One of the innovative and interesting themes in the literature of the 60s was the theme of camps and Stalinist repressions.

One of the first works written on this topic was "Kolyma stories" by V. Shalamov. V. Shalamov is a writer of a difficult creative destiny and his work is far from English fairy tales. He himself went through the camp dungeons. He began his career as a poet, and in the late 50s-60s he turned to prose. In his stories, with a sufficient degree of frankness, camp life is conveyed, with which the writer was familiar firsthand. In his stories, he was able to give vivid sketches of those years, to show images not only of prisoners, but also of their guards, the heads of the camps where he had to sit. In these stories, terrible camp situations are recreated - hunger, dystrophy, humiliation of people by brutal criminals. The Kolyma Tales explores collisions in which the prisoner "swims" to prostration, to the threshold of non-existence.

But the main thing in his stories is not only the transmission of an atmosphere of horror and fear, but also the image of people who at that time managed to preserve the best human qualities in themselves, their willingness to help, the feeling that you are not only a cog in a huge machine of suppression, and above all a man in whose soul lives hope.

The representative of the memoir direction of "camp prose" was A. Zhigulin. Zhigulin's story "Black Stones" is a complex, ambiguous work. This is a documentary and artistic narrative about the activities of the KPM (Communist Youth Party), which included thirty boys who, in a romantic impulse, united for a conscious struggle against the deification of Stalin.

It is built as the author's memories of his youth. Therefore, unlike the works of other authors, there is a lot of so-called "smart romance" in it. But at the same time, Zhigulin was able to accurately convey the feeling of that era. With documentary authenticity, the writer writes about how the organization was born, how the investigation was carried out. The writer very clearly described the conduct of the interrogations: “The investigation was generally conducted vilely ... The records in the protocols of interrogations were also vilely conducted. It was supposed to be written down word for word - how the accused answers. But the investigators invariably gave our answers a completely different color. For example, if I said: “Communist Party of Youth,” the investigator wrote down: “Anti-Soviet organization of the KPM.” If I said: "assembly," the investigator wrote "assembly." Zhigulin, as it were, warns that the main task of the regime was to "penetrate into thought" that had not even been born yet, to penetrate and strangle it to its cradle. Hence the premature cruelty of a self-adjusting system. For playing the organization, a semi-childish game, but deadly for both sides (which both sides knew about) - ten years of a prison-camp nightmare. This is how the totalitarian system works.

Another striking work on this topic was the story "Faithful Ruslan" by G. Vladimov. This work was written in the footsteps and on behalf of a dog specially trained, trained to lead prisoners under escort, “make a selection” from the same crowd and overtake hundreds of miles away crazy people who risked escaping. A dog is like a dog. A kind, intelligent, loving person more than a person himself loves his relatives and himself, a being destined by the dictates of fate, the conditions of birth and upbringing, the camp civilization that fell to his lot, to carry out the duties of a guard, and, if necessary, an executioner.

In the story, Ruslan has one production concern, for which he lives: this is to maintain order, elementary order, and the prisoners would maintain the established system. But at the same time, the author emphasizes that he is too kind by nature (brave, but not aggressive), smart, reasonable, proud, in the best sense of the word, he is ready for anything for the sake of the owner, even to die.

But the main content of Vladimirov's story is precisely to show: if something happens, and this case presented itself and coincides with our era, all the best opportunities and abilities not only of a dog, but of a person. The most sacred intentions are shifted, without knowing it, from good to evil, from truth to deceit, from devotion to a person to the ability to wrap a person, take a hand, a leg, take a throat, risking, if necessary, his own head, and turn stupid bunch named "people", "people" into the harmonic stage of the prisoners - into the ranks.

The undoubted classics of "camp prose" is A. Solzhenitsyn. His works on this topic appeared at the end of the thaw, the first of which was the story "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich". Initially, the story was even called in the camp language: "Sch-854. (One day of a prisoner)". In a small "time-space" of the story, many human destinies are combined. These are, first of all, the captain Ivan Denisovich and the film director Tsezar Markovich. Time (one day) seems to flow into the space of the camp, in which the writer focused all the problems of his time, the whole essence of the camp system. He also devoted his novels “In the First Circle”, “Cancer Ward” and a large documentary and artistic study “The Gulag Archipelago” to the topic of the Gulag, in which he proposed his concept and periodization of the terror that unfolded in the country after the revolution. This book is based not only on the personal impressions of the author, but also on numerous documents and memoirs of the prisoners themselves.

MINISTRY OF GENERAL AND VOCATIONAL EDUCATION OF SVERDLOVSK
AREAS
STATE BUDGET PROFESSIONAL EDUCATIONAL
INSTITUTION OF THE SVERDLOVSK REGION
"SVERDLOVSK REGIONAL MUSICAL AND AESTHETIC PEDAGOGICAL
COLLEGE"

PORTFOLIO (PROJECT FOLDER)

"Camp" prose by A. Solzhenitsyn

"The Gulag Archipelago", the novels "In the First Circle", "The Cancer Ward".

Semester exam Odp.02 Literature

Sapozhnikova Ekaterina Anatolievna

Specialty 44.02.02

"TEACHING IN PRIMARY SCHOOL"

Group number 14,

Supervisor:

teacher of the highest category

Sorokozherdeva Elena Alexandrovna

Introduction………………………………………………………………………….5
Biography of A.I. Solzhenitsyn………………………………………………….6
1. "The Gulag Archipelago"………………………………………………….... 7-9
2. “In the first circle”………………………………………………………..10-12
3. “Cancer Ward”……………………………………………………….13-15 Conclusion…………………………………………………… ……………..…16
List of used literature…………………………………………………………………………………………17

Project passport

Introduction

The work of A. I. Solzhenitsyn is a whole era. His works are documentary evidence of the tragic facts of the Soviet era. He wrote about what many were afraid to write about at that time: about the reality of the totalitarian regime, about what the construction of a “bright future” cost the people and whether it promised to be so bright. In his works A.I. Solzhenitsyn raises important issues that are relevant at all times: the problem of the individual in a totalitarian state, the problem of conscience and morality. The novels In the First Circle, The Cancer Ward, and the prose The Gulag Archipelago were no exception.

The most terrible moment in the life of the writer began at the moment when the doctors told him that he had cancer and that he had less than a month to live. In the proximity of death, in anticipation of his fate, AI Solzhenitsyn saw the possibility of posing the most important, final questions of human existence. First of all, about the meaning of life. The disease does not take into account social status, it is indifferent to ideological beliefs, it is terrible because of its suddenness and the fact that it makes everyone equal before death. But A. I. Solzhenitsyn did not die, despite the advanced malignant tumor, and believed that “the life returned to him since then has an embedded purpose.” After being discharged from the Tashkent Oncological Dispensary in 1955, AI Solzhenitsyn decided to write a story about people on the verge of death, about their last thoughts and actions. The idea was realized only after almost ten years. And so the novel "Cancer Ward" was created.

In the novel "In the First Circle" One of the important themes is the problem of a person's moral choice. This novel has gone through many editions. The work could not be published for a long time due to the specifics of its content. It reflected the whole wrong side of life until 1953. Only during the "thaw" Solzhenitsyn made an attempt to publish the novel, editing it (changed the plot). And only in 1968 did the writer return everything to its place.

The Gulag Archipelago. This book not only describes life in prisons during not the best years for Russia, but it also analyzes the "epoch of the cult of personality." The main meaning or teaching in this work lies in the truth. The writer offers readers the truth about what happened in the Soviet Union during Stalin's rule. The great AI Solzhenitsyn wrote that there are no fictional stories in his creation, everything that is written in his book is true.

Biography of A.I. Solzhenitsyn

Alexander Isaevich Solzhenitsyn (1918-2008) - Russian writer, historian, politician. Born December 11, 1918 in the city of Kislovodsk. Alexander's father died before his son was born. The impoverished family moved to Rostov-on-Don in 1924, where Alexander went to school.

Fascinated by literature, after graduating from school, however, he entered the Physics and Mathematics Faculty of Rostov University. The study of exact sciences did not distract from literary exercises. The year 1941 in the biography of Alexander Isaevich Solzhenitsyn is marked by the end of the university (moreover, with honors). A year before that, he married Reshetkovskaya. In 1939, Alexander entered the Institute of Philosophy, Literature and History of Moscow, but interrupted his studies because of the war.

Solzhenitsyn's biography is thoroughly saturated with interest in the history of his country. With the beginning of the war, despite poor health, he rushed to the front. After a vocation and a year of service, he was sent to the Kostroma Military School, where he received the rank of lieutenant. Alexander Solzhenitsyn since 1943 was the commander of the sound reconnaissance battery. For military services he was awarded two honorary orders, later became a senior lieutenant, then a captain. At that time, many literary works (in particular, diaries) were written in the biography of Alexander Isaevich Solzhenitsyn.

He was critical of Stalin's policies, and in his letters to his friend Vitkevich he condemned the distorted interpretation of Leninism. For this he was arrested, sentenced to 8 years in the camps. During the years of conviction in the biography of Alexander Solzhenitsyn, painstaking work was carried out on the works “Love the Revolution”, “In the First Circle”, “One Day in Ivan Denisovich”, “Tanks Know the Truth”. A year before his release (in 1953), Solzhenitsyn was diagnosed with cancer. After he was sent into exile in South Kazakhstan. In 1956, the writer was released, he settled in the Vladimir region. There he met his ex-wife, who divorced him before his release, and remarried.

Solzhenitsyn's publications, imbued with anger at the party's mistakes, were always criticized profusely. The author had to pay many times for his political position. His works were banned. And because of the novel The Gulag Archipelago, Solzhenitsyn was again arrested and expelled. The difficult fate of the great writer ended on August 3, 2008 as a result of heart failure.

"The Gulag Archipelago"

1967

The Gulag archipelago is a system of camps spread across the country. The "natives" of this archipelago were people who went through arrest and wrong trial. People were arrested mainly at night, and half-dressed, confused, not understanding their guilt, they were thrown into the terrible meat grinder of the camps. The writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn was one of them. Letters that he sent from the front to his friends and relatives led him to accusation of "contra". They often contained covert criticism of Stalin, whom Alexander Solzhenitsyn called "the godfather." Soviet counterintelligence arrested Solzhenitsyn. As a result, he lost the rank of captain, received 8 years of corrective labor without the right to return from exile. It was he who decided to lift the veil over part of the Stalinist punitive system by writing the immortal book The Gulag Archipelago.

The basis of all arrests was the Fifty-Eighth Article, consisting of fourteen points, with terms of imprisonment of 10, 15, 20 and 25 years, and ruined the lives of many law-abiding citizens of the RSFSR. Ten years were given only to children. The purpose of the investigation on the 58th was not to prove guilt, but to break the will of a person. For this, torture was widely used, which was limited only by the imagination of the investigator. The protocols of the investigation were drawn up in such a way that the arrested person involuntarily dragged others along with him. Alexander Solzhenitsyn also went through such an investigation. In order not to harm others, he signed an indictment dooming him to ten years in prison and eternal exile.

The history of the Archipelago began in 1917 with the "Red Terror" declared by Lenin. This event became the "source", from which the camps were filled with "rivers" of innocently convicted. With the coming to power of Stalin, high-profile trials erupted. Behind the high-profile trials, there were many secret cases that replenished the Archipelago. In addition, many “enemies of the people” were arrested, entire nationalities fell into exile, and dispossessed peasants were exiled by villages. The war did not stop these flows, on the contrary, they intensified due to the Russified Germans, spreaders of rumors and people who were in captivity or rear. After the war, they were joined by emigrants and real traitors - Vlasov and Krasnov Cossacks.

The very first "island" of the Archipelago arose in 1923 on the site of the Solovetsky Monastery. Then there were TONs (special purpose prisons). People got to the Archipelago in various ways: in a wagon, on steamboats and on foot. Those arrested were taken to prisons in "funnel" (black vans.). The role of the ports of the Archipelago was played by transfers, temporary camps consisting of tents, dugouts, barracks or open-air plots of land. Solzhenitsyn visited Krasnaya Presnya in 1945. Emigrants, peasants and "small peoples" were transported in red trains. Most often, such echelons stopped at an empty place, in the middle of the steppe or taiga, and the convicts themselves built a camp. Especially important prisoners, mostly scientists, were transported by special escort. So Solzhenitsyn was also transported. He called himself a nuclear physicist, and after Krasnaya Presnya he was transferred to Butyrki.

The forced labor law was passed by Lenin in 1918. Since then, the “natives” of the Gulag have been used as free labor. Corrective labor camps were merged into GUMZak (Main Administration of Places of Confinement), after which the Gulag (Main Administration of Camps) was born. The most terrible places of the Archipelago were ELEPHANTS - Northern Special Purpose Camps.

It became even harder for prisoners after the introduction of five-year plans. The first five-year plan marked the beginning of the "great construction projects". Prisoners built highways, railways and canals with their bare hands, without equipment and money. People worked 12-14 hours a day, deprived of normal food and warm clothes. These constructions claimed thousands of lives. It was impossible to do without escapes, but it was almost impossible to run "into the void", not hoping for help. The population living outside the camps practically did not know what was happening behind the barbed wire. In addition, the capture of those who escaped from the camp paid well.

By 1937, the Archipelago had expanded throughout the country. Camps for the 58th appeared in Siberia, the Far East and Central Asia. Each camp was run by two chiefs: one was in charge of production, the other was in charge of the labor force. The life of the "aboriginal" consisted of hunger, cold and endless work. The main work for the prisoners was logging, which during the war years was called "dry execution". Zeks lived in tents or dugouts where it was impossible to dry wet clothes. These dwellings were often ransacked, and people were suddenly transferred to other jobs. In such conditions, the prisoners very quickly turned into "goal". The camp medical unit practically did not participate in the life of prisoners. So, in the Burepolomsky camp in February, 12 people died every night, and their things again went into action. Women prisoners endured prison more easily than men, and died faster in the camps. The most beautiful were taken by the camp authorities and the "morons", the rest went to general work. If a woman became pregnant, she was sent to a special camp. The mother, who finished breastfeeding, went back to the camp, and the child ended up in an orphanage. In 1946, women's camps were created, and women's logging was abolished. Sat in the camps and "youngsters", children under 12 years old. For them, too, there were separate colonies. Another "character" of the camps was the camp "moron", a man who managed to get an easy job and a warm, well-fed place. Basically, they survived. By 1950, the camps were filled with "enemies of the people" .. The Soviet people did not know anything at all, and the Gulag stood on this. Some prisoners, however, remained loyal to the party and Stalin to the last. It was precisely from such orthodox people that informers or sexots were obtained - the eyes and ears of the Cheka-KGB. They also tried to recruit Solzhenitsyn. He signed the obligation, but did not engage in denunciation. A person who lived to the end of his term rarely got free. Most often he became a "repeater". The prisoners could only run.

Stalin did not stop at the camps. On April 17, 1943, he introduced hard labor and the gallows. Women were also sentenced to hard labor. Basically, traitors became convicts: policemen, "German bedding", but before they were also Soviet people. The difference between the camp and hard labor began to disappear by 1946. In 1948, a kind of fusion of camp and hard labor was created - Special Camps. The whole 58th sat in them. The prisoners were called by numbers and given the hardest work. Solzhenitsyn got a special camp Stepnoy, then - Ekibastuz. Each "native" of the Archipelago after the expiration of the term was waiting for a link. Until 1930, this was a "minus": the liberated could choose a place of residence, with the exception of some cities. After 1930, the exile became a separate type of isolation, and from 1948 it became a layer between the zone and the rest of the world. Every exile could at any moment be back in the camp. Some were immediately given a term in the form of exile - mainly dispossessed peasants and small nations. Solzhenitsyn ended his term in the Kok-Terek region of Kazakhstan. The exile from the 58th began to be removed only after the 20th Congress. Liberation was also difficult to endure. A person changed, became a stranger to his loved ones, and had to hide his past from friends and colleagues.

