“In the trenches of Stalingrad” - a story by V.P. Nekrasov. Front-line officer, holder of the medal "For Courage" and the Order of the "Red Star" Captain V.P. Nekrasov began work on the story in 1944, in the hospital, where he was in connection with the second wound. Nekrasov participated in the defense of Stalingrad from beginning to end.

By the autumn of 1945, the manuscript entitled "In the trenches of Stalingrad" was completed, and in 1946 it was published as a novel "Stalingrad" in the magazine "Znamya". The leadership of the Writers' Union met him with hostility. A.A. Fadeev, the head of the Union, crossed out "Stalingrad" with his own hand from the list of works submitted for competition. Stalin Prize. Stalin, however, did not approve this decision: in 1947, the novel was awarded the main state award and is published in a series of books published by the publishing house " Soviet writer» to the 30th anniversary October revolution. After the award of the prize, the story - now this story - "In the trenches of Stalingrad" is printed throughout the country and reprinted by most publishing houses with a total circulation of several million copies, translated into 36 languages.

“In the trenches of Stalingrad” is a landmark work for the entire Soviet literature about the Great Patriotic War: in 10-15 years, “lieutenant prose” will appear, the beginning of which was laid by V. Nekrasov; 40 years later, among the direct forerunners of the novel "Life and Fate" by V. Grossman, critics will name the story "In the trenches of Stalingrad."

For the hero of the story, the regimental engineer Kerzhentsev, just as for V.P. Nekrasov, Stalingrad began at the Crossroads of the Summer Retreat, under the bombs of the first raid on the city, in desperate autumn contracts. The front-line experience of a novice prose writer was somewhat different from the experience of already established writers, for whom the front is an object of depiction. For a combat officer Nekrasov, this is a difficult everyday life, in which he is inexorably included.

Nekrasov stubbornly proved the reliability of intelligence, contrary to the general attitude of those years: at best, the intellectual was assigned the role of a reflective individualist, if not an outright coward. Nekrasov understood intelligence as a combination of intelligence, nobility, fearlessness, openness, and the ability to sympathize. The simplicity of Kerzhentsev's narrative is the simplicity of true intelligence. His speech perfectly coexists with the business-like vigilant thoroughness of an experienced front-line soldier. Military terms, army observations are woven into a free conversation without pressure. The artistic authenticity of "Trenches" is predetermined by the fact that, synthesizing the characters, Nekrasov writes only about what he himself knows. The story "In the trenches of Stalingrad" is free from bureaucratic optimism, its characters do not feel like pawns in the hands of an omniscient strategist. The writer stubbornly believes in the ability of a person to wage a long unequal battle, and, perhaps, it was this view of the participants in the battle that told the story of that reserve vitality, which made her a kind of reference point for future writers.

Nekrasov has his own idea of ​​​​combat, life, death, he does not reject the instinct “There are no thoughts. The brain turned off. Instinct remains - the animal desire for life and expectation. Not even an expectation, but something that cannot be explained in words ... ".

Nekrasov was the first in our literature to speak about the moral responsibility of a commander who sends fighters to their deaths - he spoke about the price of blood. This topic will later become especially close to V. Bykov, G.Ya. Baklanov, Yu. V. Bondarev.

"In the trenches of Stalingrad" - a story of 1946, for which the author was awarded the highest state award at that time - the Stalin Prize. After Viktor Nekrasov was deprived of Soviet citizenship, the book was withdrawn from libraries. The article sets out summary"In the trenches of Stalingrad".

Battle of Stalingrad

What is Nekrasov's story about? The book "In the trenches of Stalingrad", a summary of which is presented below, reflects the events of important period in the war. Nekrasov's story tells about a battle that took place almost eighty years ago on the territory of the Rostov, Voronezh and Volgograd regions. Soviet soldiers spent six months in the trenches of Stalingrad. A summary of the decisive stage of the Second World War is given below.

The German offensive began in July 1942. The plans of the invader included a large bend of the Don, then the Volgodonsk isthmus and, finally, Stalingrad. If the goal had been achieved, a bridgehead would have been created for further offensive and capture of oil fields. The Germans had excellent aviation, they knew what the right military strategy was. However, they lost this battle. The Red Army succeeded in forcing the invaders to capitulate thanks to Operation Uranus. Or perhaps the miracle that one of the heroes of the story speaks of in In the Trenches of Stalingrad.

The Unmistakable Truth

What is the success of the story "In the trenches of Stalingrad"? A brief summary will not answer this question. Only reading the story in the original. The front-line soldiers claimed that Nekrasov's book shows the war as it is. Without embellishment and excessive pathos. Varlam Shalamov, who had never been to the front, called the story "a timid attempt to show something as it is." Andrey Platonov also highly appreciated this book. And finally, before summarizing the chapters of "In the trenches of Stalingrad", it is worth quoting the words of Daniil Granin: "Nekrasov's story is an impeccable truth."

