The poem "To whom it is good to live in Rus'": idea, plot, composition. Overview of the content of the poem. Historical information about the peasant reform of 1861
On February 19, 1861, Alexander II issued a Manifesto and Regulations that abolished serfdom. What did the men get from the gentlemen?
The peasants were promised personal freedom and the right to dispose of their property. The land was recognized as the property of the landowners. The landowners were charged with the obligation to provide the peasants with a personal plot and a field allotment.
The peasants had to buy land from the landowner. The transition to the redemption of the land allotment depended not on the desire of the peasants, but on the will of the landowner. Peasants who switched to the redemption of land plots with his permission were called owners, and those who did not switch to redemption were called temporarily liable. For the right to use the allotment of land received from the landowner before switching to redemption, they had to perform mandatory duties (pay dues or work off corvée).
The establishment of temporary relations preserves the feudal system of exploitation indefinitely. The value of the allotment was determined not by the actual market value of the land, but by the income received by the landowner from the estate under serfdom. When buying land, the peasants paid for it twice and three times higher than the actual value. The redemption operation made it possible for the landlords to retain in full the income that they received before the reform.
The beggarly allotment could not feed the peasant, and he had to go to the same landowner with a request to take on share-cropping: to cultivate the master's land with his tools and receive half of the harvest for labor. This mass enslavement of the peasants ended with the mass destruction of the old village. In no other country in the world did the peasantry experience such ruin, such poverty, as in Russia, even after the "liberation". That is why the first reaction to the Manifesto and the Regulations was the open resistance of the bulk of the peasantry, expressed in the refusal to accept these documents.
The poem "To whom it is good to live in Rus'" is Nekrasov's pinnacle work.
Nekrasov, following Pushkin and Gogol, decided to depict a wide canvas of the life of the Russian people and its bulk - the Russian peasant of the post-reform era, to show the predatory nature of the peasant reform and the deterioration of the people's lot. An important image of the poem is the image of the road, which brings the author's position closer to the motives of the biblical way of the cross, with the traditions of Gogol and Russian folklore. At the same time, the author's task also included a satirical depiction of the "tops", where the poet follows Gogol's traditions. But the main thing is to show the talent, will, stamina and optimism of the Russian peasant. By its style features and poetic intonations, the poem is close to the works of folklore. The composition of the poem is complicated primarily because its idea changed over time, the work remained unfinished, and a number of fragments were not published due to censorship bans.
1. The idea of the poem."The people are liberated, but are the people happy?" - this line from the "Elegy" explains Nekrasov's position in relation to the peasant reform of 1861, which only formally deprived the landlords of their former power, but in fact deceived, robbed peasant Rus'.
2. The history of the creation of the poem. The poem was begun shortly after the peasant reform. The poet worked on the poem from 1863 to 1877, that is, about 14 years. Nekrasov considered its goal to be the image of the destitute peasant lower classes, among which - as in all of Russia - there is no happy one. The search for a happy among the tops of society was for Nekrasov only a compositional device. The happiness of the “strong” and “well-fed” was beyond doubt for him. The very word "lucky", according to Nekrasov, is a synonym for a representative of the privileged classes. Depicting the ruling classes (priest, landowner), Nekrasov first of all focuses on the fact that the reform hit not so much "one end on the master" as "the other end on the peasant."
3. The composition of the poem. During the work on the poem, its idea changed, but the poem was never completed by the author, so there is no consensus in criticism about its composition, there is no exact location of its chapters.
The poet calls the wanderers "temporarily obliged", which shows that the poem began no later than 1863, since later this term was very rarely applied to the peasants.
Under the chapter "Landlord" there is a date set by the author - 1865, which indicates that before that the poet had worked on its first part.
Dates of writing other chapters: "Last Child" - 1872; "Peasant Woman" - 1873; "A Feast for the Whole World" - 1877
Nekrasov wrote "A Feast for the Whole World", already in a state of fatal illness, but he did not consider this part to be the last, intending to continue the poem with the image of wanderers in St. Petersburg.
