home
Practical psychology
The history of the image of the "little man" in world literature and its writers. Research work “The image of the “little man” in Russian literature

The history of the image of the "little man" in world literature and its writers. Research work “The image of the “little man” in Russian literature

30.04.2019

Continuation

"The Bronze Horseman" is one of the first works where the author tries to describe the "little man". Pushkin begins his creation odically. He glorifies the city of Petra, the "greatness" of St. Petersburg, admires the capital of Russia. In my opinion, the author does this in order to show the power of the capital and the entire Russian state. Then the author begins his story. The main character is Eugene, he is an impoverished nobleman, he has neither a high rank nor a noble name: "The name is forgotten by night light and rumor." Eugene lives a calm, measured life, "shy of the nobles", provides for himself by working hard. Eugene does not dream of high ranks, he only needs simple human happiness. But grief bursts into this measured course of his life, his beloved dies during a flood. Eugene, realizing that he is powerless before the elements, is still trying to find those responsible for the collapse of his hope for happiness. And finds. Eugene blames Peter I for his troubles, who built the city in this place, which means he blames the entire state machine, thereby entering into the first fight; and Pushkin shows this through the revival of the monument to Peter I. Of course, in this fight, Eugene, a weak man, is defeated due to great grief and inability to fight the state, the main character dies.

Pushkin vividly described the "little man", this man not only had his own opinion, but also tried to prove it.

In the story "The Overcoat" Akaki Akakievich Bashmachkin is the main character, all the rest of the characters create the background.

The story "The Overcoat" is one of the best in Gogol's work. In it, the writer appears before us as a master of detail, a satirist and a humanist. The hero of the "Overcoat" Akaki Akakievich is no longer a nobleman, he is an official of the lowest class - a titular adviser, a person who is strongly mocked and made fun of, thereby humiliating him. In the story about the life of a petty official, Gogol was able to create an unforgettable vivid image of a “little man” with his joys and troubles, difficulties and worries. Hopeless need surrounds Akaky Akakievich, but he does not see the tragedy of his position, as he is busy with business. Bashmachkin is not burdened by his poverty, because he does not know another life. He was so accustomed to his humiliating position that even his speech became inferior - he could not finish the sentence and instead used pronouns, interjections, prepositions, etc. This style of speech in itself made a person humiliated in front of everyone else, even equal to him in class. Akaky Akakievich not only did not oppose the state (as Yevgeny tried to do), he cannot even defend himself before equal people. And when he has a dream: a new overcoat, he is ready to endure any hardships, if only to bring the implementation of his plans closer.

The overcoat becomes a kind of symbol of a happy future, a favorite brainchild, for which Akaki Akakievich is ready to work tirelessly. The author is quite serious when he describes the delight of his hero about the realization of a dream: the overcoat is sewn! Bashmachkin was completely happy. But for how long? When Bashmachkin's overcoat was stolen, it was grief for him, equivalent to the loss of Parasha from Yevgeny. But what did he do? Bashmachkin appeals to various authorities, but it is not difficult to refuse him, because he is insignificant in his position, and most importantly, in his soul. This is proved by the fact that Bashmachkin did not dream of anything, could not stand up for himself, did not defend his human dignity.

The "little man" is not destined to be happy in this unfair world. And only after death is justice done. Bashmachkin's "soul" finds peace when he returns his lost thing.

Akaky Akakievich dies, but Gogol revives him. Why is he doing this? It seems to me that Gogol revived the hero in order to show even more the insignificance of the soul of the “little man”, and even when he came to life, he changed only on the outside, but in his soul he still remained only a “little man” (at least, it seems to me that this is precisely So).

Depicting the persecution of a poor official by his colleagues, Gogol protests against violence against a defenseless person who saw the "whole world" not in the life of people and nature, but in the words and letters of official correspondence. Gogol defends the "little man" against social injustice. He condemns the social order that oppresses the disadvantaged.

Bashmachkin is not only a poor man, he is a crushed, downtrodden person, he is one of those people who are enslaved and humiliated in their human dignity by other people who are needlessly proud of their high position in society.

Gogol evokes in the reader sincere sympathy and pity for the personality of an inconspicuous, modest worker, who is crushed to such an extent that he no longer seems to have any heartfelt feelings and aspirations. But who, nevertheless, finally finds some object for his secret heartfelt affection, for the thirst, tenderness and participation that has almost disappeared.

"The Overcoat" is permeated with bitter reflection about "how much inhumanity there is in man, how much humble rudeness is hidden, in refined, educated secularism." “The Overcoat” is a brief description of the life of a poor titular adviser, “a being protected by no one, dear to no one”, a life so insignificant and inconspicuous that even buying a new overcoat is a whole event in it.

Bashmachkin meekly and humbly endures the ridicule of his comrades, who "tricked him as much as clerical wit was enough." But even in this downtrodden creature, Gogol tried to see a person, showing how embarrassed one of the officials was by Bashmachkin’s timid objection: “leave me, why are you offending me?” - an objection in which "something so pitiful was heard."

Not great, but rather a pathetic object that brought Akaky Akakievich out of his spiritual stupor: not love, not any other sublime feeling, but everyday and ordinary - a new overcoat "on thick cotton wool, on a strong lining without demolition." And, nevertheless, we deeply sympathize with Gogol's hero, seeing his selflessness and, as it were, being present at his awakening from spiritual stupor. For the sake of the overcoat, Bashmachkin learned to starve, but on the other hand he learned to eat spiritually, "carrying in his thoughts the eternal idea of the future overcoat."

Gogol showed not only the life of the "little man", but also his protest against injustice. Let this "rebellion" be timid, almost fantastic, but the hero stands up for his rights, against the foundations of the existing order.

Maikov wrote: "Both Gogol and Dostoevsky depict a real society." But “for one individual is important as a representative of a certain circle; for another, society itself is interesting, in terms of its influence on the personality of the individual. Gogol's collected works can definitely be called the artistic statistics of Russia. In Dostoevsky, however, any images of society are completely absorbed by the immensity of psychological interest. Speaking about the artistic style of Dostoevsky, Maykov had in mind a special psychologism. It was, of course, about social psychology - the influence that society has on the human personality, but which Dostoevsky studies with an original speed that never occurred to anyone.

In the work "Poor People" the main character is also a small man, scribe Makar Devushkin. In "Poor People" the writer stops at the bottom of the social ladder and talks about people with little or no property, only to look closer into the depths of the spreading evil. The theme of poverty is not the main one here, it is subordinated to a broader social theme. That is why the novel also speaks of poor (insecure) people, and of all kinds of people who, according to Dostoevsky, are always poor, no matter how well-off they are.

The department in which Makar Alekseevich serves, and whose borders close the temporal and spatial aisles of the world for him, is divided into two unequal parts. One is all “they”, “enemies” of Makar Alekseevich and “evil people”. The other part is himself, “quiet”, “quiet”, “kind”. Because of these virtues, explains Makar Alekseevich, "evil people" were "found" to his detriment. But if all the misfortunes of Makar Alekseevich are due to the fact that he is “meek”, “quiet”, “kind”, then the question is, what force prevents him from changing his character? Only one is the force of circumstances. After all, the hero is not just Makar Alekseevich - that poor Makar, on whom all the bumps fall down and on whom the departmental proverb mockingly hinted. It is poverty that distinguishes the hero from all others. And the grief is not so much in the fact that he is “meek”, “quiet”, “kind”, but in the fact that he cannot be any other: he is a “little man”, he is a “poor man”, not a “bird of prey ", but a modest bird. Instead of pride, dignity, with which God and nature endowed the best of their creations, ambition arises, a sick and abnormal feeling - a bad distortion of good principles in a badly organized society. Ambition instills in the poor man a persistent desire, absorbing all his strength, to prove to himself and to others that he is exactly like them, that he is no worse than them.

These “they”, “others”, occupy the feelings and thoughts of Makar Alekseevich constantly: after all, he needs not to differ from “them”. And since “distinction” is innate to him here (due to poverty, due to pernicious circumstances), then “they”, these “others”, take possession of the heart and mind of a poor person with all inevitability. Makar Alekseevich lives with a constant eye: what will others say? what will they think? And the opinion of these "others" is more important for him than his own.

Before us is the “eternal titular adviser”, capable only of copying papers, trained on copper money, meek and downtrodden. Makar Alekseevich Devushkin, no less than Gogol's Bashmachkin, is humiliated and despised in the service. He was also subjected to bullying at work, but by nature he is already a completely different person, different from Akaky Akakievich. In response to insults from colleagues and offenders, the “little man” grumbled: he felt like a person, being capable not only of humility, not only of taking care of himself.

Makar is concerned about the problems of human dignity, he reflects on literature and his position in society. After reading The Overcoat, Makar was outraged that Gogol described the life of an official with great accuracy, Makar recognized himself in Akaky Akakievich, but was outraged that Gogol portrayed an official as an insignificant person. After all, he himself is able to deeply feel, love, which means that he was no longer a nonentity at all, but a person, although put on a low level by society.

What Gogol left in the shadows in The Overcoat - the self-consciousness of a downtrodden person - Dostoevsky made the main theme of his work.

The tragic end of the whole story - the departure of Varenka with the hated, rich landowner Bykov - only emphasizes the weakness and helplessness of poor people, the hopelessness of their suffering.

In the image of Devushkin, Dostoevsky for the first time posed a very important moral problem for him - the tragedy of goodness, genuine humanity in the world of those who consider the ability to “make money” to be the only civic virtue.

Showing the well-intentioned Makar Devushkin, Dostoevsky accurately described the spiritual downtroddenness of a poor person, his conservatism, limited social consciousness, ability to come to terms with lawlessness and adapt to it.

