Artistic features of the fairy tale M. E

Answered by: Guest

The problem of lack of understanding between representatives of different generations is as ancient as the world. "Fathers" condemn and do not understand their own "children". And those trying to defend their own positions at any cost, completely rejecting all the positive that was accumulated by the previous generation. In my essay, we will talk about Turgenev's novel "Fathers and Sons" as one of the most striking "echoes" of the problem of "fathers and sons" that is still relevant today. Already in the title itself, the writer defined the main task of his work. Yevgeny Bazarov is trying to defend his position in life. The young man denies everything that does not seem personally necessary and interesting to him. This category includes poetry, music, art. The image of Bazarov is a typical image of a democrat-raznochinets. And Eugene has all the qualities that are characteristic of this group. Of course, he is very hardworking. Moreover, his materialistic view of the surrounding reality, together with diligence, seems to be a positive quality. So it's undeniable that a generation of "children" can benefit society. Often the problem of "fathers and sons" is due to the fact that representatives of generations criticize and condemn each other's actions and beliefs. The purpose of criticism is to prove the inconsistency and uselessness for society, which are supposedly characteristic of another generation. Thus, the “fathers” condemn the “children”, and the “children”, in turn, condemn the “fathers”, and the main accusation is the accusation of insolvency. The protagonist of the novel, Evgeny Bazarov, has amazing willpower, a solid character, rare diligence. But, at the same time, there are many shortcomings in this image. Moreover, Turgenev deliberately exaggerates, showing the negative sides of Bazarov, and in his face - the shortcomings of the generation of democrats-raznochintsev of the sixties. The shortcomings of the generation of "children" include demonstrative indifference to art, to aesthetics, to music and poetry. Indifference to the romance of human feelings and relationships, to which love also belongs, also does not adorn the younger generation. There is a lot of rudeness and vulgarity in the behavior of Bazarov's imitators. In the novel, the image of the young nihilist Bazarov is contrasted with the image of a person of a completely different generation - Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov. Pavel Kirsanov is a real idealist, he is a typical representative of the liberal nobility. When Bazarov learns the story of Pavel Petrovich, he gives her his harsh characterization: “a man who staked his whole life on the card of female love and, when this card was killed for him, became limp and sank to the point that he was not capable of anything, such a person - not a man, not a male. ..” Bazarov argues with Pavel Petrovich about science, feelings, about the life of the people, about the problems of the development of society in general and the country in particular, and about many other things. Bazarov personifies the generation of democrats, and Pavel Petrovich - the generation of the liberal nobility. Each generation has its own ideals, which they uphold. Bazarov says that "a decent chemist is twenty times more useful than any poet." Naturally, such an opinion runs counter to the penchant for romance and sentimentality of Pavel Petrovich. Bazarov does not accept lies and pretense, he is sincere, and this is another difference from the generation of liberals, for whom pretense, posturing was something taken for granted . Not wanting to understand that the change from one order to another is natural and inevitable, Pavel Petrovich readily defends the old order, which Bazarov objects to. The disputes between Bazarov and Pavel Kirsanov clearly show that agreement and understanding between these representatives of different generations is simply impossible. The duel between Bazarov and Kirsanov is another proof of the impossibility of peaceful coexistence. The conflict between generations is becoming global. Time moves inexorably forward, and the last word remains with the "children". The novel clearly traces the idea that in the dispute between Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov and Bazarov, the latter is the winner.