Retreat

So, what did Nekrasov talk about in his work? Summary "In the trenches of Stalingrad" should begin with a description of the retreat of the Soviet troops, which took place in July 1942 near Oskol. The main character is Lieutenant Kerzhentsev. The Germans are approaching Voronezh. The regiment leaves the newly dug fortifications without a single shot being fired. The battalion, led by Kombat Shiryaev, remains without cover. To help him remains main character story. Two days later, they set off on the road, on the way they learn that the regiment is defeated.

Kerzhentsev is accompanied by an orderly Valega for several months. Other heroes of the story are Igor, Sedykh. The battalion goes in search of its own, but on the way it meets the Germans, many die. Kerzhentsev, Valega, Igor and Sedykh are sent to Stalingrad.

Peaceful city

The protagonist reminisces about pre-war life. He has been at the front for a long time, everything that was before, in his native Kyiv, it seems, never existed. What is told in the subsequent chapters of the work of V. Nekrasov? The content of "In the trenches of Stalingrad", at least in the first chapters, is reduced to reflections, memoirs of Lieutenant Kerzhentsev. He is so accustomed to front-line life that he is surprised by the city, which will soon turn into ruins. Here people still read newspapers, argue about literature, visit the library, just live...

Kerzhentsev and his comrades stop at the house of Maria Kuzminichna. The woman treats them to tea with cherry jam. Forgotten peaceful life relaxes. The heroes go for a swim in the Volga, then indulge in reading. On the evening of this day German troops launch an offensive against Stalingrad.

Kerzhentsev - sapper. Lieutenant and sent to the local tractor plant. Here he meets Georgy Akimovich, an electrical engineer, a man who is convinced that only a miracle will help the Soviet troops win this war. There is a painstaking, long preparation for the explosion. Ten days pass. The Germans are mercilessly bombing the city. There is still no order to explode, and Kerzhentsev is sent to the engineering department, located on the other side of the Volga.

Battalion command

The lieutenant is sent to the 184th division. Soon the battalion commander dies, and Kerzhentsev has to take command of the battalion. The lieutenant has two companies at his disposal, which occupy positions at one of the local factories. Here the main character lingers for a long time. Every day begins with a cannonade. So September passes, and then October.

Attack

Soon comes a message that positions need to be changed. It was ordered to occupy the hill on which the enemy machine guns are located. Before the attack, time stretches unbearably slowly. Suddenly, employees of the political department appear, whom Kerzhentsev does not meet with joy at all. The lieutenant sets up inspectors from the command post, and when the attack begins, he unexpectedly takes part in it. The hill can be taken, and without great losses.

Does Viktor Nekrasov divide his heroes into positive and negative ones? In the summary of "In the trenches of Stalingrad" it is worth paying attention to such a hero as Chief of Staff Abrosimov. The captain is sure of the need for a head-on attack. He does not listen to the arguments of either Kerzhentsev or the battalion commander Shiryaev. The protagonist of the story goes on the attack again. 26 people die in this battle. Abrosimov is tried for abuse of power and sent to a penal battalion.

Outlining the summary of Nekrasov's story "In the trenches of Stalingrad", it is worth saying that in this work the author did not create either negative or positive images. He does not force his opinion on the reader. The depiction of the attack, which took place on the orders of Abrosimov, is one of the many officer mistakes that are perhaps inevitable in a war.

Wound

The next day after the trial of Abramov, tanks arrive, which have been waiting for recent months. Soon Kerzhentsev has a birthday. A small celebration is being prepared, which, of course, will not take place, because the battle will suddenly begin. The lieutenant will be wounded, end up in the hospital, and after treatment he will return to Stalingrad, which he will call "home" in his thoughts.

Addendum to the summary

The work "In the trenches of Stalingrad" is conducted in the first person. There are no surprises in the story. plot twists. But the simplicity with which the narrator recounts the events makes a strong impression.

In the first chapters, where we are talking about the misadventures of the heroes even before their arrival in Stalingrad, the lieutenant mentally talks about the war. What is the worst thing on the front? Shells? bombs? The worst thing about war uncertainty, inactivity, the absence of an immediate goal - all that the existence of the retreating soldiers consisted of. It cannot be said that the heroes of Nekrasov are not afraid of bullets, but reading the story, one gets the impression that in Stalingrad they experienced less fear than near Voronezh when they retreated.

The author of this work touches on the topic of friendship in passing. Nevertheless, it is, perhaps, the main one. At the front, Kerzhentsev understands what true friendship is. It is unlikely that any of his Kyiv friends could pull him, wounded, from the battlefield. It is unlikely that Kerzhentsev would go on reconnaissance with anyone because of them. And the orderly Valega would have pulled it out. With him, the lieutenant would go on reconnaissance. The author compares war with litmus paper. Only at the front can you really get to know people.

Publication

A story in the trenches of Stalingrad Nekrasov Viktor Platonovich brought national fame. This piece was published in Znamya magazine. At first, official critics did not accept the story. Moreover, Nekrasov's book would never have been published if no one intervened...