Dostoevsky's hero not only suffers and complains about his fate, but also begins to reason like a citizen. In Devushkin, as he says, "the syllable has been forming recently." In fact, before our eyes there is a process of straightening the personality of the “little man”, who begins to think about the mutual responsibility of people, about human selfishness, and the inability to help each other.

Thus, we see that with the development of literature, the image of the “little man” also developed. At first he could love, respect himself, but he was powerless before the state machine. Then he could not love, not respect, and he could not even think of fighting the state. After that, the “little man” acquires a sense of dignity, the ability to love, and at the same time acutely feels his insignificant position. But the most important thing is that he is no longer insignificant in his soul! d) The theme of the "little man" in the drama of A. N. Ostrovsky "Dowry"

Julius Kapitonych Karandyshev is another "little man" among the heroes of Russian literature. In his "literary pedigree" are the heroes of Pushkin, Gogol, Dostoevsky. The image of Karandyshev Ostrovsky is written masterfully, with psychological certainty. The character of this "poor official" is perhaps even more complex and interesting than the "brilliant gentleman" Paratov.

Already in the very combination of the name of the Roman emperor Julius with the prosaic patronymic Kapitonych and the humiliating surname Karandyshev contains a contradiction, parodic, perhaps.

And indeed, "already, isn't he a parody" of the same Paratov, say? We receive the first information about Karandyshev from Vozhevatov, who, with his characteristic irony, but very aptly explains to Knurov, “where this Karandyshev came from”: “He has been spinning in their house for a long time, they held him for three years, slightly smoothed him, Once he wanted to shoot himself, yes nothing came of it, it just made everyone laugh." Having become Larisa's fiancé, Karandyshev "shines like an orange put on glasses for some reason, but he had never worn them before and it was not to hear him, and now everything is" I, yes I, I want, I want.

It seems that in the future, from the first appearance with Larisa on the boulevard to the "triumphant" dinner, Julius Kapitonych fully justifies his reputation as a person "insignificant, but proud and envious." He boasts of Larisa as an expensive, but well-purchased thing, constantly reproaches her with a homely "gypsy camp". Even at dinner, when he makes a toast in honor of Larisa, Julius Kapitonych sings a dithyramb “to himself, to his beloved”: “Yes, sir, Larisa Dmitrievna knows how to distinguish gold from tinsel. She understood me, appreciated and preferred me to everyone.”

And yet Karandyshev, according to Larisa herself, has “only one, but expensive dignity” - he loves her.

After Larisa's flight, this “little man” loses all illusions, an epiphany sets in: “I am a funny person. I know myself that I am a funny person. Do people get executed because they are funny? Laugh at me - I'm worth it. But to break the chest of a ridiculous man, tear out his heart, throw it under his feet and trample him! Oh! How can I live! In this scene, Julius Kapitonych is not funny, but pitiful and terrible.

In the last scene of the fourth act, Karandyshev is no longer the same person that he was on the boulevard in the morning, although only a few hours have passed. It is Karandyshev who pronounces the word "thing", throws it in Larisa's face. But he loves her, “forgives, forgives everything”, agrees to everything, tries to take Larisa away, realizing that there is no one to leave her to. Yes, he loves and treats Larisa, like Paratov, Vozhevatov and Knurov, as with a thing.

And, perhaps, Karandyshev's insane shot from a "fake" pistol is "the only genuine human" gesture "against the prudent calculation of the other three." Not without reason, for the only time in her life, Larisa tenderly addresses her fiancé, calling him "dear".

The "little man" Julius Kapitonych Karandyshev, as Ostrovsky sees him, turns out to be the most complex and dramatic figure from the entire male environment of the perishing seagull Larisa Ogudalova.

Having examined the image of the “little man” in the story “The Overcoat” by N. V. Gogol and “Poor People” by F. M. Dostoevsky, as well as in Ostrovsky’s drama “The Dowry”, we can conclude that these writers pay attention to the spiritual type of people. And even the presence of genuine humanity, kindness and morality in the character of Makar Devushkin does not save him from humiliation in the society of the “powerful ones”. And the image of Yuliy Kapitonych Karandyshev is valuable, in my opinion, also because it outlines further possibilities for developing the image of the “little man”, which are closely related to the problems that such people face in society. A. N. Ostrovsky shows how the desire to take a worthy place in society among "little people" degenerates into the pursuit of "the powers that be", this gives rise, on the one hand, to the ability of the "little man" to rebel, and on the other hand, leads to vulgarization and limitations.

e) The connection between the theme of the "little man" and the theory of "strong personality" in the novel "Crime and Punishment" by F. M. Dostoevsky

The human soul is an abyss, Dostoevsky argued; the depths of the subconscious of the individual remain unknown to herself. The ideal of beauty and goodness has an undoubted effect on people, but they are immeasurably more dominated by the Sodom ideal. The power of the dark, unchanging, cruel, which manifests itself in the inner life of a person, in his actions, extreme manifestations of selfishness, sensuality, cynicism, spiritual emptiness, Dostoevsky painted with great artistic truthfulness, while avoiding any naturalism.

The “little man”, descending into the abyss of his consciousness, giving vent to the power of all the “dark, terrible, vile” that has accumulated in a suffering and tormented soul for years, becomes capable of the most monstrous crimes. Dostoevsky, an artist with brilliant skill, managed to depict a dynamic connection between both spheres of our consciousness. When disgust takes over individualistic ideas, for example, in Raskolnikov, they are forced out into the subconscious, reinforced there by the desire to destroy and influence the behavior of their carrier. The passion for self-destruction, justified by the "mind" of the hero, the theory, also has its roots in the dark depths of the human "I". Nature itself is extremely contradictory, and therefore false views are fed by some of its sometimes very hidden features. The thirst for individuality of superiority over people and contempt for the "trembling creature" in Raskolnikov is a manifestation not only of thought, but also of his emotional and psychological sphere.

The theoretical constructions of the hero, which are revealed in dialogic interactions with others, do not exhaust, however, the entire "composition" of his personality. The theory of the hero associated with the subconscious attraction to "destruction" and "self-denial" conflicts with the deepest core of the personality, which is understood by the writer as a spiritual substance. The internal socio-psychological conflict is the main subject of depiction in Dostoevsky's novels. Moreover, the conflict is far from a static opposition of false individualistic views and partially subconscious moral feelings. The internal conflict is extremely contradictory and dynamic, because consciousness is not separated from the unconscious by an impenetrable wall, in turn, the conscious sometimes goes into the subconscious depth. Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, at the same time, are convinced that spiritual freedom, which is the essence of man, manifests itself conditioned, historically. socially determined. Therefore, the "ideological" nature of their characters is not self-possessing. It expresses mainly in consciousness the will as free and therefore morally responsible.

For the heroes of Dostoevsky's characters, the leading idea is: they perform actions under the influence of "theory", but the "theory" itself is refuted by the whole structure of their internal moral and spiritual organization. For example, Raskolnikov's theory is not accepted by the irrational core of his personality. The writer shows the tragedy of a man who believes in the omnipotence of false thought and is therefore doomed to internal discord. The idea, the degree of its truth, is tested by the hero's moral sense, and therefore the internal conflict, born of the influence of the social external world, is at the center of the writer's attention.

The fate of poor people, who had reached a dead end of complete despair of hopeless suffering, worried Dostoevsky from the very beginning of his creative activity and until the end of his days.

Leaving the university, Raskolnikov broke with the world, "like a spider, he hid in his corner." Only in complete solitude, in an "irritable and tense state," he was able to surrender to his "ugly dream." She was born in the conditions of St. Petersburg's "stuffiness, crush", "a special summer stink", in a "closet", which "looked more like a closet than an apartment", in poverty and even poverty. “In poverty, you still retain your nobility of innate feelings, but in poverty, never anyone,” Marmeladov explained to Raskolnikov.

Extreme poverty is characterized by "nowhere else to go". The motive of hopelessness is the most central and “cross-cutting”: “Do you understand, do you understand, dear sir,” Marmeladov says to Raskolnikov in a tavern, “what does it mean when there is nowhere else to go?”

Raskolnikov's idea about the extraordinary personality of commanders, conquerors, legislators who violate the ancient law to introduce a new one, in his own words, is not new: "This has been printed and read a thousand times." This refers to the book by Max Stirner "The Only One and His Property", published in 1844 in Germany, as well as the book of Napoleon!!! "History of Julius Caesar". But unlike the ideologists of the asserting bourgeoisie, Raskolnikov speaks with contempt for the “good of mankind”, the highest conscious goal of the heroes. In the same conversation with Porfiry Petrovich, the judicial investigator, Raskolnikov, revealing his concept of a crime, is all in worries about the conscience of “extraordinary people, carrying ideas that may be saving for all of humanity. He recognizes for the heroes the right to shed human blood according to their conscience”, i.e. “not an official right”, but an internal one, “the right to allow their conscience to step over other obstacles” and only if the fulfillment of the saving idea requires it. Razumikhin noticed something new that distinguishes Raskolnikov's theory from the previous ones - this is the moral permission to shed the blood of hundreds of thousands of people to establish improvement. However, it should be immediately noted that Raskolnikov argued the necessity of the crime in different ways “in time”, in different situations of his life. In the first conversation with Porfiry Petrovich, the motive of "blood according to conscience" stands out. But this recognition of the immutability of the moral law is later replaced by an understanding of life as an absurdity, as an absurdity. Confessing to Sonya his crime, Raskolnikov surrenders to individualistic enthusiasm, becomes the spokesman for individualistic rebellion, a nihilistic denial of the moral meaning of life: this absurdity, it's easy to take - easily shake everything by the tail to hell! I wanted to dare and killed.” It was not for nothing that Sonya exclaimed to these blasphemous words of Raskolnikov: “You have departed from God, and God has struck everything, betrayed the devil.” In her religious language and in terms of religious thinking, Sonya accurately defined the meaning of Raskolnikov's philosophical judgment. He is convinced that “people will not change and no one will remake them”, that slavery and domination are the law of human life, that for the most part people are “trembling creatures” and therefore, “whoever is strong and strong in mind, is over them and powerful.” ”, “who can spit on more, that is their legislator.” This arrogant, contemptuous attitude towards the "ordinary" determines the mode of action. He "guessed that 'power' is only given to those who dare to bend and take it." According to the author, Sonya realized that "this gloomy catechism became his faith and law."