Answered by: Guest

Since he saved Anastasia

Answered by: Guest

Each writer, creating his work, whether it be a fantasy novel or a multi-volume novel, is responsible for the fate of the characters. The author tries not only to tell about a person's life, depicting its most striking moments, but also to show how the character of his hero was formed, in what conditions he developed, what features of the psychology and worldview of this or that character led to a happy or tragic denouement. The finale of any work, in which the author draws a peculiar line under a certain stage or the whole life of the hero in general, is a direct reflection of the position of the writer in relation to the character, the result of reflections on the fate of his contemporaries.
The protagonist of I. S. Turgenev's novel "Fathers and Sons" - Yevgeny Vasilyevich Bazarov - dies at the end of the work. Why does the author act in this way with the central character? Why is the description of Bazarov's death so important for understanding the meaning of the novel as a whole? The answers to these and many other questions can be found in the analysis of the episode of the work, which tells about the death of the protagonist.
Bazarov is the son of a poor district doctor, continuing his father's work. Following the author's characterization, we present him as a smart, reasonable, rather cynical, but somewhere in the depths of his soul, a sensitive, attentive and kind person. The specificity of Eugene's life position lies in the fact that he denies everything: moral ideals and values, moral principles, as well as painting, literature and other forms of art. Bazarov does not accept the love sung by poets, considering it only “physiology”. She has no authority. He believes that each person should educate himself, not depending on anyone or anything.
Bazarov is a nihilist. But not the same as Sitnikov and Kukshina, who classify themselves as nihilists, for whom denial is just a mask that allows them to hide their inner vulgarity and inconsistency. Unlike them, Bazarov does not make faces, he, with all the ardor of a spiritually rich and addicted nature, defends views close to him. His main goal is “work for the benefit of society”, his main task is “to live for the great goal of world renewal”.
It can be said that Bazarov treated those around him with a considerable degree of condescension and even contempt, putting them below himself (remember, for example, his statements about the relatives of Arkady and himself), considers unacceptable the manifestation of such feelings as sympathy, mutual understanding, affection, tenderness, sympathy.
But life makes its own adjustments to his worldview. Fate brings Evgeny together with a smart, beautiful, calm and surprisingly unhappy woman, with Anna Sergeevna Odintsova. Bazarov falls in love, and, having fallen in love, he understands that his beliefs are at odds with simple life truths. Love appears to him no longer as “physiology”, but as a real, sincere feeling. This insight for Bazarov, who lives and "breathes" his nihilism, cannot pass without a trace. Together with the destruction of beliefs, his whole life collapses, losing its meaning. Turgenev could have shown how Bazarov would gradually abandon his views, he did not do this, but simply “killed” his main character.
Bazarov's death is an unfortunate and stupid accident. She was the result of a small cut that he received while opening the body of a peasant who died of typhus. The death of the hero was not sudden: on the contrary, she gave Bazarov time, the opportunity to evaluate what had been done and realize the extent of the unfulfilled. In the face of death, Bazarov is steadfast, strong, extremely calm and imperturbable. Thanks to the author's characterization of the hero's condition, we feel for Bazarov not pity, but respect. And at the same time, we constantly remember that before us is an ordinary person with his inherent weaknesses.
No one can calmly perceive the approach of the end, and Eugene, despite all his self-confidence, is not able to treat this with complete indifference. He regrets his unspent power, his unfulfilled task. The “giant”, whom Bazarov always considered himself to be, cannot oppose death with anything: “Yes, go ahead, try to deny death. She denies you, and that's it! Behind the irony of the hero, bitter regret about the passing minutes is clearly visible.

Answered by: Guest

After meeting with Anna Sergeevna Odintsova, Bazarov was captured by the romantic love he had previously denied. Everything that Bazarov previously denied, the nihilist, enters his life, forcing the hero to change his convictions. In chapter 18, the characters are explained. To be more precise, Anna Sergeevna provokes Bazarov to an explanation. And the hero with all the frankness and harshness tells her about his love. Turgenev writes about Bazarov's feelings as a "strong and heavy" passion, "similar to malice." Anna Sergeevna is not ready for such a turn in relations. She was interested in Bazarov, who differed from all her former acquaintances in intelligence, developed thinking, independence, independence. Bazarov's sincere impulse frightens the pampered aristocrat. Odintsova was used to living by "reason", and not by feelings, she became scared. Bazarov was not afraid of his own feelings, he managed to admit that he loves. If Anna Sergeevna accepted Bazarov's proposal, then she would have to change the order of life to which she was already accustomed. In addition, it should be noted that such a strong feeling that arose in Bazarov's soul requires an equally strong feeling in response. Anna Sergeevna is not ready for this. Over the past few years, she has become accustomed to doing everything only for herself and she loves only herself. She reflects: "No, God knows where this would lead, you can't joke with this, calmness is still the best thing in the world." The reason for the parting of the heroes lies in the uncompromising nature of Bazarov and the fact that Anna Sergeevna could not or did not want to overcome her rationality.