Meeting with Stalin

In Stalin's time, many poets and prose writers suffered. Some were convicted and sent to camps. Others are deprived of the right to publish their works, which is perhaps worse for a real writer. imprisonment. But this does not mean that Stalin understood nothing in literature. He got rid of people who were inconvenient, who did not want to reflect the official ideology in their work.

The story of Viktor Nekrasov is the first work that tells about the war with the utmost truth. This is one of the first books created by front-line soldiers. The story was printed thanks to the personal intervention of Stalin.

Writer and statesman Fadeev struck In the Trenches of Stalingrad from the list of works that were to appear in the pages of Znamya magazine. Stalin introduced. The story has been published. And after some time, state security officers arrived for Nekrasov and took him to the "leader". In one of the essays, the writer later spoke about the meeting with Stalin. According to Nekrasov, he created an unexpected impression, he was a kind of "cozy old man", a pleasant conversationalist, in addition, he respected the work of Platonov, Bulgakov, Babel - writers who suffered from the Soviet regime.

A few words about the author

In 1959, Nekrasov opposed the construction of a stadium in Babi Yar, the site of mass executions carried out by the Nazis during the war. Since then, the writer's relationship with the authorities has deteriorated sharply. He took an active part in rallies, wrote controversial articles. Finally, Nekrasov was accused of "serving the West", and his books were forbidden to be published. In 1974 the writer emigrated to Switzerland. Last years spent in Paris.

Until 1946, the thirty-five-year-old writer Viktor Platonovich Nekrasov was unknown. The story "In the trenches of Stalingrad", which was published literally in the very first months after graduation terrible war, in 1946, made him famous. This work made it possible to re-evaluate the events of the Great Patriotic War the Soviet people. In the center of the image for the first time appeared simple soldiers and their commanders, who fully knew the hardships of front-line life.

V. Nekrasov was born in Kyiv in 1911. He received the specialty of an architect, loved literature, music, theater. From the very first months of the war he became a front-line soldier, served as a military engineer. "In the trenches of Stalingrad" he wrote on the basis of his own front-line experience, his observations and feelings. Nekrasov took part in the defense of Stalingrad and was demobilized after being wounded at the end of the war - in 1945.

After the injury, he did not work well right hand, and on the advice of a doctor, he began to develop it: he wrote a lot. Thus began the story of the defense of Stalingrad. It was first published in Znamya magazine. WITH Our leader I. Stalin approved the work, and in 1947 its author was awarded the Stalin Prize of the second degree.

The story is written in the form of diary entries by a young lieutenant Yuri Kerzhentsev, where he talks about the retreat of Soviet troops from Oskol to the Volga, about fierce battles for Mamaev Kurgan. The main character is educated intelligent person who understands that war is not like peaceful life. He repeatedly catches himself thinking that in war the heart hardens, and human values ​​become completely different. Kerzhentsev is an example of how an ordinary person behaves in a war. During a conversation with Chumak, bullets fly past, Yuri bends down against his will. He, the commander, does not always know what to do, sometimes he feels guilty before the soldiers. Yuri does not refuse the milk and lemon obtained by the orderly Valega. It lacks false heroism, arrogance. We see before us an ordinary person who, at the cost of his life, defended Stalingrad and the whole country.

The author showed the defenders through the eyes of a simple warrior who felt longing for a peaceful life and relatives, pride in his comrades, shame for retreats, fear of the incessant fire in the trenches of Stalingrad. The reader is transported to the battlefield and understands at what terrible price the victory was given to the people.

In the story, along with military events, there are many digressions, in which the hero recalls the pre-war life in his beloved Kyiv. The descriptions of the calm and majestic autumn landscape also contrast with the cruel reality, which helps to feel the whole tragedy of the events that happen to the heroes of the story.

V. Nekrasov is very realistic in his descriptions of human suffering, death, torment of wounded soldiers. A deeply emotional impact on the reader is produced by the episodes of the defense of barns, the capture of a hill by a handful of poorly armed soldiers, against whom enemies with tanks and machine guns go.

The image of Valega is very interesting. Agile, loyal, easily adaptable to any conditions, this simple uneducated eighteen-year-old guy arouses interest and respect. About his orderly, Kerzhentsev said that if the cartridges run out and you need to fight for your homeland with your teeth, his orderly will cope in this situation.

The main idea of ​​this piece is that simple people in inhuman conditions of war, in the trenches they show their best qualities, are able to endure any hardships, show courage, bravery and heroism in battles with any invaders.

The story of Viktor Nekrasov "In the trenches of Stalingrad" was published in parts in the magazine "Znamya" in 1946. The end of the story was published in the same magazine, which was opened by the decision of the Central Committee of August 14, 1946 "On the magazines Zvezda and Leningrad". The resolution became the cause of high ideological vigilance in literature, and in connection with this, the leadership of the Union of Writers crossed out Nekrasov's story put forward by the editors of the Banner for the Stalin Prize. The "Union of Writers" even held two meetings, preparing the forthcoming defeat of the story in the press.

