Composition
War is grief, tears. She knocked on every house, brought trouble: mothers lost
their sons, wives - husbands, children were left without fathers. Thousands of people went through the crucible of war, experienced terrible torment, but they survived and won. We won the most difficult of all wars that mankind has endured so far. And those people who defended their homeland in the hardest battles are still alive.
The war in their memory emerges as the most terrible sad memory. But it also reminds them of steadfastness, courage, unbroken spirit, friendship and fidelity. Many writers have gone through this terrible war. Many of them died, were seriously injured, many survived in the fire of trials. That is why they still write about the war, that is why they talk again and again about what became not only their personal pain, but also the tragedy of the whole generation. They simply cannot leave this life without warning people about the danger that comes from forgetting the lessons of the past.
My favorite writer is Yuri Vasilyevich Bondarev. I like many of his works: “Battalions ask for fire”, “Coast”, “Last volleys”, and most of all “Hot Snow”, which tells about one military episode. In the center of the novel is a battery, which is tasked with not letting the enemy through, rushing towards Stalingrad, at any cost. This battle, perhaps, will decide the fate of the front, and therefore the order of General Bessonov is so formidable: “Not a step back! And knock out tanks. Stand and forget about death! Don't think about her under any circumstances." And the fighters understand this. We also see the commander, who, in an ambitious desire to seize the “moment of luck”, dooms his subordinates to certain death. He forgot that the right to dispose of the lives of others in war is a great and dangerous right.
The commanders have a great responsibility for the fate of people, the country entrusted them with their lives, and they must do everything possible so that there are no unnecessary losses, because every person is a destiny. And this was vividly shown by M. Sholokhov in his story “The Fate of a Man”. Andrei Sokolov, like millions of people, went to the front. His path was hard and tragic. The memories of the B-14 prisoner of war camp, where thousands of people were separated from the world by barbed wire, where there was a terrible struggle not just for life, for a pot of gruel, but for the right to remain human, will forever remain in his soul.
Victor Astafiev writes about a man in the war, about his courage and steadfastness. He, who went through the war, became disabled on it, in his works “The Shepherd and the Shepherdess”, “Modern Pastoral” and others tells about the tragic fate of the people, about what he had to endure in the difficult front-line years.
Boris Vasiliev was a young lieutenant at the beginning of the war. His best works are about the war, about how a person remains a person, only having fulfilled his duty to the end. “He was not on the lists” and “The Dawns Here Are Quiet” are works about people who feel and bear personal responsibility for the fate of the country. Thanks to the Vaskovs and thousands of people like him, the victory was won.
All of them fought the "brown plague" not only for their loved ones, but also for their land, for us. And the best example of such a selfless hero is Nikolai Pluzhnikov in Vasilyev’s story “He Was Not on the Lists.” In 1941, Pluzhnikov graduated from a military school and was sent to serve in the Brest Fortress. He arrived at night, and at dawn the war began. Nobody knew him, he was not on the lists, because he did not have time to report his arrival. Despite this, he became the defender of the fortress along with fighters whom he did not know, and they saw him as a real commander and carried out his orders. Pluzhnikov fought the enemy to the last bullet. The only feeling that guided him in this unequal battle with the Nazis was a sense of personal responsibility for the fate of the Motherland, for the fate of the entire people. Even left alone, he did not stop the fight, fulfilling his soldier's duty to the end. When the Nazis saw him a few months later, exhausted, exhausted, unarmed, they saluted him, appreciating the courage and stamina of the fighter. Much, surprisingly much, a person can do if he knows in the name of what and for what he is fighting.
The theme of the tragic fate of the Soviet people will never be exhausted in literature. I don't want the horrors of war to be repeated. Let children grow up peacefully, not being afraid of bomb explosions, let Chechnya not repeat itself, so that mothers do not have to cry for their dead sons. Human memory stores both the experience of many generations that lived before us, and the experience of each. “Memory resists the destructive power of time,” said D.S. Likhachev. Let this memory and experience teach us kindness, peacefulness, humanity. And let none of us forget who and how fought for our freedom and happiness. We owe you, soldier! And while there are still thousands of unburied people on the Pulkovo Heights near St. Petersburg, and on the Dnieper steeps near Kiev, and on Ladoga, and in the swamps of Belarus, we remember every soldier who did not return from the war, we remember at what cost he won victory. He preserved for me and millions of my compatriots the language, culture, customs, traditions and faith of my ancestors.
War is one of the most terrible phenomena in the world. War is pain, fear, tears, hunger, cold, captivity, loss of home, loved ones, friends, and sometimes the whole family.
