literature school number 28
Nizhnekamsk, 2012
1. Introduction 3
2. "Life of Boris and Gleb" 4
3. "Eugene Onegin" 5
4. Demon 6
5. The Brothers Karamazov and Crime and Punishment 7
6. Thunderstorm 10
7. The White Guard and The Master and Margarita 12
8. Conclusion 14
9. List of used literature 15
1. Introduction
My work is about good and evil. The problem of good and evil is an eternal problem that has worried and will worry humanity. When fairy tales are read to us in childhood, in the end, good almost always wins in them, and the fairy tale ends with the phrase: "And they all lived happily ever after ...". We grow, and over time it becomes clear that this is not always the case. However, it does not happen that a person is absolutely pure in soul, without a single flaw. In each of us there are shortcomings, and there are many of them. But that doesn't mean we're evil. We have a lot of good qualities. So the theme of good and evil arises already in ancient Russian literature. As they say in the “Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh”: “... Think, my children, how merciful and merciful God is to us. We are sinful and mortal people, and yet, if someone harms us, we are ready, it seems, to pin him right there and take revenge; and the Lord to us, the Lord of life (life) and death, bears with us our sins, although they exceed our heads, and throughout our life, like a father who loves his child, and punishes, and again draws us to Himself. He showed us how to get rid of the enemy and defeat him - with three virtues: repentance, tears and alms ... ".
"Instruction" is not only a literary work, but also an important monument of social thought. Vladimir Monomakh, one of the most authoritative princes of Kyiv, is trying to convince his contemporaries of the perniciousness of internecine strife - Rus', weakened by internal hostility, will not be able to actively resist external enemies.
In my work, I want to trace how this problem has changed for different authors at different times. Of course, I will dwell in more detail only on individual works.
2. "The Life of Boris and Gleb"
We meet a pronounced opposition of good and evil in the work of ancient Russian literature "The Life and Destruction of Boris and Gleb", written by Nestor, a monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery. The historical basis of events is as follows. In 1015, the old prince Vladimir dies, who wanted to appoint his son Boris, who was not in Kyiv at that time, as the heir. Boris's brother Svyatopolk, plotting to seize the throne, orders to kill Boris and his younger brother Gleb. Near their bodies, abandoned in the steppe, miracles begin to happen. After the victory of Yaroslav the Wise over Svyatopolk, the bodies were reburied and the brothers were proclaimed saints.
Svyatopolk thinks and acts at the instigation of the devil. The “historiographical” introduction to life corresponds to the ideas of the unity of the world historical process: the events that took place in Rus' are only a particular case of the eternal struggle between God and the devil – good and evil.
"The Life of Boris and Gleb" - a story about the martyrdom of the saints. The main theme also determined the artistic structure of such a work, the opposition of good and evil, the martyr and the tormentors, dictated a special tension and “poster” directness of the culminating scene of the murder: it should be long and moralizing.
In his own way he looked at the problem of good and evil in the novel "Eugene Onegin".
3. "Eugene Onegin"
The poet does not divide his characters into positive and negative ones. He gives each of the characters several conflicting assessments, forcing them to look at the characters from several points of view. Pushkin wanted to achieve maximum lifelikeness.
The tragedy of Onegin lies in the fact that he rejected Tatyana's love, fearing to lose his freedom, and could not break with the world, realizing its insignificance. In a depressed state of mind, Onegin left the village and "began wandering." The hero, who returned from a journey, does not look like the former Onegin. He will no longer be able, as before, to go through life, completely ignoring the feelings and experiences of the people he encountered, and think only about himself. He has become much more serious, more attentive to others, now he is capable of strong feelings that completely capture him and shake his soul. And then fate again brings him to Tatyana. But Tatyana refuses him, because she was able to see that selfishness, that selfishness that lay at the basis of his feelings for her .. In Tatyana, offended feelings speak: it was her turn to reprimand Onegin for not being able to see all the depth in her in time her soul.