Compassion for people and contempt for them, combined in Raskolnikov, were reflected in the theory of the "ruler" changing the world, saving poor people from "poverty, from decay, from death, from debauchery, from venereal hospitals." Dreaming of a “ruler” who acts in the interests of a “trembling creature”, Raskolnikov wanted to be one, a Mission, through crime to pave the way for the kingdom of goodness and truth.

It should be noted that Raskolnikov's anarchist protest is associated with an acute pity for the poor, suffering, helpless, with a desire to create social well-being for them. We must not forget that the initial and central situation in the novel - the extreme impoverishment of the urban poor - explains the tragedy of Raskolnikov.

On the way from the old usurer, to whom Raskolnikov felt "an insurmountable disgust" at first sight, he went into one poor tavern and thought hard: "A terrible thought pecks in his head, like a chicken from an egg, and very, very occupied him." From the old woman, therefore, he "carried out the germ of his thought" about the possibility of using the right of the strong and shedding the blood of this evil and worthless usurer in order to take advantage of her capital and "later devote himself to the service of all human and common cause." "One hundred thousand good deeds and undertakings that can be arranged and corrected for the old woman's money doomed to the monastery." The speech of the student, addressed to the officer, becomes, as it were, an internal monologue of Raskolnikov himself, according to which, in the name of the best, that is, the salvation of a thousand people, one death is possible: "One death and a hundred lives in return - but there is arithmetic here." From the point of view of Calculus, this mental dialectic appears to be invulnerable.

The story of Raskolnikov's self-consciousness unfolds: he must clarify his idea of the moral right to bloody violence, test true violence, test the truth of the theory by the practice of his own life and draw the last conclusions. At the same time, he sees internal barriers that he must “transgress” in order to “have the right to have”. In this sense, the planned crime becomes a moral and psychological experiment on oneself. The murder, the "elimination" of a nasty old money-lender in his eyes as a theoretician and activist is just a "test" of his own strength, just a test and answer to the question, what category of humanity does he belong to?

For Tolstoy, everything in a person is clarified, both superficial and fundamental, and therefore the most secret in him was revealed with exhaustive fullness. To Dostoevsky, as well as to Turgenev, the deep foundation of the human personality seemed mysterious, enigmatic, defying only in external completely involuntary movements, in some randomly dropped words of the hero, in the pattern of his behavior, in those momentary states that the writer almost does not comment on. That is why Dostoevsky conveyed the dialectical processes of mental life not by depicting the mental process, the “dialectics of the soul”, but by his own means, as a struggle of opposite principles in the personality of the hero-character. Passion for self-destruction, sometimes awakening under the influence of false theories, i.e., ultimately, the social environment, collides with the protest of the moral sense. Moreover, the passion for self-destruction, although it finds reinforcement in the mind of the hero, in his theoretical ideas, also has its roots in the dark subconscious depth of the human "I".

The killer feels in himself the protest of human nature, he "wanted to drop everything and leave." The second unforeseen bloody violence against the unrequited Lizaveta finally plunges him into a feeling of some kind of detachment and despair, he becomes, as it were, an unconscious conductor of an evil force. According to the author, if at that moment Rodion could see and reason correctly, then he “would have abandoned everything and immediately went to himself to declare only horror and disgust at what he had done. Disgust especially rose and grew in him with every minute. Later, in his confession, he explains to Sonya: “Did I kill the old woman? I killed myself, not the old woman! Here, all at once, I slammed myself forever. The crime is committed according to a concocted theory, which has acquired unusual strength, having met with support from the passion for destruction hiding in the depths of the subconscious.

Crime does not begin from the moment of its implementation, but from the moment of its inception in a person's thoughts. The very idea of the murder that flared up in Raskolnikov's mind in the tavern after visiting the disgusting usurer already infects him with all the poisons of selfish self-assertion and puts him in conflict with spiritual potential. He failed to defeat the "delusions" despite desperate internal resistance. Until the last minute, he did not believe in his ability to "cross over", although "the whole analysis, in the sense of the moral resolution of the issue, was already over for him: his casuistry has been sharpened like a razor, and in himself he no longer finds conscious objections."

Dostoevsky shows Raskolnikov in a state of extreme moral decline, self-destruction, self-denial, and in the perspective of "restoration", "self-preservation and repentance", gaining freedom as one's spirituality. With the same inevitability with which Raskolnikov commits a crime, retribution comes, self-disclosure unfolds. Burdened with all sorts of circumstances, Raskolnikov turned out to be a slave of an “ugly dream”, but, according to the writer, he was obliged to resist it and obey the highest necessity, which expresses the transcendent forces of life.

Raskolnikov's path to overcoming spiritual slavery is difficult. For a long time he blamed himself for the "absurd cowardice", for "unnecessary shame", for a long time he suffered from wounded pride, from his "baseness and mediocrity", from the thought that "he could not stand the first step." But inevitably he comes to moral self-condemnation. It is Sonya, first of all, who opens the soul and conscience of the people to him. Therefore, Sonya's word is so effective because it receives support from the hero himself, who has felt a new content in himself. This content turned him to overcoming pride, selfish self-affirmation.

The history of Raskolnikov's self-consciousness is a struggle between two principles: tempting power and resurrection. Through the abyss of evil, he goes to the consciousness of goodness, the truth of moral feeling. This is the story of a "little man" who rebelled against the injustice of the world.

e) Chekhov as a writer who completes the gallery of "little people" in his work

Gogol urged to love and pity the "little man" for what he is. Dostoevsky - to see a personality in him. Chekhov puts everything upside down. He is looking for someone to blame not in the state, but in the individual himself. Such a completely new approach gives completely unexpected results: the reason for the humiliation of the "little man" is himself.

Especially given is a new twist on an old theme in the story "The Death of an Official". There are many details in the story about this. Firstly, this is a comic story and it is the official himself that is ridiculed in it. For the first time, Chekhov offers to laugh at the "little man", but not at his poverty, poverty, cowardice. Laughter turns into tragedy when we finally understand what the nature and what are the life principles of this official. Chekhov tells us that Chervyakov finds true pleasure in humiliation. At the end of the story, the general himself is offended, and the dying Chervyakov is not at all sorry.

Exploring a life incident that happened to his hero, Chekhov comes to the conclusion: Chervyakov is a serf by nature. And I just want to add to these words: not a man, but a reptile. It is in this line, it seems to me, that Chekhov sees the real evil. This is not the death of a person, but of some kind of worm. Chervyakov dies not from fear and not from the fact that he might be suspected of unwillingness to grovel. The general forgave him. But because he was deprived of this sweetness of groveling, as if he had been deprived of his beloved work.

The “little man” Belikov, the hero of the story “The Man in the Case”, went down, turned into a narrow-minded bourgeois. Belikov is afraid of real life and seeks to hide from it. In my opinion, he is an unhappy person, denying not only himself, but also those around him. Only circulars are clear to him, and all kinds of permissions cause him doubts and fear: “No matter how something happens.”

He oppresses all teachers with his "case considerations", under his influence in the city they began to be afraid of everything: people are afraid to speak loudly, to get acquainted, to read books, they are afraid to help the poor, to teach literacy. And this is the danger of the Belikovs for society: they strangle all living things. Inertia, the desire to stop life, to envelop everything in a web of philistinism, were embodied in "Belikovshchina".

Belikov could find his ideal only after passing away. And he leaves, and only in the coffin does his face acquire a pleasant, meek, even cheerful expression, as if Belikov rejoices that he has fallen into a case from which he will never have to get out.

Although Belikov died, his death did not save the city from "Belikovism". Life has remained the same as it was - "not forbidden circularly, but not completely resolved either."

And if you remember Dr. Startsev? At the beginning of his life, a young doctor has a variety of interests that are characteristic of an intelligent young man. He feels the beauty of nature, is interested in art, literature, methods of rapprochement with people. He can love, worry, dream. But gradually, Startsev loses everything human, spiritually descends and closes in his little world, in which only money, cards and a hearty dinner are now important.

What led Startsev to this? Chekhov argues: the philistine environment, vulgar and insignificant, destroys the best that is in a person if there is no "antidote" and internal conscious protest in the person himself. Startsev's story makes us think about what turns a person into a spiritual freak. In my opinion, the worst thing in life is the fall of the individual into the quagmire of narrow-mindedness and vulgar philistinism. Chekhov saw in his heroes an evil that is ineradicable and gives rise to a new evil: serfs give birth to masters.

Meanwhile, Chekhov's need for broad social generalizations is ripening, he strives to depict the mood, the life of entire classes, strata of society. We needed a genre that would give such an opportunity. Drama was this genre for Chekhov.

In the first play "Ivanov", the writer again refers to the theme of the "little man". In the center of the play is the tragic breakdown of an intellectual who made big life plans and, helplessly, bowed down before the obstacles that the order of life put before him. Ivanov is a “little man” who has “overstrained himself” in the world, and has turned from an enthusiastic, active worker into a sick, internally broken loser. And further, in the plays "Uncle Vanya", "Three Sisters", the main conflict develops in the clash of morally pure, bright personalities with the world of the townsfolk, with their greed, vulgarity, and gross cynicism. And it seems that vulgarity, personified in Natalya Ivanovna and Staff Captain Solen, triumphs over pure, sensitive people. Are there people who are going to replace these people who are bogged down in dishonest everyday affairs? There is! These are Anya and Petya Trofimov from the play "The Cherry Orchard" by A. Chekhov.