And suddenly, at the behest of Stalin himself, "In the trenches of Stalingrad" was awarded the Stalin Prize, and this saved her from inevitable defeat. Nekrasov's book was not a story of an observer, but of a man who had been in the trenches and who knew all the hardships of war. Nekrasov portrayed the war without embellishment and mitigation; it was a book written from within the war. Nekrasov was the first to truthfully describe the war and its heroes. In the vast majority of works of that time, comfreys were faceless extras, and close-ups depicted heroes invulnerable to bullets and mines, who didn’t care about anything, and this shows that real picture the war was not conveyed to the reader. The image of the war, which was driven into people's heads with the help of propaganda, had nothing in common with what the front-line soldiers experienced.

Nekrasov was able to convey a truthful depiction of the war also because he himself participated in the battle for Stalingrad. He fought in Stalingrad, in Ukraine, in Poland. In 1944 he was demobilized with the rank of captain, received the medal "For Courage" and the "Order of the Red Star"

In his story, Nekrasov talks about what really happened, what the hero saw with his own eyes, what he experienced.

First of all, the novelty of Nekrasov's story lies in a truthful look at the war, far from its pretentious, romantic perception. The reader is presented with military everyday life, the life of ordinary soldiers, their quiet heroism, their judgments about the war, about retreat and victory - in a word, everything that has received the definition of “trench truth”.

The focus on “non-literary” - a direct impression, a story from the scene - determines the originality of the style of Nekrasov's story. The first chapters will allow students to draw some conclusions about the style features of this work. First of all, it is necessary to note the calm, “Chekhovian” manner, the laconicism of the narration, the details play a special role.

The meaning of the symbol is acquired by such details as a still smoking cigarette butt stuck to the lip of a dead soldier (“And it was the worst thing I saw before and after in the war.<…>A minute ago there was still life, thoughts, desires. Now - death”), a signpost with a sign “Stalingrad - 6 km”, directed directly to the sky (“the road to paradise”), a portrait of D. London in Karnaukhov’s dugout, “Lady”, which “somewhere very close something on the balalaika”, although “everyone is shooting and shooting around, and the sky is already purple, and rockets are squealing”. Thus, the events of the war are passed through the consciousness of the hero - this made it possible to create a psychological portrait of a person in the war.

V. Nekrasov, according to V. Bykov, "was ahead of his time" by choosing a hero. Later, in the 50-60s, the stories of V. Bykov "Survive until dawn", G. Baklanov "Span of the earth", Y. Bondarev "Hot snow", V. Kurochkin "In war as in war" will declare itself as called "lieutenant prose", the main characters of which will be young lieutenants - yesterday's school graduates, students who have been trained for several months and immediately sent to the front.

The principle of depicting a Soviet soldier in the work of V. Nekrasov "In the trenches of Stalingrad"

The image of the main character Lieutenant Kerzhentsev

The narration in the story of V. Nekrasov is conducted in the first person: this makes it look like diary entries, essays. In general, the essay was a favorite form of wartime writers. Almost every day of the stay of a military engineer Lieutenant Kerzhentsev at the front is described. In addition to descriptions of the battles, the story contains many memories of the hero, his thoughts about what he experienced, about how the war changed him. Shame, embarrassment feels Yuri because he, the commander, "does not know where his platoon, regiment, division." But it seemed that the worst thing - the retreat near Moscow - was already behind us. But our troops are withdrawing again. Yuri feels guilty towards civilians whom they cannot protect. He feels responsible for what seems to him the most terrible - "inactivity and lack of purpose."

War is hard work, it's not only fighting, but also hard work. physical work. Who just does not sometimes have to be a fighter in the war: and a carpenter, and a carpenter, and a stove-maker. In addition to fighting qualities, the ability to survive and adapt to conditions is also valued at the front.

Blood, sweat, trenches, death... It seemed that Yuri should have gotten used to this long ago. But he can't. One cannot get used to the fact that death is always nearby... Although there is no tragic tone in the story, the main character each time feels the death of his comrades as a personal tragedy, while speaking about it calmly and without anguish. But this calmness is the seeming calmness of a man, an officer who controls himself, despite all the horror surrounding him.

“... Lazarenko was wounded in the stomach. I see his face, suddenly so white, and clenched strong teeth.

-Kaput, it seems... - He tries to smile. …He's all tense. Wants to get up and immediately becomes limp. The lip stops trembling.

We take out of his pockets a penknife, a newspaper folded for smoking, a shabby wallet tied with a red rubber band. In the tunic there is a Komsomol ticket and a letter - a triangle with crooked letters.

We put Lazarenko in the slot, fall asleep with our hands, covering it with a cape. He lies with his legs bent at the knees, as if asleep. This is how the fighters always sleep in the cracks…”.

“... Two hours later the wounded man died. His surname is Fesenko. I learn this from the Red Army book ...

... We move to the neighboring dugout, where the wounded lie. There are four of them. One is delusional. He is wounded in the head. He talks about some zinc troughs, then he calls someone, then again about troughs. He has a completely waxy face and his eyes are closed all the time. He will probably die too.

We do not bury the dead. Mines whistle and explode all around without a break ... ".