It was V.V. Gippius who found in the poem itself objective indications of the sequence of parts: “Time is calculated in it“ according to the calendar ”: the action of“ Prologue ”begins in the spring, when the birds make their nests and the cuckoo calls. In the chapter “Pop”, the wanderers say: “But the time is not early, the month of May is coming.” In the chapter “Country Fair” there is a mention: “Only the weather stared at Nikola of spring”; apparently, on the day of Nikola (May 9, according to the old style), the fair itself takes place. “Last Child” also begins with the exact date: “Petrovka. The time is hot. Haymaking in full swing." In A Feast for the Whole World, haymaking is already over: the peasants are going to the market with hay. Finally, in "Peasant Woman" - the harvest. The events described in “A Feast for the Whole World” refer to early autumn (Grigory gathers mushrooms in Chapter IV), and the “Petersburg part” conceived but not implemented by Nekrasov was supposed to take place in winter, when wanderers come to Petersburg to seek access. to the noble boyar, the minister of the sovereign. Presumably, the poem could have ended with Petersburg episodes.
The poet did not have time to make an order about the sequence of parts of the poem. The only thing that is known is that Nekrasov wanted to place part of the “Feast for the Whole World” behind the “Last Child”. So, literary critics came to the conclusion that behind the “Prologue. Part One" should follow the parts "Peasant Woman", "Last Child", "A Feast for the Whole World". All these parts are connected with the theme of the road.
4. Poem genre. According to M. G. Kachurin, “before us epic"- a work of art, which reflects" great historical events, entire eras in the life of the country and people. The objectivity of the image of life is expressed in the fact that the author's voice is merged with the collective consciousness of the nation, the author draws life, evaluating it from the standpoint of the people. Hence the connection of the poem with folklore, with the people's perception of being. Thus, “Who in Rus' should live well” - realistic epic poem.
About the plot. The plot is close to folk tales about the search for a happy person by men-truth-seekers. The beginning of the poem (“In what year - count, in what land - guess ...”) resembles a fairy-tale beginning. Seven men from six villages "agreed", argued ("Who lives happily, freely in Rus'?") And went in search of a truly happy person. Everything that the wanderers saw during their journey through Rus', whom they met, whom they listened to, constitutes the content of the epic poem.
The poem "To whom it is good to live in Rus'" is built on the basis of a strict and harmonious compositional plan. In the prologue of the poem, a broad epic picture emerges in general outline. In it, as in a focus, the figures of epic wanderers are highlighted. Everything private, secondary is eliminated, attention is focused on the original epic event. The circumstances that caused the dispute and the decision of the peasants are not developed.
The very scene of action - Tightened province, Terpigorev district, Empty volost - is higher than one or another private area. Like the names of the six villages, the scene characterizes the entire post-reform Russia. From the first lines of the poem, Nekrasov introduces the reader to the essence of events, puts forward its main theme:
- In what year - count
- In what land - guess
- On the pillar path
- Seven men came together:
- Seven temporarily liable,
- tightened province,
- County Terpigorev,
- empty parish,
- from adjacent villages
- Zaplatova, Dyryavina, Razutova, Znobishina,
- Gorelova, Neelova
- Crop failure too.
- Agreed - and argued:
- Who has fun
- Feel free in Rus'?
The fabulous form of the beginning of the poem is interrupted by an expressive detail that gives the events a local historical character: the participants in the dispute are temporarily liable peasants. Russian peasants became temporarily liable on February 19, 1861. In the epic beginning, the poet found it necessary to use the fairy-tale form. ("In what year - count, in what land - guess").
For guessing, toponymic designations that are quite accurate in meaning, but not attached to a specific, specific area, are reported. The names of the villages Zaplatovo, Dyryavilo, Razugovo, Znobishina, Gorelovo, Neelovo characterize the entire post-reform peasant Russia. In further enumerations, there will be modified names of villages expressing the same side of the matter: instead of Razutov, Znobishino, Nesitovo, Golodukhino will appear. Of course, the replacement did not occur due to an oversight of the author, even less - due to the forgetfulness of the peasants. Obviously, the direct desire of the author is to express in toponymic designations that general, substantial thing that is characteristic of post-reform Russia - the extreme poverty and lack of rights of the peasantry.