The history of the Special Camps continued after Stalin's death. In 1954 they merged but did not disappear. After his release, Solzhenitsyn began to receive letters from the modern "natives" of the Archipelago, who convinced him: the Gulag will exist as long as the system that created it exists.

"In the first circle"

1958

On December 24, 1949, at five o'clock in the evening, State Councilor of the Second Rank Innokenty Volodin almost ran down the stairs of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, jumped out into the street, took a taxi, rushed along the central Moscow streets, got off at the Arbat, went into a telephone booth near the Khudozhestvenny cinema and dialed the number of the American embassy. A graduate of the Higher School, a capable young man, the son of a famous father who died in the civil war (his father was one of those who dispersed the Constituent Assembly), the son-in-law of the prosecutor for special cases, Volodin belonged to the highest strata of Soviet society. However, natural decency, multiplied by knowledge and intelligence, did not allow Innocent to fully put up with the order that exists on one sixth of the land.

The trip to the village, to his uncle, who finally opened his eyes, told Innokenty about the violence against common sense and humanity that the state of workers and peasants allowed itself. In a conversation with his uncle, Innokenty also discussed the problem of the atomic bomb: how terrible it would be if the USSR had it. Some time later, Innokenty learned that Soviet intelligence had stolen blueprints for the atomic bomb from American scientists. This is what Volodin tried to inform the American embassy over the phone. How much they believed him and how much his call helped the cause of peace, Innokenty, alas, did not find out.

The call, of course, was recorded by the Soviet secret services and produced the effect of a bombshell. Treason! It is terrible to report to Stalin about high treason. It is dangerous to pronounce the word "telephone" under Stalin. The fact is that back in January last year, Stalin ordered the development of a special telephone connection: especially high-quality so that it could be heard, as if people were talking in the same room, and especially reliable so that it could not be overheard. The work was entrusted to a scientific special facility near Moscow, but the task turned out to be difficult, all the deadlines have passed, and things are barely moving forward. And very inopportunely there was this insidious call to a foreign embassy. Four suspects were arrested near the Sokolniki metro station, but it is clear to everyone that they have nothing to do with it. The circle of suspects in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is small - five to seven people, but they cannot be arrested. You need to recognize the voice of the caller. There is an idea to entrust this task to the same special facility near Moscow.

Marfino's object is the so-called sharashka. A kind of prison in which the color of science and engineering is collected from all the islands of the Gulag to solve important and secret technical and scientific problems. Sharashkas are convenient for everyone. State. Here fame and money do not threaten anyone, half a glass of sour cream for one and half a glass of sour cream for another. All work. sharashka is the best of prisons, the first and softest circle of hell, almost heaven: warm, well fed, no need to work in terrible penal servitude. In addition, men, reliably cut off from families, from the whole world, from any fate-building problems, can indulge in free or relatively free dialogues. The spirit of male friendship and philosophy soars under the sailing vault of the ceiling. Perhaps this is the bliss that all philosophers of antiquity tried in vain to define.

The Germanist philologist Lev Grigorievich Rubin was at the front a major in the "Department for the Decomposition of the Enemy Troops." From the POW camps, he chose those who were willing to return home to cooperate with the Russians. Rubin not only fought against Germany, not only knew Germany, but also loved Germany. After the January offensive of 1945, he allowed himself to doubt the slogan "blood for blood and death for death" and ended up behind bars. Fate brought him to the sharashka. The personal tragedy did not break Rubin's faith in the future triumph of the communist idea and in the genius of Lenin's project. Rubin, even in prison, continued to believe that the red cause wins, and innocent people in prison are only an inevitable side effect of a great historical movement. It was on this topic that Rubin led heavy disputes with his sharashka comrades. And he remained true to himself. In the sharashka, Rubin deals with "sound types", the problem of finding the individual features of speech, captured in a graphic way. It is Rubin who is offered to compare the voices of those suspected of treason with the voice of the person who made the treacherous call. Rubin takes on the task with great enthusiasm. First, he is filled with hatred for a man who wanted to prevent the Motherland from seizing the most advanced weapons. Secondly, these studies can become the beginning of a new science with great prospects.

The problem of such cooperation is solved for themselves by many other prisoners of the sharashka. Illarion Pavlovich Gerasimovich went to jail "for sabotage" in 1930, when all the engineers were imprisoned. In the 1935 he left, his bride Natasha came to him and became his wife. Returning to Leningrad, Illarion became a gravedigger and survived at the expense of other people's deaths. Even before the end of the blockade, he was imprisoned for the intention to betray the Motherland. Now, on one of the dates, Natasha begged him to complete some super-important task, then it would turn out to cut off the deadline. To wait another three years, she was fired from her job as the wife of an enemy, and she no longer has the strength ... After a while, Gerasimovich has a happy opportunity: to make a night camera for door jambs, so that he can shoot everyone who comes in and goes out. Will do: early release. But he answered nevertheless: “Putting people in jail is not my specialty! It's enough that we were imprisoned ... "

Counts on early release and Rubin's friend-enemy in disputes Sologdin. He is developing, secretly from his colleagues, a special model of the encoder, the project of which is almost ready to be put on the table of the authorities. He passes the first examination and receives a "good". The path to freedom is open. But Sologdin is not sure that it is necessary to cooperate with the communist secret services. After another conversation with Rubin, which ended in a major quarrel between friends, he realizes that even the best of the communists cannot be trusted. Sologdin burns his blueprint. Lieutenant Colonel Yakonov, who has already reported his successes to the top, is horrified by indescribable horror. Although Sologdin explains that he realized the fallacy of his ideas, the lieutenant colonel does not believe him. Sologdin, who has already been in prison twice, understands that a third term awaits him. Sologdin concedes and undertakes to do everything in a month.

Gleb Nerzhin, another friend and interlocutor of Rubin and Sologdin, becomes a victim of the intrigues that two competing laboratories lead inside the sharashka. He refuses to move from one lab to another. The work of many years is perishing: a secretly recorded historical and philosophical work. It is impossible to take him to the stage where Nerzhin will now be sent. Love is dying: lately, Nerzhin has been experiencing tender feelings for the free laboratory assistant Simochka, who reciprocates. Simochka has never had a relationship with a man in her life. But Nerzhin unexpectedly gets a date with his wife, whom he had not seen for a very long time. And decides to abandon Simochka.

Rubin's efforts are bearing fruit: the circle of suspects of treason has narrowed to two people. At that moment, realizing that through his efforts an innocent person was going to the hell of the Gulag, Rubin felt terribly tired. He remembered his illnesses, and his term, and the hard fate of the revolution. Innokenty Volodin was arrested a few days before leaving for a business trip abroad - to that same America.

Many characters in the novel are faced with the problem of moral choice. So, Nerzhin, Sologdin, Gerasimovich prefer to return to the camp, but not to betray their convictions. They do not compromise their conscience, although they know that hard work, hunger, and possibly death await them ahead. Particularly interesting is the image of Innokenty Volodin, in fact the central character of the novel. This prosperous young man with a brilliant career as a diplomat risks everything to prevent the transfer of materials needed to build an atomic bomb to Soviet intelligence.

Thus, Solzhenitsyn showed that in any conditions, at all times, a person can remain a person, can fight against a powerful system that destroys a person and wins a moral victory over him.

"Cancer Ward"

1966

In Cancer Ward, Solzhenitsyn depicts the life of an entire state using the example of one hospital ward. The author manages to convey the socio-psychological situation of the era, its originality on such seemingly small material as the image of the life of several cancer patients who, by the will of fate, found themselves in the same hospital building. All heroes are not just different people with different characters; each of them is a bearer of certain types of consciousness generated by the era of totalitarianism. It is also important that all the characters are extremely sincere in expressing their feelings and upholding their beliefs, as they are in the face of death.

Everyone was gathered by this terrible corps - the thirteenth, cancerous. The persecuted and the persecutors, the silent and the vigorous, the hard workers and money-grubbers - he gathered and depersonalized everyone, all of them are now only seriously ill, torn from their usual environment, rejected and rejected everything familiar and dear. They now have no other house, no other life. They come here with pain, with doubt - cancer or not, live or die? However, no one thinks about death, it does not exist.

Oleg Kostoglotov, a former convict, independently came to the denial of the postulates of the official ideology. Shulubin, a Russian intellectual, a participant in the October Revolution, gave in, outwardly accepting public morality, and doomed himself to a quarter of a century of mental torment. Rusanov appears as the "world leader" of the nomenklatura regime. But, always strictly following the line of the party, he often uses the power given to him for personal purposes, confusing them with public interests. The beliefs of these heroes are already fully formed and are repeatedly tested in the course of discussions.

The rest of the heroes are mostly representatives of the passive majority who have accepted official morality, but they are either indifferent to it or defend it not so zealously. The whole work is a kind of dialogue of consciousness, reflecting almost the entire spectrum of life ideas characteristic of the era. The external well-being of the system does not mean that it is devoid of internal contradictions. It is in this dialogue that the author sees the potential for curing the cancer that has affected the entire society.

Born of the same era, the characters of the story make different life choices. True, not all of them realize that the choice has already been made. Efrem Podduev, who lived his life the way he wanted, suddenly understands, turning to Tolstoy's books, all the emptiness of his existence. But this epiphany of the hero is too late. In essence, the problem of choice confronts every person every second, but out of many solutions, only one is right, out of all life's paths, only one is right to the heart. Demka, a teenager at a crossroads in life, realizes the need for a choice. At school, he absorbed the official ideology, but in the ward he felt its ambiguity, having heard the very contradictory, sometimes mutually exclusive statements of his neighbors. The clash of positions of different heroes occurs in endless disputes, affecting both everyday and existential problems.

Kostoglotov is a fighter, he is tireless, he literally pounces on his opponents, expressing everything that has become sore during the years of forced silence. Oleg easily fends off any objections, since his arguments are self-sufficient, and the thoughts of his opponents are most often inspired by the dominant ideology. Oleg does not accept even a timid attempt at compromise on the part of Rusanov.... And Pavel Nikolaevich and his like-minded people are unable to object to Kostoglotov, because they are not ready to defend their convictions themselves. The state has always done this for them.

Rusanov lacks arguments: he is used to realizing his own rightness, relying on the support of the system and personal power, but here everyone is equal in the face of imminent and imminent death and in front of each other. Kostoglotov's advantage in these disputes is also determined by the fact that he speaks from the position of a living person, while Rusanov defends the point of view of a soulless system. Shulubin only occasionally expresses his thoughts, defending the ideas of "moral socialism." It is precisely to the question of the morality of the existing system that all disputes in the chamber ultimately converge. From Shulubin's conversation with Vadim Zatsyrko, a talented young scientist, we learn that, according to Vadim, science is only responsible for the creation of material wealth, and the moral aspect of a scientist should not be a concern. Demka's conversation with Asya reveals the essence of the education system: from childhood, students are taught to think and act “like everyone else”. With the help of schools, the state teaches insincerity, instills in schoolchildren distorted ideas about morality and morality.

In the mouth of Avietta, the daughter of Rusanov, an aspiring poetess, the author puts official ideas about the tasks of literature: literature should embody the image of a “happy tomorrow”, in which all the hopes of today are realized. Talent and writing skill, of course, can not be compared with the ideological requirement. The main thing for the writer is the absence of “ideological dislocations”, so literature becomes a craft that serves the primitive tastes of the masses. The ideology of the system does not imply the creation of moral values, which Shulubin yearns for, betraying his convictions, but not losing faith in them. He understands that a system with a displaced scale of life values ​​is not viable. Rusanov's stubborn self-confidence, Shulubin's deep doubts, Kostoglotov's intransigence - different levels of personality development under totalitarianism. All these life positions are dictated by the conditions of the system, which thus not only forms an iron support for itself from people, but also creates conditions for potential self-destruction.

All three heroes are victims of the system, since it deprived Rusanov of the ability to think independently, forced Shulubin to renounce his beliefs, and took away freedom from Kostoglotov. Any system that oppresses a person disfigures the souls of all its subjects, even those who serve it faithfully. 3. Thus, the fate of a person, according to Solzhenitsyn, depends on the choice that the person himself makes. Totalitarianism exists not only thanks to tyrants, but also thanks to the passive and indifferent to the majority, the “crowd”. Only the choice of true values ​​can lead to victory over this monstrous totalitarian system. And everyone has the opportunity to make such a choice.

Conclusion

Solzhenitsyn is sure that the only effective way to fight evil is moral perfection, spiritual growth, painstaking, diligent forging of the soul, the search for that point of view, which will become more precious than life itself. Thus, in the course of a detailed analysis of the typology of the heroes of the novel, representing various types of Russian national character, we examined the specifics of the formulation and solution by the author and the heroes of the eternal questions of being - the problems of external and internal freedom, the meaning of life and moral choice.

The main theme of A. I. Solzhenitsyn's work is the exposure of the totalitarian system, the proof of the impossibility of the existence of a person in it. But at the same time, it is in such conditions, according to A. I. Solzhenitsyn, that the Russian national character is most clearly manifested. The people retain their fortitude and moral ideals - this is their greatness. The novels raise issuespatriotism, relations between the state and the individual. It should be noted that Solzhenitsyn's heroes combine the ultimate tragedy of being and love of life, just as the writer's work combines tragic motives and hope for a better life, for the strength of the people's spirit.

List of used literature 4. Ranchin A.M. – Analysis of the "Gulag Archipelago" by A.I. Solzhenitsyn

Hard labor prose" by Russian writers of the 19th century is a prototype of "camp prose". P. 19

§ 1 Genre originality of the "convict prose" of the 19th century.S. 24

§ 2 The image of the Dead House in the image

F. M. Dostoevsky, P. F. Yakubovich, A. P. Chekhov.S. 41

§ 3 The problem of nature and human freedom in the "convict prose" of the XIX century.S. 61

§ 4 Motives of loneliness and paradoxes of the human psyche

§ 5 The theme of the executioner and butchery in the "convict prose" of the 19th century.S. 98

The image of the camp as an image of absolute evil in the "camp prose" of the XX century.S. 111

§1 Genre originality and features of manifestation of the author's position in the "camp prose" of the XX century.S. 114

§2 The theme of the House of the Dead in "camp prose"

XX century.S. 128

§3 The problem of moral stability of a person in the camp world.S. 166

§4 The problem of confrontation between "socially close" and the intelligentsia.S. 185

§5 The theme of butchery in the “camp prose” of the 20th century. .WITH. 199

Dissertation Introduction 2003, abstract on philology, Malova, Yulia Valerievna

Nowadays, it becomes obvious that "camp prose" has become firmly established in literature, like rural or military prose. The testimonies of eyewitnesses, miraculously survived, escaped, risen from the dead, continue to amaze the reader with their naked truth. The emergence of this prose is a unique phenomenon in world literature. As Yu. Sokhryakov noted, this prose appeared due to "an intense spiritual desire to comprehend the results of the grandiose genocide that was carried out in the country throughout the entire twentieth century" (125, 175).

Everything that is written about camps, prisons, prisons is a kind of historical and human documents that provide rich food for thought about our historical path, about the nature of our society and, importantly, about the nature of man himself, which is most expressively manifested precisely in emergency circumstances. , what were the terrible years of prisons, prisons, penal servitude, the Gulag for the writers-“camps”.