In Onegin's soul, there is a struggle between good and evil, but, in the end, good wins. We do not know about the further fate of the hero. But perhaps he would have become the Decembrists, to which the whole logic of the development of character, which had changed under the influence of a new circle of life impressions, led.
4. "Demon"
The theme runs through all the work of the poet, but I want to dwell only on this work, because in it the problem of good and evil is considered very sharply. The demon, the personification of evil, loves the earthly woman Tamara and is ready to be reborn for good for her sake, but Tamara, by her nature, is not able to respond to his love. The earthly world and the world of spirits cannot converge, the girl dies from one kiss of the Demon, and his passion remains unquenched.
At the beginning of the poem, the Demon is evil, but by the end it becomes clear that this evil can be eradicated. Tamara initially represents good, but she causes suffering to the Demon, since she cannot answer his love, which means that for him she becomes evil.
5. The Brothers Karamazov
The history of the Karamazovs is not just a family chronicle, but a typified and generalized image of contemporary intellectual Russia. This is an epic work about the past, present and future of Russia. In terms of genre, this is a complex work. It is a fusion of "life" and "novel", philosophical "poems" and "teachings", confessions, ideological disputes and judicial speeches. The main problem is the philosophy and psychology of "crime and punishment", the struggle between "God" and "devil" in the souls of people.
Dostoevsky formulated the main idea of the novel "The Brothers Karamazov" in the epigraph "Truly, truly, I say to you: if a grain of wheat, falling into the ground, does not die, it will bear much fruit" (Gospel of John). This is the thought of the renewal that inevitably takes place in nature and in life, which is invariably accompanied by the dying of the old. The breadth, tragedy, and irresistibility of the process of renewing life are explored by Dostoevsky in all their depth and complexity. The thirst for overcoming the ugly and ugly in consciousness and actions, the hope for a moral rebirth and familiarization with a pure, righteous life overwhelm all the heroes of the novel. Hence the "anguish", the fall, the frenzy of the heroes, their despair.
At the center of this novel is the figure of a young commoner, Rodion Raskolnikov, who succumbed to new ideas, new theories, circulating in society. Raskolnikov is a thinking man. He creates a theory in which he tries not only to explain the world, but also to develop his own morality. He is convinced that humanity is divided into two categories: one - "they have the right", and others - "trembling creatures" that serve as "material" for history. The schismatics came to this theory as a result of observations of contemporary life, in which everything is allowed to the minority, and nothing to the majority. The division of people into two categories inevitably raises in Raskolnikov the question of what type he himself belongs to. And to clarify this, he decides on a terrible experiment, he plans to sacrifice an old woman - a pawnbroker who, in his opinion, brings only harm, and therefore deserves death. The action of the novel is built as a refutation of Raskolnikov's theory and his subsequent recovery. By killing the old woman, Raskolnikov placed himself outside society, including even his beloved mother and sister. The feeling of cut off, loneliness becomes a terrible punishment for the criminal. Raskolnikov is convinced that he was mistaken in his hypothesis. He experiences the anguish and doubts of the "ordinary" criminal. At the end of the novel, Raskolnikov takes the Gospel in his hands - this symbolizes the hero's spiritual turning point, the victory of the good in the hero's soul over his pride, which gives rise to evil.
Raskolnikov, it seems to me, is generally a very controversial person. In many episodes, it is difficult for a modern person to understand him: many of his statements are refuted by each other. Raskolnikov's mistake is that he did not see in his idea the crime itself, the evil that he committed.
Raskolnikov's condition is characterized by the author with such words as "gloomy", "depressed", "indecisive". I think this shows the incompatibility of Raskolnikov's theory with life. Although he is convinced that he is right, this conviction is something not very sure. If Raskolnikov was right, then Dostoevsky would describe the events and his feelings not in gloomy yellow tones, but in bright ones, but they appear only in the epilogue. He was wrong in taking on the role of God, having the courage to decide for Him who should live and who should die.