Since the genre of the work is an epic novel, there are a large number of characters in the novel, and in connection with this, a large number of storylines. Conventionally, all storylines can be divided into two parts: firstly, the life story of Grigory Melekhov and those heroes with whom he is connected by the events of his personal life; secondly, the history of events on the Don during the civil war. Some of the storylines develop in parallel, some of them do not intersect, so the composition of the work is consistent, with parallel elements. The author uses the technique of antithesis, contrasting the peaceful life of the Cossacks with the time when the war began. Sholokhov in the novel uses a lot of documentary material when describing military operations. Thus, he introduces extra-plot elements into the overall narrative.

The novel has an open ending, i.e. the story is not finished. The reader can only guess how the further fate of Gregory will turn out. Sholokhov deliberately stops the story of his fate.

Intention

Sholokhov worked on the novel for several years. He collects extensive documentary material, so the work is based on reliable events in which both real and fictional characters participate.

Interest in the era depicted in the novel is not accidental. The author recreated almost ten years that were full of many events, some of which he describes in detail, such as the civil war in southern Russia. Sholokhov mentioned some events in the course of the story (revolution, Kornilov rebellion). All the events described were of interest to the author only to the extent that their influence on the fate of the heroes of the novel was great. So, mentioning P.M.V., Sholokhov describes only those battles in which Grigory Melikhov was a participant. It was there that he first killed a man, which he remembered and worried about for a long time, since the Austrian was unarmed. The writer emphasized with similar episodes that in Gregory there was by nature neither aggressiveness nor cruelty, and that was what time later made him. Habitual life, it would seem, was destroyed after the 1917 revolution. In the course of the story, the author reflected the idea that the Cossacks could not accept those changes, as a result of which they were deprived of their usual rights and privileges, deprived of the way of life in which the meaning of their existence consisted.

In the novel, the author contrasts two concepts: War and Peace . Sholokhov does not openly declare his position, but the whole plot of the work is structured in such a way that it becomes obvious: war is a terrible evil, it cripple people not only physically, but also kills their soul, deprives them of many human qualities that are familiar in peacetime . As an originality, it can be noted that the writer does not depict the battlefields and battlefields in a wide and versatile way. Most often, he is limited to creating a general panorama, and then transfers the narration to people in order to emphasize their condition during military events. He also does not describe any heroic deeds.

Firstly, during the World War, the Cossacks behave as is customary among them: with dignity, courage, that is, they do their duty. It is no coincidence that Grigory was awarded one of the highest military awards - the St. George Cross. At the same time, from the point of view of the writer, there could be no talk of any heroism on the fronts of the civil war: there was a fratricidal war, and people defended not the fatherland, but certain interests of the warring parties.

Sholokhov emphasizes the senselessness of the civil war by the fact that for a long time his heroes cannot determine on whose side the truth is. Who really represents their interests. It is no coincidence that Gregory changes his supporters several times, trying to understand the complex, often contradictory, actions of each of their parties. The hero's path to the truth is long and painful - it was important for the writer to show this. The author intentionally does not accept the points of view of any of the parties, does not embellish reality, trying to preserve subjectivity and reliability.

What most of all did not suit Gregory, and with him the other Cossacks? It is likely that each of the parties tried to resolve their issues, while defending the interests of a certain group of people. Gregory is convinced that power should take care of the living conditions of everyone, and not of someone chosen: whites - about the return of their former life, about the return of their rights; the new government is about the poor and the poor, which would be good if not for one circumstance: to feed the hungry, it was considered among the rich.

The Cossacks could not accept this, since everything they had was acquired by their own labor.

The tragic fate of the Don Cossacks is presented on the pages of the novel fully and comprehensively. From the author's point of view, this estate has always lived by its own work, had ideas about issues of morality and morality, and faithfully served its Fatherland. But as a result of revolutionary transformations, their usual way of life was destroyed, they could not come to terms with this, and as a result of the civil war, many of them died.

Historical events in one way or another influenced the fate of many, for example, from the large Melekhov family (there were at least 10 of them, only three survived in the final: Grigory, his son and sister). The fate of these people can also be called tragic because they could hardly imagine how they would live on, how their fate would turn out. It is no coincidence that Sholokhov interrupts the narrative of 1921, thereby “he, as it were, gives his heroes the opportunity to hope for a better future, although the author himself knows that the tragedy has not yet been completed and in the 30s, during the period of mass repressions, many Cossacks were subjected to?