Prisons, jails, camps - this is not a modern invention. They have existed since the time of Ancient Rome, where exile, deportation, “accompanied by the imposition of chains and imprisonment” (136, 77), as well as life exile, were used as punishment.

In England and France, for example, a very common form of punishment for criminals, with the exception of prisons, was the so-called colonial expulsion: to Australia and America from England, in France - exile to galleys, to Guiana and New Caledonia.

In tsarist Russia, convicts were sent to Siberia, and later to Sakhalin. Based on the data cited in his article by V.

Shaposhnikov, we learned that in 1892 there were 11 hard labor prisons and prisons in Russia, where a total of 5,335 people were kept, of which 369 were women. “These data, I believe,” writes the author of the article, “will cause a sarcastic grin to those who for many years hammered into our heads the thesis about the incredible cruelties of the tsarist autocracy and called pre-revolutionary Russia nothing more than a prison of peoples” (143, 144).

The advanced, enlightened part of Russian society of the 19th century suffered from the fact that in the country, even in the distant Nerchinsk mines, people were kept in custody, shackled, and subjected to corporal punishment. And the first, most active petitioners for mitigating the fate of the convicted were writers who created a whole trend in Russian literature, which was quite powerful and noticeable, since many word artists of the last century made their contribution to it: F. M. Dostoevsky, P. F. Yakubovich, V. G. Korolenko, S. V. Maksimov, A. P. Chekhov, L. N. Tolstoy. This direction can be conditionally called "convict prose".

The founder of the Russian "convict prose", of course, is F. M. Dostoevsky. His "Notes from the House of the Dead" shocked Russia. It was like a living testimony from the "world of outcasts." Dostoevsky himself was rightly annoyed that his work is read as direct evidence of the cruel treatment of prisoners, ignoring its artistic nature and philosophical problems. D. I. Pisarev was the first of the critics who revealed to readers the ideological depth of the work and connected the image of the House of the Dead with various public institutions in Russia.

N. K. Mikhailovsky also gave a high assessment to "Notes from the House of the Dead". While generally negative about Dostoevsky's work, he also made exceptions for The House of the Dead. The fact that he defined "Notes" as a work with a "harmonic" and "proportional" structure requires modern researchers to pay special attention and carefully study it from this point of view.

The modern researcher V. A. Nedzvetsky in the article “The denial of personality: (“Notes from the House of the Dead” as a literary dystopia)” notes that the Omsk prison prison - “The Dead House” - is gradually “transforming” from an institution for especially dangerous criminals. into a miniature of an entire country, even humanity. (102, 15).

N. M. Chirkov in his monograph “On Dostoevsky’s Style: Problems, Ideas, Images” calls “Notes from the House of the Dead” “the true pinnacle of Dostoevsky’s work” (140, 27), a work equal in strength “only to Dante’s “Hell”. And this is indeed “Hell” in its own way,” the researcher continues, “of course, of a different historical era and environment” (140, 27).

G. M. Friedlender in the monograph "Realism of Dostoevsky", dwelling on "Notes from the House of the Dead", notes the "outward calm and epic routine" (138, 99) of the narrative. The scientist notes that Dostoevsky describes with harsh simplicity the dirty, stupefying atmosphere of the prison barracks, the severity of forced labor, the arbitrariness of the administration's representatives, intoxicated with power. G. M. Friedlander also notes that the pages dedicated to the prison hospital are "written with great force." The scene with the sick man, who died in shackles, emphasizes the deadening impression of the atmosphere of the House of the Dead.

In I. T. Mishin’s article “Problematics of F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “Notes from the House of the Dead”, attention is also focused on the “worldlikeness” of penal servitude: Dostoevsky proves with stories of the crimes of convicts that the same laws operate outside the prison walls” (96, 127 ). Step by step, analyzing the work. The researcher concludes that there is no way to establish where there is more arbitrariness: in hard labor or in freedom.

In the study by Yu. G. Kudryavtsev “Three Circles of Dostoevsky: Eventful. Temporary. Eternal” the author dwells in detail on the nature of the crime. The scientist notes that the author of the "notes" finds something human in each prisoner: in one - fortitude, in the other - kindness, gentleness, gullibility, in the third - curiosity. As a result, Yu. G. Kudryavtsev writes, there are people in the prison who are not worse at all than outside the prison. And this is a reproach to justice, because the worst should still be in prisons.

The monographs of T. S. Karlova “Dostoevsky and the Russian Court”, A. Bachinin “Dostoevsky: the metaphysics of crime” are devoted to the same problem of crime and punishment.

The monographs of O. N. Osmolovsky "Dostoevsky and the Russian Psychological Novel" and V. A. Tunimanov "Creativity of Dostoevsky (1854-1862)" are detailed and deep in content and thoughts. O. Osmolovsky quite rightly noted that for Dostoevsky the psychological situation experienced by the hero, its moral meaning and results, was of paramount importance. Dostoevsky depicts the phenomena of human psychology, its exceptional manifestations, feelings and experiences in an extremely pointed form. Dostoevsky portrays the heroes in moments of mental upheaval, extreme psychological manifestations, when their behavior is not subject to reason and reveals the valley foundations from the personality. V. A. Tunimanov, dwelling in detail on the analysis of the psychological state of the executioner and the victim, also draws attention to the critical state of the soul of the executioner and the victim.

In the article of the researcher L.V. Akulova "The theme of penal servitude in the works of Dostoevsky and Chekhov", parallels are drawn between the works of two great writers in the depiction of penal servitude as a real earthly hell. The same problem of human necrosis in the House of the Dead is discussed in the articles by A. F. Zakharkin “Siberia and Sakhalin in the work of Chekhov”, Z. P. Ermakova “Sakhalin Island” in A. Solzhenitsyn’s “GULAG Archipelago”. G. I. Printseva in the dissertation research “Sakhalin works of A. P. Chekhov in the early and mid-90s. (Ideas and Style)” resonates with the above studies that Sakhalin is not a place of correction, but only a haven for moral torture.

G. P. Berdnikov in the monograph “A. P. Chekhov. Ideological and creative searches” gives a detailed analysis of the work, reveals its problems. A.F. Zakharkin also very clearly traces “the justice of the picture of hard labor, exile, settlements, drawn by Chekhov in the essays “Sakhalin Island” (73, 73). The researcher quite rightly considers “the complete absence of fiction in it” to be the originality of the book. Using the disclosure of the character's biography as an artistic device, the author tries to "find out and determine the social causes of crimes" (73, 80-81).

Hard labor prose is distinguished by a variety of genres and features of the manifestation of the author's position. The genre features of hard labor prose and the originality of the manifestation of the author's position in the novel by F. M. Dostoevsky are devoted to the works of V. B. Shklovsky "Pros and Cons: Dostoevsky", E. A. Akelkina "Notes from the House of the Dead: An example of a holistic analysis of a work of art", dissertations M. Gigolova "The evolution of the hero-narrator in the works of F. M. Dostoevsky in the 1845-1865s", N. Zhivolupova "Confessional narration and the problem of the author's position ("Notes from the Underground" by F. M. Dostoevsky)", article B B. Kataeva "The author in the "Sakhalin Island" and in the story" Gusev ".

The influence of Dostoevsky on the literature of the 20th century is one of the main problems of modern literary criticism. The question of the influence of the work of the great Russian writer on the literature of the 19th century, in particular, on the work of P. F. Yakubovich, is also extremely important.

A. I. Bogdanovich gave a high assessment to the novel, noting that the work of Melshin-Yakubovich was written “with amazing force” (39, 60).

The modern researcher V. Shaposhnikov in the article “From the House of the Dead” to the Gulag Archipelago, tracing the evolution from the House of the Dead to the Gulag Archipelago on the example of the works of Dostoevsky, Yakubovich and Solzhenitsyn, noted that the image of the head of the Shelaevsky prison Luchezarov in Yakubovich’s novel is a prototype future Gulag "kings".

A. M. Skabichevsky, reflecting on the attitude of the mass of convicts to the nobles, noted the greater intelligence of the Shelaevsky shpanka than the prisoners of Dostoevsky. The critic explains this by the reforms carried out by the government: the abolition of serfdom, the introduction of universal military service, and the mitigation of the excessive severity of military discipline. This also led to the fact that "involuntarily injured people who stand at a more moral height" (121, 725) are beginning to fall into the composition of convicts less and less. Skabichevsky confirms his thesis with the following facts from the novels: Dostoevsky writes that it was not customary to talk about his crimes in prison. Yakubovich was struck by how much the prisoners loved to boast of their adventures, and describing them in the most detailed way.

The orientation towards "Notes from the House of the Dead" was especially emphasized by P. Yakubovich himself, considering it the unattainable pinnacle of Russian "convict prose". Borrowing a ready-made genre model, which was developed by Dostoevsky, Yakubovich created a work that reflects the real picture of Russian hard labor reality in the 80-90s of the XIX century.

For many years, the topic of hard labor and exile remained the "property" of pre-revolutionary Russia. The appearance in 1964 of A. I. Solzhenitsyn’s story “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich” in the press marked that the curtain hiding the secret area of ​​Soviet reality was beginning to lift. With his story, A. Solzhenitsyn laid the foundation for a new trend in Soviet literature, later called "camp prose."

In our opinion, the term "camp theme" was first put forward by V. T. Shalamov. In his manifesto "On Prose" he writes: "The so-called camp theme is a very large topic, which will accommodate one hundred writers like Solzhenitsyn and five writers like Leo Tolstoy" ("On Prose" -17, 430).

After the publication of testimonies of prisoners of the Stalinist camps on the pages of periodicals, the phrase "camp prose" began to be used in modern literary criticism. For example, there are a number of works in the title of which this term is present: in the article by L. Timofeev, for example, "The Poetics of Camp Prose", in the study by O. V. Volkova "The Evolution of the Camp Theme and Its Influence on Russian Literature of the 50s - 80s ", in the work of Yu. Sokhryakov "Moral lessons of "camp" prose". The term "camp prose" is also widely used in I. V. Nekrasova's dissertation work "Varlam Shalamov - prose writer: (Poetics and problems)". We, for our part, also consider it quite legitimate to use the term "camp prose."

The camp theme is studied by AI Solzhenitsyn at the level of different genres - stories, documentary narrative of a large volume ("artistic research" - by the definition of the writer himself).

V. Frenkel noted the curious, “as it were, stepped structure” (137, 80) of Solzhenitsyn’s camp theme: “One day of Ivan Denisovich” - camp, “In the first circle” - “sharashka”, “Cancer Ward” - exile, hospital, “Matrenin Dvor” is the will, but the will of the former exile, the will in the village, which is not much different from the exile. Solzhenitsyn creates, as it were, several steps between the last circle of hell and "normal" life. And in the "Archipelago" all the same steps are collected, and, in addition, the dimension of history opens up, and Solzhenitsyn leads us along the chain that led to the Gulag. The history of the "streams" of repression, the history of the camps, the history of the "organs". Our history. The sparkling goal - to make all mankind happy - turned into its opposite - into the tragedy of a man thrown into a "dead house".

Undoubtedly, "camp prose" has its own characteristics, inherent in it alone. In his manifesto article "On Prose" V. Shalamov proclaimed the principles of the so-called "new prose": "The writer is not an observer, not a spectator, but a participant in the drama of life, a participant not in a writer's guise, not in a writer's role.

Pluto ascended from hell, not Orpheus descended into hell.

What has been suffered by one's own blood comes out on paper as a document of the soul, transformed and illuminated by the fire of talent" ("On Prose" -17, 429).

According to V. Shalamov, his "Kolyma Tales" is a vivid example of "new prose", the prose of "living life, which at the same time is a transformed reality, a transformed document" ("On Prose" -17, 430). The writer believes that the reader has lost hope of finding answers to "eternal" questions in fiction, and he is looking for answers in memoirs, the credibility of which is unlimited.

The writer also notes that the narration in Kolyma Tales has nothing to do with the essay. Essay pieces are interspersed there "for the greater glory of the document" ("On Prose" -17, 427). In "Kolyma stories" there are no descriptions, conclusions, journalism; the whole point, according to the writer, "is in the depiction of new psychological patterns, in the artistic study of a terrible topic" ("On Prose" -17, 427). V. Shalamov wrote stories indistinguishable from a document, from a memoir. In his opinion, the author must examine his material not only with his mind and heart, but "with every pore of the skin, with every nerve" ("On Prose" -17, 428).

And in a higher sense, any story is always a document - a document about the author, and this property, V. Shalamov notes, makes one see in the "Kolyma Tales" the victory of good, not evil.

Critics, noting the skill, originality of the style and style of the writers, turned to the origins of Russian "convict prose", to Dostoevsky's Notes from the House of the Dead, as A. Vasilevsky does. He called Dostoevsky "the famous convict", and defined his novel as "the book that marked the beginning of all Russian "camp prose" (44, 13).

Quite deep and interesting are the articles on the development of "camp prose" of a comparative nature. For example, in the article by Yu. Sokhryakov "Moral lessons of "camp" prose" a comparative analysis of the works of V. Shalamov, A. Solzhenitsyn, O. Volkov is made. The critic notes that in the works of "camp" writers we constantly meet with "reminiscences from Dostoevsky, references to his Notes from the House of the Dead, which turn out to be the starting point in artistic calculus" (125, 175). Thus, there is a persistent comparative comprehension of our past and present.

V. Frenkel in his study makes a successful comparative analysis of the works of V. Shalamov and A. Solzhenitsyn. The critic notes the originality of V. Shalamov's chronotope - "there is no time in Shalamov's stories" (137, 80), that depth of hell, from which he himself miraculously emerged, is the final death, between this abyss and the world of living people there are no bridges. This, - considers V. Frenkel, - is the highest realism of Shalamov's prose. A. Solzhenitsyn, on the other hand, “does not agree to cancel time” (137, 82), in his works he restores the connection of times, which “is necessary for all of us” (137, 82).

It is impossible not to note the article by V. Shklovsky “The Truth of Varlam Shalamov”. The main attention of the critic is paid to the problem of human morality, reflected in the works of Varlam Shalamov. E. Shklovsky speaks about the moral impact of his prose on readers, dwelling on the contradiction: the reader sees in V. T. Shalamov the bearer of some truth, and the writer himself strenuously denied edification, teaching, inherent in Russian classical literature. The critic examines the peculiarities of V. Shalamov's worldview, world outlook, and analyzes some of his stories.

L. Timofeev in his article “The Poetics of “Camp Prose” dwells to a greater extent on the artistic properties of V. Shalamov's prose. The critic rightly considers death to be the compositional basis of the Kolyma Tales, which, in his opinion, determined their artistic novelty, as well as the features of the chronotope.

Unfortunately, there are few works on O. Volkov's novel "Immersion in Darkness".

Among them, first of all, I would like to note the article by E. Shklovsky "Formula of Confrontation". The critic emphasizes the lyrical softness of the novel, in which there is "neither Shalamov's bitterness. nor the soul-squeezing tragedy of Solzhenitsyn's Archipelago. It contains a subtle, sometimes undisguisedly lyrical acceptance of life - contrary to fate! Forgiveness to her "(148, 198). According to E. Shklovsky, the narration undoubtedly softens the reflection of decency, sincerity, disinterestedness of the people met by O. Volkov where the darkness was ready to close over his head, his own ability to rejoice at small successes sent by Fate, to appreciate them. The critic sees this as the “formula of confrontation” of the patriarch of our modern literature, O. V. Volkov.