Raskolnikov constantly oscillates between faith and unbelief, good and evil, and Dostoevsky fails to convince the reader even in the epilogue that the gospel truth has become Raskolnikov's truth.
Thus, Raskolnikov’s own doubts, internal struggles, disputes with himself, which Dostoevsky constantly leads, were reflected in Raskolnikov’s searches, mental anguish and dreams.
6. Thunderstorm
in his work "Thunderstorm" also touches on the theme of good and evil.
In The Thunderstorm, according to the critic, “the mutual relations of tyranny and voicelessness are brought to the most tragic consequences. Dobrolyubov considers Katerina a force that can resist the bone old world, a new force brought up by this kingdom and its amazing foundation.
The play Thunderstorm contrasts two strong and solid characters of Katerina Kabanova, a merchant's wife, and her mother-in-law Marfa Kabanova, who has long been nicknamed Kabanikha.
The main difference between Katerina and Kabanikha, the difference that separates them into different poles, is that following the traditions of antiquity for Katerina is a spiritual need, and for Kabanikha it is an attempt to find the necessary and only support in anticipation of the collapse of the patriarchal world. She does not think about the essence of the order that she protects, she emasculated from it the meaning, content, leaving only the form, thereby turning it into a dogma. She turned the beautiful essence of ancient traditions and customs into a meaningless ritual, which made them unnatural. It can be said that the Kabanikha in The Thunderstorm (as well as the Wild One) personifies a phenomenon inherent in the crisis state of the patriarchal way of life, and not inherent in it initially. The deadly influence of wild boars and wild ones on living life is especially evident precisely when life forms are deprived of their former content and are already preserved as museum relics. Katerina, on the other hand, represents the best qualities of patriarchal life in their primordial purity.
Thus, Katerina belongs to the patriarchal world - all other characters belong to it. The artistic purpose of the latter is to describe the reasons for the doomedness of the patriarchal world as fully and multi-structured as possible. Thus, Varvara learned to deceive and seize the opportunity; she, like Kabanikha, follows the principle: “do whatever you want, if only it was sewn and covered.” It turns out that Katerina in this drama is good, and the rest of the characters are representatives of evil.
7. "White Guard"
The novel tells about the events of the years when Kyiv was abandoned by the German troops, who surrendered the city to the Petliurists. The officers of the former tsarist army were betrayed at the mercy of the enemy.
In the center of the story is the fate of one such officer's family. For the Turbins, a sister and two brothers, the fundamental concept is honor, which they understand as service to the fatherland. But in the ups and downs of the Civil War, the fatherland ceased to exist, and the usual landmarks disappeared. Turbines are trying to find a place for themselves in the world that is changing before our eyes, to preserve their humanity, the goodness of the soul, not to become embittered. And the heroes succeed.
In the novel, there is an appeal to the Higher Forces, which must save people in a period of timelessness. Alexei Turbin has a dream in which both the Whites and the Reds go to heaven (Paradise), because both are loved by God. So, in the end, good must win.
The devil, Woland, comes to Moscow with a revision. He watches the Moscow philistines and passes sentence on them. The culmination of the novel is Woland's ball, after which he learns the history of the Master. Woland takes the Master under his protection.
After reading a novel about himself, Yeshua (in the novel he is a representative of the forces of Light) decides that the Master, the creator of the novel, is worthy of Peace. The master and his beloved are dying, and Woland accompanies them to the place where they now have to live. This is a pleasing house, the very embodiment of an idyll. So a person who is tired of the battles of life gets what he aspired to with his soul. Bulgakov hints that in addition to the posthumous state, defined as "Peace", there is another higher state - "Light", but the Master is not worthy of Light. Researchers are still arguing why the Master is denied the Light. In this sense, the statement of I. Zolotussky is interesting: “It is the Master himself who punishes himself for the fact that love has left his soul. The one who leaves the house or whom love leaves does not deserve the Light ... Even Woland is lost in front of this tragedy of fatigue, the tragedy of the desire to leave the world, leave life ”
Bulgakov's novel about the eternal struggle between good and evil. This work is not dedicated to the fate of a certain person, family or even a group of people somehow connected with each other - he considers the fate of all mankind in its historical development. The time interval of almost two millennia, separating the action of the novel about Jesus and Pilate and the novel about the Master, only emphasizes that the problems of good and evil, the freedom of the human spirit, its relationship with society are eternal, enduring problems that are relevant for a person of any era.