Along with the events of a national scale, Sholokhov showed great interest in human life at his level household, family relationships with other people. Describing in detail the Melekhov family, the writer reflected the typical relationships, the traditional way of life, the world of feelings of the characters. That is why he tells about the difficult relationship of Gregory with two women. Feeling love multifaceted, unambiguous answers, for which people love each other can not be. Therefore, it is difficult for Grigory to figure out where his true happiness is, he cannot make the final choice, because. every woman is dear to him in her own way. Fate made a decision for him - deprived him of both and in the finale he remains alone. Maybe that's why Gregory strives to return to his native home, where he left his last hope for happiness - his son.

Finale, composition, episode

The ending of the novel is very important in many respects.

Firstly, Gregory has lost almost everything that he had in his life: he has no women he loves and loves, he has no friends, no parents, his sister married a man whom Gregory cannot understand, and the one who in turn, I am convinced that Gregory is an enemy.

Secondly, Gregory makes the final decision for himself not to fight anymore. It is symbolic that he threw into the Don all the weapons he had.

Thirdly, the author emphasizes in the finale how cruel and merciless time and events turned out to be in relation to Gregory: in less than ten years that have passed since the beginning of the novel, he has grown old and gray. This is an exhausted and endlessly tired person, although according to the chronology of the work he is only thirty-odd years old.

Fourthly, in the finale, the author unobtrusively makes it clear: what is the true meaning of human life? At the beginning of the novel, everything was clear for Gregory: he has a house, land on which he will work, he will have a family, children, whom he will take care of, raise them according to the life values ​​on which he himself was brought up. Whatever happened in his life later, his dreams always returned to that pre-war life, where everything was simple and clear. And at the end of the novel, he comes to the realization that if he doesn’t return home to his son in order to try to live as he dreamed before, then it’s not worth living on - it’s pointless. The author left him this hope for the future. Actor system

The meaning of the name

The author called the novel "Quiet Flows the Don" not by chance. This concept is ambiguous. Firstly, the Don is a place of collective residence of the Cossacks, whose whole life passed on the banks of this river. Don is present on the pages of the novel no less than other characters. The author describes it in a variety of periods: different seasons, time of day.

Important events in the life of the characters, especially in the first book, take place near the river. So, for the first time Grigory and Aksinya drew attention to each other when they met on the shore. Later, their secret meetings were also, as it were, invisibly guarded by Don. Landscape sketches of this river could be both very detailed and short, but very bright and memorable: “Along the Don ... a wavy, untraveled lunar path. Above the Don - fog, and above - star millet.

Secondly, the author emphasized the role and significance of the Don in the epigraph - an excerpt from folk songs, where the Don is called a father, which emphasized the importance of the river both as a breadwinner (it allowed waterless steppes to be irrigated) and a protector (more than once it saved the Cossacks from enemy persecution) .

Thirdly, Don is a kind of symbol of life. Like any river, it flows, and there is no end to it, as well as time, which flows quickly and irrevocably.

The definition of "quiet", at first glance, may seem paradoxical. Quiet and calm, he was only outwardly on the surface, at a depth where numerous springs beat, he is swift.

LESSON 80. "Extremely truthful and human." Pages of the life and work of M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin

The lesson can be held in the form of a lecture with elements of a conversation and begin with an acquaintance with A. I. Kuprin's story "Giant".

A gymnasium teacher teaching Russian literature and grammar, Mr. Kostyka betrayed the ideals of youth, turned into a soulless official. Once he gave an exam to the great Russian writers. Their portraits, "acquired a long time ago, in the calf years of enthusiastic words and preserved partly out of avarice, partly out of mechanical habit," hang in his office. They are his enemies, terrible and invulnerable. As unfortunate students, he gives them deuces and ones for their behavior: Pushkin, Lermontov, Gogol.