Researcher L. Palikovskaya in the article "Self-portrait with a noose around his neck" evaluates the work of O. V. Volkov as an attempt to explain both the fate of his own and the fate of Russia. The author makes observations on the figurative structure of the work. According to the researcher, the word "darkness" in the title is ambiguous: it is the "darkness" of the author's personal fate, the "darkness" of general poverty and lack of rights, mutual distrust and suspicion. But the main thing, “in linguistic terminology, the dominant meaning is “darkness” as opposed to spiritual light” (107, 52). The researcher defines the main idea of ​​the work as follows: the origins of all future troubles are in the oblivion of universal morality, the assertion of the primacy of material values ​​over spiritual ones.

The relevance of the work is due, first of all, to the cardinal changes that took place in the social, political, cultural spheres of Russian reality at the end of the 20th century. Just as in the first years of Soviet power they tried to consign to oblivion the achievements, research, discoveries made in tsarist Russia, so now - especially in the late 80s - early. 90s XX century - it has become fashionable to denounce from the stands and from the pages of newspapers and magazines the discoveries and achievements made during the years of Soviet power. Meanwhile, not everything was so good and prosperous in pre-revolutionary Russia. Jails and prisons have always existed, and staying in them was as hard as at any other time. That is why it seemed possible and interesting for us to compare the works of writers of the 19th and 20th centuries, to find common ground to find out by what artistic means the author conveys to us the change in the psychological state of a person who has found himself on the other side of the barbed wire.

The works on which we chose characterize, in our opinion, entire epochs of our history: 40-50s. XIX century (pre-reform period). This period is represented in our study by F. M. Dostoevsky's novel Notes from the House of the Dead. The works of P. F. Yakubovich “In the world of outcasts. Notes of a former convict” and A.P. Chekhov’s travel notes “Sakhalin Island” characterize the 90s of the 19th century (post-reform period), the eve of the first Russian revolution. And, finally, the 30-40s of the 20th century (the heyday of the personality cult of I.V. Stalin) are represented by the works of A.I. O. V. Volkov's novel "Immersion in Darkness".

The scientific novelty of the proposed dissertation lies in the fact that for the first time an attempt is made to compare works devoted to hard labor and exile with the works of writers - prisoners of the Gulag, as well as aesthetics and poetics in the writers' depiction of a person who finds himself in such conditions.

The theoretical and methodological basis of the dissertation research were the works of domestic literary critics, philosophers, critics of thinkers, specialists: D. I. Pisarev, M. M. Bakhtin, I. Ilyin, N. A. Berdyaev, L. Ya. Ginzburg, O. R. Latsis, G. M. Fridlender, V. B. Shklovsky, V. Ya. Kirpotin, G. P. Berdnikov, V. B. Shklovsky, V. S. Solovyov.

The methodological approach to the study of the formation and development of "camp prose" in Russian literature of the 19th-20th centuries is based on methods for studying a work of art, associated with the use of comparative historical, problem-thematic and historical-descriptive approaches to the study of literature. A lexical-semantic approach is used, which implies the possibility, through the study of means of artistic expression, to come to an understanding of the originality of the creative thinking of writers.

The scientific and practical significance of the study is determined by the possibility of using its theoretical provisions and empirical material in studying the problems of modern Russian literature. The use of provisions and conclusions is possible when giving a course of lectures, when developing special courses, educational and methodological manuals and recommendations, when compiling programs, textbooks and anthologies on Russian literature for universities and senior students of secondary schools.

Approbation of the work took place at the department of Mordovian State University named after N.P. Ogarev. On the topic of the study, reports were made at the XXIV, XXV and XXVI Ogaryov readings, at the I and II conferences of young scientists, during optional classes in the senior classes in the gymnasium and lyceum.

Subject and object of research. The subject of the study is Russian "camp prose" of the 19th-20th centuries. The object of research is the formation and development of Russian "camp prose" of the 19th-20th centuries.

The objectives of the work are aimed at creating a holistic picture of the origin and development of Russian "camp prose" of the 19th-20th centuries; clarification of the point of view of writers on the problem of the possible correction of prisoners in the camp (hard labor, exile) and the possibility of its moral revival.

The following tasks are subordinated to the implementation of these goals:

1. Determine the origins and further development of Russian "camp prose" of the XIX-XX centuries.

2. To reveal the genre originality of the "camp" prose and the peculiarities of the manifestation of the author's position in the analyzed works.

The outlined range of tasks determined the structure of the dissertation, which consists of an introduction, two chapters, a conclusion and a list of references.

Conclusion of scientific work dissertation on the topic "Formation and development of "camp prose" in Russian literature of the 19th-20th centuries."

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, the following conclusions can be drawn.

Prison, penal servitude and exile in Russian literature is a more than extensive topic, rooted, perhaps, in The Life of Archpriest Avvakum. If you add documentary evidence, memoirs, journalism to fiction, then this is truly a boundless ocean. Thousands of pages of memoirs of the Decembrists, “Notes from the House of the Dead” by F. M. Dostoevsky, “In the World of Outcasts” by P. F. Yakubovich, “Sakhalin Island” by A. P. Chekhov, “The Gulag Archipelago” by A. I. Solzhenitsyn, “Kolyma Stories" by V. T. Shalamov, "A Steep Route" by F A Ginzburg, "Immersion in Darkness" by O. V. Volkov, "The Zecameron of the 20th Century" by V. Kress, and many other artistic and documentary studies form, outline this huge, important for Russia topic.

F. M. Dostoevsky, who became the founder of Russian “hard labor prose”, posed in his confessional novel such important problems as the problem of crime and punishment, the problem of human nature, his freedom, the problem of the relationship between the people and the intelligentsia, the problem of the executioner and butchery.

The writer pays special attention to the issue of the detrimental effect of the House of the Dead on human morality; at the same time, the writer confirms with examples that hard labor cannot make a criminal out of a person if he was not one before. F. M. Dostoevsky does not accept the unlimited power given to one person over another. He argues that corporal punishment has a detrimental effect on the state of mind of the executioner and the victim.

Undoubtedly, prison cannot make a villain, a criminal out of a good person. However, he leaves his mark on a person who has come into contact with him in one way or another. It is no coincidence that the hero-narrator, after leaving hard labor, continues to shun people, as he used to do in hard labor, and eventually goes crazy. Therefore, staying in the House of the Dead leaves a mark on the soul of any person. Dostoevsky, in fact, 150 years before V. Shalamov, expressed the idea of ​​​​an absolutely negative experience of the camp.

The novel by P. F. Yakubovich “In the world of outcasts” is a memoir-fictional narrative about the experience. Borrowing a ready-made genre model, P. F. Yakubovich gave in his novel a realistic picture of Russian hard labor reality, showed us how hard labor has changed 50 years after Dostoevsky's stay there. Yakubovich makes it clear that Dostoevsky was lucky to meet the best representatives of the Russian people in hard labor, while in hard labor Yakubovich was made up of "the scum of the people's sea." In the novel there is such a category of criminals as vagrants. These are some kind of prototypes of the blatars that appeared in the 30s. years of the XX century in the Gulag. In the convict chief Luchezarov, the features of the Gulag "kings" - camp chiefs - are clearly seen.

By means of artistic journalism, A.P. Chekhov continued and developed what was started by Dostoevsky. The writer appears before us as a scientist and a writer at the same time, combining scientific material with a subtle depiction of human characters. The totality of facts, episodes, individual "stories" irresistibly testify to the pernicious influence of the House of the Dead, in this sense, Chekhov's work echoes Dostoevsky's novel, in particular, in depicting hard labor as a real earthly hell. This image repeatedly pops up on the pages of Chekhov's work. Like Dostoevsky, Chekhov emphasizes the negative impact of corporal punishment on the mental state of executioners and victims. The writer believes that both themselves and society are guilty of crimes committed by criminals. Chekhov saw the main evil in the common barracks, in life imprisonment, in a society that looked indifferently and got used to this evil. Every person should have a sense of responsibility - the writers believed, and no one should have illusions about their own non-involvement in what is happening.

The intra-literary regularity that has developed more than one century ago is such that continuity and renewal are characteristic of literature. And even if we do not have direct authorial confessions about the impact of this or that literary source on his work, then indirectly, “secretly”, this interaction always “manifests itself”, because tradition can also enter into literary creativity spontaneously, regardless of the intentions of the author.

Writers - chroniclers of the GULAG, "Virgils of new prose", repeatedly refer to the work of "prison chroniclers" of the 19th century on the pages of their memoirs about the Stalinist camps.

First of all, in depicting the most terrible abomination that is conceivable on earth - human life in the worst version of lack of freedom, the works of writers of two centuries have in common a humanistic orientation, faith in man and aspiration for freedom. In their works, writers of the 19th and 20th centuries noted a person's constant striving for freedom, which was expressed in various ways: in Dostoevsky and Chekhov - escape, illegal wine trade, playing cards, homesickness; with Solzhenitsyn and Shalamov - an attempt to escape, an attempt to "change their fate."

Philanthropy and faith in man, in the possibility of his spiritual and moral rebirth distinguishes the works of Dostoevsky, Chekhov, Solzhenitsyn and Volkov. It was philanthropy and faith in man that made Chekhov make a trip to Sakhalin. Solzhenitsyn bluntly pointed out that the prison helped him "nurture his soul", turn to faith. O. V. Volkov, an orthodox Christian, connects his salvation, "resurrection from the dead" precisely with faith. V. Shalamov, on the contrary, says that it was not God, but real people who helped him get through the hell of the Kolyma camps. He argued, by no means unfounded, that in the camp corruption covers everyone: both the chiefs and the prisoners. A. Solzhenitsyn argued with him in his artistic research, arguing that the personality of the author of Kolyma Tales is an example of the opposite, that Varlam Tikhonovich himself did not become either a “snitch”, or an informer, or a thief. In fact, A. Solzhenitsyn expressed the idea of ​​A. P. Chekhov and F. M. Dostoevsky: penal servitude (camp, exile) cannot make a criminal out of a person if he was not such before, and corruption can seize a person in the wild.

A significant contribution of A. P. Chekhov and P. F. Yakubovich to fiction is the image, following F. M. Dostoevsky, of convicts, the underworld. The "criminal world" is shown by Chekhov and Yakubovich mercilessly, in all its diversity and ugliness, not only as a product of a certain social class society, but also as a moral and psychological phenomenon. The authors, by an excellent grouping of facts and personal observations, show true life and show the practical unsuitability of prisons and islands.

The most terrible thing in the criminal world is not even that it is frenziedly cruel, monstrously immoral, that all the laws of nature and man are perverted in it, that it is a collection of all sorts of impurities, but that, once in this world, a person finds himself in the abyss from which there is no escape. All this is confirmed by illustrative examples of writers-"camp". Like the tentacles of a giant octopus, the thieves, "socially close," entangled all the camp authorities with their nets and, with their blessing, took control of the entire camp life. In hospitals, in the kitchen, in the rank of brigadier, criminals reigned everywhere. In the "Essays on the Underworld" V. T. Shalamov, with the meticulousness of a researcher, reproduces the psychology of the prisoner, his principles, or rather, their absence.

And if Russian classical literature believed in the revival of the criminal, if Makarenko affirmed the idea of ​​the possibility of labor re-education, then V. T. Shalamov “Essays on the Underworld” leaves no hope for the “rebirth” of the criminal. Moreover, he speaks of the need to destroy the "lesson", since the psychology of the underworld has a detrimental effect on young, immature minds, poisoning them with criminal "romance".

Works about the camps of the 20th century have something in common with the 19th century in the depiction of penal servitude (camp, exile, prison) as a "Dead House", an earthly hell. The idea of ​​the world-likeness of the camp (hard labor, exile), a cast of the "free" life of Russia, echoes back.

Dostoevsky's thought about the inclinations of the beast that exists in every person, about the danger of intoxication with the power given to one person over another, runs like a red thread through all the works. This idea was fully reflected in V. Shalamov's Kolyma Tales. In a calm, subdued tone, which in this case is an artistic device, the writer reveals to us what “blood and power” can bring, how low the “crown of creation” of nature, Man, can fall. Speaking about the crimes committed by doctors against patients, two categories can be distinguished - a crime of action ("Shock therapy") and a crime of inaction ("Riva-Rocci").

The works of the "camp" writers are human documents. V. Shalamov's attitude that the writer is not an observer, but a participant in the drama of life, largely determined both the nature of his prose and the nature of many other works of "camp" writers.

If Solzhenitsyn introduced into the public consciousness the idea of ​​the previously taboo, the unknown, then Shalamov brought emotional and aesthetic richness. V. Shalamov chose for himself the artistic setting "on the verge" - the image of hell, anomalies, the transcendence of human existence in the camp.

O. Volkov, in particular, notes that the government, which has chosen violence as its instrument, negatively affects the human psyche, its spiritual world, plunges the people into fear and dumbness with bloody reprisals, destroys the concepts of good and evil in it.

So, what was started in Russian literature by the “House of the Dead” was continued by the literature that received the name “camp prose”. I would like to believe that the Russian "camp prose", if we mean by this the stories about innocent political prisoners, has only one future - to remember the terrible past again and again. But prisons have always been and will always be, and there will always be people in them. As Dostoevsky rightly noted, there are such crimes that everywhere in the world are considered indisputable crimes and will be considered as such, "as long as a person remains a person." And humanity, in turn, in its centuries-old history has not found another (except for the death penalty) way of protection from encroaching on the laws of human society, although the corrective value of the prison, as we have seen from the above, is very, very doubtful.

And in this sense, "camp prose" always has a future. Literature will never lose interest in the guilty and innocent man in captivity. And Notes from the House of the Dead - with its desperate belief in the possibility of salvation - will remain a reliable guide for many, very different writers.

List of scientific literature Malova, Yulia Valerievna, dissertation on the topic "Russian literature"

1. Bunin I. A. Cursed days: Diary entries / Ivan Bunin. Tula: Approx. book. publishing house, 1992.-318 p.

2. Volkov O. V. Immersion in darkness M.: Sov. Russia, 1992.-432p.

3. Ginzburg E. Steep route: Chronicle of the cult of personality / Eugene Ginzburg. M.: Sov. writer, 1990. - 601 p.

5. Dostoevsky F. M. Notes from the House of the Dead / / Dostoevsky F. M. Sobr. op. In 15 volumes. T. 3. M-J1: Khudozh. lit., Leningrad. department, 1972- p.205-481

6. Kress V. Zecameron of the 20th century: Novel / Vernoy Kress. M.: Artist. lit., 1992.-427 p.

7. Memoirs of the Decembrists. Sev. total.-M.: MGU, 1981.-400 p.

8. Memoirs of the Decembrists. South total.-M.: MGU, 1981.-351 p.

9. Murzin N.P. Scenes from life//Ural.-1988.-№№9-11; No. 9.-S. 132-152; No. 10, -S. 155-176; No. 11.-S.145-167.

10. Yu.Serebryakova G. Tornado // Rise.- 1988.-№7.-S. 20-72.

11. Solzhenitsyn A. I. The Gulag Archipelago / / Solzhenitsyn A. I. Small collected works. T. 5.-M.: INCOM NV, 1991. -432s.; T. 6. - M .: INCOM NV, 1991.-432 e .; T. 7.-M.: INCOM NV, 1991.-384 p.

12. Solzhenitsyn A. I. One day of Ivan Denisovich / / Solzhenitsyn A. I. Small collected works. T. 3. M.: INCOM NV, 1991, - S. 5-111.

13. Taratin I.F. Lost years of life//Volga.-№5.-S.53-85.

14. Black Book Storming the Heavens: Sat. docum. data//Moscow.-1991.-№1.-S. 142-159.

15. Chekhov A.P. Sakhalin Island // Chekhov A.P. Complete works and letters in 30 volumes. Works in 18 volumes. T. 14-15. With. 41-372.