ON THE. All his life Nekrasov nurtured the idea of a work that would become a folk book, a book "useful, understandable to the people and truthful", reflecting the most important aspects of his life. For 20 years he accumulated material for this book "word by word", and then worked on the text of the work for 14 years. The poet began work on the grandiose concept of the "people's book" in 1863, and finished it conceived mortally ill in 1877, with a bitter consciousness of incompleteness, incompleteness: "One thing that I deeply regret is -
That he did not finish his poem "To whom it is good to live in Rus'." It "should have included all the experience given to Nikolai Alekseevich by studying the people, all the information about him accumulated ... "at a word" for twenty years," G. I. Uspensky recalled conversations with Nekrasov. The result of this colossal work was this epic poem "Who should live well in Rus'?".
Perhaps none of Nekrasov's contemporaries dared to get so close, to get close to a peasant on the pages of a poetic work. Only he could then not only write about the people, but also "speak with the people", letting the peasants, beggars, artisans with their different perceptions of the world, different languages into his poems. And such poetic audacity cost Nekrasov dearly: it was the source of the deep drama of his poetry. This drama arose not only because it was excruciatingly difficult to extract poetry from such vital prose, which none of the poets had penetrated before Nekrasov, but also because such an approach of the poet to the people's consciousness destroyed many of the illusions that lived his contemporaries.
This is its specific difference from other forms of poetic art. However, the question of "incompleteness" "Who in Rus' to live well?" highly controversial and problematic. First, the confessions of the poet himself are subjectively exaggerated. It is known that a writer always has a feeling of dissatisfaction, and the larger the idea, the sharper it is. Dostoevsky wrote about "The Brothers Karamazov": "... I myself think that even one tenth of it was not possible to express what I wanted." But on this basis, do we dare to consider Dostoevsky's novel a fragment of an unfulfilled plan? The same is true with "Who is it good to live in Rus'?".
Secondly, "Who should live well in Rus'?" was conceived as an epic, that is, a work of art depicting with the maximum degree of completeness an entire era in the life of the people. Since folk life is boundless and inexhaustible in its countless manifestations, the epic in any variety (epic poem, epic novel) is characterized by incompleteness, incompleteness.
The dominant place in this work is occupied by a wide social panorama deployed in it, a truthful depiction of peasant life. Separate plot-independent parts and chapters of the epic are connected by the inner unity of the poem - the image of the life of the people.
But, on the other hand, it is noteworthy that this dispute itself involuntarily confirms the epic nature of "Who is living well in Rus'?" The composition of the work is built according to the laws of the classical epic: it consists of separate, relatively autonomous parts and chapters. Outwardly, these parts are connected by the theme of the road: seven men-truth-seekers wander around Rus', trying to resolve the question that haunts them: who lives well in Rus'? In the "Prologue" a clear outline of the journey seems to be outlined - meetings with a priest, a landowner, a merchant, a minister and a tsar. However, the epic is devoid of a clear and unambiguous purposefulness. Nekrasov does not force the action, he is in no hurry to bring it to an all-permissive result. As an epic artist, he strives for the completeness of recreating life, for revealing the whole variety of folk characters, all the indirectness, all the winding paths, paths and roads of the people.
From the first chapter of the first part begins the study of the people - the main life force of Russia. It was the desire to portray the entire people's Rus' that led the poet to such paintings where a lot of people could be gathered. It appears especially fully in the chapter "Country Fair".
Wanderers came to the square:
A lot of goods
And apparently invisible
To the people! Isn't it fun?
With great skill, Nekrasov conveys the flavor of Russian festivities. There is a feeling of direct participation in this holiday, as if you are walking among a motley crowd and absorbing the atmosphere of universal joy, a holiday. Everything around is moving, making noise, screaming, playing.
"Who is good to live in Rus'?" and in general, and in each of its parts, it resembles a peasant secular gathering, which was the most complete expression of democratic people's self-government. At such a meeting, the inhabitants of one or several villages decided all the issues of joint, worldly life. The meeting had nothing to do with the modern assembly. There was no chairman leading the discussion. Everyone present, at will, entered into a conversation or skirmish, defending his point of view. Instead of voting, the principle of general consent was used. In the course of the discussion, a "worldly sentence" ripened, and the dissatisfied were persuaded or retreated. If there was no general agreement, the meeting was postponed to the next day. In the course of heated debates, a unanimous opinion gradually matured, agreement was sought and found.