“But suddenly his eyes collided with angry, dilated, bulging eyes, almost colorless from pain, the eyes of a man who, raising his majestic bearded head high, was staring at Kostyka. [These are Shchedrin's eyes.] Your Excellency stammered Kostyka and trembled all over coldly and finely. And a hoarse, rough voice was heard, which said slowly and sullenly: Slave, traitor and

Shchedrin's flaming lips uttered another terrible word, which the great man, if he utters, then only in moments of the greatest disgust. And this word hit Kostyk in the face, blinded his eyes, starred his pupils with lightning.

Questions to the class

How do you see the satirist from the pages of Kuprin's story?

Why was Kostyka afraid? (The writer was afraid of everyone in whom the conscience was unclean.)

Saltykov-Shchedrin has a fairy tale-elegy "The Adventure with Kramolnikov". In it, the author tells about himself, about his writing activity, about his sorrows and joys, at the same time about the torments of the Russian forced writer. “Kramolnikov was a native Poshekhon writer. He deeply loved his country.

He devoted all the strength of his mind and heart to restoring in the souls of his relatives the idea of ​​light and truth and to maintain in their hearts the faith that light would come and darkness would not embrace him. This, in fact, was the task of all his activities.

Using the textbook, the teacher, together with the students, will compile a chronological table reflecting the facts of the life and work of the writer. You can start work in class and finish at home.

January 15, 1826 was born into a family of wealthy landowners in the Tver province. Sixth child. A joyless, difficult childhood. Cruel, greedy mother, poverty of the peasants - hatred of serfdom. Pictures of childhood were reflected in the "Poshekhonskaya antiquity".

1836 Moscow Noble Institute, where V. A. Zhukovsky, A. S. Griboyedov, M. Yu. Lermontov were brought up. Early work is influenced by Lermontov.

1838 among the best he was transferred to the lyceum, where drill and poor knowledge reigned. Passion for reading, passion for Pushkin, Lermontov, Gogol, Belinsky.

18441848 years service. An official in the office of the department, but his thoughts are only about literature. Critical articles, reviews. The story "Contradictions". The story "A Tangled Case"

April 26, 1848 Nicholas I personally signs the order for arrest and exile in Vyatka. The arrest of the Petrashevsky Society.

18571863 years cycles of satirical stories. Criticism of reforms. A call to action.

18581868 public service, literary activity. Vice-governor in Ryazan, in Tver, chairman of the state chamber in Penza, served in Tula, defended the people. Closing of Sovremennik.

18681884 Nekrasov invites Saltykov-Shchedrin to Otechestvennye Zapiski, where the writer works until they are closed. After the death of Nekrasov, he becomes the editor of the magazine. Fight against censorship. Aesopian language. Thoughts on the overthrow of the existing system. Satirical cycle "Pompadours and Pompadours". The novel "History of one city".

70s illness, hard work, trip abroad, new experiences.

1880 a separate edition of "Mr. Golovlyov".

80s years reflections on the fate of the Russian people. Fairy tales are the result of reflections. Hatred for the enslavers, love for the people.

1884“Domestic Notes” was closed. Written "Poshekhonskaya antiquity".

April 28, 1889 Saltykov-Shchedrin died. The Tiflis workers wrote that the work of Saltykov-Shchedrin awakens the consciousness of the people, calls to fight against evil, oppression, in search of truth and light.

At the end of the lesson, Pushkin's poem "The Prophet" sounds.

Final questions

1. What is the connection between Pushkin's poem "The Prophet" and the life of Saltykov-Shchedrin?
2. Why did A. N. Ostrovsky call the satirist M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin a prophet?

LESSON 81 “Although animals, but still kings” Problematics and poetics of fairy tales by Saltykov-Shchedrin

These words can be successfully attributed to the study of the fairy tales of Saltykov-Shchedrin, which the writer himself called fairy tales "for children of a fair age." At the first lesson, it is necessary to highlight several main provisions:

1. "Tales" is a kind of result of the writer's artistic activity, as they were created at the final stage of his life and creative path. Of the 32 fairy tales, 28 were created within four years, from 1882 to 1886.
2. The study of "Fairy Tales" is expected in the context of the correlation of the social and universal in the work of Saltykov-Shchedrin. In the satirical images of the writer, not only laughter over how you can distort, mutilate your life and even your appearance, but also tears about how easily and imperceptibly a person is able to abandon his high destiny and irretrievably lose himself. (This is the hero of the fairy tale "The Wise Piskar" from the word "squeak", since the minnow fish, if grabbed by hand, makes a sound like a squeak.)
3. The tales of Saltykov-Shchedrin are not the speech of a people-storyteller. These are philosophical and satirical tales. They are about life, about what the writer saw and observed in reality. To verify this, one can compare the tales of Saltykov-Shchedrin with Russian folk tales and note their common and distinctive features.