16. Shalamov V. T. Kolyma stories. -M.: Sovremennik, 1991. -526 p.

17. Shalamov V. T. Several of my lives: Prose. Poetry. Essay. M.: Respublika, 1996. -479 p.

18. Yakubovich P. F. In the world of outcasts. Notes of a former convict. T. 1-2. -M-L .: Literary artist, Leningrad. department, 1964.-T. 1.-419 e.; T. 2.-414 p.

19. Yakushkin I. D. Memoirs. Articles. Dates.-Irkutsk: Vost-Sib. Book. publishing house, 1993.-400 p.1.

20. Akatkin V. M. The Last Days of Russia (“Cursed Days” by I. Bunin) // Philological Notes: Bulletin of Literary Studies and Linguistics: Issue 1. Voronezh: Voronezh Publishing House, University, 1993. - S. 69-78.

21. Akelkina T. I. Some features of the narration in "Notes from the House of the Dead" // Problems of Method and Genre. Issue 7. Tomsk, 1980. - S. 92-102.

22. Akelkina E. A. Notes from the House of the Dead by F. M. Dostoevsky: An example of a holistic analysis of a work of art: Proc. allowance for students. philol. fak. Omsk: Publishing House of the Omsk State Council, 2001. - 32 s.

23. Akulova L. V. The theme of penal servitude in the works of F. M. Dostoevsky and A. P. Chekhov // Method, outlook and style in Russian literature of the XIX century. M., 1988. -S.

24. Akulova L. V. F. M. Dostoevsky and A. P. Chekhov: (Traditions of Dostoevsky in the work of Chekhov): Abstract of the thesis. dis. .cand. philol. Sciences: 10.01.01. -M., 1988.-24 p.

25. Altman B. Dostoevsky: by milestones of names. Saratov: Saratov Publishing House. Unta, 1975.-279 p.

26. Andreev Yu. Reflections on the story of A. Solzhenitsyn "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich" in the context of the literature of the early 60s // Rainbow, - Kyiv, 1991.-№6.-S. 109-117.

27. Andreevich Essays on current Russian literature // Life. 1900. - No. 4. - S. 310-335; No. 6.-S. 274-282.

28. Apukhtina V. A. The concept of personality in modern Soviet prose (60-80s) / / Ideological and artistic diversity of Soviet literature of the 60-80s. M.: MGU, 1991. - S. 77-84.

29. Bakhtin M. M. The problem of content, material and form in verbal artistic creativity // Bakhtin M. M. Literary and critical articles, - M .: Khudozh. lit., 1986. S. 26-89.

30. Bakhtin M. M. The problem of text in linguistics, philology and other humanities: Experience of philosophical analysis// Bakhtin M. M. Literary and critical articles. M.: Artist. lit., 1986. - S. 473-500 p.

31. Bakhtin M. M. Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics, Izd. 4th-M.: Sov. Russia, 1979.-320 p.

32. Bakhtin M. M. Aesthetics of verbal creativity. M.: Artist. lit., 1979.423 p.

33. Belaya G. The moral world of works of art//Questions of literature. 1983. - No. 4. - S. 19-52.

34. Berdnikov G. P. A. P. Chekhov. Ideological and creative searches. 3rd. ed., revised - M.: Artist. lit., 1984.-511 p.

35. Berdyaev N. A. The origins and meaning of Russian communism // Youth.-1989.-№11.-S. 80-92.

36. Berdyaev N. A. The fate of man in the modern world: To the understanding of our era // Berdyaev N. A. Philosophy of the free spirit. M.: Respublika, 1994. -S. 320-435.

37. Bachinin V.A. Dostoevsky: the metaphysics of crime (artistic phenomenology of the Russian postmodern). St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg Publishing House. unta, 2001 .-407 p.

38. Bitov A. New Robinson: (To the 125th anniversary of the publication of "Notes from the House of the Dead") // Znamya.-1987.-Kn.12.-S. 221-227.

39. Bogdanovich A. I. Years of turning point 1895-1906: Sat. critical Art. SPb, 1906, - S.

40. Bondarenko VG Uncombed thoughts. M.: Sovremennik, 1989. -223 p.

41. Bocharov A.G. Two thaws: faith and confusion//October.-1991.-№6.-S. 186.

42. Bocharov A. G. How is literature alive?: Modernity and the literary process. M.: Sov. Writer, 1986, - 400 p.

43. Weinerman V. Dostoevsky and Omsk. Omsk. book. publishing house, 1991.-128 p.

44. Vasilevsky A. "Special Notes on the Lost People" // Det. lit.-1991.-№8.-S. 13-17.

45. Vasilevsky A. The suffering of memory // View: Criticism. Controversy. Publications. Issue. Z.-M.: Sov. writer, 1991.-p. 75-95.

46. ​​Vasiliev V. Satanism in Literature: The Tragedy of Realism. // Young Guard.-1992.-№2.-S. 217-258.

47. Vasilyeva O. V. The evolution of the camp theme and its influence on Russian literature of the 50-80s // Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. Ser. 2. Issue 4.-1996.-S. 54-63.

48. Vigerina J1. I. "Notes from the House of the Dead" by F. M. Dostoevsky: (Personality and people): Abstract of the thesis. dis. . cand. philol. Sciences: 10.01.01. SPb, 1992. - 16 p.

49. Vinogradov I. Solzhenitsyn-artist//Continent.-1993.-№75.-S. 25-33

50. Vozdvizhensky V. The way to the barracks // From different points of view: Getting rid of mirages: Socialist realism today.-M.: Sov. writer, 1990.-p. 124-147.

51. Voznesenskaya T. The Camp World of Alexander Solzhenitsyn: Theme, Genre, Meaning // Literary Review. -1999. - No. 1. - P. 20-24.

52. Volkova E. V. The tragic paradox of Varlam Shalamov. M.: Respublika, 1998.-176 p.

53. Volkova E. V. The duel of the word with the absurd // Questions of Literature.-1997, No. 6.-S. 3-55.

54. Volkov O. V. The path to salvation: A conversation with the Russian writer O. Volkov / Recorded by A. Segen. // Our contemporary.-1991.-№4.-S. 130-133.

55. V. F. Strange cult / / Russian Bulletin.-1897.-T. 274.-S.229-260.

56. Gaiduk V. K. A. P. Chekhov, Russian classics and Siberia // About Chekhov's poetics. -Irkutsk: Irkut Publishing House. un-ta, 1993, - S. 59-65.

57. Gernet M.N. History of the royal prison: In 5 volumes. T. 5 - M .: Legal literature, 540s.

58. Gigolov M. G. The evolution of the hero-narrator in the work of F. M. Dostoevsky 1845-1865: Author. dis. .cand. philol. Sciences: 10.01.01. Tbilisi, 1984, -24 p.

59. Ginzburg L. Ya. About documentary literature and principles of character building // Vopr. lit.-1970.-No. 7.-S.62-91.

60. Ginzburg L. I About psychological prose. L.: Owls. writer, Leningrad department, 1971.-464 p.

61. Golovin KF Russian novel and Russian society. Ed. - 2nd St. Petersburg, 1904, - 520 p.

62. Gromov E. The tragic artist of Russia // V. Shalamov Several of my lives: Prose. Poetry. Essay. M.: Respublika, 1996.-S. 5-14.

63. Derzhavin N. S. "Dead House" in Russian literature of the XIX century. Pg, 1923.28 p.

64. Dolinin AS Dostoevsky and others: Articles and research on Russian classical literature. L.: Artist. lit., Leningrad. department, 1989.-478 p.

65. Dyuzhev Yu. Russian break//North.-1993.-№2.-S. 138-148.

66. Elizavetina G. G. "The last line in the field of the novel.": (Russian memoirs as a subject of literary research) // Questions of Literature.-1982.-№10.-S. 147-171.

67. Ermakova 3. P. "Sakhalin Island" by A.P. Chekhov in "The Gulag Archipelago" by A.I. Solzhenitsyn // Philology. Saratov, 1998, - Issue. 2.-S.88-96.

68. Esipov V. The norm of literature and the norm of being: Notes on the writer's fate of Varlam Shalamov. // Free Thought.-1994.-№4.-S. 41-50.

69. Zhbankov D. N., Yakovenko V. I. Corporal punishment in Russia at present. M., 1899.- 212 p.

70. Zolotussky I. The collapse of abstractions // From different points of view: Getting rid of mirages: Socialist realism today. M.: Sov. writer, 1990. - S. 238-239.

71. Ivanova N. Prisoners and guards //Spark.-1991.-№11.-S. 26-28.

72. Ivanova N. B. Resurrection of the right things. M.: Moskovsky Rabochiy, 1990. -217 p.

73. Ivanova N. Pass through despair//Youth.-1990-№1.-S.86-90.

74. Ilyin I. A. The path of spiritual renewal // Ilyin I. A. Soch. in 2 vols. T. 2, Religious Philosophy. M.: Medium, 1994. - S. 75-302.

75. Karlova T. S. Dostoevsky and the Russian court. Kazan: Publishing house Kazan, un-ta, 1975.-166 p.

76. Karyakin Yu. F. Dostoevsky on the eve of the XXI century. M.: Sov. writer, 1989.650 p.

78. Kirpotin V. Ya. Dostoevsky in the sixties. M.: Artist. lit., 1966. -559 p.

79. Kodan S. V., Shostakovich B. S. Siberian political exile in the internal policy of the autocracy (1825-1861) // Exiled revolutionaries in Siberia of the XIX century. Feb. 1917 - Sat. scientific tr. - Issue. 12. -Irkutsk: Irkut Publishing House. un-ta, 1991. - S. 82-94.

80. Kostomarov N. I. Rebellion of Stenka Razin. - St. Petersburg, 1859. -237 p.

81. Kudryavtsev Yu. G. Three Circles of Dostoevsky: Eventful. Temporary. Eternal. -M.: Moscow Publishing House. un-ta, 1991. -400 p.

82. Latin-Russian Dictionary / Ed. O. Petruchenko M.: Enlightenment, 1994.

83. Latynina A. The collapse of ideocracy: From "One day of Ivan Denisovich" to "The Gulag Archipelago" by A. I. Solzhenitsyn. II Liter. review.-1990.-№4.-S. 3-8.

84. Latsis O.R. Fracture: Experience of reading unclassified documents. M.: Politizdat, 1990. -399 p.

85. Leksin Yu. Beyond all human // Knowledge is power. -1991 -№6.-S. 77-82.

86. Lifshits M. On the story of A. I. Solzhenitsyn “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich”; About the manuscript of A. I. Solzhenitsyn "In the first circle": Art. //Q. lit.-1990.-№7.-S. 73-83.

87. Likhachev D. S. Literature reality - literature. - L.: Owls. writer, Leningrad department, 1981. - 216 p.

88. EZ.Marinina S. History must be understood//Liter, review.-1990.-№8.-S. 5-16.

90. Milyukov A. Literary meetings and acquaintances. SPb., 1890.- 281 p.

91. Mishin I. T. Artistic features of “Notes from the House of the Dead” by F. M. Dostoevsky // Uchenye zapiski Armavir, ped. in-ta. T. 4. Issue. 2., 1962. -S. 21-42.

92. Mikhailovsky N. K. Cruel talent // N. Mikhailovsky Literary criticism: Art. about Russian literature of the XIX beginning. XX century. - L .: Artist. lit., Leningrad. Department, 1989. - S. 153-234.

93. Molchanova N. The potential of the genre: To the question of the genre and stylistic features of the stories of V. Shalamov // Bulletin of the Moscow University. Ser.: History, linguistics, literary criticism.-1990.-№4.-S. 107-110.

94. Mochulsky K. Dostoyevsky. Life and art. Paris, 1980. - 230 p.

95. Muravyov N. V. Our prisons and the prison issue // Russian Bulletin. -1878.-T. 134.-S. 481-517.

96. Murin D. N. One hour, one day, one life of a person in the stories of A. Solzhenitsyn // Literature at school.-1990.-№5.-p. 103-109.

97. Nedzvetsky V. A. Denial of personality: (“Notes from the House of the Dead” as a literary dystopia) // Izv. RAN. Ser. literature and language.-1997.-T. 56.-№6.-S. 14-22.

98. Gentle A. Root theme // Liter. review.-1987.-№5.-S. 69-70.

99. Nekrasova I. V. Varlam Shalamov prose writer: Poetics and problems.: Author. dis. .cand. philol. Sciences: 10.01.01, Samara, 1995.-15 p.

100. Nikitin A. Man without a face // Writer and time: Sat. docum. prose. -M.: Sov. writer, 1983. S. 219-288.

101. Osmolovsky O. N. Dostoevsky and the Russian psychological novel. - Chisinau: Shtinnitsa, 1981. 166 p.

102. Palikovskaya L. Self-portrait with a noose around his neck // Liter. Review.-1990,-№7.-S. 50-53.

103. Pereverzev VF Creativity Dostoevsky. Critical feature article. -M., 1912. -369 p.

104. Correspondence between V. Shalamov and N. Mandelstam // Znamya.-1992.-No. 2.1. pp. 158-177.

105. Pereyaslov N. The people called them: "Father." // Moscow.-1993.-№8,-S. 181-185.

106. Pisarev D. I. The dead and dying / D. I. Pisarev Literary criticism. In 3 vols. T. 3.-L .: Khudozh. lit., Leningrad. Department, 1981.-S. 50-116.

107. Letters from Varlam Shalamov to Alexander Solzhenitsyn // Znamya.-1990.-№7.-S. 77-82.

108. Posse V. Journal review / L. Melshin. In a world of outcasts. Notes of a former convict" // Russian wealth.-1912.-Kn. 10. S. 56-75.

109. Princeva G. I. Sakhalin works of A. P. Chekhov in the early and mid-90s. (Ideas and style): Abstract of the thesis. dis. .cand. philol. Sciences: 10.01.01, - M „1973.-18 p.

110. Prishvin M. M. "What Russia remains after the demons": From the diary entries about F. M. Dostoevsky // Friendship of peoples. -1996. - No. 11. - P. 179-202.

111. Redko A. E. P. Ya. and Melshin//Russian wealth.-1911.-No. 4.1. pp. 101-117.

113. Selivsky V. At the grave of P. F. Yakubovich // Russian wealth.-1911 .-№ 4,-S. 126-133.

114. Semanova M. L. Work on an essay book // In the creative laboratory of Chekhov.-M.: Nauka, 1974.-S. 118-161.

115. Sirotinskaya I. About Varlam Shalamov // Liter, Review.-1990.-No. 10,-S. 101-112.

116. Skabichevsky A. M. Penal servitude 50 years ago and now // Skabichevsky A. M. Critical studies, publications, essays, literary memoirs. In 2 vols. T. 2.-St. Petersburg, 1903.-S. 685-745.

117. Solzhenitsyn A., Medvedev R. Dialogue from 1974: Publication of A. Solzhenitsyn's letter "Letter to the leaders of the Soviet Union" dated 1973 and R. Medvedev's response to it "What awaits us ahead?" dated 1974 //Dialogue.-1990.-No. 4.-S. 81-104.

118. Solovyov V. S. On Christian Unity Reprint, reproduction ed. 1967, Brussels.-.[Chernivtsi].-1992.-492 p.

119. Solovyov S. M. Visual means in the work of F. M. Dostoevsky: Essays. M.: Sov. writer, 1979. - 352 p.

120. Sokhryakov Yu. Moral lessons of "camp" prose // Moscow.-1993, No. 1.-S. 175-183.

121. Struve N. Solzhenitsyn // Liter. Newspaper. -1991.-#28.

122. Surganov V. One warrior in the field: About the book by AI Solzhenitsyn "The Gulag Archipelago". II Liter, review.-1990,- No. 8.-S. 5-13.

