Composition on the theme Moral images of the story by Vasil Bykov “Sotnikov. To help the student Moral images of the work in Bykov centurions paintings

Composition

Sotnikov has someone to protect, he has something to die for. And the only opportunity given to him of freedom in a fatal, hopeless situation - to make his own last choice - Sotnikov used in full: he preferred, in conscience, to "leave this world" than to remain in it at the cost of abandoning his conscience, he preferred to die as a man than to survive as a bastard . The story contains the following reflection by Sotnikov: “Rybak was a good partisan, probably considered an experienced foreman in the army, but as a person and citizen he certainly lacked something. However, how could this Rybak get it, who, after his five classes, hardly read a dozen good books." The book here is a sign, if you will, a symbol. Moreover, the symbol is fundamental: what is strict and economical in Bykov's prose, what is the harsh picture of the war he creates, but the image of the book is one of the most stable in his artistic world.

Already in Bykov's first military story, in "Crane Cry", the most remarkable detail of the appearance of the Red Army soldier Boris Fischer, an art critic in peacetime, was the old book "The Life of Benvenuto Cellini", which he kept in a bag next to a piece of stale bread and several clips of cartridges. In the Obelisk, Prince Andrei's monologue sounds, which the sick Ales Ivanovich Moroz reads to his students. And Lieutenant Ivanovsky from the story "To Live Until Dawn" regrets that in childhood he did not have time to read good books, "and he did not have to read anything better than Gaidar in his life." And in "His Battalion" Captain Ivanov, in a dugout, consider it at the very "front end", revels in poems from Yesenin's collection ... Moreover, with Bykov, a book is not the privilege of art history candidates or school teachers. Pyotr Kachan reads the Bible by the light of an oil lamp, and in response to Rybak's remark ("I see the Bible for the first time") the old man grumbled, not without reproach: "And in vain. It would not hurt to read it." And a simple uncle from Budilovichi, modestly attesting himself - "I am a dark man", fully enlightened the idea of ​​the need for moral standards from Dostoevsky's book, which Miklashevich, a student of Ales Ivanovich Moroz, read aloud in the hospital.

For Bykov, the image of a book always acts as a lapidary and capacious symbol of spiritual culture, moreover, a conscious culture. This image is a symbol of the inner strength hidden in a person, the strength on which he relies in his resistance to the soulless will of fate. This is the line in which "a dozen good books" that Rybak did not read, and a huge grandfather's chest with books that Sotnikov read as a child under the clever guidance of his father, a heroic squadron commander and a modest watchmaker, fit in. In the same row, Rybak's dislike for "book science", his five classes and the teacher's institute Sotnikov. With Bykov, all the details are significant.

These "signs" lead to the deepest sources of what later, in the trials of fate, leads a person to the greatness of a feat or to the baseness of a fall. In Bykov's stories, the disengagement and confrontation of the central characters is epicly assessed by what Pushkin called "popular opinion." In "Sotnikov" the bearers of this opinion are old Peter, the mother of three children Demchikha, the Jewish girl Basya (behind these images the biblical symbolism flickers - the Elder, the Mother and the Child). And they, following the simple laws of morality - a sense of dignity, decency, gratitude, go to death along with Sotnikov. This is how an organic connection is manifested between the mature worldview of an intelligent person and the original norms of humanity that have developed in the common people over many centuries of their difficult life on earth.

Other writings on this work

Vasil Bykov is a military writer. His books describe everyday military events, the life and life of soldiers, and shows all the ugly sides of a brutal war that breaks the fate of people.

In the book "Sotnikov" there are two main characters, Sotnikov and Rybak. They have a lot in common, they are both brave and courageous warriors, both at the front from the first days of the war. Both Sotnikov and Rybak have a fierce hatred of the Nazis and their henchmen. They are reliable comrades, ready to help, despising danger. On their account, the killed Fritz, exploits, wounds. In these two heroes there are differences, both external and internal.

Sotnikov is an intellectual to the marrow of his bones, before the war he worked as a school teacher. He is in poor health and has lung problems since childhood. Being an excellent warrior and comrade-in-arms helps him with strong fortitude, determination and perseverance. His ideological considerations cannot be broken, he is firmly convinced that fascism is an evil that must be destroyed.

At the beginning of the war, Sotnikov was the commander of a battery, which was completely destroyed in the first battle. Sotnikov was captured, but he was lucky to escape. He joined the partisan detachment, and again began to fight.