1. What did Saltykov-Shchedrin teach "children of a fair age" to think about? "Children of a fair age" must grow up and stop being children. What are the objects of Saltykov-Shchedrin's satire?

   Government circles and the ruling class;

   philistine-minded (liberal) intelligentsia;

   the disenfranchised position of the people in Russia, their passivity and humility;

   lack of spirituality.

2. Satirical techniques used in fairy tales by the writer. Different ways to laugh:

   a) irony ridicule, which has a double meaning, where the true is not a direct statement, but the opposite;

   sarcasm caustic and poisonous irony, sharply exposing phenomena that are especially dangerous for a person and society;

   grotesque extremely sharp exaggeration, a combination of real and fantastic, violation of the boundaries of plausibility;

b) allegory, allegory a different meaning, hidden behind the external form. Aesopian language artistic speech based on forced allegory;

c) hyperbole excessive exaggeration.

On the example of the fairy tale "The Wild Landowner", students, under the guidance of a teacher, find methods of satirical depiction of reality by Saltykov-Shchedrin.

At the end of the lesson, the teacher informs the students of the main issues of the fairy tales of Saltykov-Shchedrin and the features of the satirical depiction of reality in "Tales". Students can record this information in the form of a table:

In a weak class, it is possible to organize a collective analysis of the fairy tale "The Bear in the Voivodeship", as it is a transitional bridge to the study of the "History of a City".

Parallels between the fairy tale "The Bear in the Voivodship" (1884) and the novel "The History of a City":

forest slum city of Glupov;

Toptygin, Osel, Lev mayors;

forest peasants are stupid.

Reference from the dictionary of S. I. Ozhegov:

slum is a word-image, the ambiguity of which has great meaning, and the lexical meaning is wider due to subtext, since this is an Aesopian language. In the center of the tale is life in a forest slum, but the image of Magnitsky destroys the illusion of the tale. Fairy-tale images are traditional: Bear, Eagle, Lion, but they acquire additional nuances. The lion, the enemy of education and the arts, dreams of catching a siskin. Ignorant, illiterate. Resolution "scribbled".

Thus, Saltykov-Shchedrin mixes various features in the characters: they are both animals and people.

Why was the fairy tale banned until 1906? (It is assumed that contemporaries guessed the features of the government in the images of the fairy tale:

Leo Alexander III,

Donkey Pobedonostsev,

Toptygin I and Toptygin II Count D. Tolstoy and Minister of the Interior Ignatiev.)

1. Analysis of a fairy tale read at home.
2. Retelling of a folk tale in the style of Saltykov-Shchedrin.
3. Writing your own fairy tale in the spirit of Saltykov-Shchedrin.

An approximate plan for analyzing a fairy tale

1. What is the main theme of the story?
2. The main idea of ​​the tale (why?).
3. Plot features. How is the main idea of ​​the tale revealed in the system of characters?
4. Features of fairy tale images:
   a) images-symbols;
   b) the originality of animals;
   c) closeness to folk tales.
5. Satirical techniques used by the author.
6. Features of the composition: inserted episodes, landscape, portrait, interior.
7. Combination of folklore, fantastic and real.

LESSONS 8283 . "Darkness of Time" The idea, history of creation, genre and composition of the novel by M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin "The History of a City". Images of mayors

In the first part of the lesson, the teacher reports on the idea, the history of creation, and the features of the composition of the novel. Then there is work on the chapter "Inventory to the mayors."

Perception Questions

1. What does the word "description" mean?
2. Why did the author title the chapter "Inventory for the mayors"?
3. Is this a writer's slip or not?

No, not a clause. The author uses a vivid satirical device and names the chapter in such a way as to show readers that they are not people, but "mechanisms", things, puppets acting according to a given program. The problematic issue of the lesson may be the question of the genre of the novel.