123. Sukhikh I. N. "Sakhalin Island" in the work of A. P. Chekhov // Rus. lit., -1985.-No. Z.-S. 72-84.

124. Telitsyna T. Imagery in the "Gulag Archipelago" by AI Solzhenitsyn // Philological Sciences.-1991 .-№5.-S. 17-25.

125. Teofilov M. P. "Notes from the House of the Dead" by F. M. Dostoevsky. Poetics and problems: Abstract of the thesis. dis. .cand. philol. Sciences: 10.01.01.-Voronezh, 1985.-20 p.

126. Timofeev L. Poetics of "camp prose" // October.-1991 .-№ 3.1. pp. 182-195.

127. Tolstoy LN What is art? // Tolstoy L. N. Full. coll. op. In 22 vols. T.15-St. about art-ve and literature. M.: Artist. lit., 1983. - S. 41-221. T. 17-18 - Letters. - S. 876.

128. Difficult questions of Kengir: Through the pages of "The Gulag Archipelago" by AI Solzhenitsyn. // October.-1990.-№12.-S. 179-186.

129. Tunimanov V. A. Creativity of Dostoevsky (1854-1862). -L.: Nauka, Leningrad. department, 1980. 295 p.

130. Udodov B. Problems of the theory of the essay // Rise.-1958.-№3,- P. 148-153

132. Frenkel V. In the last circle: Varlam Shalamov and Alexander Solzhenitsyn // Daugava. - Riga, 1990.-No. 4.-S. 79-82.

133. Friedlander G. M. Dostoevsky's Realism. M-L .: Nauka, 1964. -403 p.

134. Chalmaev V. A. Solzhenitsyn. Life and art. M.: Enlightenment, 1994.-246 p.

135. Chirkov NM About Dostoevsky's style: Problems, ideas, images. M.: Nauka, 1967.-303 p.

136. Chudakov A. P. Poetics of Chekhov. M.: Nauka, 1971. - 291 p.

137. Chulkov G. M. How Dostoevsky worked. M: Nauka, 1939.-148 p.

138. Shaposhnikov V. From the House of the Dead to the Gulag: (About the "convict prose" of the XIX-XX centuries) / / Far East. -1991 .- No. 11 .-S. 144-152.

139. Shentalinsky V. The Resurrected Word // New World.-1995.-No. Z.-S. 119-151.

140. Shereshevsky L. Hell remains hell // Liter, review. 1994. - No. 5/6. -WITH. 91-94.

141. Shiyanova I. A. Typology of "outcasts" in Russian literature of the 19th century and L. N. Tolstoy's novel "Resurrection": Abstract of the thesis. dis. PhD in Philology Sciences: 10.01.01, - Tomsk, 1990, - 18 p.

142. Shklovsky V. B. Pros and cons: Dostoevsky // Shklovsky V. B. Sobr. Op. In 3 vols. T. Z.-M.: Khudozh. lit., 1974.-816 p.

143. Shklovsky E. The truth of Varlam Shalamov // Friendship of peoples.-1991.- No. 9,-p.254-263.

144. Shklovsky E. The formula of confrontation // October.-1990.-№ 5.-S. 198-200.

145. Schrader Y. Border of my conscience// Novy Mir.-1994.-№ 12.-S. 226-229.

146. Shumilin D. A. The theme of suffering and the rebirth of the individual in the "Gulag Archipelago" // Literature at school.-1998.-№8.-S. 36-43.

147. Yadrintsev N. The situation of the exiles in Siberia // Bulletin of Europe.-1875.-T.11-12. T. 11.-S.283-312; T.12.-S.529-550.

The article was published in the journal "Bulletin of the Kemerovo State University", issue No. 2-4 (62) / 2015. Electronic version on the university website.

"Camp Prose" in the Context of Russian Literature of the 20th Century: Concept, Limits, Specifics

Works belonging to the thematic direction of camp prose have been studied since the late 1980s. the following domestic literary critics: O. V. Vasilyeva, E. Volkova, V. Esipov, L. V. Zharavina, Yu. V. Malova, A. V. Safronov, I. Sukhikh, etc. has not been revealed, since the main object of research is individual authors or works, without entering the direction as a whole. Therefore, the purpose of our article is to summarize the various positions to designate the boundaries and content of this definition, as well as to identify the specific features of the direction.
In Russia, the camp experience of several generations is not sufficiently comprehended and not truly experienced; it is not given as much attention as some researchers would like. According to E. Mikhailik (Australia), “One gets the impression that the main audience of camp literature does not want not only to polemize, but in general to face the arbitrarily indirectly expressed assertion that the society of which it is a part has fallen out of history and has lost the remnants of social connections, and she herself needs an ethical and social evolution. In Western culture, historians, philosophers, philologists turn to this topic much more often. Yes, in the 90s. 20th century in France, an independent direction “aesthetics of disappearance” arose (and in relation to the texts of surviving prisoners of the camps - “aesthetics of Lazarus”), designed not only to analyze the array of artistic expressions about the death camps and the crimes of fascism, but seeking to comprehend the break in sensuality that occurred in the middle of the 20th century in a post-catastrophe Europe. In Poland, they study (including at school) works of Polish camp prose, for example, the book “We were in Auschwitz” by Tadeusz Borovsky, Kristin Olszewski and Janusz Nel Siedlecki, published in Munich in 1946. Although the trend towards oblivion can also be traced in Poland , since in 2015 "Russia did not receive an official invitation to the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz from the Polish side: the event was made non-state" . D. A. Ardamatskaya noted the importance of overcoming transcendent experience and the inner essence of writing camp prose: “evidence itself is the most important component of the reflection of a catastrophic experience that resists historical amnesia” . Reflection and memory of the experienced become the basis for writing works that embody the transcendental experience of a person in an absurd reality.
Let us dwell on two review articles devoted to camp prose. In 1989, the first review article by I. Sukhikh appeared. He considers the following works: "Kolyma Tales" by V. T. Shalamov, "Uninvented" by L. Razgon, "Black Stones" by A. Zhigulin, "Life and Fate" by V. Grossman. The researcher considers all authors belonging to this direction to be followers of the “new prose” method of V.T. the narrative of the "new prose" all the time leads to key questions about the nature of man and the human. Following V. Shalamov, I. Sukhikh uses the term "new prose". Researcher Yu. V. Malova claims the beginning of the term camp prose directly in the essay "On Prose" by V. Shalamov. In it, the writer uses the phrase "camp theme", then the direction began to be called camp prose, perhaps in relation to the concept of hard labor prose.
In a 1996 article, O.V. Vasilyeva makes an attempt to trace the evolution of the camp theme. She takes A. Solzhenitsyn's story "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich" as the opening point of the topic. Next in line, she puts V. Shalamov, who "deliberately repels" from his predecessor. The researcher considers the narratives of both authors to be extremely similar, only emphasizing the differences in the angle of view on the camp experience: V. Shalamov takes extreme, outrageous situations, and Solzhenitsyn takes the “average statistical” camp of political prisoners. The next stage in the development of the theme is "Faithful Ruslan" by G. Vladimov, where the camp is described through the eyes of a guard dog. This author removed the confrontation between the individual and the system, since "the personal beginning of the individual turned out to be so oppressed and suppressed by the state that the confrontation" personality - state "has lost its meaning" . Then O. V. Vasilyeva considers the story of S. Dovlatov "The Zone", which in modern literature has practically completed the camp theme, combining and mixing everything that was connected with the camp in the real and artistic world, including the positions of its predecessors. In general, it is possible to identify the common thing that the researcher notes in all writers: hell and the absurdity of the camp reality. But she also notes that, in fact, this direction only confirmed the type of the average person, the same as in military and rural prose.
In the work of 2006, O. V. Vasilyeva and A. V. Savelyeva separately address the theme of the camp in the work of M. Kuraev (the story "Night Watch", 1988), they consider him, following S. Dovlatov, a writer who introduced ironic comic perspective of the idea of ​​a man of the Soviet era, revealing in a lighter way the tragedy of the camp problems. M. Kuraev, in their opinion, also refuses to define a person through the concepts of “bad” and “good”, shows his versatility: he “created a model of a multipolar cosmosociety, when the perception, assessment, awareness of a phenomenon depends on many reasons: points vision, visual acuity, beliefs of the perceiver, his desires, his skills, and even the time of day.
N. V. Ganushchak, studying the work of V. T. Shalamov, designates the poetics of camp prose as a global, all-human theme: “The writer considers the camp as a kind of model of human life, when its age-old collisions and contradictions are brought and sharpened to the extreme limit” .
Yu. V. Malova considers camp prose as a continuation of the tradition of “convict prose” of the 19th century, especially relying on the motifs of F. M. Dostoevsky’s “House of the Dead”: “Works about the camps of the 20th century. resonate with the 19th in the depiction of penal servitude (camp, exile, prison) as a "Dead House", an earthly hell. The idea of ​​the world-likeness of the camp (hard labor, exile), a cast of the “free” life of Russia, echoes in an echo. Highlights the historicism of this direction.
The continuity of the traditions of camp prose from hard labor is also considered by the researcher A. Yu.
I. V. Nekrasova, summarizing the experience of researchers in the monograph of 2003, in particular the opinion of D. Lekuh, describes two directions of camp prose of the 20th century. A. I. Solzhenitsyn is considered the founder of the "real-historical" direction, the second, "existential" direction was initiated by V. T. Shalamov. It is distinguished by "the author's desire to explore" a person in a limiting situation ". After Shalamov, according to the researcher, the direction was continued by S. Dovlatov. “The real-historical seeks guilt in the external: in Bolshevism, in the trampling of God, in the distortion of the essence of man - in anything, but not in itself. The direction existentially finds in itself the courage to admit: evil is the product of man, it is one of the components of his nature. by: 18, p. 36]. So D. Lekuh contrasts two directions through the definition of a person and his will to take responsibility for what happens to him.
I. V. Nekrasova considers the work of V. Shalamov and his “new prose” to be the basis of the “existential” direction. Under the “new prose”, the writer himself understood a specific new method of translating life experience into an artistic form, according to N. E. Tarkan, this is “Documentation, coupled with psychologism, is one of the remarkable characteristics of Shalamov’s stories, which he called “new” prose » .
M. Mikheev calls the concept of anti-catharsis proposed by him the key moment of the “new prose”. “The technique consists in the reader’s obvious transfer of himself - to the place of the murdered, or rather, to the place of the unnamed “I” who watched this murder ... The author deliberately influences the reader’s feelings, forcing him to experience relief for the “I” - but at the same time time and pangs of conscience. That is, anti-catharsis is an even more aggravated experience instead of relief, or new anxiety, anxiety, doubt - accompanying local relief. We can find examples of anti-catharsis in the works we are considering. In the cycle “The Resurrection of the Larch” by V. T. Shalamov, a vivid example is the story “Silence”, where the narrator is glad for the silence that came after the suicide of an annoying sectarian who sang psalms and hymns. He does not survive the moment of death, it is already common for the heroes of camp prose, he thinks about the vital: now he needs to look for a new partner. In V. Maksimov's Nomad to Death, one of the heroes kills a man in order to win back at cards. And for everyone, this is a normal event, the camp murder even became a reason for hoping to “glue together” the group case and receive an award from the opera Zhdan.
A. V. Safronov, in an article of 2013, considers from an interesting point of view a number of writers of camp prose (I. M. Guberman, D. Yu. Shevchenko, E. V. Limonov), starting from A. Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago. The researcher reveals the features of the travel genre inherited by the camp prose, starting from the "convict" literature, in particular, "Sakhalin Island" by A.P. Chekhov:
“1) “Road”, “path”, “route” in the role of a compositional dominant - the heroes of “camp prose” literally have to make a “journey”: some to Siberia, some to the Far East, some to the Solovetsky Islands ...
2) The perception of a prison, a camp as a special world, an independent state, an “unknown country”.
3) The story "about the natives" (prisoners): history, the hierarchy of the "natives" society, a gallery of prison and camp types, research into the causes of crimes; relations between "thieves" and "political", aesthetics and philosophy of life; language, folklore.
A year earlier, the same researcher published a textbook, where a separate chapter is devoted to the camp prose of the 2nd half of the 20th century. This manual contains a definition of the direction: “By “camp prose” we mean a thematic branch (flow) of Russian fiction and documentary prose that arose in the “Khrushchev thaw”, which adopted the traditions of “hard labor prose” of the 19th century, ... based on traditions “ ethnographic realism” and travel genre. In relation to the works of these authors, it is also possible to use the term "essay - crime". "Camp prose" is presented in the genres of memoirs, diaries, notes, memoirs, autobiographies. The emphasis is on the traditions of the genre of travel and essay writing, with which we cannot agree, since, first of all, camp prose is a work of art. For example, V. Shalamov argued that his stories had nothing to do with the essay: “The prose of KR has nothing to do with the essay. Essay pieces are interspersed there for the greater glory of the document, but only in some places each time it is dated, calculated. - Living life is put on paper in completely different ways than in the essay. There are no descriptions in “KR”, there is no digital material, conclusions, journalism. In "CR" it's about depicting new psychological patterns, about the artistic study of a terrible topic, and not in the form of "information", not in the collection of facts. Although, of course, any fact in the "KR" is irrefutable.
Let us summarize the key points identified by researchers that characterize the direction
camp prose and which are also reflected in the works we have taken for analysis.
1. The space of the camp as hell, the “house of the dead”, the absurdity of camp reality (O. V. Vasilyeva, Yu. V. Malova, A. Yu. Mineralov, E. Mikhailik, I. Sukhikh).
2. New about a person and his behavior (N. V. Ganushchak, E. Mikhailik, I. V. Nekrasova, I. Sukhikh, N. E. Tarkan).
3. Reflection of the principles of the "new prose", derived by V. T. Shalamov (I. V. Nekrasova, I. Sukhikh, N. E. Tarkan).
4. Autobiography (E. Mikhailik, A. V. Safronov, I. Sukhikh).
5. Documentary, historicism (Yu. V. Malova, A. V. Safronov, N. E. Tarkan).
6. Author's reflection (D. A. Ardamatskaya).
7. The camp as a special world, an island (A. V. Safronov).
Not all of these points are sufficiently developed, for example, many researchers mention the behavior of a person in the camp reality, but do not specify the characteristic features that manifest themselves in the camp. Only O.V. Vasilyeva specifically states that the type of average person is shown in the works of camp prose, with which we cannot agree, since in different works a person shows different facets of himself. And in The Resurrection of the Larch, the main character, who escaped from hell, writes poetry, cannot be considered by us as an average person. It is also of particular interest for us to develop the reflexive nature of camp prose, which is reflected in the metatextual structure of the works we have taken. Turning to the following works of camp prose: "The Resurrection of the Larch" (1965 - 1967) by V. Shalamov, "The Zone" (1964 - 1989) by S. Dovlatov and "Nomadism to Death" (1994) by V. Maksimov, we single out the artistic image of the zone , embodied by writers with different camp experiences. They were written at different times, belong to different literary trends, the camp experience is shown from different points of view and in different volumes, but they all belong to the thematic direction of camp prose with its characteristic features.
On the basis of these works, I would like to consider in more detail the general points: the special space of the camp, a person in a situation of lack of freedom, the reflexive nature of the narrative.
The camp is a different, separate world, an island. Despite the fact that geographically Kolyma is a peninsula and adjoins the continent, in the artistic world of camp prose it becomes an island separated from the mainland. This is especially evident in the works of V. Shalamov, which is also noted by some researchers, for example, N. L. Leiderman: “A concentration camp that has replaced the entire country, a country turned into a huge archipelago”; M. Brewer: “It is also often called the “island”, and the rest of the space is the “mainland” or “mainland”. There, on the mainland, they live "above", and by analogy, Kolyma is at the very bottom, "in hell". In the story "For a letter" the protagonist goes for
a letter sent to him for the first time in 15 years. He gets to the letter within a few days, drives 500 km, and sells almost all valuable things along the way. And the hero makes this difficult path not even to freedom, then he will again have to come back. In the story “Boris Yuzhanin”, the author explains that “the central parts of Russia in Kolyma are called the“ mainland ”, although Kolyma is not an island, but a region on the Chukotka Peninsula - but the Sakhalin lexicon, shipping only by steamboats, a many-day sea route - all this creates the illusion of an island . There is no psychological illusion. Kolyma is an island. From it they return to the "mainland", to the "mainland". Both the mainland and the mainland are the dictionary of everyday life: magazine, newspaper, book.
The image of the camp in these works is described as hell on earth, which has already been confirmed by some researchers, where absurdity becomes the norm of existence, and death passes from an existential concept into the realm of the ordinary. S. D. Dovlatov himself, analyzing his predecessors and their perception of the camp, writes a phrase that has become a textbook: “According to Solzhenitsyn, the camp is hell. I think that hell is ourselves.” . But in this case, despite the postmodern nature of the "Zone", Dovlatov's laughter and play, his concept is even more depressing: if hell is us, people, everything, then hell is not just a camp, hell is the whole world, besides hostile: "On both sides of the ban lay a single and soulless world." “The world I got into was terrible,” the hero of the Zone emphasizes more than once. The camp is a system that operates not only within a specific zone, but also within the country and the whole world.
Characteristic in this regard is also the experience of the hero of the novel by V. Maksimov "Nomadism to Death", to whom all the orders of the world at all times are seen only as variants of the camp system, in which guards and prisoners are replaced. The whole world is described as a trap for man, the power of nature and the universe dominates him, even the "illuminated camp" looks "like a toy model, hastily assembled by a random hand." As a result, for the hero, the world is a “huge mousetrap” that slams shut, and the only way out of it is death (for the hero, suicide).
In this space, a special psychology of a person who finds himself in the borderland, trying to understand himself, can be traced. The key is the philosophical understanding of a person in a situation of lack of freedom. V. Shalamov, in his essay “On Prose,” writes that his stories “show new psychological patterns, new things in the behavior of a person reduced to the level of an animal - however, animals are made from the best material and not a single animal can endure the torments that a person endured . New in human behavior, new - despite the huge literature on prisons and imprisonment. In the story “The Thermometer of Grishka Logun”, V. Shalamov emphasizes that power is the main criterion for the corruption of the human soul: “Power is corruption. The beast unleashed, hidden in the human soul, seeks the greedy satisfaction of its eternal human essence in beatings, in murders. Another example is the story "Squirrel", where a crowd of people kills an animal just like that, according to the animal nature of a person who is thirsty for murder.
According to S. Dovlatov, “Evil is determined by the market situation, demand, and the function of its bearer. In addition, the factor of chance. An unfortunate set of circumstances. And even - bad aesthetic taste "; “Man unrecognizably changes under the influence of circumstances. And in the camp - especially. The situation owns the choice of a person, and evil always exists in him, as well as good. A characteristic example of duality in the "Zone" can be considered the situation with one of the characters - Egorov, a Vokhrovite, whose wife could not sleep because of the barking of a guard camp dog. And he just shot the dog. In fact, he committed the murder, guided by a good purpose. And the protagonist himself goes through a difficult path in the course of his service in the thieves' camp: from an intellectual with a naive bookish mentality, imbued with romantic motives, to a fall he had never seen before (his meeting with a prostitute). In the last short story, he himself finds himself under escort, becoming a prisoner.
I. Sukhikh, in a monograph dedicated to the work of S. Dovlatov, analyzing the idea of ​​a person in the “Zone”, also speaks of the previous tradition: “Solzhenitsyn is absolutely sure that a person who has kept God in his soul will endure any torment, overcome, win ... A man can be killed, but not broken." According to V. Shalamov, if “a person still retained something in himself, it means that he was simply not beaten enough. Enlightenment "environment stuck" is transformed by Shalamov into an absolute, slavish dependence of a person on a totalitarian whole. Therefore, Shalamov's stories are "notes from the next world" of a person who never escaped, did not return from hell. So, the position of S. Dovlatov is in some way between two extremes, and “Man to man ... how to put it better - tabula rasa. In other words, anything."
Of the three writers we are considering, V. Maksimov pronounces the most severe sentence on a person, showing a person as essentially weak, helpless in a world-mousetrap. He goes further, on the one hand, and turns out to be somewhat similar to S. Dovlatov at the moment of determining the essence of a person depending on the circumstances, on the other hand, he is in solidarity with V. Shalamov in the impotence of culture (civilization), the loss of which exposes everything vile in a person. One of the heroes (a doctor in the camp) is sure: “Hungry people are all the same, our culture, dear friend, it’s true, light makeup on an ordinary monkey, does not withstand the first serious test like snow or rain.”
The three writers are also united by the motive of creativity, which reflects reflection on their lives and the history of the country. They interpret not only texts, but also reality, comprehending and experiencing it with artistic images, which allows us to consider these works at the metatextual level.
Firstly, all the main characters of the works we have taken are writers. The hero of V. Shalamov writes poetry and is a reflection of the author-Shalamov. He is a poet, poetry becomes his salvation, escape from the hell of reality.
The structure of the "Zone" initially has a metatextual character: the hero-writer collects his own old short stories into a single whole, and the text is created, as it were, before our eyes. His hero reflects not only on the past, but also in the process of life, which is sometimes reflected in his view of himself from the side of a third person: “When I was beaten near the Ropchinsk timber exchange, my consciousness acted almost imperturbably: “A person is beaten with boots. It covers the ribs and stomach. He is passive and tries not to arouse the rage of the masses... What, however, vile physiognomies! This Tatar has lead seals...”. Terrible things were happening around."
In V. Maksimov's Nomad to Death, the hero not only reflects on his own life, but is also the author of a historical novel about his father and the history of Russia. The structure itself demonstrates the "text in text" technique. A. V. Baklykov defines the genre of “Nomadism to Death” as a “philological novel”: “The presence of numerous lyrical digressions in the novel “Nomadic to Death” and the use of the “novel in a novel” technique, which the protagonist allegedly writes, allows us to talk about the importance of the topic creativity, the psychology of the creative process, which makes it possible to define the genre variety of the work as a "philological novel".
Secondly, all three works are built as a description of the past through the present, which dictates the reflexivity of the author's narrative. “The Resurrection of the Larch” begins with the story “The Path”, where the events reflect the last years of V. Shalamov’s imprisonment in the camp, and already from this point he is considering the path from the very beginning of his arrival to the camp (the story “The Berth of Hell”). In S. Dovlatov, the very structure of construction is presented in the form of letters to the publisher with short stories about the experience of the warden in the camp. In V. Maksimov, the novel is built as a sequence of changing the description of the events of the present and the past, interspersed with insertions of the “novel in the novel” of the hero himself, who writes his novel in front of the reader, and also comments on it.
Thirdly, creativity becomes a defining vector for the heroes of the works of "camp prose", as well as for the writers themselves, who are experiencing the camp period of their lives by translating it onto paper. In The Resurrection of the Larch, only creative people who create something new are able to resist destruction. For Sergei Dovlatov, the camp experience became one of the impetuses for the start of a writer's life, and his hero overestimates his life principles through creativity. For the hero of the novel “Roaming to Death”, creativity is a profession, it helps him to keep himself for some time, but in the end the hero still chooses death.
Let us indicate, perhaps, an incomplete list of writers whose works are included in the circle of camp prose: G. Vladimov, O. Volkov, E. Ginzburg, V. Grossman, S. D. Dovlatov, A. Zhigulin, V. Kress, M. Kuraev, V. E. Maksimov, L. Razgon, A. Sinyavsky, A. I. Solzhenitsyn, V. T. Shalamov.
Based on the analysis of studies on camp prose and the works we took as an example (“Resurrection of the Larch” by V. Shalamov, “Zone” by S. Dovlatov and “Nomadism to Death” by V. Maksimov), as well as a comparison of the findings, we will try define the concept of "camp prose".
So, camp prose is a thematic trend that manifested itself in the development of the Russian literary process in the late 1950s and 1990s. XX century, creating an artistic image of the camp in the creative reflection of writers (eyewitnesses, observers from the outside, those who did not see at all or studied from archives, memories), with characteristic features inherent in it.
1. General themes and issues: prison, zone / camp, the Gulag system as a whole, lack of freedom, existential motives, perception of death and life, material and spiritual.
2. The autobiographical nature of the narrative, which is due to the personal experience of the writers.
3. Documentary and connection with history (the camps existed and developed in a certain historical period), but documentary is more poetic, an artistically embodied document about a person and his feelings.
4. Concreteness of descriptions, everyday perception of reality (as a result of documentary).
5. The artistic image of the camp, recreated in the individual author's pictures of the world.
6. Special space: the camp is like an island, separated from the mainland, Moscow and free life; the image of the zone as hell, "dead house"; the image of the camp as an improper existence with inverted value ideas.
7. The special psychology of a person who finds himself in the borderland, trying to understand the "new" world order and preserve individual traits, his own borders; philosophical understanding of a person in a situation of lack of freedom.
8. A special author's reflection on the text, based on his own experience, reflecting the psychological and moral changes of the human soul after being tested by hell in camp life.
I would like to note that we do not pretend to be unambiguous in the characteristics we have given, since our material does not fill the entire direction of camp prose, but many features are reflected in the works of other authors that we have not considered.