The fisherman is a healthy village guy, from childhood he knows all the “charms” of peasant labor. Being a good fighter helps him great physical strength and endurance, as well as excellent health. The fisherman is a prudent, economic man. He was the foreman of the company, then he was wounded. After he recovered, Rybak went to the partisan detachment.

The detachment commander instructed the soldiers to get some food for the detachment, and the choice fell on Sotnikov and Rybak.

Other fighters were asked to go, but they refused, and Sotnikov volunteered. Although he did not feel well, his high ideological principles did not allow him, like others, to refuse, and Sotnikov went. It is very difficult for him, he constantly has a heavy cough, and he is not dressed for the weather. The fisherman takes care of his friend all the way, he helps him to go. At the headman's, he gives Sotnikov the opportunity to warm up. He does all the work, Sotnikov is just a burden for him, especially after being wounded. The fisherman does not reproach him, he even sympathizes with his sick and wounded friend. The highly moral Sotnikov deeply feels guilty, because he understands that he is unable to fulfill his duty to the country, to the people. He suffers agonizingly that he let Rybak down, the innocent woman Demchikha, blames himself for treating the headman too softly.

Having been captured by the police, these feelings are aggravated even more, and at the last moment he wants to change everything. Sotnikov takes everything upon himself, shielding his friends in misfortune, but this does not bring any result. The police have already made a decision, and the innocent people are waiting for the noose. Sotnikov, smiling at the boy from the crowd, calmly accepts death.

The fisherman is trying to the last to find some loophole, a struggle takes place in his soul. Rybak hates the Nazis, but he wants to save his life. He thinks that if you find yourself among the enemies, you can fight from the inside with the fascist machine that crushes the minds and lives of people. The desire to survive at any cost pushes him to betrayal, and at the last moment Rybak goes over to the side of the enemy. And yet, Rybak realized what a mistake he had made, that now he had no way out. He remained to live physically, but died spiritually, and there is no return.

Some interesting essays

• The main characters of the fairy tale Town in Odoevsky's snuffbox (characteristic)

  Tale of V.F. Odoevsky's "Town in a Snuffbox" is unusual in its narration and characters. The author managed to combine reality and fantasy of what is happening into a single connection. A boy who fell asleep next to a musical snuffbox

• Kolobok - an analysis of a Russian folk tale

  The fairy tale tells about a kolobok hero who did not let grandma and grandpa eat it, made from low-quality ingredients, or rather from scraped flour and swept in the bottom of the barrel.

• Characteristics of Trishka and his image in the comedy Undergrowth Fonvizin

  Serf Trishka, belonging to the Prostakov family, was bred to demonstrate the ignorance of the nobles. The purpose of the writer was to glorify the mind and stigmatize ignorance

Youth is the best time. At this time, you are full of strength and energy. Your heart is full of bright hopes and it seems to you that only good things lie ahead. It is very important for young people to be recognized in society.

Each country has its own cultural and historical heritage. This tradition also exists in Russia. Many different exhibits and relics are also stored in our country.