Bulgakov's Pilate is not at all shown as a classic villain. The procurator does not want the evil of Yeshua, his cowardice led to cruelty and social injustice. It is fear that makes good, intelligent and brave people a blind weapon of evil will. Cowardice is an extreme expression of inner subordination, lack of freedom of spirit, dependence of a person. It is especially dangerous also because, once reconciled to it, a person is no longer able to get rid of it. Thus, the powerful procurator turns into a miserable, weak-willed creature. On the other hand, the vagabond philosopher is strong in his naive faith in the good, which neither the fear of punishment nor the spectacle of general injustice can take away from him. In the image of Yeshua, Bulgakov embodied the idea of goodness and unchanging faith. Despite everything, Yeshua continues to believe that there are no evil, bad people in the world. He dies on the cross with this faith.
The clash of opposing forces is most vividly presented at the end of the novel The Master and Margarita, when Woland and his retinue leave Moscow. What do we see? "Light" and "darkness" are on the same level. Woland does not rule the world, but Yeshua does not rule the world either.
8.Conclusion
What is good and what is evil on earth? As you know, two opposing forces cannot but enter into a struggle with each other, therefore the struggle between them is eternal. As long as man exists on earth, there will be good and evil. Through evil we understand what good is. And good, in turn, reveals evil, illuminating the path to truth for a person. There will always be a struggle between good and evil.
Thus, I came to the conclusion that the forces of good and evil in the world of literature are equal in rights. They exist in the world side by side, constantly opposing, arguing with each other. And their struggle is eternal, because there is no person on Earth who has never committed a sin in his life, and there is no such person who has completely lost the ability to do good.
9. List of used literature
1. "Introduction to the temple of the word." Ed. 3rd, 2006
2. Big school encyclopedia, vol.
3., plays, novels. Comp., intro. and note. . True, 1991
4. "Crime and Punishment": Roman - M .: Olympus; TKO AST, 1996
1. Features of the interaction of good and evil in folk tales.
2. Changing the approach to the relationship of antagonist characters.
3. Differences in the relationship of positive and negative characters.
4. Blurring of boundaries between concepts.
Despite the apparent diversity of artistic images and characters, fundamental categories have always existed and will continue to exist in world literature, the opposition of which, on the one hand, is the main reason for the development of the storyline, and on the other hand, encourages the development of moral criteria in the individual. The vast majority of the heroes of world literature can easily be classified into one of two camps: the defenders of Good and the adherents of Evil. These abstract concepts can be embodied in visible, living images.
The significance of the categories of Good and Evil in culture and human life is undeniable. A clear definition of these concepts allows a person to assert himself in life, evaluating his own and other people's actions from the point of view of proper and improper. Many philosophical and religious systems are based on the concept of opposition between two principles. So is it any wonder that the characters of fairy tales and legends embody opposite traits? However, it should be noted that if the idea of the behavior of heroes embodying the evil inclination changed little over time, then the idea of what the representatives of Good should respond to their actions did not remain unchanged. Let us first consider how victorious heroes acted in fairy tales with their evil opponents.
For example, the fairy tale "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs." The evil stepmother, with the help of witchcraft, tries to destroy her stepdaughter, envying her beauty, but all the intrigues of the witch are in vain. Good triumphs. Snow White not only stays alive, but also marries Prince Charming. However, how does the victorious Good deal with the defeated Evil? The ending of the tale seems to be taken from the story of the activities of the Inquisition: “But iron shoes were already placed for her on burning coals, they were brought, holding them with tongs, and placed in front of her. And she had to put her feet in red-hot shoes and dance in them until, at last, she fell dead to the ground.