The protagonist of the story, Yuri Kerzhentsev, seems to be the least suitable for military life. Architecture, painting, music, books - that's what interested him before the war. It is not for nothing that the scout Chumak tells him: “I thought you were writing poetry. Your look is so poetic.” But his attitude towards Yuri changes from complete disdain to deep respect and recognition of his courage.

Kerzhentsev is not talkative, although he cannot be called withdrawn and not sociable. He tries to find something in common with everyone, he is perplexed by Farber's unsociableness and aloofness. But at the same time, we rarely hear any lengthy reasoning out loud from the hero. In dialogues with minor characters the main character is laconic and short. However, his internal monologue continuous, it is on it that the whole story is built.

Yuri Kerzhentsev talks about the nature of Russian patriotism, about the very “Russian miracle”, about the “hidden warmth of patriotism”, which L. Tolstoy wrote about, that it is stronger than German organization and tanks with black crosses.

“... ask him what socialism or homeland is, he, by God, will not really explain: concepts that are too difficult to define in words for him. But for this homeland - for me, Igor, for his comrades in the regiment, for his rickety hut somewhere in Altai - he will fight to the last bullet. And the cartridges will run out - with fists, teeth ... this is what a Russian person is. Sitting in the trenches, he will scold the foreman more than the Germans, but when he comes to the point, he will show himself ... ".

Kerzhentsev does not argue vehemently, like Igor Svidersky, about the impossibility of the victory of the German army, but one feels his internal disagreement with Georgy Akimovich, who claims that according to all the rules of war, the Germans must win, hidden indignation at the words of Kaluga. But it is precisely what is hidden and internal - aloud and loudly expressing an assessment and opinion about something that the author provides to minor characters.

Kerzhentsev does not shout about the defense of the Motherland, beating his chest, does not rush words about invincibility Soviet army, but it is felt that thoughts of a forced retreat torment him, that anxiety for the fate of the surrendered cities does not let him go.

“…Is the German really wedged in so deeply? Voronezh ... If he really broke through there, our situation is unenviable ... But apparently, he broke through, otherwise they would not have taken us away without a fight. Yes, even from such a frontier as Oskol. And to the Don, it seems, there are no rivers in our area. Is it really to go to the Don ... ".

We feel his pain due to the fact that we had to surrender the defense, leave the Germans one more line, another part of our native land will be desecrated by the invaders. He is tormented by the thought that the retreat is inglorious, without a fight, without a fight, without an attempt to defend the sacred - native land. But an order is an order.

“... The defense on Oskol no longer exists. Everything that yesterday was still alive, shooting, bristling with machine guns and rifles, which was indicated on the diagram by small red arches, zigzags and intersecting sectors, for which thirteen days and nights were spent, dug, blocked in three or four rolls, carefully disguised by grass and branches - nobody needs all this anymore. In a few days, all this will turn into a frog dwelling covered with silt, fill up with black, smelly water, collapse, and be covered with green, fresh grass in the spring. And only kids, knee-deep in water, will roam the places where machine guns once stood with flanking and dagger action, and collect rusty cartridges. We leave all this without a fight, without a single shot ... ".

The look of the protagonist (author?) is tense and studying. The specifics of the conditions of the war make you notice every little thing, peer into people, remembering every feature of faces and characters. Through the eyes of Kerzhentsev, we snatch out of the chaos of the war scattered pictures: how many mines and machine guns are left, how the Chief of Staff Maximov is buttoned up, how gadflies are hovering over the river, German bombers in the sky, in the basement - a cat with kittens, wounded by shrapnel.

But Kerzhentsev, an engineer, performing the routine military work(mining the coast, digging trenches), thoughts are constantly transferred to pre-war life, to his native city, to home, going over in memory every little thing, every detail: from Kyiv chestnuts and Khreshchatyk to the whiskers of an old cat and grandmother's pills. It is as if he finds salvation in these memories from the endless horrors of war, from inhuman fatigue.

“I remember our street - a boulevard with mighty chestnut trees; the trees grew and formed a vault. In spring they turn white and pink flowers like candles. In the fall, the janitors burn the leaves, and the children fill their pockets full with chestnuts. I used to collect too. We brought them home by the hundreds. Neat, varnished, they cluttered drawers, interfered with everyone, and for a long time swept them out from under cupboards and beds. Especially a lot of them have always been under a large sofa. The sofa was nice - soft, spacious. I slept on it. There were a lot of bedbugs in it, but we lived together, and they did not touch me. After dinner, my grandmother always rested on it. I covered her with an old overcoat, which served only for this purpose, and handed over someone's memoirs or Anna Karenina. Then I looked for glasses. They ended up in the sideboard, in a box with spoons. When I found it, my grandmother was already asleep. And the old cat Frakas with a burnt mustache squinted from under a peeling collar ... My God, how long ago it all was! .. Or maybe it never happened, it just seems ...".