A new stage in the creative development of V. Bykov was opened by the story "Sotnikov" - one of the most profound works about the war, not only by the writer himself, but also in all multinational Soviet literature. "Sotnikov" is firmly connected with the previous stories of the prose writer. Critics A. Adamovich, Naumova, Lazarev have already noted the connection between Sotnikov and the Kruglyansky Bridge. Sotnikov has a cruel choice: it is better to die as a man than to live as a beast. About the idea of ​​Sotnikov, V. Bykov wrote: “First and foremost, I was interested in two moral problems, which can be formulated as follows: “What is a person in the face of the annihilating force of inhuman circumstances? What is he capable of when the possibilities to protect life are exhausted to the end and it is impossible to prevent death? Both front-line soldiers and partisans equally remember these questions from their combat experience, when they had to be solved not mentally, but practically, at the cost of blood, putting life at stake. But no one wanted to lose their one and therefore dear life. And only the need to remain human to the end forced to go to death. At the same time, there were people who tried to combine the incompatible: to save life and sin against humanity, which in a tragic situation turned out to be incredibly difficult, if not completely hopeless. In many ways, Sotnikov is an ordinary war worker. He is one of the ordinary representatives of the multi-million army. Sotnikov is by nature not a hero at all, and when death becomes a reality, he chooses it primarily because his moral basis in such circumstances does not allow him to do otherwise, to look for another way out. Sotnikov's incredulity, even cruelty towards people is noticeable. Only by the end of the work Sotnikov overcomes his straightforwardness, becomes much softer. Sotnikov's feat, which has primarily a moral, spiritual meaning, lies precisely in this: humanity, high spirituality, which, as an unconditional value, necessarily includes devotion to the Motherland; and Sotnikov defends it to the very end, to the last breath, confirming the ideals with death itself. “For me, Sotnikov is a hero. Yes, he did not defeat the enemy, but he remained a man in the most inhuman situation. As a feat, his resilience is also considered in the eyes of those few dozen people who witnessed his last minutes, ”Bykov insists. Sotnikov, too, "was sometimes afraid for his life, when he could easily and unnoticed die in battle." “Coming out of the battle alive, he concealed in himself a quiet joy that the bullet had passed him.” All this was humanly understandable and natural. It is known that Sotnikov, like other heroes of V. Bykov. knew how to fight the enemy "until the last minute." In the partisans, he ceased to be afraid of death. It was important for him to live when he was a commander in the army. Having been captured by the Nazis, he thinks of death with weapons in his hands as a great luxury. Here he almost envied the thousands of those lucky ones who found their end on numerous battlefields. Before the hanging, Sotnikov reappears a hatred of death that is very natural for a person, an unwillingness to say goodbye to life. Sotnikov, before his death, wanted to laugh, but he finally chuckled with his exhausted, pathetic smile. I'm going to die. Sotnikov is not so much thinking about himself as he is concerned about doing something for others. And so that death is not dirty. Rybak is a former guerrilla comrade, now a traitor. Rybak in the first parts of the book is shown to us as a good partisan, who behaves in a comradely way with Sotnikov, thinks about other partisans. In the army, Rybak, thanks to his quickness, rose from a private to the position of foreman. In a word, he is a very good person, if we take him at the household level, in ordinary, human circumstances. We can say that there is no price for him. But the fact of the matter is that war, in presenting its cruel demands, very often offered inhuman circumstances. The fisherman understood this and tried to hold on. When he got into a shootout with Sotnikov and then, when it calmed down for a while, he sighs with relief, thinking that everything is over, that Sotnikov is dead. This means that it was not the pain for his death that arose in Rybak in the first place, but a feeling of relief caused by the fact that in this case it is definitely not necessary to take risks yourself again. The author connects the betrayal with the insignificance of Rybak's moral and ethical ideas, with the low development of his spiritual world. He turned out to have insufficient human, spiritual potential, not enough moral strength to be not only a good partisan, but also to endure to the end in difficult circumstances, paying for it with his life. The fisherman cannot do this, because it was more important for him to survive, no matter what. Bykov wrote: “The fisherman is also not a scoundrel by nature: if circumstances had developed differently, perhaps a completely different side of his character would have manifested itself, and he would have appeared before people in a different light. But the inexorable force of military situations forced everyone to make the most decisive choice in human life - to die or remain a scoundrel, and everyone chose his own. Spiritual deafness does not allow Rybak to understand the depth of the fall. It is only at the end that he sees, irremediably belatedly, that in some cases surviving is no better than dying. In captivity, Rybak begins to cautiously approach the policemen, trick them and get out. And it rolls, rolls down, more and more losing humanity in itself, surrendering one position after another. Already inexorably sliding into the abyss of betrayal, Rybak all the time reassures himself that this is not the end, that he can still fool the policemen. Bykov describes Sotnikov's latest gesture: "Before being punished, he knocks out a stand from under his feet in order to prevent Rybak, who betrayed him, from doing it." Sotnikov wants Rybak, who has not yet smeared his hands with blood, to have the opportunity to change his mind, not to completely lose his soul. Popular morality has always resolutely condemned betrayal, especially when it entailed the death of innocent people.

Literature lesson

Class

“The problem of moral choice in the story of V.V. Bykov "Sotnikov"

During the classes

A moral person does a lot for the sake of

their friends and for the sake of the fatherland, even if

he had to lose his life.