Such an attitude towards the defeated enemy is characteristic of many fairy tales. But it should be noted right away that the point here is not the increased aggressiveness and cruelty of the Good, but the peculiarities of the understanding of justice in antiquity, because the plots of most fairy tales were formed a very long time ago. “An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth” is the ancient formula of retribution. Moreover, the heroes, embodying the traits of Good, not only have the right to brutally deal with the defeated enemy, but must do it, because revenge is a duty entrusted to man by the gods.
However, the concept gradually changed under the influence of Christianity. A. S. Pushkin in "The Tale of the Dead Princess and the Seven Bogatyrs" used a plot almost identical to "Snow White". And in Pushkin's text, the evil stepmother did not escape punishment - but how is it done?
Here longing took her
And the queen died.
The inevitable retribution does not take place as the arbitrariness of mortal conquerors: it is the judgment of God. In Pushkin's fairy tale there is no medieval fanaticism, from the description of which the reader involuntarily trembles; the humanism of the author and the positive characters only emphasizes the greatness of God (even if He is not mentioned directly), supreme justice.
The “longing” that “took” the queen—isn’t it conscience, which the ancient sages called the “Eye of God in man”?
So, in the ancient, pagan understanding, the representatives of Good differ from the representatives of Evil in the way they achieve their goals and the undoubted right to something that their enemies are trying to take away - but not at all in a kinder, more humane attitude towards the defeated enemy.
In the works of writers who have absorbed Christian traditions, the unconditional right of positive heroes to carry out merciless reprisals against those who could not stand the temptation and took the side of Evil is questioned: “And count those who should live, but they are dead. Can you resurrect them? If not, don't rush to condemn anyone to death. For even the wisest are not given to foresee everything ”(D. Tolkien“ The Lord of the Rings ”). “Now he is fallen, but it’s not for us to judge him: who knows, maybe he will still be exalted,” says Frodo, the protagonist of Tolkien’s epic. This work raises the problem of the ambiguity of the Good. So, representatives of the light side can share distrust and even fear, moreover, no matter how wise, brave and kind you are, there is always the possibility that you can lose these virtues and join the camp of villains (perhaps without wanting to do so consciously). ). A similar transformation occurs with the magician Saruman, whose initial mission was to fight Evil, embodied in the face of Sauron. It threatens anyone who wishes to possess the Ring of Omnipotence. However, Tolkien does not even hint at a possible redemption of Sauron. Although Evil is also not monolithic and ambiguous, however, it is to a greater extent an irreversible state.
In the work of writers who continued the tradition of Tolkien, various views are presented on what and which of Tolkien's characters should be considered Good and Evil. Currently, one can find works in which Sauron and his teacher Melkor, a kind of Lucifer of Middle-earth, do not act as negative characters at all. Their struggle with other creators of the World is not so much a conflict of two opposite principles, but the result of misunderstanding, rejection of non-standard decisions of Melkor.
In fantasy, which was formed on the basis of fairy tales and legends, the clear boundaries between Good and Evil are gradually blurring. Everything is relative: Good again is not so humane (as it was in the ancient tradition), but Evil is far from black - rather blackened by enemies. The literature reflects the processes of rethinking the old values, the actual implementation of which is often far from ideal, and the tendency towards an ambiguous understanding of the multifaceted phenomena of being. However, it should be remembered that in the worldview of each person, the categories of Good and Evil should still have a fairly clear structure. Moses, Christ and other great teachers have long said about what to consider as real Evil. Evil is the transgression of the great commandments that should govern human behavior.
Goodness and beauty are two concepts that are inextricably linked with each other. In my opinion, these two life principles are the basis of the worldview of any moral person. These concepts have been preached everywhere and at all times by different people using them in their own way.
Goodness and beauty are both the commandments of Christianity, the inviolable laws of all believers, this is also the basis of the doctrine of the God-Man, which arose in the Renaissance, this is also the ideological foundation of the totalitarian theories of the twentieth century, contradictory, by the way, in its formulation (goodness, beauty and totalitarianism are incompatible) . And, speaking of goodness and beauty, all the thoughts that seemed new and my own to me, I find already expressed in Russian literature.