Literature

1. Ardamatskaya D. A. Varlam Shalamov and poetics after the Gulag // Bulletin of the Leningrad University. A. S. Pushkin. 2013. V. 2. No. 2. S. 137 - 143.
2. Ardamatskaya D. A. Philosophy “after the Gulag”: understanding the historical catastrophe // Studia Culturae. 2013. No. 16. S. 256 - 264.
3. Baklykov A. V. Genre originality of the novel by Vladimir Maksimov “Nomadism to death”: author. ... dis. cand. philol. Sciences. Tambov, 2000.
4. Bruer M. Depiction of space and time in camp literature: “One day of Ivan Denisovich” and “Kolyma stories” // Shalamovsky collection. M., 2011. Issue 4. P. 143 - 151.
5. Vasilyeva O. V. The evolution of the camp theme and its influence on Russian literature in the 1950s and 1980s // Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. 1996 Ser. 2. Issue. 4 (No. 23). pp. 54 - 63.
6. Vasilyeva O. V., Savelyeva A. V. The theme of the camp in the prose of Mikhail Kuraev. SPb., 2006. 43 p.
7. Ganushchak N. V. Varlam Shalamov's creativity as an artistic system: author. dis. ... cand. philol. Sciences. Tyumen, 2003. 26 p.
8. Dovlatov S. Zone: (Notes of the Warden) // Dovlatov S. Collected Works: in 4 volumes; comp. A. Yu. Ariev. St. Petersburg: Azbuka, Azbuka-Atticus, 2014. Vol. 2. S. 5 - 196.
9. Zaitseva A. R. Metaphysics of death in the prose of Varlam Shalamov // Bulletin of the Bashkir University. 2005. V. 10. No. 2. S. 67 - 71.
10. Leiderman N. L. “In a freezing blizzard century” (V. Shalamov. “Kolyma stories”) // Leiderman N. L. Post-realism: a theoretical essay. Yekaterinburg, 2005, pp. 139 - 174.
11. Lekuh D. “Hell is ourselves ...” // Literary newspaper. 1991. Jan 11
12. Maksimov V. E. Nomadism until death // Maksimov V. E. Favorites. M., 1994. S. 523 - 735.
13. Malova Yu. V. Formation and development of "camp prose" in Russian literature of the 19th - 20th centuries: author. ... dis. cand. philol. Sciences. Saransk, 2003.
14. Mineralov A. Yu. “Convict-camp” plot-figurative tradition in Russian prose of the XX century. // Bulletin of the Kemerovo State University of Culture and Arts. 2012. No. 18. P. 106 - 112.
15. Mikhailik E. In the context of literature and history // Shalamovsky collection. Vologda: Griffin, 1997. Issue. 2. S. 105 - 129.
16. Mikhailik E. Does not reflect and does not cast a shadow: "closed" society and camp literature // New Literary Review. 2009. No. 100. S. 356 - 375.
17. Mikheev M. On the “new” prose of Varlam Shalamov // Questions of Literature. M., 2011. Issue. 4. S. 183 - 214.
18. Nekrasova I. V. The fate and work of Varlam Shalamov: monograph. Samara: Publishing house of SGPU, 2003. 204 p.
19. Safronov A. V. Genre originality of Russian documentary fiction (essay, memoirs, “camp” prose): teaching aid; Ryaz. state un-t im. S. A. Yesenina. Ryazan, 2012. S. 49 - 86.
20. Safronov A. V. After the “Archipelago” (poetics of the camp prose of the late XX century) // Bulletin of the Ryazan State University. S. A. Yesenina. 2013. No. 3 (40). pp. 139 - 154.
21. Sukhikh I. Sergey Dovlatov: time, place, fate. St. Petersburg: Azbuka, 2010. 288 p.
22. Sukhikh I. This topic has come. // Star. 1989. No. 3. S. 193 - 200.
23. Tarkan N. E. Features of the poetics of "Kolyma stories" by V. Shalamov // Problems of Slavic culture and civilization: materials of the X international. scientific-practical. conf. May 22, 2008 Ussuriysk, 2008, pp. 322 - 326.
24. Temnova A. Camp prose: a special report. Air from 01/18/15. Access mode: http://www.vesti.ru/videos/show/vid/633010/
25. Shalamov V. T. Resurrection of larch // Shalamov V. T. Collected works: in 6 volumes + v. 7, add. Vol. 2: Essays on the underworld; Resurrection of larch; Glove, or KR-2; Anna Ivanovna: Play / comp. under-ready text, eg. I. Sirotinskaya. M.: Knigovek Klub Klub, 2013. P. 105 - 280.
26. Shalamov V. T. About prose // Shalamov V. T. Collected works: in 6 volumes + v. 7, add. Vol. 5: Essays and notes; Notebooks 1954 - 1979 / comp. prepared text, eg. I. Sirotinskaya. M.: Knigovek Klub Klugovek, 2013. S. 144 - 157.

Starikova Lyudmila Semyonovna - Applicant of the Department of Journalism and Russian Literature of the 20th Century, Kemerovo State University, [email protected]

* This work is not a scientific work, is not a final qualifying work and is the result of processing, structuring and formatting the collected information, intended to be used as a source of material for self-preparation of educational work.

Introduction.

Reasons for addressing this topic. Goals and objectives

Main part

A word about writers. The significance of Solzhenitsyn, Shalamov in literature and the development of the country's social thought.

The fate of the book "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich"

a) time and space in a work of art;

b) "the camp through the eyes of a peasant." The role of episodes in the disclosure of content.

3) V.T.Shalamov. The fate of the books

a) the story "The Wanderer" Reception of comparison as a means of revealing the character, state of a person;

b) the autobiographical nature of the stories.