What is the "History of one city" in terms of genre?

A satire on autocracy, the greatest dystopia on the themes of Russian reality, or a philosophical novel about the paradoxes of human existence?

The question remains open, since each version has convincing arguments in its favor. Perhaps another point of view on the problem of the genre of the novel will be born in the lesson, which the students will express during the discussion.

At the center of the lessons are reflections on the images of the most distinguished city governors. It is most appropriate to organize this work in groups and invite students to fill out a table-characteristic of the rulers of the city according to the following plan:

1. Surname, name, patronymic of the mayor. Pay attention to speaking surnames, surnames-nicknames.
2. Appearance and character traits.
3. Management methods.
4. The life of the people during the reign of each mayor.
5. Historical analogies.
6. Satirical techniques used by the author to create the image.
7. Author's position.

1st group selects material about Dementy Varlamovich Brudast.

2nd group about Semyon Konstantinovich Dvoekurov.

3rd group about Petr Petrovich Ferdyshchenko.

4th group about Vasily Semenovich Borodavkin.

5th group about Ivan Panteleevich Pryshch.

6th group about Erast Andreevich Sadtilov.

7th group about Ugryum-Burcheev.

In the course of student research, students will notice the techniques of satirical portrayal of characters used by Saltykov-Shchedrin in the novel:

1. Techniques for typing a satirical image-character.
2. Grotesque in the depiction of comic situations where the characters of the work act.
3. Parody of legislative documents.
4. Stylization of the narrative in the style of chroniclers-archivists.
5. Aesopian language.

Thus, a whole gallery of wild, half-witted, arrogant and cruel rulers of the city (and hence of the country) passed before the eyes of readers, as the boundaries of the city of Glupov are expanding to the borders of all of Russia. It combines villages, villages, county and provincial cities and even capitals. This is a grotesque city, in which the negative aspects of many phenomena of life have been embodied: legalized robbery, wars, outright terror, famine, devastation and the slave psychology of the Foolovites (ch. "Hungry City", "Straw City").

The final part of the lesson can be devoted to teaching a comparative analysis of episodes from the novel and identifying their role in the narrative. When working with the class, one should also pay attention to the problems of speech development and the ability to “read the text”, finding details in it that help to better understand it.

For comparison, let's take the fragments devoted to the description of two catastrophes depicted in the chapters "Organchik" and "Confirmation of repentance." This is the breaking of Brodasty's head and the taming of the river Ugryum-Burcheev. In the image of Brodasty, it is necessary to reveal the generalizing meaning of Shchedrin's grotesque - the organ on the shoulders of the mayor, who performs only two "melodies", which are quite enough for the victorious control of the Foolov people.

When getting acquainted with the image of Ugryum-Burcheev, the students also already determined the meaning of his idea of ​​“equalizing” all the Foolovites. Therefore, in the lesson, the teacher will first focus the attention of students on the very fact of the breakdown of the organ.