Let's remember the blockade of Leningrad. People were starving and dying. All the animals in the city were eaten. And someone's fathers, husbands, sons, brothers fought at the front.
Many men died during the war and during this dark time, the number of fatherlessness and widows increased. It is especially scary when a woman, having survived the war, finds out that her son or sons died and will never return home. This is a huge grief for a mother, and I could not bear it.
Many people returned from the war disabled. But after the war, such a return was considered a success, because a person did not die, and many, as I said, died! But what was it like for these people? The blind know that they will never see the sky, the sun, the faces of friends again. The deaf to know that they will not hear the birds singing, the rustling of the grass and the voice of a sister or a loved one. Legless to understand that they will no longer get up and will not feel solid ground under their feet. Armless to understand that they will never be able to take the child in their arms and hug him!
And the worst thing is, all those who remain alive and escape from terrible captivity after being tortured will never be able to smile with a truly happy smile, and most will forget how to show their feelings and put on a mask on their faces.
But after the war, ordinary people realize how wonderful it is to breathe deeply, eat warm bread and raise children.
Reviews
Anastasia, just now I read you, and I realized that you have reflected a topic that is always very relevant, but especially in our troubled times - the misfortune and scythe of mankind. Affected, thanks for the good post. Good luck in creativity.
The Proza.ru portal provides authors with the opportunity to freely publish their literary works on the Internet on the basis of a user agreement. All copyrights to works belong to the authors and are protected by law. Reprinting of works is possible only with the consent of its author, which you can refer to on its author page. The authors are solely responsible for the texts of works on the basis of
“The insidious fate of a man who got lost in the war” - V. Bykov ends the story about Rybak with such a phrase. Fate is the irresistible power of circumstances and how much at the same time depends on the person. The question naturally arises: why, in the same circumstances, one of the two partisans turned out to be a traitor?
The fisherman is not an evil person who has been disguised for the time being; much in him is sympathetic, and not because at first we did not recognize his true face, but because he really has many virtues. He has a sense of camaraderie. He sincerely sympathizes with the fallen ill Sotnikov; noticing that he is freezing in his overcoat and cap, he gives his towel so that he at least wraps his neck. Sharing with him the rest of his portion of steamed rye - this is not so little, because they have long been sitting in the detachment on a starvation ration. And in battle, under fire, Rybak was not a coward, he behaved with dignity. How did it happen that Rybak, apparently not a coward and not a selfish person, becomes a traitor and participates in the execution of his comrade?
In the mind of Rybak there is no clear boundary between the moral and the immoral. Having been captured, he thinks with irritation about Sotnikov's "hard-headed" stubbornness, about some principles that he will never want to give up. Being together with everyone, in the ranks, he conscientiously follows the usual rules of conduct in the war, without thinking deeply about either life or death. Faced one on one with inhuman circumstances, he turns out to be spiritually and ideologically unprepared for difficult moral trials.
If for Sotnikov there was no choice between life and death, then for Rybak the main thing was to survive at any cost. Sotnikov thought only about how to die with dignity, since there was no way to survive. The fisherman, on the other hand, is cunning, dodges, deceives himself and, as a result, surrenders his positions to the enemies. Egoist, he is endowed with an instinctive sense of self-preservation. He believes that in a moment of danger, everyone thinks only of himself, and he does not care about anything. Let's trace his behavior before he and Sotnikov were taken prisoner.
In a shootout with the policemen, Rybak decided to leave alone - “Sotnikov can no longer be saved”, and when the shootout subsided, he thought with relief that, apparently, everything was already over there, and only after some time he realized that it was impossible to leave - what will he say in the forest, in the detachment? He was not thinking about saving Sotnikov at that moment, when he returned for him, but only about himself.
Being in captivity, he vaguely feels that he has some chance to safely get out of this alteration, but he can use it only by untying his hands, that is, by separating his fate from the fate of his partner. It was the first step towards his downfall. And here is his last step. Four who died a heroic death are swinging on the gallows, and an empty fifth loop of a new hemp rope is slowly swinging over them - a strong and visible image.
And even now Rybak does not understand what he did: what does he have to do with it? He only pulled the block out from under Sotnikov's feet. And then on the orders of the police. Even now, he does not understand that, having decided at any cost to "get around fate", "get out", he dooms himself to only one thing - to betrayal. He tells himself, convinces himself that he needs to survive to fight the enemy. And only when he sees the hatred and fear in the eyes of the locals, he feels that he has nowhere to run. The story of Rybak ends with an unsuccessful suicide attempt, after which comes reconciliation with betrayal.
BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION ABOUT V. BYKOV.
Vasily Vladimirovich Bykov was born in 1924 into a peasant family in the Vitibsk region. Before the war, he studied at the Vitebsk Art College. When the war began, Bykov studied at the Saratov Infantry School of Accelerated Graduation. Nineteen-year-old junior lieutenant goes to the front. He participates in many military operations, and he had to go through a lot. This is evidenced by the following fact: on the obelisk of one of the mass graves near Kirovograd, there is also his name in the long list of the dead. He escaped death by accident: being seriously wounded, he crawled out of the hut, which a few minutes later was demolished by the fascist tanks that broke through. Bykov on the territory of Ukraine, Belarus, Romania, Hungary, Austria. Was wounded twice. Demobilized only in 1955. Collaborated in the newspapers of Belarus.
The first stories of V. Bykov are not about the war, but about the post-war life of rural youth: “Happiness”, “Night”, “Fruza”. In the years he creates the first military stories and remains true to the military theme in subsequent works: "Crane Cry" (1959), "Alpine Ballad" (1963), "Trap" (1964), "Sotnikov" (1970), "Obelisk" (1972), "Wolf Pack" (1974), "Sign of Trouble" (1984).
For the stories "Obelisk" and "Survive Until Dawn" V. Bykov was awarded the State Prize of the USSR. In 1984, the writer was awarded the title of Hero of Labor.
In recent years, the writer turned to the theme of the dramatic thirties. The story "Roundup" refers to such works.
In the works of V. Bykov about the war, along with the theme of the moral origins of the struggle, there is also the motive of testing for humanity. The heroes of V. Bykov go through such a test at the turn between life and death. It is very important for a writer to find out what are the moral qualities of our people, who manifested themselves with such force in a fierce battle.
Sotnikov began to fight from the very first days. The first battle was his last in the sense that he was captured. Then escape, captured again, escape again. In the persistent desire to escape from captivity, one can feel the determination, strength, courage of Sotnikov's character. After a successful escape, Sotnikov ends up in a partisan detachment. Here he manifests himself as a brave, resolute partisan. Once he stayed in cover with Rybak when their detachment ran into the punishers. In the battle, Sotnikov saves Rybak's life. After that, they ate together from the same pot... Sick Sotnikov goes on another mission with Rybak, while two healthy partisans refuse. To the question of the bewildered Rybak why he agrees to go on a mission, Sotnikov replies: “That’s why he didn’t refuse, because others refused.”
Already at the beginning of the story, a bold contrast is outlined between the strong, energetic, successful Rybak and the silent, sick, gloomy Sotnikov. The gloomy, clumsy, uncompromising Sotnikov does not immediately and simply win our respect and sympathy. And even sometimes, at first, some kind of hostility arises towards him: why did he, the patient, go on this task and only fetter Rybak's actions? There is also in Sotnikov a reckless categoricalness, which at other times and in other conditions may turn out to be not harmless.
Here is one of these episodes of the story. Sotnikov and Rybak, in search of food, went into the hut to the elder Peter. Sotnikov is not touched by either the sympathy of the elder, who noticed that he was ill, or her visible good-heartedness.
He had a case when the same kind of woman “seemingly simplicity itself, with a prudent face, in a white scarf on her head”, as V. Bykov describes her, who also scolded Germany and offered to eat, sent for the police at that time, and he barely took his legs. The war weaned Sotnikov from excessive credulity. Therefore, he categorically refuses the food, drink, and medicine offered to him in this house.
L. Lazarev in the book "Vasil Bykov". The essay of creativity believes that the logic of his character is manifested in such behavior of Sotnikov: to accept someone's help for him means to take upon himself the obligation to repay the same, and he does not wish good to people who have contacted enemies. Then, in the basement of the policemen, he will find out how and why Peter became the headman, he will understand that he was wrong in relation to this old man, that one cannot judge a person only by his external behavior.
Feelings of guilt, remorse will not give him rest. He will try to shield the headman and all others before whom he considers himself guilty. But the exception that he made for the headman, having learned the truth, did not in the least shake his general firm and uncompromising position: he is convinced that one has only to stretch out a finger to the Nazis, and they will have to serve. He eradicated everything in himself that could turn into weakness. This made his character difficult, but the times were also difficult.
Do not be a burden to others, always demand more from yourself than from others - he will strictly follow these principles.