It would seem that trifles, ordinary, low-lyric memories, sorting through ordinary household parts, and how much anguish and pain! The hero thinks about the lost hometown, about friends - someone has already died, but he does not know about someone's fate, one can only hope for the best. And all this through the same stubborn, monotonous work being done - for life, for death, for war. And on top of only one thought - retreat, retreat. And heavy guilt. "Quiet. Surprisingly quiet. Even the dogs don't bark. Nobody suspects anything. They are sleeping. And tomorrow they will wake up and see the Germans. And we walk in silence, as if realizing our guilt, looking at our feet, not looking back, not saying goodbye to anyone or anything ... ".

Kerzhentsev is tormented by the thought that during the retreat, peaceful villages and civilians remain behind them. Although he does not think about how they will have to deal with the Germans, these thoughts hang in the air, itching the soul. Through the eyes of the hero, we see the faces of the inhabitants of the abandoned territory, we feel his painful guilt before them, an involuntary guilt, but no less heavy for that. Kerzhentsev feels that, as an officer, he bears great responsibility for everything that happens, feels guilty for being in the wrong place, does not fulfill his duty to the Motherland, cannot answer at least something encouraging in these frightened faces and is forced to lower his eyes and brush off questions.

“... I can’t look at these faces, at these questioning, perplexed eyes. What will I answer them? I have two dice on my collar, a pistol on my side.

Why am I not there, why am I here, why am I shaking on this creaky cart and only waving my hand to all questions? Where is my platoon, my regiment, division? After all, I'm the commander ... ".

Although war, and work, and the responsibility of an officer and engineer, however, Kerzhentsev is attentive to the people around him: to his friend Shiryaev and orderly Volegov, to engineer Georgy Akimovich, to the closed, silent Farber. This is not some special soulfulness of the hero or sentimentality. This is the harsh life of war, bringing people together, forcing them to look at them, to be warm with loved ones - tomorrow you may not be able to do it. The protagonist is sometimes rude to his comrades, irritable and uncommunicative, but in his heart he feels strong affection, tenderness for many of them - not only for his orderly, whom he loves like a brother, but also for Igor, grieving that the war separates them, fearful at the thought that he might never see him again; to Shiryaev, whom he respects as a good fighter and an intelligent commander, and simply as a cheerful comrade, with whom it is easier to share the hardships of war; to Chumak, with whom at first he comes into conflict, but later begins to feel sympathy, respecting and appreciating in him his cockiness, easy, unstrained courage, his sharp tongue and ability to joke in a difficult moment, even his explosive temper, from which he himself at first did not times suffer.

However, this is partly the merit of the protagonist. Kerzhentsev - obviously intelligent type a person with a fine mental organization, a person who reflects. But at the same time, when faced with less intelligent, less educated people, he is able to see in them something better, which he himself may be deprived of: practicality, economic acumen and impeccable devotion of his orderly, the desperate courage of Sedykh, the foresight of Pilipenko. And seeing this in them, he learns to appreciate in people something other than what people of his circle, his type appreciate.

“...After all, I had friends before. There were many friends. We studied together, worked together, drank vodka, argued about art and other lofty matters... But is all this enough? Drinking, arguing, so-called common interests, common culture? Vadim Kastritsky is a smart, talented, subtle guy. I am always interested in him, I learned a lot from him. But would he pull me, wounded, from the battlefield? It didn't interest me before. And now he's interested. And Valega will pull it out. I know this... Or Sergey Velednitsky. Would I go with him to investigate? Don't know. And with Valega - even to the ends of the world. In war you get to know people for real. It's clear to me now. She is like a litmus test, like a special developer ... ".

But at the same time, the hero does not judge other people, those who, perhaps, would not have been "pulled out of the battlefield." He does not judge Kaluga either, in any case, we do not hear words of condemnation from his lips. If the hero expresses his dissatisfaction, he does so through action, as befits a party member, which can be seen in the episode with the scout taking off his watch from the murdered German. But even indignant at this, having risen, the hero gradually comes, although not to the acceptance of such things, then at least to understanding and non-judgment. And in the situation with Abrosimov, we almost do not hear words of condemnation, although there is no doubt that there is condemnation from the author - he expresses it in the words of Shiryaev and Farber, Major Borodin. Kerzhentsev's only reaction to Abrosimov's unacceptable behavior is withdrawal, removal.

“In the army, they don’t agree, but carry out orders,” Abrosimov interrupts. “What did I order you in the morning? ... And, suddenly becoming furious again, he waves a pistol in the air. - March to the attack! I'll shoot you like cowards! Order not to follow!

It seems to me that he is about to collapse and convulse.

-All commanders forward! And go ahead! I'll show you how to save your own skin...

I can't listen anymore. I turn around and leave…”

Once in the burning Stalingrad, Kerzhentsev suddenly feels the whole burden of responsibility, perhaps because he was left without friends for some time (not counting his orderly), perhaps because he was among strangers, many of whom are waiting for his officer's orders. But confused at first, he comes to his senses - in the midst of battle and confusion, among successive shots of the war, both terrible and curious even in their horror.

