very tasty", a woman capable of" making up ... the happiness of a decent person, "provided that they give her "two hundred thousand dowry."

So at first glance, only a humorous episode leads the reader to important, inescapable topics: to reflection on the peculiarities of the national character, on education, on the attitude of a man to a woman, their roles in society at any period of its historical development.