How did it happen that Sotnikov and Rybak were captured? Many asked: why in the attic, when the police heard Sotnikov's cough, did he not get up first? Maybe that would have saved Rybak. He, hiding, waited for Sotnikov to rise, and his policemen would not notice. The logic of Sotnikov's character is such that he is capable of self-sacrifice. But, firstly, he was sick and his reactions were slow, otherwise he would have shot at enemies, and secondly, he is not one of those who are the first to surrender. Sotnikov prefers death when he does not find the strength to resist.
Sotnikov is the first to be taken for interrogation, reading that he will quickly give information, since he is physically weak. But the hero of V. Bykov does not justify the hopes of the policemen, he is silent even under torture.
On the last night of his life, Sotnikov is overwhelmed by childhood memories. Bykov in many of his works refers to the childhood of the heroes and shows a direct connection between the past and the present. The childhood episodes of Sotnikov and Rybak at first glance do not portend their future behavior in extreme situations of captivity. Rybak saves the children's lives, Sotnikov first lies to his father, then hardly admits that without permission, he secretly took his father's Mauser and fired from it. The fisherman performs his childish feat without hesitation, instinctively, relying on his physical strength. Sotnikov's lie to his father became a lesson in pangs of conscience for him for life. Sotnikov's moral sense is not dormant, he strictly judges himself and holds an answer to his conscience. Sotnikov lived and fought for the people, tried to do everything for them that was in his power. It is no coincidence that in the last minutes of his life, already standing with a noose around his neck, Sotnikov wanted to see people. Catching the eye of a thin, pale boy in Budenovka, he, realizing how unbearable the sight of the execution is for a child, finds the strength to support him. He smiled at the boy with his eyes - "nothing brother." Probably the boy will never forget this partisan smile addressed to him, just as Sotnikov himself did not forget the feat of the gray-haired colonel when he was in captivity. So Bykov in this work emphasizes that courage and heroism do not disappear without a trace, but are passed on from generation to generation.
The main thing for Sotnikov is to die “according to his conscience, with the dignity inherent in a person,” as Bykov writes about this. He does not die in battle, but in single combat with a police car, with his own physical weakness. He remained human in inhuman circumstances. And this is his feat, his moral ascent, opposed to the fall of Rybak.
The author and his characters help us understand the origins of the mass heroism of our people in the fierce battle against fascism. Sotnikov withstood a terrible test and showed his maturity, ideological and moral. That is why Sotnikov is of great importance in this story.
This story is more fortunate in its own way than others. The writer himself spoke about how it arose in response to the many-valued questions and requests of readers in the article, which is called “How the story“ Centuries ”was created.
It turns out that the idea was prompted by the real fate of a man whom Lieutenant Vasil Bykov met on his front-line roads, and the meeting with him sunk into my memory for a long time, excited my consciousness for many years, until it was reflected in the plot, did not germinate into the ideas and images of the story ...
It happened in August 1944 at the height of the famous Iasi-Kishinev operation. Soviet troops broke through the defenses, surrounded a large group of Nazis. Driving in those days past the Romanian village, where there are many unfamiliar faces, he suddenly saw the face of a man who seemed familiar to him. The prisoner also kept a detached look on him, and in the next moment Vasil Bykov recognized the former fellow soldier, who had long been considered dead. As it turned out now, he did not die, but ended up wounded in a Nazi concentration camp. In the horrendous conditions of captivity, he did not find the strength to resist and fight, and, wanting to survive at all costs, he deliberately made a temporary, of course, a temporary deal with his conscience. Enrolling in the Vlasov army, he consoled himself with the hope of running across to his own at a convenient moment. Day after day, man, at first without guilt guilty, bogged down in apostasy, took upon himself an ever-increasing time of betrayal. As they say, nothing can be done: such is the logic of fascism, which, having grabbed its victim by the little finger, will not stop until it is swallowed whole. This is how V. Bykov formulated the instructive lesson of the human fate that was revealed to him, which, a quarter of a century later, led to the writer's awareness of the moral idea underlying the story "Sotnikov".
"Sotnikov" is the ninth story by V. Bykov, but among other stories preceding it, it occupies a special place.
Lesson - seminar on the story of V. Bykov "Sotnikov".
The purpose of the lesson: trace the stages of the writer's creative path in the lesson; features of his work; consider the moral problems posed in the story "Sotnikov"; develop the ability to independently analyze a work of art; development of logical thinking and monologue speech.
Equipment: a portrait of the writer, an exhibition of books: V. Bykov "Alpine Ballad", "Obelisk", "Sotnikov", "Survive Until Dawn", works by other writers about the war.
Preliminary preparation for the lesson:
1. Lesson - consultation, which recalls the main features of the creative personality of V. Bykov, based on the works read earlier.