The skirmish with Chumak shows the reader what the main character is worth not only as a commander and fighter, but simply as a man, as a person with strong will. A conversation with Farber finally convinces us that the hero is an educated person, an intellectual. However, an intellectual who can find mutual language with everyone, to understand not only their own kind, but also people of a different type, a different type of character.

But the main character of Viktor Nekrasov is not perfect image an infallible Russian officer, or a fearless communist "clean hands - a warm heart." He has his weaknesses and human habits. He loves lemon, he gets irritated, feeling guilty before his people, his vanity is offended by Chumak's defiant behavior. But with all this, he is alien to the snobbery and arrogance of an officer - something that we will see in Bondarev's heroes. He does not get his hands dirty with random profit and looting (shameful and inevitable companions of any, the most holy war). He holds back his pride for the sake of discipline in the battalion. He is all bright and clean, but at the same time alive, without a halo and embellishment. Kerzhentsev is alien to false heroism, he admits, if he does not know how to complete the task. But at the same time he understands what needs to be done and will have to be done. “And what is courage anyway? I do not believe those who say that they are not afraid of bombings. They are afraid, they only know how to hide. Others don't. Maximov, I remember, once said: “There are no people who are not afraid of anything. Everyone is afraid. brave people."

We see how the mood of the hero changes: he is either set to work, to activity, or indulges in memories, without breaking away from the main stream of the war. And then we see how fatigue overcomes him, what Boris Slutsky would later call in his poem “tired early old age”, the old age of a young man who has seen too much, who has experienced too terrible for his “age of joy”. " Lusya then asked if I loved Blok. Funny girl. I should have asked if I loved Blok, in the past tense. Yes, I loved him. And now I love peace. Most of all I love peace. So that no one calls me when I want to sleep, does not order ... ". human fatigue, for a long time living a hard life, with frequent nervous tensions. Unless, of course, one can call life in hell, which is any war, a “hard life”. In this context, it sounds more like a euphemism.

As for the image of the protagonist in the battle scenes, in the thick of the events of the war, it cannot be said that he is somehow especially changed or distinguished by the author. In general, these pages of the work are the most “essays”, so to speak. Phrases are short, dry, chopped, but expressive and clear. The hero does what is supposed to be done in war - he attacks, he shoots, he helps his comrades, he gets hurt. But at the same time there is a stream of consciousness going on. Heightened feelings mark everything around: cold, from which fingers freeze, shots, groans, gray skies, bullets, snow. Frames and details flash both around and in the mind of the hero, forcing us to feel this sharpening of perception during the battle.

We don't hear complaints or outrage from the protagonist during and after the battle and attack scenes. However, we feel his pain and bitterness when he talks about the dead and wounded comrades, about Karnaukhov, whose body remains with the Germans - he cannot be taken away or buried. Kerzhentsev is horrified by the simplicity of death in war, although it would seem that he should have gotten used to this for a long time. But the main character each time feels the tragedy of the death of such young, nothing but war guys who have not had time in this life.

“... In total, the battalion lost twenty-six people, almost half, not counting the wounded.

Simple coffins made of unplaned pine boards. Three pits darken.

It's just somehow it's all here at the front. Was there yesterday, not today. And tomorrow, maybe you won't be. And just as deafly the earth will fall on the lid of your coffin. Or maybe there will be no coffin, but it will cover you with snow and you will lie with your face buried in the ground until the war is over.

Three small red mounds rise above the Volga. Three gray earflaps. Three pegs. Salute - dry, small fraction of a machine gun. A moment of silence. Sappers are collecting shovels, touching up the graves.

And it's all. We are leaving.

None of them was more than twenty-four years old ... ".

With pain, Kerzhentsev thinks about the deceased Karnaukhov, about how he saw him last time, about the fact that Karnaukhov did not have time to read his poems to him, that, perhaps, Karnaukhov had a premonition of his death.

Such thoughts haunt everyone in the war, and the main character is no exception. In a peaceful life normal person avoids thoughts of death, lives as if he had eternity at his disposal. Another thing is in the war. Death surrounds people, it is everywhere and everywhere, and it is impossible to ignore its presence, to forget about it. A man in war acutely feels his mortality, he understands that every minute, every second he may no longer see his loved ones, not have time to smile at them, not to have time to complete his task. Death is ubiquitous and omnipresent, it is impossible not to hide and hide, and it is impossible - the duty of a warrior is just the opposite.

Kerzhentsev rarely thinks about his death, that it is possible that he will no longer see his relatives and friends. But it is felt that these thoughts haunt him relentlessly, breaking through the usual reflections and memories. However, the protagonist drives them away from him, realizing that he can succumb to panic, let the horror of war fall on the mind, extinguish it. And this cannot be allowed - he is an officer, he is a commander, his duty is to serve as an example to the soldiers, to keep his head clear.

The protagonist as a warrior and officer is clearly a man of action. It is unbearable for him to be idle in the general activities of the war. He feels lost, not having a combat mission. From the tone of the narrative, we can feel how tense he is outside of hostilities and how collected, focused, being on the front line. War, battle - for him there is no reason to distinguish himself, to make military career, get an order. War is the cause for which he is here, the cause that he tries to do in good faith, and the hero suffers unbearably when he is forced to be removed from him.