4) Experience in the comparative - comparative nature of the works of Solzhenitsyn and Shalamov

III. Conclusion.

Bibliography

Goals and objectives.

Show the significance of Solzhenitsyn, Shalamov in literature and the development of the country's social thought.

Show publicism, appeal of stories to the reader.

Analyze individual episodes, their role in the overall content of the narrative, compare the characters in the works of Solzhenitsyn and Shalamov: portrait, character, actions ...

Based on the works of Solzhenitsyn and Shalamov, to show the tragic fate of a person in a totalitarian state.

Introduction.

…People of spirit and intellect

Must be aware of their independence

and freedom, its determinability from within,

but also its social mission, its

calling to serve the cause of justice

through their thought and creativity.

The future of humanity depends on

Will the world be connected

Spiritual and social movement

And creation is fair and humane...

K. Berdyaev.

The theme of captivity, guard or prison, was not a discovery of the literature of the 20th century. At the origins of this literary tradition is “Notes from the House of the Dead” by F.M. Dostoevsky. But never before has this topic occupied such an extensive place in the literary stream. Politics and literature became closely intertwined only in the 20th century.

Now the literature about the camp is huge, the most famous are the works of Solzhenitsyn, Shalamov, Snegov. I would like to dwell on the works of two writers - the founders of camp prose. I wanted to learn not only about the literary feat of the two writers, but also to imagine the history of this topic, the features of its artistic solutions and the place in the spiritual life of our people in the 60s and today.

“Camp prose” is a 20th century term. “Notes from the House of the Dead” by F.M. Dostoevsky also told about the experience in hard labor, but there was no definition of “camp” itself. There were no camps as a mass phenomenon - and it is they who set the theme of the work.

Main part.

A word about writers.

A.I. Solzhenitsyn.

Born in 1918 in Kislovodsk. Graduated from Rostov University. In 1941 he went to the front, in 1945, when he was already arrested by the captains (military censorship), his letters to a close friend were opened, which contained a negative assessment of Lenin and Stalin. Until 1953, he was kept in camps of a general and special type.

In 1956 he was rehabilitated and worked as a teacher in Ryazan. In 1962, the Novy Mir magazine published the work One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich. Solzhenitsyn is experiencing an unprecedented creative upsurge: at the same time he begins: "The GULAK Archipelago" (materials flow from former prisoners from all over the country).

In 1964, the writer was nominated for the Lenin Prize, but did not receive it due to a change in political course. In 1966, the story was published for the last time in the Soviet press.

In 1970, Solzhenitsyn was awarded the Nobel Prize, which he could not receive personally.

At that time, the campaign against the writer intensified in the USSR, because. he gave permission for the publication in Paris of the book "August 14" and later - "The GULAK Archipelago", outlining the history of repressions in the USSR since 1918.

In 1974 the writer was expelled from the country. For a long time he lived and worked in the USA. Perestroika led to the fact that in 1990 Solzhenitsyn was returned to Soviet citizenship, and in 1994 he returned to his homeland.

The fate of the book "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich"

“I haven’t read anything like this in a long time. Good clean, great talent, no falsehood…” This is the very first impression of A.T. Tvardovsky, who read the manuscript of this story. Tvardovsky made incredible efforts to ensure that Solzhenitsyn's story saw the light of day.

Varlaam Shalamov wrote: “Dear Alexei Isaakovich! I didn’t sleep for two nights, reading the story, rereading it, remembering…”

“I was stunned, shocked,” Vyacheslav Kondratiev wrote about his impressions. - once in my life I really realized that the truth can ... "

After the 22nd Congress, when N.S. Khrushchev launched a "Furious attack on Stalin", Solzhenitsyn decided to give the manuscript "Shch-854" as the story was originally called in the Novy Mir magazine. This was the first time in Soviet fiction a work about the Stalinist camps.

The story "One day of Ivan Denisovich".

Time and space in a work of art.

While reading the work, it was interesting for me to learn about the author's attitude towards his heroes: the author treats some heroes with sympathy, others with irony, and a third with hostility. I decided to think: what explains the choice of Shukhov for the role of the central character.

After reading the story, I asked myself a number of questions:

1) What saves a person in an inhuman life? (on the example of the camp in which Shukhov was imprisoned)

2) What keeps camp life going? What keeps a person alive in general?

3) What role does the biography of the characters play in the story?

4) Kokov moral subtext of the situation: Shukhov - Caesar.

Analysis of the work

“The camp through the eyes of a peasant,” said Lev Kopelev, handing Solzhenitsyn's manuscript to Tvardovsky. Yes, through the eyes of Shukhov, because through the eyes of Buinovsky or Caesar we would have seen the camp differently. The camp is a special world with its own “landscape”, its own realities: zone, zone lights, towers, guards on towers, barracks, wall paneling, barbed wire, BUR, head of the regime, condo with withdrawal, full punishment cell, convicts, black jacket with a number , rations, a bowl of gruel, guards, shmon, dogs, a column, an object, a foreman, a foreman ... Solzhenitsyn recreates the details of camp life: we see what and how the convicts eat, what they smoke, where they get smoke, how they sleep, what they dress and put on shoes, where they work, how they talk among themselves and as with the authorities, what they think about the will, what they fear most of all and what they hope for. The author writes in such a way that we learn the life of a convict not from the outside, but from the inside, from “him”.

Solzhenitsyn created on the pages of his works the image of a huge impressive force - the Gulag Archipelago. The documentary The Chosen One shows Solzhenitsyn's map of the Gulag archipelago. In one of its points - the camp "One day ...".

Tvardovsky considered "a good choice of hero." According to the author, “the image of Ivan Denisovich was formed from the soldier Shukhov, who fought with him in the Soviet-German war (and never sat), the general experience of prisoners and the author’s personal experience in the Special Camp as a bricklayer. The rest of the faces are all from camp life, with their true biographies.

Talking about the camp and camp inmates, Solzhenitsyn writes not about how they suffered there, but about how they managed to survive, preserving themselves as people. Shukhov forever remembered the words of his first brigadier, the old camp wolf Kuzemin: “Here’s who dies in the camp: who licks the bowls, who hopes for the medical unit, and who goes to the godfather to knock.”

In "One day ..." there are people about whom the author talks with great sympathy: these are the foreman Tyurin, Shukhov, the commander of the rank Buinovsky, the Latvian Kildigs, Senka Klevshin. The writer singles out one more hero, not named by name. Only half a page is occupied by a story about a "tall, silent old man." He sat in prisons and camps for an uncountable number of years, not a single amnesty touched him. But he didn't lose himself.

His face was exhausted, but not to the weakness of a disabled wick, but to a hewn, dark stone. And by the hands, large, in cracks and blackness, it was clear that not much had fallen to him in all the years to sit out as a moron.

"Nerks" - camp "aristocrats" - lackeys: orderlies in the barracks, foreman Der, "observer" Shkuropatenko, a hairdresser, an accountant, one of the KVCh - "the first bastards who were sitting in the zone, these hard workers considered people below shit."

As you can see, in the author's characteristics, short, mean, the moral aspect is very strongly expressed. He is especially noticeable in the clash scenes: Buinovsky - Volkovoy, the foreman - Tyurin - foreman Der. Of great importance are short episodes that reveal the relationship of prisoners: Shukhov - Caesar, Shukhov - Senka Klevshin. The best pages of the story include those episodes that show the 104th brigade at work.

The fate of the heroes of the story convinces that Solzhenitsyn did not lead the history of totalitarianism from 1937, but from the first post-October years. This is evidenced by the camp terms of convicts. The unnamed "tall, silent old man" has been sitting since the early Soviet years. Shukhov's first foreman, Kuzemin, was arrested in "the year of the great turning point," and the last, Tyurin, in 1933, in "the year of the victory of the collective farm system." The reward for courage in German captivity was a ten-year term for Senka Klevshin... With the thought of them, with memories of them, Solzhenitsyn began work on his main book, The Gulag Archipelago, which opens with a dedication:

I DEDICATE

to all those who did not have enough life

tell about it.

And may they forgive me

that I didn't see everything

I didn't remember everything

didn't think of everything

A word about the writers Varlam Shalamov.

Born in 1907, and Vologda. His father, a man of progressive views, kept in touch with the exiles who lived in Vologda. The youthful ideal of Varlam is the People's Will - the sacrifice of their feat, the heroism of the resistance of all the might of the autocratic state. In 1926, Shalamov entered the Moscow State University at the Faculty of Soviet Law, actively participated in rallies, literary debates, and poetry reading. On February 19, 1929, Shalamov was arrested for distributing Lenin's will - "a letter to the Congress" - and sentenced to three years in a camp. In 1932 he returned to Moscow and worked in magazines. In 1937 he was arrested again and spent 17 years in the Kolyma camps. In July 1956 he was rehabilitated and returned to Moscow. He writes poems that are published in Znamya, Moscow, Yunost.

His stories about Kolyma life are not printed, they are returned, he died in 1982 without seeing his Kolyma Tales published.

About the fate of the book

Essays from camp life were distributed in samizdat in 1978. A separate book of Shalamov's stories is published in London. In Tolka's homeland in 1987, his first works from the "Kolyma notebooks" appeared.

The Kolyma epic of V.T. Shalamov includes collections of stories and essays: “Kolyma stories”, “Left Bank”, “Essays on the underworld” ... He has a large work “Antiroman” in the tragic epic of Kolyma stories there is no fiction.

The story "Stlanik" by V. T. Shalamov

Better to die standing than to live on your knees.

The story "Stlanik" was written by the Russian writer Varlam Tikhonovich Shalamov in the fifties of our century, during his residence in the Kalinin region, and belongs to the cycle "Kolyma stories". Like many other writers of that time, Varlam Tikhonovich fell victim to totalitarianism. Endless exiles, gold mines, taiga business trips, hospital beds... In 1949, in Kolyma, he first began to record his works. In documentary-philosophical prose, Shalamov expressed the entire long-suffering experience of superhuman trials in Stalin's strict regime camps. Hunger, cold, beatings and humiliation stopped only after the writer was rehabilitated in 1956. But this event, alas, was not the end of all the suffering suffered. As a writer, the author of many thoughtful works, the worst awaited him: a boycott by various literary publications, a complete disregard for creativity. Shalamov's stories were not published. This was motivated by the fact that they lacked enthusiasm, only one abstract humanism. But how could a person who suffered so much from this regime, praise him? Despite the fact that his stories were constantly returned by the editors, he continued to write. The most difficult state of health did not allow him to do it himself, so he dictated his poems and memoirs. Only five years after the death of the writer, in 1987, his first works were published: works from Kolyma notebooks. Among them is the story I'm reviewing.

Dwarf is a taiga tree, a relative of cedar, growing, due to its unpretentiousness, on mountain slopes, clinging to stones with its roots. It is remarkable in that it is able to respond to environmental conditions. In anticipation of a cold snap or snowfall, it clings to the surface, spreads out. This is the literal meaning of the story, its theme. But it seems to me that this tree for Shalamov is not only a weather forecaster. He writes that the dwarf is the only evergreen tree in these northern regions, the tree of hope. Strong, stubborn, unpretentious, he is like a man left alone in the fight against the elements. In summer, when other plants try to bloom as quickly as possible, overtaking each other in this, the elfin, on the contrary, is invisible. He is an unshakable ideologist of the struggle, embraced by the warm breath of summer, does not succumb to temptation and does not change his principles. He is constantly alert and ready to sacrifice himself to the elements. Doesn't it look like people? Remember what humiliation Boris Pasternak was subjected to? And a little later, already, it would seem, at a completely different time, mockery of Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov? Yes, these people survived, although they were misunderstood by the majority and rejected. But many others broke down under the yoke of the totalitarian system. Were they unfaithful to their ideals or just too gullible? Maybe they really faded and left behind only an extinct, cold forest?

Shalamov wrote about the dwarf as a too trusting tree: one has only to make a fire near it, as it immediately raises its fluffy green branches. The fire will go out, and the dwarf, upset by the deceit, will sink, covered with snow. According to the author, human feelings are not so refined. But despite this, people too often remain deceived. If a tree is then able to return to everyday life, then a person is rarely. The appearance of a fire in the life of a cedar can be compared, in my opinion, with the period of the Khrushchev “thaw”. How many people then became victims of deception, betrayal!

As Shalamov wrote, a person has only five senses. Yes, maybe they are not enough to recognize the changes taking place around, but they are quite enough to be imbued with those thousands that took possession of the writer. After reading the story, I realized how important hope is for a person, faith in the best. Like a sprout, an evergreen tree, breaking through a blizzard and cold to sunlight, hope in the human mind makes him believe, defend his ideals. No wonder they say that she is the last to die. In addition, the thought of the exorbitant courage of both a lonely taiga tree and many people fighting for justice did not leave me. Review - a study containing a critical assessment. My rebellious nature, of course, could help me in criticism, but only when I disagree with something. This seemingly abstract work contains so many hidden meanings and various arguments that I simply cannot argue with, that I can only fully share my opinion with the author. If the criticism is positive, then the review was a success for me. And finally, I want to say that it would be wonderful if the fire in the soul of every fighter for justice burned as hot and bright as firewood from a wonderful taiga tree.

An experience of the comparative nature of the works of Solzhenitsyn and Shalamov.

Conclusion.

1) The books of Shalamov, Solzhenitsyn are books of warning. A monstrous experiment on humanity has no right to exist, the regime of a totalitarian state is terrible and cruel. We should be grateful to the people who survived in inhuman conditions and told the world the truth about political prisoners.

2) It is important for Shalamov and Solzhenitsyn to make readers participants in what is happening here and now, to create the illusion of presence. Human attention.

Shalamov's task is to answer the question: can a person endure more than any animal, especially when it comes to 38 years.

3) We perceive the books of repressed writers as a document created on biographical material. These are the Steep Route E, Ginsburg, Black Stones by A. Zhigulin. Simultaneously with these works, during the perestroika years, “Children of the Arbat” by A. Rybakov, “Faculty of Useless Things” by Y. Dombrovsky, “Verny Ruslan” by G. Vladimirov were published.

And this is not all works. This means that the topic continues to be relevant for both writers and readers.

Bibliography.

A.I. Solzhenitsyn "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich".

V.T.Shalamov "Kolyma stories".

S. Averintsev Magazine "New World" 1998 No. 12.

E. Volkova "Varlam Shalamov: the duel of the word with the absurd."

Journal "Questions of Literature" 1997 No. 6.

N.A. Berdlev "The fate of man in the modern world"

Magazine "New World" 1990 No. 1.

A. Latynina "Solzhenitsyn and We"

Magazine "New World" 1990 No. 1.

Dictionary for this topic.

TOTALITAR, -th, -th; -ren, -rna (book). Based on the complete domination of the state over all aspects of society, violence, the destruction of democratic freedoms and individual rights. T. mode. totalitarian state.

DICTATORY, -s, and.

1. State power, ensuring the complete political domination of a certain class, party, group. Fascist d.d. of the proletariat(in Russia: the power of the working class proclaimed by the Bolshevik Party).

2. Unlimited power based on direct violence. Military d.

REPRESSION, -and, and., usually pl. A punitive measure emanating from government agencies. Get repressed. victims of repression.

TERROR, -a, m.

1. Intimidation of their political opponents, expressed in physical violence, up to destruction. Political vol. Individual vol.(single acts of political assassinations).

2. Hard intimidation, violence. T. tyrant.

adj. terrorist, -th, -th (to 1 value). T. act.

GULAG, -a, m. Reduction: the main administration of the camps, as well as an extensive network of concentration camps during the mass repressions. Gulag prisoners.

ZEK, -a, m.(simple). Same as a prisoner.