Nekrasov offers his own solution to unite the peasantry and the Russian intelligentsia. Only the joint efforts of the revolutionaries and the people can lead the Russian peasantry onto the broad road of freedom and happiness. In the meantime, the Russian people are still only on their way to a "feast for the whole world."
GENRE ORIGINALITY OF THE POEM
This task - to comprehensively explore the life and being of the Russian people, to penetrate into the depths of his soul largely determines the genre originality of the poem. We must agree with L.A. Evstigneeva, which defines Genre "Who should live well in Rus'"- How " epic review, montage of various kinds of events subject to the development of the central thought of the author". “The consistent implementation of the plot scheme outlined in the Prologue,” the researcher writes, “Nekrasov replaces with a sequence of analytical judgments about the people, their present situation, the fate of Russia and the future of the revolutionary movement. An innovative plot is born, later called centrifugal, which brings Nekrasov closer to the literary process of the late 19th - early 20th centuries.
Accurate definitions of the poem - "encyclopedia of folk life" or "epopee of folk life"- suggest not only the ability of the writer to draw a generalized portrait of all classes of Russian society, but also to give a kind of "philosophy of life" of the people, to recreate the national character in the poem. This task, the theme chosen by the author, is subject to the author's orientation towards polyphony. In the poem "To whom it is good to live in Rus'", a significant place is occupied by dialogues of often unnamed, undescribed characters, polylogues, each of which can be developed into a separate narrative. But the extreme brevity of dialogues and polylogues does not prevent us from imagining the nature of the interlocutors or even their fate. The desire to recreate the life and existence of the people determines the multi-hero character of the story: each hero enters the story with his own destiny and with his own intimate history.
A special role in the narrative is played by folklore genres - riddles, proverbs, sayings and - most importantly - songs. It is known how Nekrasov perceives songs: “folk poetry for Nekrasov was not only the keeper of the poetic ideas of the peasantry, but also the result of the life of the masses as a whole, the focus of national artistic thinking, the best expressor of the Russian national character.”
The people in Nekrasov's poem cry out their pain, complain and grieve, open their soul to the reader and try to understand the secrets of their soul and heart.
COMPOSITION OF THE POEM
This issue is also debatable. First of all, because researchers do not have a unanimous opinion in resolving the question: what principle to follow when forming the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'” - whether to take as a basis the time of creation of the parts or the chronology of the peasants' journey. Given the time of writing the parts, they should go in the following sequence: Prologue; First part; "The Last"; "Peasant Woman"; "A feast for the whole world." But such a composition is contradicted by the author's will: according to Nekrasov's notes, "Last Child" and "Feast for the Whole World" are plot-related: the poet attributed both of these chapters to the second part, and "Peasant Woman" to the third part. Thus, the composition should be different: Prologue, Part One, "Last Child", "Feast for the Whole World", "Peasant Woman".
There is another justification for just such a composition - the duration of the parts. The wandering of the peasants was supposed to cover several months, and time in chapters, as shown by V.V. Gippius, "calculated according to the calendar." The action of the Prologue refers to the beginning of spring. “In the chapter “Pop,” the researcher noted, “the wanderers say: “and the time is not early, the month of May is coming.” In the chapter “Village Fair” there is a mention: “Only the weather stared at Nikola of spring”; apparently, on the day of Nikola (May 9) the fair itself takes place. "Last Child" also begins with the exact date: "Petrovka. The time is hot. Haymaking in full swing." This means that the time of the chapter is June 29 (old style). In A Feast for the Whole World, haymaking is already over: the peasants are going to the market with hay. Finally, in the "Peasant Woman" - harvest and, as shown by K.I. Chukovsky, in draft versions there is even the name of the month - August.