After all, not all "little people" turn into narrow-minded and small people, raznochintsy-democrats, whose children became revolutionaries, appeared from among the "little people". As you might guess, Petya Trofimov, the “eternal student”, belongs to the student movement, which gained momentum in those years. It was not by chance that Petya hid at Ranevskaya's for several months. This young man is smart, proud, honest. He knows in what a difficult situation the people live, and he thinks that this situation can be corrected only by continuous work. Trofimov lives by faith in the bright future of the Motherland, but Petya does not yet see clear ways to change the life of society. The image of this hero is rather contradictory, however, like most of Chekhov's images. Trofimov considers love an unnecessary occupation at the moment. “I am above love,” he says to Anya. Petya is proud of his disregard for money, he is not offended by the nickname "shabby gentleman." Petya Trofimov has a great influence on the formation of the life views of Anya-daughter Ranevskaya. She is beautiful in her feelings and moods.

We perceive Petya and Anya as new, progressive people. And with this faith in the new and better, I so want to say that a person should not be “small”. And the keen eye of the artist Chekhov, noticing the hypocrisy, stupidity, narrow-mindedness of people, saw something else - the beauty of a good person: “My God, how rich Russia is in good people!” Such, for example, is Dr. Dymov, the hero of the story "The Jumper". A person who lives for the happiness of others, a humble doctor with a kind heart and a beautiful soul.

The image of the "little man" in foreign literature

The theme of the "little man" is reflected not only in the work of Russian writers, but also in the works of foreign writers.

In his understanding of art and the role of the artist, Stendhal came from the enlighteners. He always strived for the accuracy and truthfulness of the reflection of life in his works.

Stendhal's first major novel, Red and Black, was published in 1830, the year of the July Revolution. Already its name speaks of the deep social meaning of the novel, of the clash of two forces - revolution and reaction. The epigraph to the novel Stendhal took the words of Danton: "True, harsh truth!" and, following it, the writer put the true action at the basis of the plot.

The title of the novel also emphasizes the main features in the character of Julien Sorel, the protagonist of the work. Surrounded by people hostile to him, he defies fate. Defending the rights of his personality, he is forced to mobilize all the forces and means to fight the world around him.

Julien Sorel comes from a peasant environment. This determines the social sound of the novel.

Julien Sorel is a commoner, a plebeian, who wants to take a place in the society to which he has the right by his origin. On this basis, a struggle with society arises. Julien himself well defines the meaning of this struggle in the scene at the court, when he is given the last word. Thus, Julien realizes that he is being judged not so much for the crime actually committed, but for the fact that he dared to cross the line that separates him from high society, tried to enter that world to which he has no right to belong. For this attempt, the jury must pass a death sentence on him.

But the struggle of Julien Sorel is not only for a career, for personal well-being; the question in the novel is much more complicated. He wants to establish himself in society, “to reach the people, take one of the first places in it, but on condition that this society recognizes in him a full-fledged personality, an outstanding, talented, gifted, intelligent, strong person.”

He does not want to give up these qualities, to refuse them. But an agreement between Sorel and the world of Recals is possible only on the condition of a complete adaptation of the young man to their tastes. This is the main meaning of Julien Sorel's struggle with the outside world.

Julien is doubly alien in this milieu; and as a native of the social lower classes, and as a highly gifted person who does not want to remain in the world of mediocrity.

Stendhal convinces the reader that this struggle that Julien Sorel is waging with the surrounding society is waged by him not for life, but for death. But in bourgeois society there is no place for these talents. Napoleon, whom Sorel dreams of, is already the past, instead of heroes came merchants, self-satisfied shopkeepers - that's who became a true "hero" at the time in which he lives. For these people, outstanding talents and heroism are ridiculous - all that is so dear to Julien.

Julien's struggle develops in him great pride and heightened ambition.

Obsessed with these feelings, Sorel subordinates to them all other aspirations and affections. Even love ceases to be joy for him.

Without hiding the negative aspects of the character of his hero, Stendhal at the same time justifies him.

First, the difficulty of the struggle he is waging; standing alone against all, Julien is forced to use any weapon. But the main thing that, according to the author, justifies the hero is the nobility of his heart, generosity, purity - features that he did not lose even in moments of the most cruel struggle.

In the development of Julien's character, the episode in prison is very important. Until then, the only stimulus that guided all his actions, limiting his good intentions, was ambition. But in prison, he is convinced that ambition led him the wrong way. At the same time, in prison, Julien's feelings for Madame de Renal and Matilda are reassessed.

These two images, as it were, mark the struggle of two principles in the soul of Julien himself.

And Julien has two beings; he is proud, ambitious and at the same time - a man with a simple heart, almost a childish, direct soul. When he overcame ambition and pride, he moved away from the equally proud and ambitious Matilda. And the sincere Madame de Renal, whose love was deeper than that of Matilda, is especially close to him.

Overcoming ambition and the victory of real feelings in Julien's soul leads him to death.

Julien gives up trying to save himself. Life seems to him unnecessary, aimless, he no longer values it and prefers death on the guillotine.

Thus, we can see that this ending of the novel is indicative.

Stendhal could not resolve the issue of how the hero, who overcame his delusions, but remained in bourgeois society, should rebuild his life. This is how the “little man” perishes, having overcome the “slave” in himself.

Thus, it is clear that the image of the "Little Man" has undergone significant changes in the work of writers. The origins of this topic were laid by the work of N. Karamzin, and also due to the social political development of Russia and the ideas of Jean-Jacques Rousseau to eliminate the inequality of people by eradicating prejudices.

For the first time, the image of the "Little Man" can be found in the works of A. S. Pushkin "Tales of Belkin", "The Captain's Daughter", and also "The Bronze Horseman. In the work of M. Yu. Lermontov, the image of the "Little Man" is reflected in the story "Princess Ligovskaya". Having examined the images of "Little People" in the works of Pushkin and Lermontov, we can conclude that all the characters evoke sympathy and pity, and the authors are guided in creating the images of "Little People" by the principles of humanism, trying to draw attention to the problem of "humiliated and offended". N.V. Gogol continues the theme of “The Little Man”, who in his story “The Overcoat” for the first time shows the spiritual stinginess, squalor of poor people and, like Pushkin in The Bronze Horseman, draws attention to the ability of the “Little Man” to rebel and for this , like Pushkin, introduces elements of fantasy into his work. Based on the propensity of the “Little Man” to rebellion, one can conclude that the theme of “The Little Man” is close to the theory of “strong personality” and understand the origins of the individualistic rebellion of the “Little Man” against injustice and his desire to become a “Strong Personality”, which is manifested in the image R. Raskolnikov.

The gallery of “Little People” is completed by images from the stories of A.P. Chekhov, which make it possible to understand the inability of the “Little Man” to do great things, his isolation from society and the spiritual world as a whole, a miserable existence, cynicism, vulgarity, lack of spirituality. Chekhov shows how "little people" turn into small people.

Having examined the gallery of "little people" in the works of writers of the 19th century, I conclude that this topic occupied a significant place in Russian literature. The problem of the “little man”, his troubles and aspirations, his views on the world and urgent needs, vividly worried the writers of the 19th century, and although each of them reveals the image of the “little man” in his own way, or causing sympathy and pity from readers and making you think about the problems of such people, or exposing the spiritual poverty, squalor of "poor people", the humiliation of their existence in order to help them change, nevertheless, one cannot agree with A.P. Chekhov, who argued that "this topic has become obsolete." This topic is relevant in our time, when the problems of "little people" appear in modern society.

In the course of my work, I have learned:

Analyze the material read;

Summarize and systematize the data obtained during the research;

Compare and contrast both heroes and individual works;

Learned to find the sources and causes of the emergence of new concepts in the literature; more clearly represent the course of the historical and literary process;

Also draw conclusions and generalizations.

The writing

“Pain for a man” is, perhaps, the main theme of Russian literature of the 19th century. Compassion for the tragic fate of the "little man" formed the basis of the work of all Russian writers. And the first in this series was, of course, A. S. Pushkin.

In 1830, Pushkin wrote five stories, united by a common title and a common narrator - Belkin's Tales. Of these, the most touching and at the same time the saddest is, it seems to me, the story "The Stationmaster". In it, the poet for the first time brought to the pages of Russian literature the "little man" - Samson Vyrin. Pushkin very accurately described his social position - "a real martyr of the fourteenth grade."

The caretaker of a small postal station endured a lot in his miserable life, endured a lot. Almost every one of the passers-by, voluntarily or involuntarily, offended him, taking out on him, an unrequited official, annoyance at bad roads and the delay of horses. He had one consolation - his daughter Dunya, whom he loved more than life itself. But he lost her too: Dunya was taken with him to St. Petersburg by a passing officer Minsky. Vyrin tried to get the truth, but everywhere he was driven away. And the poor official could not bear the insult - he drank himself and soon died. Pushkin clearly showed Samson Vyrin with sympathy, a deeply unhappy man, with his little, but no less sorrowful drama.

“The Little Man” is dedicated to the story of N. V. Gogol “The Overcoat”, which V. G. Belinsky called the “deepest creation” of the writer. The protagonist of the story is Akaky Akakievich Bashmachkin, "the eternal titular adviser." All his life he "zealously and lovingly" copied papers in the department. This rewriting was not only his work, but also his vocation, one might even say, his life's mission. Bashmachkin, without straightening his back, worked all day in the service and took papers home, and rewrote some of the most interesting ones for himself - as a keepsake. His life was rich and interesting in its own way. But one thing upset Akaky Akakievich: the old overcoat, which had served him faithfully for more than a dozen years, eventually fell into such a “decline” that it could no longer be repaired by the most skilled tailor. Bashmachkin's existence acquired a new content: he began to save money for sewing a new overcoat, and dreams of it warmed his soul on long winter evenings. This overcoat, which became the subject of Bashmachkin's constant thoughts and conversations, acquired an almost mystical meaning for him. And when she was finally ready, Bashmachkin, rejuvenated, inspired, appeared in her service. It was the day of his triumph, his triumph, but it ended unexpectedly and tragically: at night the robbers took away his new overcoat. For the poor official it was a catastrophe, the collapse of his whole life. He turned to some "significant person" for help, begging to find and punish the robbers, but his request seemed too insignificant to the important general to pay attention to. And the loss became fatal for Bashmachkin: he soon fell ill and died. Gogol urged the reader to love the "little man" because he is "our brother", because he is also a man.