“... Yes, the worst thing in war is not shells, not bombs, you can get used to all this; the worst thing is inactivity, uncertainty, the absence of a direct goal. It is much more terrible to sit in a crack in an open field under bombardment than to go on the attack. And in the gap, after all, the chances of death are much less than in the attack. But in the attack - the goal, the task, and you only count the bombs in the gap, whether it will hit or not ... ".

In this striving for action, Nekrasov does not at all want to show some special, extraordinary courage of the protagonist. No, Kerzhentsev openly admits if he feels fear, confusion, the weight of the burden of responsibility of the commander and officer. But this does not torment him, these are only surmountable difficulties. And inactivity frightens him, makes him feel inferior and guilty.

The main character of Viktor Nekrasov is the character most removed from any politics and propaganda. If we hear any political reasoning, then, as a rule, from minor characters (Shiryaev, Farber). Almost all references that can be attributed to this area are either ordinary military jokes. (“let’s put Hitler in a barrel of lice and tie his hands so that he can’t scratch”), or the conversations of simple fighters far from politics (Sedykh, Lazarenko).

The only serious mention of Hitler is at the end of the story, when the hero reads the Fuhrer's speech to Chumak about the capture of Stalingrad and then reflects on how they came to victory. Soviet troops, not being better prepared for war than the Germans, not having the best ammunition and German organization. But even then he does not give any assessment of this, does not speak of patriotism and fortitude. We hear only the joy of victory, the ecstasy of a fighter who defended his homeland. “... And behind those red ruins, - only the walls remained like a sieve, - Rodimtsev's positions began - a strip two hundred meters wide. Just think - two hundred meters, some unfortunate two hundred meters! Go through all of Belarus, Ukraine, Donbass, Kalmyk steppes and not reach two hundred meters ... Ho-ho!

And Chumak asks why. Not anyone, namely Chumak. ... Eh, Chumak, Chumak, your sailor soul, well, you ask stupid questions, and you don’t understand a damn thing. Come here. Go, go... Let's hug. We both drank a little. And come on Valega. Come on, come on ... Drink, squire! .. Drink for victory! You see what the fascists did to the city... Brick and nothing else... But we are alive. And the city... We'll build a new one. Really, Valega? And the Germans are kaput."

The only mention of Stalin (which so surprised and outraged the literary community of that time) - from minor hero- from a minor character, while the main character does not express any coherent opinion in response. And although the statement about the Commander-in-Chief is positive (and what else could it be from the party member and Stalingrader Nekrasov), but how far from the “reinforced concrete” images of Stalin in other works military prose, at least for Bondarev.

“... - But still, what a will he has ... - says Shiryaev, without raising his eyes. - By God...

-Who? - I do not understand.

-Stalin, of course. To contain two such retreats. Just think! In forty-one and now. To be able to drive away from Moscow. And here to become. How much are we already? Third month? And the Germans can't do anything with all their Junkers and Heinkels. And this is after a breakthrough, such a breakthrough!.. After the July days. What was it like for him? What do you think? After all, the second year we pull the strap. And the commander-in-chief for the entire front needs to think. Even then, probably, he does not have time to read the newspaper. What do you think, Kerzhentsev, is he on time or not?

-Don't know. I think it still works.

-Succeeds, do you think? Oh, I don't think so. You feel good. You sit in the dugout, you smoke shag, but if you don’t like it, you get out, you cover it with swearing, well, sometimes you threaten with a gun there ... Yes, you know everything about everything - and you personally climb over every bump, every bump. What does he have? Map? And it has flags. Go find out. And keep everything in your memory - where they advance, where they stand, where they retreat. "No, I don't envy him. I don't envy him at all..."

And although the main character does not like mentioning the importance of the task performed by him and his fighters, it is felt that he understands this well, and, chuckling at Ippolit Astafyev with his “historical mission”, Kerzhentsev in his heart admits that he was partially right. War seems to unite Soviet soldiers left alone with death, with the rest of the world, which is also at war with fascism, ”just like they are, here, on Stalingrad land.

“... Allied aviation made small raids on Lae, Salamaua, Bua in New Guinea and on the island of Timor. Fighting with the Japanese in the Owen-Stanley sector became somewhat more intense. American troops arrived in Monrovia, the capital of Liberia .. And here, at a depth of fourteen meters, one and a half kilometers from the front line, which the whole world is now talking about, I feel so comfortable ... "

Summing up, we can say that the image of Lieutenant Kerzhentsev in the story is not an image of a fighter and not a communist as such. First of all, it is an image of a Man. A person, the same as everyone else, no better and no worse. A person who has a family, relatives, friends, smokes, has preferences in food, knows German, music loving Tchaikovsky and reading poetry, proud, but restrained, silent, but insightful. All these small parts make the image of the protagonist humane, not propaganda-patriotic. But for all that, this "ordinary" person, there, in the burning Stalingrad, created a feat. A feat for the sake of life on earth.