Aristotle

The 20th century is the century of global changes, catastrophes, the century of revolutions and the most severe wars. This is a turning point in human history. People who fell into the millstones of history were forced to make their own moral choice: to commit a noble deed and perish, to abandon their moral principles and save their lives. What is more important - everyone decides for himself. Sometimes this choice was unbearably difficult, crushing a person who deviated from the concepts of honor, justice and goodness. Sometimes even decent, honest people could not cope with the natural desire to save their lives at all costs. The era broke human souls and crushed people's ideas about morality, ethics, forcing them to renounce the usual moral values. And only those people who managed to preserve human dignity, who remained true to their convictions, who did not betray their ideals, deserve to be called heroes.

In the story of Vasil Bykov, as in many other works of the 20th century, the problem of moral choice is the main one. Today we dedicate a lesson of literature to the discussion of this problem. It is impossible to reveal the theme of moral choice without a comparative description of the main characters of the story - Sotnikov and Rybak.

(On the blackboard) “... first of all and mainly I was interested in two moral points, which can be simplified as follows: what is a person in the face of the crushing force of inhuman circumstances? What is he capable of when the possibilities to defend his life are exhausted to the end and it is impossible to prevent death?

A word about a writer

Vasil Vladimirovich Bykov (1924 - 2003)

Born in the village of Bychki, Ushachsky district, Vitebsk region, into a peasant family. In June 1941, he passed the exams for the 10th grade as an external student. The war found him in Ukraine, where he participated in defense work. During the retreat, in Belgorod, he lagged behind his column and was arrested and almost shot as a German spy. He fought as part of an army engineering battalion. Drafted into the army in 1942, he graduated from the Saratov Infantry School. In the autumn of 1943 he was promoted to the rank of junior lieutenant. Participated in the liberation of Romania, with the army went through Bulgaria, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Austria; senior lieutenant, commander of a regimental platoon, then army artillery. He recalled the war in the book of memoirs "Long Road Home" as follows:

In 1955 he finally demobilized from the army. From the end of 1997 he lived abroad in political exile in Finland, Germany, the Czech Republic. Buried in Minsk.

Analysis of the work

The story "Sotnikov" was written in 1970.

Comparative characteristics of Sotnikov and Rybak

- Compare the portraits of the heroes. What conclusion can be drawn?

What qualities of character are disposed to Rybak?

At what point does he become wary of him?

At the headman

How did Rybak's refusal to shoot the headman Peter, contrary to Sotnikov's demands, reveal the difference in the moral positions of his comrades? Whose side is the author on?

Tendency to compromise

Shootout with the police

(Only the thought of how he would explain what had happened to the commander of the detachment made Rybak return for the wounded)

Attitude towards a friend

3) In Demchikha's house

How does Dyomchikha behave during the arrest of partisans?

Compare the behavior of the woman and Rybak.

(Dyomchikha does not reproach the partisans for her tragedy, despite the fact that her children will remain complete orphans.)

- What worries each of the characters?

Images of policemen

How are the policemen depicted in the story: Stas, Budila, Portnov?

Find in the text words that give an expressive description of these characters.

(The author deeply despises traitors. Having deviated from moral laws, they ceased to be people. The policemen in the story “squeal”, “scream”, “bristle”, i.e. behave like mongrels who curry favor with their masters. Stas even betrayed his own language, speaking a wild mixture of Belarusian and German": "Go to the basement! Bitte please!")

In captivity

(Concessions to evil in the name of good are impossible. Having embarked on the path of treason, you can’t turn off it later. The colonel’s refusal to make any compromises was his last victory over the enemy. The colonel’s act is the ideal behavior of a true patriot.)

- What horrified Rybak when he saw Sotnikov returning after interrogation?

(Peter: "Beasts." Fisherman: the same will happen to him.)

– What position did Rybak take during the interrogation?

(Adjust, cunning.)

- What irritates him in Sotnikov? (Principledness.)

- And Sotnikova? (Silence. At first I wanted to take over everything in order to close others.)

Why wasn't Rybak tortured?

How will his journey end?

- What does Sotnikov see as the reason for the fall (betrayal) of Rybak? (He is a good partisan, but his human qualities fall short.)

Moral Choice

What moral choice do Sotnikov and Rybak make?

Sotnikov's dream

Comment on the hero's dream.

Dream: the father says in a dream: "There was fire, and there was the highest justice in the world ...". There is a Supreme Court, before which everyone is responsible without exception. The boy in Budyonovka is the personification of the coming generation: Sotnikov must repeat the feat of the Russian colonel in the face of the future, pass on the testament to future generations.

(Sotnikov takes all the blame, trying to save other people - it is important for him to die with dignity by doing good.)