Every adult would like goodness and beauty to become the main principles in the life of his child. Today, it seems impossible to imagine such an upbringing without the fairy tales of A. S. Pushkin. As in any Russian fairy tales, in "The Tale of Tsar Saltan", in "The Tale of the Dead Princess and the Seven Bogatyrs", in "The Tale of the Golden Cockerel" and in many others, the plot is not simple.
As a rule, it is based on the struggle between good and evil, light and darkness, spiritual beauty and moral deformity. Of course, a beautiful, kind, pure hero always wins. Fairy tales end either with a noisy feast, which the world has never seen before, or with the triumphal procession of the hero of a fairy tale after a heated battle with evil and, of course, victory over him, or with a direct conclusion of morality about the triumph of goodness and beauty.
Pushkin's fairy tales are always accompanied by the amazing beauty of language, fantasy and fabulous pictures. Here is one example of the triumph of goodness, beauty and Pushkin's skill, which is in harmony with the idea of Pushkin the thinker, Pushkin the educator. In The Tale of the Dead Princess and the Seven Bogatyrs, the poet writes:
Before him, in the mournful darkness,
The coffin is rocking crystal,
And in that crystal coffin
The princess sleeps forever.
And about the coffin of the bride dear
He hit with all his might.
The coffin was broken. Virgo suddenly
Revived. Looks around
With astonished eyes
And, swinging over the chains,
Sighing, she said:
"How long have I been asleep!"
And she rises from the grave...
Oh! ..and both burst into tears.
He takes her in his hands
And brings it into the light from darkness,
And, talking pleasantly,
They start on the way back.
And the rumor is already trumpeting:
The royal daughter is alive.
F. M. Dostoevsky also reflects on goodness and beauty. In his novel Crime and Punishment, the writer endows the idea of goodness and beauty with the surprisingly pure and refined image of Sonechka Marmeladova. She knew all the hardships of life, found herself in deadlock situations.
Her father, a drunkard and a loafer, tragically dies on the streets of St.
falls under the horse's hooves. Sonechka's consumptive stepmother does not love her stepdaughter. But for the sake of her stepsisters and brother, for the sake of Katerina Ivanovna, Sonechka sacrifices herself, becomes a prostitute. Thanks to the money earned in this way, the Marmeladov family survives in the cruel world of the “humiliated and insulted”.
It remains a mystery how such a fragile, defenseless creature has a huge power based on a certain worldview. Sonechka's theory saves both her creator and her family, and the protagonist of the novel, Rodion Raskolnikov, in the novel.
Christian ideas of goodness, love, faith and beauty are opposed to the inhuman bloody theory about ordinary and extraordinary people. Good collides with evil, and both in a fairy tale and in life, that is, in Dostoevsky's novel, good conquers evil.
In L. Tolstoy's epic novel "War and Peace", the idea of goodness and beauty is primarily associated with "family thought". According to the author of the novel, happiness, that is, goodness, beauty and love, can only be found in the family way of life. I remember the scenes of the novel in the Rostovs' house.
Secular brilliance is combined with the beauty of genuine family joy, serious conversations of adults - with the running and laughter of noisy children. Love, kindness and beauty reign in the family ... The idea of goodness and beauty is inextricably linked with the female images in the novel. Tolstoy's favorite heroines, Natasha Rostova and Princess Marya, are bright images of family life.
The writer never recognized external beauty (on the contrary, this is the quality of his unloved heroines, such as Helen Bezukhova). Tolstoy endowed both Natasha and Princess Mary with a special inner beauty of the soul. Again, the Christian principles of goodness and beauty were most valued by the author of the novel in his favorite female images.