The theme of the “little man” was continued by F. M. Dostoevsky, who very accurately said about himself and his contemporaries: “We all came out of Gogol’s Overcoat.” Indeed, the protagonists of almost all of his works were "little people", "humiliated and offended". But, unlike Gogol's hero, Dostoevsky's heroes are able to openly protest. They do not accept the terrible reality; they are able to tell the bitter truth about themselves and about the society around them.

Their spiritual world is not as limited and miserable as that of Bashmachkin. They are sharper than he, feel the injustice and cruelty of the world of profit and money. So, the poor official Marmeladov, thrown to the very bottom of life, retained his soul, did not become a scoundrel and a scoundrel. He is much more human than the "masters of life" - Luzhin and Svidrigailov. Marmeladov's monologue in the tavern is not only regret about his ruined life, but also a bitter reproach to the whole society.

Sonya Marmeladova was forced to sell herself in order not to let her stepmother's little children, Katerina Ivanovna, die of hunger. She suffers for the pain of all people, all orphans and the poor. Sonya helps not only her family, she strives to help complete strangers. It was Sonya who became the moral and spiritual support for Raskolnikov: Sonya carried his “cross” with him - she followed him to hard labor. This is her strength and her greatness - the greatness of self-sacrifice in the name of people, which only an extraordinary person was capable of.

The works of Russian writers make us painfully think about the meaning of human life, about the destiny of man. Together with their heroes, we learn to respect the human personality, to sympathize with its pain and empathize with its spiritual quest.

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………...3

Chapter 2

2.1. "Little Man" in the works of A.S. Griboedova…………………9

2.2. The development of the image of the “little man” by N.V. Gogol………………..10

2.3. The theme of the "little man" in the work of M.Yu. Lermontov…………..10

2.4. F.M. Dostoevsky, as a successor to the theme of the "little man" ....11

2.5. Vision of the image of the "little man" L.N. Tolstoy…………………..13

2.6. The theme of the "little man" in the works of N.S. Leskova……………16

2.7. A.P. Chekhov and the "little man" in his stories………………………17

2.8. Creation of the image of the “little man” by Maxim Gorky…………..20

2.9. "Little Man" in "Garnet Bracelet" by A.I. Kuprin…………21

2.10. The theme of "Little Man" by A.N. Ostrovsky……………………...21

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………….23

List of literature sources………………………………………………...25

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

In world literature, one can single out a novel-parable Franz Kafka“A castle that reveals the tragic impotence of a little man and his unwillingness to reconcile with fate.

In German literature, the image of the "little man" gravitated Gerhart Hauptmann in his dramas Before Sunrise and The Lonely. The wealth of images of the "little man" in the works of Hauptmann gives rise to many different options (from a poorly educated carter to a subtle intellectual). Continued the tradition of Hauptmann Hans Fallada .

In Russian literature of the 19th century, the image of the image of a small man became especially popular. Worked on it Pushkin, Lermontov, Gogol, Gribodoev, Dostoevsky, Chekhov, Leo Tolstoy and many other writers.

The idea of a "little man" changed throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries. Each writer also had his own personal views on this hero. But since the second third of the 20th century, this image has disappeared from the pages of literary works, since the method of socialist realism does not imply such a hero.

Chapter 1. The image of the "little man" in the works of A.S.

Pushkin

The greatest poet of the 19th century, A.S. Pushkin, also did not leave unnoticed the theme of the “little man”, only he turned his gaze not to the image of a kneeling man, but to the fate of an unfortunate person, showing us his pure soul, unspoiled by wealth and prosperity, who knows how to rejoice, love , suffer. This is a story "Station Master" included in the cycle Belkin's Tale. Pushkin sympathizes with his hero.

Initially, his life is not easy.

"Who did not curse the stationmasters, who did not scold them? Who, in a moment of anger, did not demand from them a fatal book in order to write in it their useless complaint of oppression, rudeness and malfunction? Who does not consider them monsters of the human race, equal to the deceased let's be fair, let's try to understand their position, and maybe we'll judge them much more leniently. not always ... Peace, day or night. All the annoyance accumulated during a boring ride, the traveler vents on the caretaker. The weather is unbearable, the road is bad, the coachman is stubborn, the horses are not driven - and the caretaker is to blame. Entering his poor dwelling, the traveler looks at him as an enemy; well, if he soon manages to get rid of the uninvited guest; but if there are no horses? God! what curses, what threats will fall on his catch! In rain and sleet he is forced to run around the yards; in the storm, in the Epiphany frost, he goes into the canopy, so that only for a moment can he rest from the screams and pushes of the irritated guest ... Let us delve into all this carefully, and instead of indignation, our heart will be filled with sincere compassion.

But the hero of the story Samson Vyrin, remains a happy and calm person. He is accustomed to his service and has a good assistant daughter.

He dreams of simple happiness, grandchildren, a large family, but fate disposes differently. Hussar Minsky, while passing by, takes his daughter Dunya with him. After an unsuccessful attempt to return his daughter, when the hussar "with a strong hand, grabbing the old man by the collar, pushed him onto the stairs," Vyrin was no longer able to fight. And the unfortunate old man dies of longing, grieving about her possible deplorable fate.

Evgeniy, the hero of The Bronze Horseman, looks like Samson Vyrin.
Our hero lives in Kolomna, serves somewhere, shy of nobles. He does not make great plans for the future, he is satisfied with a quiet, inconspicuous life.

He also hopes for his personal, albeit small, but family happiness that he needs so much.

But all his dreams are in vain, because evil fate breaks into his life: the element destroys his beloved. Eugene cannot resist fate, he quietly worries about his loss. And only in a state of madness does he threaten the Bronze Horseman, considering the man who built the city on this dead place to be the culprit of his misfortune. Pushkin looks at his heroes from the side. They do not stand out either in intelligence or in their position in society, but they are kind and decent people, and therefore worthy of respect and sympathy. In the novel "Captain's daughter" the category of "little people" includes Petr Andreevich Grinev and captain Mironov. They are distinguished by the same qualities: kindness, justice, decency, the ability to love and respect people. But they have another very good quality - to remain faithful to the given word. Pushkin took out the saying in the epigraph: "Take care of honor from a young age." They saved their honor. And just as dear to A.S. Pushkin, as are the heroes of his previously named works.

Pushkin puts forward a democratic theme in them
little man (the story "The Stationmaster"), anticipating Gogol's "Overcoat".

Here is what he writes in his critical article "Pushkin's Artistic Prose" literary critic S.M. Petrov:

"Tales of Belkin" appeared in print first realistic work Russian prose. Along with the traditional themes from the life of the nobility ("The Young Lady-Peasant Woman"), Pushkin puts forward in them democratic theme of the little man(the story "The Stationmaster"), anticipating Gogol's "Overcoat".

Belkin's Tales was Pushkin's polemical response to the main currents of contemporary Russian prose. the truthfulness of the image, deep insight into human nature, the absence of any didacticism "Station master" Pushkin put an end to influence
sentimental and didactic story about a little man like "Poor Liza" Karamzin. Idealized images, plot situations of a sentimental story deliberately created for didactic purposes are replaced by real types and everyday pictures, depicting the true joys and sorrows of life.

deep humanism Pushkin's story is opposed to the abstract sensitivity of the sentimental story. The mannered language of the sentimental story, falling into moralistic rhetoric, gives way to a simple and unsophisticated narrative, like the story of the old caretaker about his Dun. Realism replaces sentimentalism in Russian prose.

D. Blagoy considers the image of the “little man”, the unpretentious “college registrar”, to be the crown of Pushkin’s realism, its consistent completion, even going so far as to directly identify the life ideals of Eugene (“The Bronze Horseman”), the most typical of a series of such heroes, with the aspirations of the poet himself.

“In reality, Pushkin of the 1930s, who more than once sympathetically depicted the life and life of “little people”, endowed the latter with warm human feelings, at the same time could not help but see the limitations, the paucity of the spiritual needs of a petty official, tradesman, impoverished nobleman. Pitying the "little man", Pushkin at the same time shows the petty-bourgeois narrowness of his requests.

How typical is the type of French teacher in Dubrovsky:

“I have an old mother, I will send half of my salary to her for food, from the rest of the money in five years I can save up a small capital - sufficient for my future independence, and then bonsoir, I’m going to Paris and embarking on a commercial turn.” - Emphasizes A. Grushkin in article "The Image of a Folk Hero in the Works of Pushkin in the 1930s".

Sometimes little man image at Alexander Sergeevich go into the description of the folk hero. Let us turn to a fragment of the same article by Grushkin:

“In the Songs of the Western Slavs, he found this hero. The latter, it would seem, is endowed with all the features of a “little man”. At first glance, we have before us an undemanding, simple person, whose way of life is primitive to the extreme. What, for example, would you like to tell the old father, who is already “beyond the grave”, the hero of the “Funeral Song?”

The "little man" in literature is the designation of rather heterogeneous heroes, united by the fact that they occupy one of the lowest places in the social hierarchy and that this circumstance determines their psychology and social behavior (humiliation, combined with a sense of injustice, wounded by pride).