The final

Pay attention to how the hero's vocabulary changes in the finale. Physical weakness recedes into the background. We hear the voice of a wise, tired man. Words of high spirituality, timeless, sound in his speech.

(Conscience is the measure of actions. Mercy, endure, conscience, morality, Btbliya)

There is no word God, no prayer sounds, but the words of the prayer are read in the semantics of the text. Prophet Isaiah:

Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil, who revere darkness as light, and light as darkness, who consider bitter to be sweet, and sweet to be bitter!
Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes and prudent in their own eyes!
Wash yourself, cleanse yourself; remove your evil deeds from my eyes; stop doing evil;
Learn to do good; looking for the truth...
(Book of Isaiah: ch. 5:20-21; ch. 1:16-17)

- As if the lines from the father's Bible sound. It seems that Sotnikov ascended not to the scaffold, but to some unthinkable height from which he could even look at Rybak without anger.

- Confirm with the text this height of Sotnikov and the fall of Rybak.

– What does Sotnikov see from this height?

(Nature, the eyes of a child, the church - a world that will not betray him.)

(The fisherman executes his comrade with his own hands. And although he is saved from physical death, he dooms himself to a long, shameful death of the traitor, Judas. The fisherman, like Judas, tries to hang himself, and nowhere else but in the latrine, among the stench of human waste, is even ready to throw himself head down, but he does not dare. The humiliating existence of a slave becomes a life sentence for him.)

On the board is an image of an old church.

– Church… Describe it… (“Abandoned by people, but not far from the village” – the hope that maybe people will turn their eyes to it again, and then what their souls have lost will return again.)

- The eyes of a boy. There is an artistic device in Russian literature that Blok would later call "meeting the eyes". Spark - spiritual understanding - continuity here.

L.N. Thanks to such a meeting of the eyes, the French officer did not send Tolstoy to the death of Pierre Bezukhov. In Dostoevsky, the meeting of Sonya's bright eyes and Raskolnikov's dark ones unites them.

- In a difficult situation of choice, Rybak turned out to be Judas, who betrayed both Sotnikov and his comrades, he himself determined the price of his life in the face of threatened death. Sotnikov, in the face of inexorable death, makes the only possible choice for himself of his father's precepts - the salvation of honor, conscience, soul. And, who knows, maybe if Sotnikov had had his father’s Bible in the last minutes of his life, he would have reread these very lines ...

Listen to them too. Try to find an echo in your own soul:

When they betray you, do not worry about how or what to say; for in that hour you will be given something to say...
And do not be afraid of those who kill the body, but cannot kill the soul; but rather fear the One Who can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna…
Enter through the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and many go through it;
For narrow is the gate and narrow is the way that leads to life, and there are few who find it.
(Gospel of Matthew: ch. 10:19, 28; ch. 7:13-14)

How do you understand the ending of the story?

(Having stumbled once, a person can no longer stop, no matter how much he wants to. A life bought by betrayal is worthy of only contempt. A person who has not changed his moral convictions, even after dying, remains forever alive in the memory of his descendants.)

9) Results

A) teacher's word

Bykov's prose is characterized by the opposition of a person's physical and moral health. However, the inferiority of the soul is not revealed immediately, not in everyday life: it is necessary "moment of truth", a situation of categorical moral choice. Two are sent to partisan reconnaissance: Rybak, full of vitality, and the intelligent Sotnikov, who is not distinguished by power, volunteered to go on a mission, despite the illness. Sotnikov is a purely civilian person who worked as a school teacher before the war. Physical strength is replaced by stubbornness and strength of character.

Rybak, from the age of 12, was engaged in hard peasant labor, he more easily endured physical exertion and hardships of partisan life. The fisherman is more inclined to moral compromise. He refuses to shoot the headman Peter, who served the Nazis. But what is good in a peaceful life is disastrous in a war. Sotnikov perfectly understands the laws of war, he knew what captivity, betrayal is, therefore he did not compromise with his conscience.

Bykov does not spare black colors for depicting policemen: people who deviate from moral laws cease to be people for him.

The fisherman is trying to outwit his enemy, not realizing that he has already embarked on the path of betrayal, because he put his own salvation above the laws of honor, camaraderie. Step by step, he gradually yields to the enemy, betraying first Demchikha, then Sotnikov. Sotnikov, unlike Rybak, tries to take the blame of other people in order to save them, it is important for him to die with dignity. Like Christ, Sotnikov goes to his death for "his friends", in the name of humanity. Like Christ, he will be betrayed by a comrade.