However, not all researchers agree with this composition. The main objection: such an arrangement of parts distorts the pathos of the poem. As he wrote in the comments to the poem K.I. Chukovsky, “demanding that we finish the poem “Peasant Woman”, V.V. Gippius, first of all, ignores the fact that in "The Peasant Woman" (in its last chapter) sounded, contrary to the entire content of the poem, "notes of liberal servility"<...>. This chapter is called "The Governor". After all the curses on the hated system that caused so much suffering to the enslaved peasant woman, in this chapter appears a noble aristocrat, the wife of the governor, who saves the peasant woman from all her torments.<...>The whole poem “Who lives well in Rus'” will be completed with a hymn to the benevolent lady<...>. And then to Nekrasov’s question: “Where are you, the secret of the people’s contentment?” - there will be only one answer: in the lordly caress, in the lordly philanthropy. K.I. Chukovsky proposed another version of the composition: the Prologue and the first movement; "Peasant Woman"; "Last Child" and "A Feast for the Whole World." This composition is adopted in most publications, although both the author's will and the temporary calendar, which underlies the parts, are violated.
Objecting to Chukovsky, the researchers point out that the “Peasant Woman” ends not with the anthem of the “governor”, but with the bitter “Woman's Parable” - a kind of conclusion in reflections on the inevitability of tragedy in the fate of a woman. In addition, ideological arguments, of course, should not determine the composition. Guided, first of all, by the time of creation of the parts, the author's will and the logic of the development of the author's thought, some researchers propose to print the chapter "Peasant Woman" after "Last Child", but to complete the poem "Feast for the whole world", indicating that "Feast" "directly connected with the chapter "Last Child" and is its continuation".
The poem “To whom it is good to live in Rus'” is the pinnacle of N. A. Nekrasov’s work. He himself called her "his favorite brainchild." Nekrasov devoted many years of tireless work to his poem, putting into it all the information about the Russian people, accumulated, as the poet said, “by word of mouth” for twenty years. Not a single work of Russian literature has shown itself with such force and
Ravda characters, habits, views, hopes of the Russian people, as in this poem.
The plot of the poem is very close to the folk tale about the search for happiness and truth. The poem opens with the "Prologue" - the chapter richest in folklore elements. It is in it that the main problem of the poem is constant: "who lives happily, freely in Rus'." The heroes of the poem are seven (one of the traditional significant numbers) peasants go to the “Unwhacked province, Ungutted volost, Izbytkov village”. The seven men who argued in the Prologue are endowed with the best qualities of a national character: pain for their people, disinterestedness, a burning interest in the main issues of life. They are interested in the basic question, what is truth and what is happiness.
The description of what the truth-seekers saw during their wanderings in Rus', the stories about themselves of the imaginary “happy ones”, to whom the peasants turned, constitute the main content of the poem.
The composition of the work is built according to the laws of the classical epic: it consists of separate parts and chapters. Outwardly, these parts are connected by the theme of the road: seven men-truth-seekers wander around Rus', trying to resolve the question that haunts them: who lives well in Rus'? And here one of the most important motives of Russian folklore sounds - the motive of wandering. Even the heroes of Russian fairy tales went to look for common happiness, to find out if it exists at all - peasant happiness. The very nature of the poem is also combined with the Russian fairy tale. The journey of the Nekrasov peasants is, in fact, a spiritual journey.
The first chapter "Pop" opens with the image of a "wide path". This is one of the important poetic symbols of Russian literature, which embodies the idea of movement, striving forward. This is an image of not only the life, but also the spiritual path of a person.
The meeting with the priest in the first chapter of the first part of the poem shows that the peasants do not have their own, peasant understanding of happiness. Men still do not understand that the question of who is happier - a priest, a landowner, a merchant or a king - reveals the limitations of their ideas about happiness. These representations are reduced only to material interest. It is no coincidence that the priest proclaims the formula of happiness, while the peasants passively agree. "Peace, wealth, honor" - this is the formula for the happiness of the priest. But his story makes the men think about a lot. The life of a priest reveals the life of Russia in its past and present, in its various estates. Like the laity, among the priests only the higher clergy live well. But the clergy cannot be happy when the people, their breadwinner, are unhappy. All this testifies to a deep crisis that has engulfed the entire country.