Therefore, the "Little Man" often acts in opposition to another character, a high-ranking person, a "significant person" (according to the word usage adopted in Russian literature under the influence of "The Overcoat", 1842, N.V. Gogol), and the development of the plot is built mainly as a story of resentment, insult, misfortune.

"Little Man" has an international distribution, and its origins date back to ancient times. Interest in the life of the "Little Man" was already discovered by the neo-Attic comedy; the point of view of the "Little Man" was used in the satires of Juvenal, which denounced the moral degradation of those in power. In medieval literature, an example of the implementation of such a point of view is the “Prayer” by Daniil Zatochnik (13th century). One of the first works in European literature devoted to the theme of the “Little Man” is considered to be “The Weckfield Priest” (1766) by O. Goldsmith, where a typical plot outline for this topic is already outlined (the persecution of a poor man, the seduction of his daughter by a landowner).

The theme of "The Little Man" was consistently developed in Russian literature of the 19th century, especially after "The Stationmaster" (1830) by A.S. Pushkin. One of the first cases of the use of the concept is found in the article by V. G. Belinsky “Woe from Wit” (1840), and with a clear description of the entire opposition: “Become our mayor<из «Ревизора» Гоголя>general - and when he lives in a county town, woe to the little man ... then a tragedy for the "little man" could come out of the comedy ... ".

In the 1830s and 1850s, the theme of "The Little Man" was developed in Russian literature mainly in line with the story of a poor official; at the same time, the evolution of the central character took place, rethinking the motives of his behavior. If the object of Akaky Akakievich Bashmachkin’s aspirations is a thing, an overcoat, then in the works of the natural school (Ya.P. Butkov, A.N. Maikov, etc.), the hero’s attachment to his daughter, bride, lover was demonstratively brought to the fore, the discrepancy between the official ( official) and his home life, priority was given to the motives of honor, pride, "ambition".

This process reached its climax in F. M. Dostoevsky's Poor People (1846), which was emphasized by the polemical repulsion of the main character of the story from Gogol's Bashmachkin. In the literature of the second half of the 19th century, the theme of the "Little Man" continued to develop in the works of Dostoevsky, A.N. Ostrovsky, E. Zola, A. Daudet, among verists (see Verism). At the origins of the topic in modern literature is Schweik (J. Hasek. The Good Soldier Schweik's Adventures During the World War, 1921-23), whose naivety and "idiocy" are the reverse side of wisdom that protects him from the omnipotence of militarism and bureaucracy.

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………...3

Chapter 2

2.1. "Little Man" in the works of A.S. Griboedova…………………9

2.2. The development of the image of the “little man” by N.V. Gogol………………..10

2.3. The theme of the "little man" in the work of M.Yu. Lermontov…………..10

2.4. F.M. Dostoevsky, as a successor to the theme of the "little man" ....11

2.5. Vision of the image of the "little man" L.N. Tolstoy…………………..13

2.6. The theme of the "little man" in the works of N.S. Leskova……………16

2.7. A.P. Chekhov and the "little man" in his stories………………………17

2.8. Creation of the image of the “little man” by Maxim Gorky…………..20

2.9. "Little Man" in "Garnet Bracelet" by A.I. Kuprin…………21

2.10. The theme of "Little Man" by A.N. Ostrovsky……………………...21

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………….23

List of literature sources………………………………………………...25

In world literature, one can single out a novel-parable Franz Kafka“A castle that reveals the tragic impotence of a little man and his unwillingness to reconcile with fate.

Chapter 1. The image of the "little man" in the works of A.S.

Pushkin

Initially, his life is not easy.

But the hero of the story Samson Vyrin, remains a happy and calm person. He is accustomed to his service and has a good assistant daughter.

He also hopes for his personal, albeit small, but family happiness that he needs so much.

Pushkin puts forward a democratic theme in them
little man (the story "The Stationmaster"), anticipating Gogol's "Overcoat".

Here is what he writes in his critical article "Pushkin's Artistic Prose" literary critic S.M. Petrov:

How typical is the type of French teacher in Dubrovsky:

Sometimes little man image at Alexander Sergeevich go into the description of the folk hero. Let us turn to a fragment of the same article by Grushkin:

I am healthy and son Jan
My mistress gave birth to me.

My daughter lives in Lizgor;
With her husband she is not bored there,
Twark has long gone to sea,
Alive or not, you'll find out for yourself.

But in the everyday, unpretentious life of the "little man" the features of courageous combat heroism suddenly break in. It turns out that far from idyllic associations are associated with the little boy, whom the “hostess” gave birth to:

In honor of his grandfather, he is named Jan:
I have a smart boy;
Already owns a scimitar
And shoots a gun."

The hero of the "Songs", the so-called "little man" ceased to be "little", transformed, exalted by the liberation struggle. Thus, Pushkin created artistic images that outgrow the framework of the noble ideology, filled with deeply democratic exercise.

In a later period, the same Dmitry Blagoy in his book "The Creative Way of Pushkin" brings out a new interpretation of the "little man" of the poet - the one who opposes himself to autocracy:

“The deep regularity, the organic nature of Peter’s theme for Pushkin’s post-December period, is convincingly confirmed by all the further course of his work, in which this theme becomes one of the leading, central themes, being filled, as we will see later, with more and more complex ideological-philosophical and socio-historical content, acquiring an increasingly problematic character, due to the staging and artistic development by Pushkin on this very topic of the central issues of his own modernity and Russian historical life in general - about relationship between the state and the individual, autocratic power and a simple "little" person, about the ways of Russian historical development, about the fate of the country, nation, people. It is this issue that will be at the center of such Pushkin's works related to the theme of Peter, as "Peter the Great's Moor", as "Poltava", as the deepest of the poet's creations - "Petersburg story" in verse, "The Bronze Horseman". The first in this series, as it were, a compressed, concentrated introduction to everything that follows is the poem "Stans".

2.1. "Little Man" in the works of A.S. Griboyedov

The writer who anticipated the image of a little man, even before Pushkin, was Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov.

In comedy Griboyedov "Woe from Wit" shows the collision of the "current century" and "past century". The first are people who live guided by progressive ideas, people who understand what Russia will come to if life is left as it is and does not try to change anything. The latter are representatives of the Moscow nobility, who are quite satisfied with their life. They not only do not want to change anything, but also in every possible way prevent the implementation of the ideas of representatives of the "current century". These two opposing sides are personified by two main characters: Chatsky and Famusov. It is in the Famus world that he lives Molchalin, which we will classify as "little people". This young man learned from childhood the rule of pleasing everyone.

He perfectly feels the mood of the Moscow nobility, the whole society around him. And he behaves as the mighty of this world want, "because now they love the dumb." This contributes to the fact that soon he becomes an integral part of this society, the right hand of his boss, which means a good career in the very near future. The second step is to intermarry with everyone respected person. Sophia, in love not with Molchalin, but with an ideal that she herself invented, does not see his true face, but idealizes him.

In fact, Molchalin is a cunning, treacherous, vile liar who will stop at nothing to achieve his goal. His idea of happiness is very one-sided: wealth, a successful career, a significant position in society. Molchalin, in the image of Griboedov, is not only pathetic and disgusting, but also dangerous and completely not like Pushkin's heroes .

At Gogol, a small man has great faith, exists where it seems impossible to exist in the social sense. He continuation of the image laid down by Alexander Sergeevich. But such people live everywhere. We do not notice them, because we do not know how to love in a person his immortal soul. Therefore, stories like "The Overcoat" do not reveal to us the tragic meaning of life. Where sensitivity disappears, wisdom declines.

In a big, cold city, the petty clerk is in terrible misery. No one appreciates his diligence, skill and honesty. Years of need have meant that he can no longer look decent, as required by his service. At the cost of superhuman efforts, he acquires new clothes, as if restoring his lost dignity, but happiness does not last long: malefactors replace new clothes with rags from someone else's shoulder. This man is dying of grief. Death frees from service, but not from service, which is the meaning of being for him. He wanders the city at night, looking for what he has lost. And nothing more. He doesn't need someone else.

M.Yu.Lermontov, unlike many other writers, set himself the goal of portraying an outstanding personality, suffering from inactivity. He was one of the first Russian prose writers to touch on the topic of the "little man". The image of Maxim Maksimovich is unforgettable. We first meet him in the story "Bela". On the way, the narrator meets an elderly officer who gives him useful advice. This is Maxim Maksimovich. He lived in the Caucasus for quite a long time, which means that he knows local customs, customs, and customs very well. At first glance, he wins over the reader.

By origin, Maxim Maksimovich was a nobleman, but, obviously, from the impoverished nobility. Without influential connections and money. Despite his age, he is only in the rank of staff. -captain. This man is not used to curry favor with the powers that be. His words sound honest and sincere.

He is harmless, rustic, it is difficult for him to understand the complex feelings of Pechorin. But he knows one rule firmly - you can’t offend people. His whole protest is expressed in the fact that in the presence of Pechorin he began to put on a uniform, stopped accepting it as before, at home. An old campaigner and a decent man, Maxim Maksimovich understands only one thing, that he is to blame for the death of Bela no less than Pechorin, and inwardly he constantly executes himself for this. Bela and Pechorin replaced him with a family that he never had. But still, the environment to which he is accustomed, in which he lives, has left its mark on his soul and manner of behavior. A kind, taking everything to heart, a brave, resourceful person from the people - that's who Maxim Maksimovich is. Lermontov portrayed him not offended and humiliated, although pity still slips in the depths of the reader's soul. We, the readers, feel that Lermontov loves his hero, Sight him to "little man" the same as that of A.S. Pushkin. And Maxim Maksimovich himself in many ways resembles Captain Mironov.

In F. M. Dostoevsky, the “little man” fully understands his uselessness, uselessness. A vivid example of this is Marmeladov from the novel "Crime and Punishment". He is a drunkard, a rag, an insignificant person, from his point of view, but he is a philosopher.