PURPOSE OF THE CONSULTATION: prepare students for independent analysis of V. Bykov's story "Sotnikov".
2. Prior to the analysis of the story "Sotnikov", written questionnaires were conducted to find out the opinion of the students about what they read.
QUESTIONNAIRE QUESTIONS:
Questionnaires were used in the introductory speech of the teacher, in reports and during the debate.
3.Individual consultation of the two main speakers, who considered the motives for the behavior of Sotnikov and Rybak.
4. Interview questions during the seminar.
Did they expect just such an ending, could they foresee that this is how the fate of the heroes would end?
What are the writer's ideas about heroism and heroic personality?
How is the question of the continuity of generations raised in the works “To Live Until Dawn”, “Obelisk”, “Sotnikov”?
What moral problems does the writer solve by referring to the topic of the Great Patriotic War?
What artistic techniques are most often used by the author in the story "Sotnikov"?
What do you see as the main features of V. Bykov's work?
5. Biographical information about the writer.
6. The history of the creation of the story "Sotnikov" (message).
Seminar plan.
1). Org. moment.
2) Introductory speech of the teacher.
Vasil Bykov is one of the writers who is faithful to the military theme. He writes about the war as an eyewitness, as a person who has experienced both the bitterness of defeat, and the severity of losses and losses, and the joy of victory.
Biographical information about the writer (student's speech).
V. Bykov writes about the war in such a way that he leaves no one indifferent. said the following about the work of V. Bykov: “ V. Bykov is a writer of heightened moral consciousness, his stories exude pain and burning, they seem to be burning in their impatience of an immediate answer, an immediate resolution of the situation. Their move is uncompromising to any hesitation, to any extension of the hour of choice. Yes, and this hour is most often not an hour, but a minute of an instant in which the hero must stand on one side or the other: on the side of evil or on the side of good. Every hesitation in these conditions is an apostasy, apostasy, a moral fall."
Today we are talking about the story "Sotnikov".
The history of the creation of the story (student's speech).
As the questionnaires showed, many of you have questions that we will try to figure out. In your works, you noted one feature of the works of V. Bykov: the writer is interested in the cruelly severe test that each of his heroes must go through: will he be able not to spare himself in order to fulfill his duty, his duties as a citizen and patriot?
Bykov are simple at first glance, but through their characters some important features of the people's war are revealed. Therefore, although there are usually only a few episodes in the center of the writer's stories, the action is usually concentrated in a small area of space and is closed in a short time span and only two or three heroes act, behind them one can feel the scale of a nationwide battle in which the fate of the Motherland is decided.
V. Bykov portrays the war as a cruel and merciless test of the inner essence of people. Its moral lessons should help us understand our current problems. The war was such a test of a person's ideological and moral strength. This is what the images of Sotnikov and Rybak tell us.
2. Listening and discussion of students' reports.
Report on Sotnikov - "Private nationwide feat" (V. Bykov).
Report on Rybak - "The insidious fate of a man who got lost in the war" V. Bykov).
CONCLUSION: In criticism, there was a concept - "Bykov's hero". This is “an ordinary nationwide feat”, as the author himself defines it. Such in the story is Sotnikov.
3. Conversation on questions.
Why, under the same circumstances, did Sotnikov rise to a feat, while Rybak died morally?
(details-symbols, internal monologues, childhood episodes).
What are the person and circumstances in their interaction in the works of V. Bykov?
Teacher's word.
Today we turn to the heroes of V. Bykov with the question “How to live?” We want to hear the answer from them who saw IT. We peer into their faces, obscured by time, and say: "We would like to be with you." Because they knew what they were doing. And they had nothing to choose from. When THIS began, they went to meet HIM and did what they could. Now we think we would do the same. And sometimes it seems to us that it was easier for them, because they had no choice. Selfishly envious of them, we forget that only those who have not been THERE can envy.
THERE, IN THE WAR...
4. Written work.
Compilation of abstracts reflecting the features of V. Bykov's stories about the war.
The main theme of the stories is war.
The main problem of creativity is moral and philosophical: a person in inhuman circumstances, overcoming limited physical abilities with the strength of the spirit.
In criticism, there was a concept - "Bykov's hero". This is “an ordinary nationwide feat”, as the author himself defines it.
The situation in which the writer's characters find themselves and act is extreme, alternative, tragic.
The action is usually concentrated on a small area of space and is closed in a short time span, most often it is one day.
The language of the work is characterized by deep imagery and philosophy.
Of the artistic techniques, the most frequently used by the author are symbolic details (a road, a field, an empty noose on the gallows), internal monologues of characters, episodes of childhood ...