In the next chapter, "Country Fair", the protagonist is the crowd, wide and varied. Nekrasov creates pictures in which the people themselves spoke, spoke about themselves, revealing the best and most unattractive features of their lives.
creates pictures in which the people themselves spoke, spoke about themselves, revealing the best and most unattractive features of their lives. But in everything: both in beauty and in ugliness - the people are not pitiful and not petty, but large, significant, generous and
In the next chapter, "Drunken Night," the celebratory feast reaches its climax. From the depths of the people's world emerges a strong peasant character, Yakim Nagoi. It appears as a symbol of working peasant life: "At the eyes, at the mouth from a torch, like cracks in the dried earth." Nekrasov for the first time in Russian literature creates a realistic portrait of a working peasant. Defending the feeling of peasant pride with labor, Yakim sees social injustice towards the people.
You work alone
And a little work is over,
Look, there are three equity holders:
God, king and lord!
In the image of Yakim, the author shows the emergence of spiritual inquiries among the peasants. "Spiritual bread is higher than earthly bread."
In the chapter "Happy" the entire peasant kingdom is involved in a dialogue, in a dispute about happiness. In their miserable life, even a tiny bit of luck already seems like happiness. But at the end of the chapter, a story about a happy person sounds. This story about Yermil Girin advances the action of the epic, marks a higher level of the people's idea of happiness. Like Yakim, Yermil is endowed with a keen sense of Christian conscience and honor. It would be given, he has "everything that is necessary for happiness: peace of mind, and money, and honor." But at a critical moment in his life, Yermil sacrifices this happiness for the sake of the truth of the people and ends up in prison.
In the fifth chapter of the first part, "The Landowner", the wanderers treat the masters with obvious irony. They already understand that noble “honor” is worth little. The wanderers spoke to the master as boldly and uninhibitedly as Yakim Nagoi. The landowner Obolt-Obolduev is most amazed by the fact that the former serfs shouldered the burden of the historical question “Who should live well in Rus'?”. As in the case with the priest, the story of the landowner and about the landowner is not just a denunciation. It is also about a general catastrophic, gripping crisis. Therefore, in the subsequent parts of the poem, Nekrasov leaves the outlined plot scheme and artistically explores the life and poetry of the people.
In the chapter “Peasant Woman”, Matryona Timofeevna appears before the wanderers, embodying the best qualities of the Russian female character. Harsh conditions honed a special female character - independent, accustomed to relying on her own strength everywhere and in everything.
The theme of spiritual slavery is central in the chapter "Last Child". A terrible "comedy" is played by the characters of this chapter. For the sake of the half-mad Prince Utyatin, they agreed to pretend that serfdom had not been abolished. This proves that no reform makes yesterday's slaves free, spiritually complete people.
The chapter "A Feast for the Whole World" is a continuation of "Last Child". It depicts a fundamentally different state of the world. This is people's Rus', already awakened and at once speaking. New heroes are being drawn into the festive feast of spiritual awakening. All the people sing songs of liberation, judge the past, evaluate the present, begin to think about the future.
liberation, judges the past, evaluates the present, begins to think about the future. Sometimes these songs contrast with each other. For example, the story "About an exemplary serf - Jacob the faithful" and the legend "About two great sinners." Yakov takes revenge on the master for all the bullying in a servile way, committing suicide in front of him. The robber Kudeyar atones for his sins, murders and violence not by humility, but by the murder of the villain - Pan Glukhovsky. Thus, the morality of the people justifies righteous anger against the oppressors and even violence against them.
According to the original plan, the peasants had to make sure that it was impossible to find a happy person in Rus'. But he appeared in life - "a new hero of a new era", a raznochinets democrat. The author introduces a new face into the poem - the people's protector Grisha Dobrosklonov, who sees his happiness in serving the people. Despite the fact that Grisha’s personal fate was difficult (“Fate prepared a glorious path for him, the name of the loud protector of the people, consumption and Siberia”), he believes in a bright future for the people as a result of the struggle. And, as if in response to the growth of the people's consciousness, the songs of Grisha begin to sound, knowing that the happiness of the people can be achieved only as a result of the nationwide struggle for the "Unwhacked province, Ungutted volost, Izbytkovo village."
The poem, conceived about the people and for the people, becomes a denunciatory act against the landlords.