“My dear sir,” he began almost with solemnity, “poverty is not a vice, but a truth. I know that drunkenness is not a virtue, and even more so. But poverty, dear sir, poverty is a vice. retain your nobility of innate feelings, but in poverty, never anyone. For poverty, they are not even driven out with a stick, but swept out of human company with a broom, so that it would be more insulting; and rightly so, because in poverty I myself am the first ready to insult myself. Marmeladov wants to improve, but he can't. He understands that he has condemned his family, and especially his daughter, to suffering, he is worried about this, but he cannot help himself. “Pity! Why pity me!” Marmeladov suddenly yelled, standing up with his hand outstretched ... “Yes! There’s nothing to pity me for! Crucify me on the cross, not pity me! In Chekhov, "little people" cause indignation, hostility, in Dostoevsky - pity and empathy. "And if there is nowhere else to go! After all, it is necessary that every person could at least go somewhere. For there is a time when you absolutely must go at least somewhere." "Compassion is the most important and, perhaps, the only law of human existence," said Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky. Compassion helps to survive, helps to understand the "little man" that, despite his baseness and worthlessness, someone needs him, someone worries about him, and this is very important for every person.
Another hero who sympathizes with everyone and tries to help is Sonya Marmeladova. She has a good heart and a great soul. Sonya is a "little person", she cannot change something in the life of the country, change the state, but she is able to help her neighbor, help those who need her help. We see great spiritual wealth and inner beauty in this fragile girl. Her beliefs will not allow anyone to confuse her, to commit acts that are contrary to moral standards. For her, every person is valuable. She can understand and forgive everyone.

And in the novel "Poor People" It's about "little people". Makar Devushkin and Varvara Alekseevna also belong to the lower stratum of society. They want to live well, work, hope for their happiness. Makar Devushkin loves Varenka very much, he is like a father to her: he buys her what she dreams of, although she does not ask him about it, and he himself remains virtually without food, becomes a debtor to the mistress of the house in which he lives. Varenka, having learned about the misfortune of Makar Devushkin, tries to help him: she sends him money so that he can pay off the hostess and buy something for himself. It should be noted that she gives far from the extra money earned by her painstaking work. Pity and kindness are characteristic of this tender girl and her friend Makar Devushkin, who once saved her from an evil relative. Mutual assistance is very important here, because only these people can hope for it. The author wanted to point out the problems of the disadvantaged with his works. They are forced to live in gloomy, dirty, vile and smelly areas of the city. And why did so many of them deserve it? How did Sonya Marmeladova deserve this? How did Makar Devushkin and Varvara Alekseevna deserve this? This is what Dostoevsky draws attention to. His "little man" knows how to reason. He is not only "humiliated and insulted", understanding his insignificance, he is also a philosopher, posing questions of the greatest importance to society.

Pushkin's influence in "Poor People" turns out to be secondary- Gogol writes with an eye on Pushkin, and Dostoevsky - with an eye first of all on Gogol and his "Overcoat". Common features of Pushkin and Dostoevsky- these are similar interpretations of the image of a little man, posing the problem of permissiveness, interest in confession.

2.5. Vision of the image of the "little man" L.N. Tolstoy

L.N .Tolstoy in an epic novel "War and Peace" built in front of readers people of different walks of life, wealth and characters. His sympathy is on the side of those characters who are spiritually close to the people. Therefore, with such warmth, he draws the image of Captain Tushin. This is a hero who belongs to the category of "little people". And at first glance, he is clumsy, funny. But this is only at first glance, when he is not minding his own business. In battle, this is a real hero, courageous, fearless. In Tolstoy's huge novel, Captain Tushin is given ten pages, but the image of this man turns out to be very important for understanding the entire work and the views of the author himself. This is how this hero appears to us at the first meeting:

“Prince Andrey involuntarily smiled, glancing at Staff Captain Tushin. Silently and smiling, Tushin stepped from bare foot to foot, looked inquiringly with large, intelligent and kind eyes first at Prince Andrei, then at the headquarters officer.

“The soldiers say: wiser more dexterously,” said Captain Tushin, smiling and shy, apparently wanting to go from his awkward position into a joking tone. But he had not finished yet, when he felt that his joke was not accepted and did not come out. He was confused.

- If you please go, - said the staff officer, trying to keep seriousness.

Prince Andrei once again looked at the figure of the artilleryman. There was something special in it, not at all military, somewhat comical, but extremely attractive.

And now this timid, insecure person is in a completely different situation, where a lot depends on him, where he forgets about himself, and thinks about the common cause. “The Tushin battery was forgotten, and only at the very end of the case, continuing to hear the cannonade in the center, Prince Bagration sent the staff officer on duty there and then Prince Andrei to order the battery to retreat as soon as possible. in the middle of the action, but the battery continued to fire and was not taken by the French only because the enemy could not imagine the audacity of firing four unprotected cannons.On the contrary, from the energetic action of this battery, he assumed that here, in the center, concentrated the main forces of the Russians, and twice tried to attack this point, and both times were driven off by shots of four cannons standing alone on this hill. And this man, a real hero, after the battle cannot even defend himself from the attacks of those officers who turned out to be cowards, but knew how to win the favor of their superiors by any means. “Tushin appeared on the threshold, timidly making his way from behind the backs of the generals. Bypassing the generals in a cramped hut, embarrassed, as always, at the sight of his superiors, Tushin did not see the flagpole and stumbled on it. Several voices laughed.

- How did the gun leave? - asked Bagration, frowning not so much at the captain as at the laughing ones, among whom Zherkov's voice was heard loudest of all.

Tushin now only, at the sight of the formidable authorities, in all horror imagined his guilt and shame in the fact that he, having remained alive, had lost two guns. He was so excited that until now he had no time to think about it. The laughter of the officers confused him even more. He stood in front of Bagration with a trembling lower jaw and barely said:

- I don't know... Your Excellency... There were no people, Your Excellency.
- You could take from the cover!

That there was no cover, Tushin did not say this, although it was the absolute truth. He was afraid to let the other boss down by this and silently, with fixed eyes, looked straight into Bagration's face, just as a student who has gone astray looks into the examiner's eyes. The silence was quite long. Prince Bagration, apparently not wanting to be strict, had nothing to say; the rest did not dare to intervene in the conversation. Prince Andrei looked at Tushin from under his brows, and his fingers moved nervously.

“Your Excellency,” Prince Andrei interrupted the silence with his harsh voice, “you deigned to send me to Captain Tushin’s battery. I was there and found two-thirds of the men and horses killed, two guns mangled and no cover.

Prince Bagration and Tushin equally stubbornly looked at Bolkonsky, who spoke with restraint and excitement.

“And if, Your Excellency, let me express my opinion,” he continued, “the success of the day we owe most of all to the action of this battery and the heroic stamina of Captain Tushin with his company,” said Prince Andrei and, without waiting for an answer, immediately got up and moved away from the window.

Prince Bagration looked at Tushin and, apparently not wanting to express distrust of Bolkonsky's harsh judgment and at the same time feeling unable to fully believe him, bowed his head and told Tushin that he could go. Prince Andrew followed him.

“Thank you, you helped me out, my dear,” Tushin told him.
For Leo Tolstoy, a "little man" is a man of the people, capable of performing miracles, but very modest and not understanding his own greatness.

2.6. The theme of the "little man" in the works of N.S. Leskova

At Nikolai Semenovich Leskov"little man" is quite another human, than his predecessors, including Pushkin. In order to understand this, let's compare the heroes of three works of this writer: Lefty, Ivan Severyanovich Flyagin and Katerina Izmailova. All three of these characters are strong personalities, and each is talented in its own way. But all the energy of Katerina Izmailova is aimed at arranging personal happiness by any means. In order to achieve her goals, she goes to crime. And therefore this type of character is rejected by Leskov. He sympathizes with her only when she is cruelly devoted to her beloved.

Lefty is a talented person from the people who cares about his homeland more than the king and courtiers. But he is ruined by a vice so well known to Russian people - drunkenness and the unwillingness of the state to help its subjects. He could do without this help if he were a strong man. But a strong person cannot be a drunk person. Therefore, for Leskov, this is not the hero who should be given preference.
Among the heroes belonging to the category of "little people", Leskov singles out Ivan Severyanovich Flyagin. The hero of Leskov is a hero in appearance and spirit.

He is strong not only physically, but also spiritually. Flyagin's life is an endless test. He is strong in spirit, and this allows him to overcome such difficult life ups and downs. He was on the verge of death, he saved people, he himself fled. But in all these tests he improved.

This is a simple person with his own virtues and shortcomings, gradually eradicating these shortcomings and coming to an understanding of God. Leskov portrays his hero as a strong and brave man With a huge heart and a big soul. Flyagin does not complain about fate, does not cry. Leskov, describing Ivan Severyanovich, evokes pride in the reader for his people, for his country. Flyagin does not humiliate himself before the mighty of this world, like Chekhov's heroes, does not become an inveterate drunkard because of his insolvency, like Dostoevsky's Marmeladov, does not sink "to the bottom" of life, like Gorky's characters, does not wish harm to anyone, does not want to humiliate anyone, does not wait for help from others, does not sit idly by. This is a person who recognizes himself as a person, a real person, ready to defend his rights and the rights of other people, not losing his dignity and confident that a person can do anything.

Little Man" is constantly found on the pages of works A.A. Chekhov. This is the main character of his work. Chekhov's attitude towards such people is especially vividly manifested in his satirical stories. And the relationship is clear. in the story "Death of an Official" the "little man" Ivan Dmitrievich Chervyakov constantly and obsessively apologizes to General Brizzhalov for accidentally splashing him when he sneezed.