1. Indeed, is there a reason for the accident of this state machine? (To answer this question, you can read the following fragment: “It was a beautiful spring day. Nature rejoiced; sparrows chirped; dogs squealed with joy and wagged their tails. The townsfolk, holding bags under their arms, crowded in the courtyard of the mayor’s apartment and tremblingly expected a terrible fate. Finally, the expected moment arrived. He went out, and for the first time the Foolovites saw on his face that friendly smile that they yearned for. It seemed that the beneficial rays of the sun had an effect on him too (at least, many townsfolk later assured that they saw with their own eyes how his tails were shaking). and the longer this mysterious hissing continued, the more and more his eyes spun and sparkled. Pn plus! finally escaped his lips; with this sound, he flashed his eyes for the last time and rushed recklessly through the open door of his apartment. .) Let's draw students' attention to unusual details: "beautiful spring day", "friendly smile"; after all, in the works of Saltykov-Shchedrin even the landscape is satirical. What is the matter here? And just the boss "smiled"! The machine of statehood suddenly began to work in a regime that was not characteristic of it, a regime of naturalness, humanity. And broke.
   It is this incompatibility of the idea of ​​statehood and the idea of ​​humanity, unnaturalness and "nature" that is brought to the limit by Grim-Burcheev. The result is a catastrophe, the beginning of which is in the riot of the river. He succeeded in destroying the city, but he failed to eliminate the river. Barely having time to open his eyes, Moody-Grumbling immediately hurried to admire the work of his genius, but, approaching the river, he stood in his tracks. There was a new nonsense. The meadows are exposed; the remnants of the monumental dam floated downstream in disorder, and the river murmured and moved in its banks, exactly the same as the day before.
2. Why did the plan of Moody-Burcheev fail? What did he want to conquer? (Nature "nature". But nature did not submit, refused to obey the deadly will of the "gloomy idiot." a distant space flooded with water in springtime". The main thing in the description of the river is not a detailed image of specific signs of nature. The river is here as a symbol. A symbol of life. "Water" in the understanding of the writer is the beginning of eternal, life-giving, generous to man. "But the blind element is joking tore and scattered the rubbish inflicted at the cost of superhuman efforts, and each time made a bed deeper and deeper.")
   The finale of the gloomy-burcheev catastrophe in the manifestation of "It" and the "cessation of history". The rebellious "nature" sweeps away the gloomy-burcheev's utopia from the face of the earth. The spontaneous rebellion of nature was eventually supported by people. They saw that the goals pursued by the idiot are to extinguish the sun, to cut a hole in the earth through which one could observe what is happening in hell. Their conscience woke up late. And the Foolovites suffered a severe punishment: "The North has darkened History has stopped its course."
3. What story are you talking about? Gloomy-Burcheevskaya? Or more broadly Foolov's? Or human history? Is this not a warning to those who want to forget the past and do not think about the future?

Thus, the finale of the work remains "dark", as evidenced by its various interpretations in literary criticism:

a) the appearance of "It" means the prediction of a people's revolution.

b) "It" marks the beginning of an even more violent reaction.

Or maybe it's the salvation of the soul? After all, Saltykov-Shchedrin all the time in the novel tells about the inhabitants of the city of Glupov, that is, about the people of Russia. In the traditions of Gogol, he discovers in him a living soul, mind and feelings, the ability to suffer, sympathize and laugh merrily. The people distinguish from their midst such people as the walker Evseich, who devotes himself to the search for the truth and believes that the truth will be obtained and the people will certainly survive: “I survived for many years! .. I saw many bosses! I live!”

Perhaps, following Gogol, Saltykov-Shchedrin believes in the resurrection of the human soul, because from childhood he knew and learned to perfectly understand the Bible (especially the Gospel), which played a unique role in his self-education. The writer conveys the impression of contact with the Book of Books in this way: “The Gospel was such a life-giving ray for me. For me, these days brought a complete life upheaval The main thing that I learned from reading the Gospel was that it sowed in my heart the beginnings of a universal conscience". From now on, Saltykov-Shchedrin becomes the defender of the "humiliated and insulted", a fighter against spiritual slavery, so he exclaims: “I will not give offense to a peasant!” firmly believes in his strength, in his living soul.

If you have time in an extracurricular reading lesson, you can consider the fairy tales of Saltykov-Shchedrin "The Conscience Lost" and "Christ's Night" in the context of the Bible.

The study of the work of Saltykov-Shchedrin can be completed with a home essay on one of the topics indicated in the appendix.

1 A. Griboyedov.

In this tale, Saltykov-Shchedrin reflects on the unlimited power of the landowners, who in every way torment the peasants, imagining themselves almost as gods. The writer also speaks of the landowner's stupidity and uneducatedness: "that landowner was stupid, he read the newspaper Vest and his body was soft, white and crumbly." The disenfranchised position of the peasantry in tsarist Russia Shchedrin also reflects in this tale: "The torch did not light up the peasant in the light, there was no rod to sweep the hut with." The main idea of ​​the fairy tale was that the landowner cannot and does not know how to live without a peasant, and the work of the landowner only dreamed of in nightmares. So in this tale, the landowner, who had no idea about labor, becomes a dirty and wild beast. After he was abandoned by all the peasants, the landowner never even washed his face: “Yes, I’ve been walking unwashed for many days! ".

The writer caustically ridicules all this negligence of the master class. The life of a landowner without a peasant is far from reminiscent of a normal human life.