5. The result of the lesson.
Public lesson
literature:
MOU "Novo-Nikolaev secondary school"
V. BYKOV "SOTNIKOV".
QUESTIONNAIRE QUESTIONS:
What are your impressions of the characters in V. Bykov's novel "Sotnikov"?
Why, under the same circumstances, did Sotnikov rise to a feat, while Rybak died morally?
Is Rybak's moral revival possible?
What questions would you like to discuss?
Questions for the interview.
Did they expect just such an ending, could they foresee that this is how the fate of the heroes would end?
Is Rybak's moral revival possible? Is it fair to blame Rybak for the fact that, contrary to “The last hope for a miracle did not leave him with a nagging sense of misfortune.”
Why, under the same circumstances, did Sotnikov rise to a feat, while Rybak died morally?
What artistic techniques are most often used by the author in the work?
Is the problem of the story relevant?
PROBLEM: a person in inhuman circumstances, overcoming limited physical abilities with the strength of the spirit.
What are the person and circumstances in their interaction in the works of V. Bykov?
What are the writer's ideas about heroism and heroic personality?
How is the question of the continuity of generations raised in the works of V. Bykov "Obelisk" and "Sotnikov"?
What moral problems does V. Bykov solve by addressing the theme of the Great Patriotic War?
The theme of the Great Patriotic War became for many years one of the main topics in the literature of the 20th century. There are many reasons for this. This is the enduring awareness of those irreplaceable losses that the war brought, this is the sharpness of moral conflicts, which are possible only in an extreme situation (and the events of the war are exactly like that!). In addition, any truthful word about modernity was banished from Soviet literature for a long time, and the theme of war sometimes remained the only island of authenticity in a stream of far-fetched, false prose, where all conflicts, according to the instructions "from above", should have been reflect only the struggle of the good with the best. But the truth about the war did not come through easily, something prevented it from being told to the end.
“War is a state contrary to human nature,” wrote Leo Tolstoy, and we, of course, agree with this statement, because war brings pain, fear, blood, tears. War is a test for man.
The problem of the moral choice of a hero in war is characteristic of the entire work of V. Bykov. It is set in almost all of his stories: "Alpine Ballad", "Obe-lisk", "Sotnikov", "Sign of Trouble", etc. In Bykov's story "Sotnikov", attention is emphasized to the essence of true and imaginary heroism, which is collision of the work.
In the story, not representatives of two different worlds collide, but people of one country. The heroes of the story - Sotnikov and Rybak - in ordinary, peaceful conditions, perhaps, would not have shown their true nature. But during the war, Sotnikov goes through difficult trials with honor and accepts death without renouncing his beliefs, and Rybak, in the face of death, changes his beliefs, betrays his homeland, saving his life, which after betrayal loses all value. He actually becomes an enemy. He enters a world alien to us, where personal well-being is placed above all else, where fear for his life makes him kill and betray. In the face of death, a person remains as he really is. Here the depth of his convictions, his civic fortitude are tested.
Going on a mission, they react differently to the impending danger, and it seems that the strong and quick-witted Ry-bak is more prepared for the feat than the frail, sick Sotnikov. But if Rybak, who all his life "managed to find some way out," is inwardly ready for betrayal, then Sotnikov remains true to the duty of a person and citizen to the last breath. “Well, it was necessary to gather the last strength in oneself in order to face death with dignity ... Otherwise, why then life? It is too difficult for a person to be carefree towards its end.
In Bykov's story, each character took his place among the victims. Everyone, except Rybak, went their way to the end. The fisherman took the path of betrayal only in the name of saving his own life. Rybak's passionate desire to live in any way was felt by the traitor investigator and, almost without hesitation, stunned Rybak point-blank: “Let's save life. You will serve great Germany.” The fisherman has not yet agreed to go to the police, but he has already been delivered from torture. The fisherman didn't want to die, and you chatted something to the investigator. Sotnikov lost consciousness during the torture, but did not say anything. The policemen in the story are depicted as stupid and cruel, the investigator as cunning and just as cruel.
Sotnikov reconciled with death, he would like to die in battle, although he understood that in his situation this was impossible. The only thing left for him was to decide on his attitude towards the people who happened to be nearby. Before the execution, Sotnikov demanded an investigator and said: "I am a partisan, the rest have nothing to do with it." The investigator ordered Rybak to be brought in, and he agreed to join the police. The fisherman tried to convince himself that he was not a traitor and was determined to escape.