"I sprayed him!" Thought Chervyakov. "Not my boss, someone else's, but still awkward. I must apologize."

The key word in this thought is "boss". Probably, Chervyakov would not endlessly apologize to an ordinary person. Ivan Dmitrievich has a fear of the authorities, and this fear turns into flattery and deprives him of self-respect.

A person already reaches the point where he allows himself to be trampled into the dirt, moreover, he himself helps to do this. We must pay tribute to the general, he treats our hero very politely. But the common man is not accustomed to such treatment. Therefore, Ivan Dmitrievich thinks that he was ignored and comes to ask for forgiveness for several days in a row. Brizzhalov gets fed up with this and finally yells at Chervyakov.

"-Get out !! - the general suddenly turned blue and trembling."

"What, sir?" Chervyakov asked in a whisper, trembling with horror.

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

Something broke in Chervyakov's stomach. Seeing nothing, hearing nothing, he backed away to the door, went out into the street and trudged along ... Arriving home mechanically, without taking off his uniform, he lay down on the sofa and ... died.

This is what the fear of the highest ranks brings, eternal admiration and humiliation before them. For a more complete disclosure of the image of his hero, Chekhov used a "speaking" surname. Yes, Ivan Dmitrievich is small, pitiful, like a worm, you can crush him without effort, and most importantly, he is just as unpleasant.

in the story "Celebration of the Winner" Chekhov presents us with a story in which father and son humiliate themselves in front of the boss so that the son can get a position.

“The boss was talking and, apparently, wanted to seem witty. I don’t know if he said anything funny, but I only remember that dad every minute pushed me in the side and said:

Laugh!..

... - So, so! - Dad whispered. - Well done! He looks at you and laughs... It's good; maybe he'll actually give you a job as an assistant clerk!"

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

Anton Pavlovich believed that a person should have a goal to which he will strive, and if it is not there or it is very small and insignificant, then the person becomes just as small and insignificant. A person must work and love - these are two things that play a major role in the life of any person: small and not small. Unlike Pushkin, Chekhov specifically emphasizes the human dignity of the “little man” and relationships with superiors in society.

Maksim Gorky wrote a play "At the bottom", in which all the actors are "little people". The action takes place in a rooming house. All the dregs of society are gathered here: drunkards, murderers and thieves. All of them are cruel, they have no feeling of compassion, no desire to help their neighbor. Klesch's wife dies, but he doesn't care. The sister cripples her own sister, everyone always drinks and no one cares about the other. They themselves are to blame for what happened to them, they do not have the strength and perseverance to fight fate. Insults in this society are becoming the norm. No one wants to say a kind, warm word to each other. Then Luke appears in their monotonous, cruel and vile life. He is able to sympathize, comfort people. And gradually, over time, some people become a little kinder. Luke brings them hope for a better life, he is gentle and kind to them. When he leaves, everyone is going to run after him, look for him. And all just because this simple and also "little man" gave them hope and sympathy, all that they had been waiting for so long. Luke is like a biblical character, like a pilgrim. He is the embodiment of goodness and justice. And this similarity is not accidental. Gorky draws the reader's attention to the fact that in our life there is not enough sympathy and warmth. He calls to help your neighbor, and this is important for any person.

This is how Gorky painted the "little man" for us in realistic works, which is fundamentally different from the heroes of his early romantic works. In the play "At the Bottom" we can draw an analogy with "Crime and Punishment".

Dostoevsky also called for compassion. In this, the views of Gorky and Dostoevsky coincide, which means that Gorky also was influenced by the image of the "little man" of Pushkin mediated by Nikolai Gogol.

At A.I. Kuprin in " Garnet bracelet"Zheltkov is a" little man. "And again, the hero belongs to the lower class. But he loves, and he loves in a way that many of the high society are not capable of. Zheltkov fell in love with a girl and all his later life he loved only her alone. He understood that love is a sublime feeling, it is a chance given to him by fate, and it should not be missed.His love is his life, his hope.Yeltkov commits suicide.But after the death of the hero, the woman realizes that no one loved her as much as he. The hero of Kuprin is a man of an extraordinary soul, capable of self-sacrifice, able to truly love, and such a gift is a rarity. Therefore, the "little man" Zheltkov appears to us a figure towering above the surrounding. He not oppressed like the heroes of Pushkin's "little man" rather, on the contrary, he is morally superior to everyone else, but this is what destroys him.

At A.N. Ostrovsky ideas about the "little man" are more like Chekhov's, but there is also something from Dostoevsky in them. In a play "Dowry""little man" is Karandyshev. He does not want to feel like a third-class person, as Chekhov did, but at the same time he is aware of his failure in society, like Dostoevsky's characters. Karandyshev wants to join this society, a society where he is not expected, where no one needs him. But at the same time, he wants to humiliate those who humiliate him. This desire for revenge makes him insensitive towards his bride, whom Karandyshev's behavior causes torment. In The Thunderstorm, Tikhon and Boris, despite their outward dissimilarity, are equally weak-willed. Neither the author nor the readers have any respect for them.
The female images in these plays, on the contrary, are very vivid. The main character of the play "Dowry" is Larisa Ogudalova. Her mother's advice is as follows: "We are poor people, we have to humiliate ourselves all our lives. So it's better to humiliate yourself from a young age, so that later you can live like a human being ... And pretend and lie! Happiness will not follow you if you run away from it yourself." But Larisa Ogudalova is a solid person, unable to dodge and lie. Her soul is open to people. And she doesn't want to live any other way. Katerina Kabanova, like Larisa, is ready to die, but not to live in a vulgar, false world. Death for both of them becomes the only way out. Larisa Ogudalova and Katerina Kabanova look like Sonya Marmeladova. They do not merge with the general mass of petty and bilious people. Sonya is a spiritual person, she does not take offense at anyone and helps everyone. Larisa is also not like everyone else, she does not follow the rule: “You cannot live without tricks in the world.” Before her death, she forgives everyone, although she probably does not take offense at anyone. For all their identical spiritual qualities, the external manifestations of these the heroines are different. Sonya is seemingly a very modest and even timid person. Larisa and Katerina are natures more resolute and strong in appearance, but they are all equally firm spiritually. Ostrovsky's position coincides with the position of Turgenev, who portrayed his girls an order of magnitude higher morally than those around them men.

The image of the "little man" appeared in world literature in the 19th century and became very popular. This hero was a person from low social strata, with his own strengths and weaknesses, joys and sorrows, dreams and aspirations. During the heyday of the realistic trend in literature, the inner world, the psychology of the "little man" occupied many writers. Especially often Russian classics turned to the theme of the “little man”. The first of them were Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin and Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov. Even the term itself was first used by the critic Belinsky when considering Griboedov's work Woe from Wit.

Pushkin, as one of the first classics who described the image of the "little man" in the early stages of his work, tried to show the high spirituality of the characters, as, for example, in the story "The Stationmaster". Later, in his works, the motives of the transition of the image of the “little man” and the merger with the image of the national hero sounded - “Songs of the Western Slavs”. In his historical poems, Alexander Sergeevich considers the eternal relationship between the "little man" and unlimited power - "Peter the Great's Moor", "Poltava".

All of Pushkin's works were characterized by a deep penetration into the character of each hero - a "little man", a masterful writing of his portrait, from which not a single feature escaped.

Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol became a direct successor to the theme of the "little man" of Pushkin. She expressed herself most fully in the story "The Overcoat". Later, in the footsteps of Pushkin and Gogol, Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky followed, giving us not a single image of the “little man” in the novels Crime and Punishment and Poor People.

Standing apart is Griboyedov, who looks at this hero in a different way, which brings his views closer to those of Chekhov and partly Ostrovsky. Here

the concept of vulgarity and self-humiliation comes to the fore

In the view of L. Tolstoy, N. Leskov, A. Kuprin, a "little man" is a talented, selfless person. The most striking of these images came out in the novel "War and Peace" and the story "Lefty".

Such diversity in the interpretation of the image of the little man and its evolution in Pushkin himself are explained by constant social changes and the variability of life itself. Each era gives its "little man".

But, since the beginning of the 20th century, this topic has gradually faded away and the image of the “little man” in Russian literature has disappeared, giving way to other heroes.

1. Pushkin A.S. Collected works in 10 volumes. T.5. Novels, short stories. - M: State Publishing House of Fiction, 1960.

2. A. Grushkin. The image of a folk hero in the works of Pushkin in the 1930s. In the book: Pushkin. Vremennik of the Pushkin Commission, vol. 3. Ed. Academy of Sciences of the USSR, M. - L., 1937.

3. Blagoy D.D. Pushkin's creative path. M., 1967.

4. E.P. Pedchak. Russian literature of the late 18th-19th centuries. Foreign literature. –M: Phoenix, 2003.

5. Khramtsev D.V. Pushkin and Dostoevsky // Magazine Samizdat from 09/06/2004.

6. Sokolov A.G. History of Russian literature of the late XIX - early XX century: Proc. -4th ed., additional and revised - M .: Vyssh. school; Ed. Center Academy, 2000.

Pushkin A.S. Collected works in 10 volumes. T.5. Novels, short stories. - M: State Publishing House of Fiction, 1960.

A. Grushkin. The image of a folk hero in the works of Pushkin in the 1930s. In the book: Pushkin. Vremennik of the Pushkin Commission, vol. 3. Ed. Academy of Sciences of the USSR, M. - L., 1937.

Blagoy D.D. Pushkin's creative path. M., 1967.

E.P. Pedchak. Russian literature of the late 18th-19th centuries. Foreign literature. –M: Phoenix, 2003.

Khramtsev D.V. Pushkin and Dostoevsky // Magazine Samizdat from 09/06/2004.

Sokolov A.G. History of Russian literature of the late XIX - early XX century: Proc. -4th ed., additional and revised - M .: Vyssh. school; Ed. Center Academy, 2000.