B ) Evaluation of performances and work of students in the lesson.

(A report on the decision made in the group, on how the group worked. Evaluation of work in groups is carried out by the students themselves.)

C) Assignment for those who failed to prove themselves during the seminar:

Explain the following words and expressions: morality, moral choice, honor, betrayal, nobility, patriotism.

G) Record the conclusion on the topic of the lesson in a workbook.

10) Homework:

Write a detailed answer to the following questions:

- « What is the essence of Sotnikov's feat?»

- « How does Rybak become a traitor?»

Application

Task for the lesson in groups

Task for all groups:

Find portraits of Sotnikov and Rybak in the text of the story, compare them. How are the characters in the story different from each other? How did each of them get into the partisans?

How do you understand the ending of the story? Explain its meaning.

1 group:

How did Rybak's refusal to shoot the headman Peter, contrary to Sotnikov's demands, reveal the difference in the moral positions of his comrades? Whose side is the author on?

How do the heroes of the story manifest themselves in the episode of the shootout with the policemen?

2 group:

Why did Rybak, who was scared, still return to the rescue of his comrade?

What role does the scene of the interrogation of the Russian colonel play in the story, witnessed by Sotnikov during the interrogation in captivity?

3rd group:

How does Dyomchikha behave during the arrest of partisans? Compare the behavior of the woman and Rybak in this situation?

How are the policemen depicted in the story: Stas, Budila, Portnov? Find in the text words that give an expressive description of these characters.

4th group:

What moral choice does Rybak make when trying to save himself?

Can he be called an inveterate villain?

What moral choice does Sotnikov make? How does he behave on the eve of death? Comment on the hero's dream.

Why does Sotnikov, looking at the noose prepared for him, think: “One for two”?

Similar information.

In Bykov's story, the author shows how selfless a person can be. Using the example of partisan Sotnikov, who was captured by the Nazis and remained faithful to his homeland to the end, the author shows the reader his attitude to this situation.

Sotnikov is a young man of twenty-eight. He is by nature very ambitious and easy-going. He is used to always and everywhere going to the end. This desire, throughout his life, brought him both major troubles and victories.

Sotnikov is a man of conscience and honor. For him, these concepts are inseparable. He tries to always tell the truth and do as his heart tells him. Therefore, some of his impulses seem to the reader a little naive and even frivolous. Take, for example, the fact that Sotnikov, in a sick state, with a "fellow soldier" goes to get food for the detachment. This manifestation of excessive demands on oneself, and on others, leads both men to captivity to the police. Perhaps such behavior can be called "stupid", but a man is not a fool. He has a constant comprehension of his life in his head. He evaluates not only his position, but also those around him, fearing to burden them with his "incapacity".

In the basement, when the man came to his senses, he began to understand the hopelessness of the situation. He was clearly aware that only execution lay ahead. This time, the old woman will come for everyone, and take them into her arms. Although the man did not want to die in battle, he considered it a shame to die from a bullet in captivity. But what can he do? He will not be able to save himself, but here are the rest, you can try. Therefore, Sotnikov decides to finally commit a heroic deed - tomorrow he will say that he is a partisan and take the blame.

What to dissemble, anyone sitting in the basement wanted to live. Each of them had their own future plans. However, Sotnikov had the last hope that perhaps this recognition would help someone, and maybe everyone else, survive. He "sacrificed himself" neither for fame nor for gratitude, but to clear his own conscience. He did everything he could - so he lived his life not in vain. Thanks to his deed, someone else will be delighted with the light, will dream, will leave a mark on history.

And yet the man "miscalculated." He did not even imagine that his comrade Rybak, thought otherwise, and for the sake of his own salvation, was ready to betray his homeland. This circumstance greatly upset Sotnikov, and practically killed his faith in people.

The man went to hang, overcoming pain and fatigue. He did not need anyone's pity, sympathy, or any other feeling that offends and humiliates his manhood. He was independent of this craving for life, and yet he did not want to die.

Finally, Sotnikov pushed his former comrade away from him, who was trying to help him climb the stump in order to reach the noose. He considered it beneath his own dignity to show weakness and give others a reason to laugh at him. Yes, let him die, but the enemies will be defeated just as sooner or later.