In the last moments of his life, Sotnikov suddenly lost his confidence in the right to demand from others the same thing that he demands from himself. The fisherman became for him not a bastard, but simply a foreman who, as a citizen and a person, did not get something. Sotnikov did not seek sympathy from the crowd that surrounded the place of execution. He did not want to be thought badly of him, and was angry only at Rybak, who was performing the duties of the executioner. The fisherman apologizes: "I'm sorry, brother." - "Go to hell!" - follows the answer.
What happened to Rybak? He did not overcome the fate of a man who got lost in the war. He sincerely wanted to hang himself. But circumstances interfered, and there was a chance to survive. But how to survive? The police chief believed he had "picked up another traitor." It is unlikely that the chief of police understood what was going on in the soul of this man, confused, but shocked by the example of Sotnikov, who was crystal honest and fulfilled the duty of a man and a citizen to the end. The chief saw the future of Rybak in serving the invaders. But the writer left him the possibility of another path: the continuation of the struggle in the ravine, the possible recognition of his fall to his comrades and, ultimately, the atonement of guilt.
The work is imbued with thoughts about life and death, about human duty and humanism, which are incompatible with any manifestation of selfishness. An in-depth psychological analysis of every action and gesture of the characters, a fleeting thought or remark is one of the strongest sides of the story "The Centuries".
The Pope of Rome presented the writer V. Bykov with a special prize of the Catholic Church for the story "The Centurions". This fact indicates what a universal, moral principle is seen in this work. The enormous moral strength of Sotnikov lies in the fact that he was able to accept suffering for his people, to maintain faith, not to succumb to that vile thought that Rybak could not resist.
1941, the year of military trials, was preceded by the terrible year 1929 of the "great turning point", when the liquidation of the "kulaks as a class" did not notice how all the best in the peasantry was destroyed. And so came 1937. One of the first attempts to tell the truth about the war was Vasil Bykov's story "The Sign of Trouble". This story became a milestone in the work of the Belarusian writer. It was preceded by the already classic Obelisk, the same Sotnikov, Survive Until Dawn, etc. After The Sign of Trouble, the writer’s work takes on a new breath, delves into historicism. This applies primarily to such works as "In the Fog", "Raid".
In the center of the story "The Sign of Trouble" is a man at war. A person does not always go to war, she herself sometimes comes to his house, as happened with two Belarusian old men, peasants Stepanida and Petrak Bogatko. The farm where they live is occupied. The policemen come to the estate, followed by the Germans. V. Bykov does not show them intentionally atrocious. It’s just that they come to someone else’s house and settle down there, like hosts, following the idea of their Fuhrer that anyone who is not an Aryan is not a person, one can cause complete ruin in his house, and perceive the inhabitants of the house as draft animals. And therefore, Stepanida's refusal to obey unquestioningly was unexpected for them. Not allowing yourself to be humiliated is the source of this middle-aged woman's resistance in a dramatic situation. Stepanida is a strong character. Human dignity is the main thing that drives her actions. “During her difficult life, she nevertheless learned the truth and, bit by bit, gained her human dignity. And the one who once felt like a man will never become cattle, ”V. Bykov writes about his heroine. At the same time, the writer does not simply draw this character for us, he reflects on its origins.
It is necessary to think about the meaning of the title of the story - “The Sign of Trouble”. This is a quote from a poem by A. Tvardovsky, written in 1945: “Before the war, as if as a sign of trouble ...” What was happening even before the war in the countryside became that “sign of trouble” that V. Bykov. Stepanida Bogatko, who “for six years, not sparing herself, toiled as laborers,” believed in a new life, one of the first to enroll in the collective farm - it was not without reason that she was called a rural activist. But soon she realized that there was no truth that she was looking for and waiting for in this new life. When they began to demand new dispossession of kulaks in order to avert suspicions of pandering to the class enemy, it was she, Stepanida, who threw angry words at an unfamiliar man in a black leather jacket: “Don’t you need justice? You smart people, don't you see what's going on?" More than once Stepanida tries to intervene in the course of the case, intercede for Levon, who was arrested on a false denunciation, send Petrok to Minsk with a petition to the CEC chairman himself. And every time her resistance to untruth stumbles upon a blank wall.
Unable to change the situation alone, Stepanida finds an opportunity to save herself, her inner sense of justice, to move away from what is happening around: “Do what you want. But without me." The source of Stepanida's character is not that she was a collective farmer-activist in the pre-war years, but that she managed not to succumb to the general rapture of deceit, words about a new life, fear * managed to listen to herself, follow her innate sense of truth and preserve the human element in oneself. And during the war years, all this determined her behavior.
At the end of the story, Stepanida dies, but dies, not resigned to fate, resisting her to the last. One of the critics remarked ironically that "there was great damage inflicted by Stepanida on the enemy's army." Yes, the visible material damage is not great. But something else is infinitely important: Stepanida, by her death, proves that she is a person, and not a working animal that can be subdued, humiliated, forced to obey. In resistance to violence, that strength of character of the heroine is manifested, which refutes even death, shows the reader how much a person can, even if he is alone, even if he is in a hopeless situation.
Next to Stepanida, Petrok is the exact opposite of her; in any case, he is completely different, not active, but rather timid and peaceful, ready to compromise. Petrok's endless patience is based on a deep conviction that it is possible to negotiate kindly with people. And only at the end of the story this peaceful man, having exhausted all his patience, decides to protest, openly fight back. Violence prompted him to disobedience. Such depths of the soul are revealed by an unusual, extreme situation in this person.
The folk tragedy, shown in the stories of V. Bykov "The Sign of Trouble" and "Sotnikov", reveals the origins of genuine human characters. The writer continues to create to this day, bit by bit extracting from the treasury of his memory the truth that cannot be left unsaid.
Loshkarev Dmitry
For 72 years the country has been illuminated by the light of the victory of the Great Patriotic War. She came at a heavy price. For 1418 days our homeland walked along the paths of the hardest of wars in order to save all of humanity from fascism.
We have not seen the war, but we know about it. We must remember at what price happiness was won.
Few remained of those who went through these terrible torments, but the memory of them is always alive.
Download:
Preview:
War - there is no crueler word
I still don't quite understand
How am I, and thin, and small,
Through the fires to May's victory
Came in kirzachs of one hundred pounds.
Many years have passed since the first day of the Great Patriotic War. There is not a single family, probably, which the war would not touch. No one will ever be able to forget this day, because the memory of the war has become a moral memory, again returning to the heroism and courage of the Russian people. War - how much this word says. War is the suffering of mothers, hundreds of dead soldiers, hundreds of orphans and families without fathers, terrible memories of people. Children who survived the war recall the atrocities of punishers, fear, concentration camps, an orphanage, hunger, loneliness, life in a partisan detachment.
War does not have a feminine face, much less a childish one. There is nothing more incompatible in the world than this - war and children.
The whole country is getting ready to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the Victory. Many books have been written about that unforgettable disaster, a large number of films have been staged. But the most vivid and truthful in my memory for the rest of my life will be the stories about the war of my great-grandmother Kirilicheva Valentina Viktorovna, unfortunately, she is no longer alive.
Her mother worked day and night in the field on a horse instead of men,growing bread for the army, not having the right to eat it herself. Each spike counted.They lived in poverty. There was nothing. In autumn the collective farm will dig up the potatoes, and in the spring people go to dig up the field and pick up the rotten potatoes to eat. In the spring, they collected last year's spikelets of rye, collected acorns, quinoa. Acorns were threshed at the mill. Bread and cakes were baked from quinoa and ground acorns. It's hard to remember!
During the war, my great-grandmother was 16 years old. She and her friend worked as a nurse in a hospital. How many bloody bandages and sheets were washed. From morning to evening they worked tirelessly, and in their free time they helped the nurses to care for the sick. There was one thing in their thoughts: when will it all end, and they believed in victory, believed in better times.
All people at that time lived by faith, faith in victory. She, who survived the war at a young age, knew the price of a piece of bread. I'm proud of her! After her story, I realized that the main dream of all the people who lived on our planet is one: “If only there was no war. World peace!". I would like to bow to all those who fought and died on the fronts of the Great Patriotic War so that peaceful life continues, so that children sleep peacefully, so that people rejoice, love, be happy.
War takes the lives of millions, billions of people, changes their destinies, deprives them of hope for the future and even the meaning of life. Unfortunately, many modern people laugh at this concept, not realizing what horrors any war brings.
The Great Patriotic War… What do I know about this terrible war? I know it was very long and hard. That many people died. More than 20 million! Our soldiers were brave and very often acted like true heroes.
Those who did not fight also did everything for the Victory. After all, those who fought needed weapons and ammunition, clothing, food, medicine. All this was done by women, old people and even children who remained in the rear.
Why should we remember the war? Then, that the exploits of each of these people should live in our souls forever. We must know and remember, respect, appreciate, cherish the memory of those who, without hesitation, gave their lives for our lives, for our future! What a pity that not everyone understands this. They don't appreciate the life given by veterans, they don't appreciate war veterans themselves.
And we must remember this war, do not forget the veterans and be proud of the exploits of our ancestors.