How sharply the main theme of the novel, the theme of war and peace, sounds against the backdrop of family happiness! War, blood, violence destroy a beautiful world, take away from it dear, close people: Prince Andrei, Petya Rostov ... But the war goes away, leaving, however, eternal traces, but the world remains. Peace wins war, good wins evil. It's like a fairytale …
The 20th century in Russia with its new ideas about morality, the value of life, and personality makes us think about goodness and beauty from a different angle. In this age, the laws of fairy tales no longer apply ...
In Bulgakov's novel "The Master and Margarita" the main characters, the Master and Margarita, images of goodness and beauty, have no place in life. The work created by the Master turns out to be useless to anyone; its author ends up in a psychiatric hospital. Margarita is deeply unhappy in her family life, she is deprived of her only happiness - the Masters.
For the revival of love, for beauty and goodness, some kind of miracle is needed. And it appears in the form of Satan and his helpers. The Master and Margarita find each other again, they come to life. Margarita, blossoming like a flower, regains its former beauty.
Eyebrows, plucked into a thread with tweezers, thickened and lay in black arcs over green eyes. A thin vertical wrinkle that cut the bridge of the nose, which appeared then, in October, when the Master disappeared, disappeared without a trace.
The yellowish shadows at the temples, and two slightly noticeable dimples at the outer corners of the eyes, also disappeared. The skin of the cheeks was filled with an even pink color, the forehead became white and clean, and the hairdresser's curl of the hair developed. A naturally curly-haired, black-haired woman of about twenty was looking at the thirty-year-old Margarita from the mirror, laughing uncontrollably, grinning her teeth ... "
The clash of goodness and beauty with the new century is very clearly visible in the story “We” by E. Zamyatin. Wild natural beauty is opposed to the iron of machines, human relationships and goodness are opposed to mathematically accurate, infallible reason. This leads to an inevitable struggle.
Zamyatin in his story proclaims the idea that the natural moral foundations of a person (such as love, freedom, goodness and beauty) cannot be taken away from him.
Man will always fight for them, because life itself is unthinkable without these foundations. The idea of beauty and goodness also comes in connection with the theme of nationalism, a new theme brought by the 20th century.
In his story “A Golden Cloud Spent the Night,” Anatoly Pristavkin tells about two boys from an orphanage, the Kuzmin brothers. They were not related by blood, but became brothers by fate, by friendship. The Russians killed all the men in the family of one of them, a Chechen, and the Chechens took away his brother from the other. (It is surprising how tragically relevant this story has become.)
But, even without looking at the nationalist nonsense, saving each other's lives more than once, they retained the most precious thing they had - the touching kindness and beauty of their relationship.
Thus, thinking about goodness and beauty, you come to the conclusion that life is impossible without these two most important values. Goodness and beauty, invisible behind the pettiness of life, have been and remain the foundations of the soul of any moral person.
The creative activity of a person can be directed for good or for evil, depending on the worldview and moral foundations of each individual. What to dedicate life to? Creation or destruction is the classic question of being or not being human.
The end result of any creativity is a created object, a work of art, a product, i.e. that last link in creative activity, which performs the function planned even before creation to meet the needs of the customer, buyer or consumer. Even if you create something for yourself, the author and consumer-customer merge into one person. The criterion for evaluating creative activity is the purpose of the created object.
There is a special article in the patent legislation of the countries of the world that prohibits even the consideration of applications for inventions that do not comply with the norms of morality and humanity. However, although no one patents, many inhuman developments are ordered and applied - this is a paradox that has political roots, and politics is impersonal and immoral.
The reason for creating something may be partly humane, but the final destination is the main criterion for the humanity of the work. For example, the author of the guillotine wanted to eliminate the suffering of people during execution, guaranteeing instant death without pain.
If you look into ancient times, when people first appeared, then everything that they created was aimed at survival in the animal world. The goal was noble and the tools created and the weapons for defense were one and the same. A stone knife or an ax, a spear or an arrow served to kill and butcher animals. But there was a line when it was necessary to defend against their own kind - attacking neighboring tribes. Murder took on a legal status and was not punished, but encouraged, because. the goal was the same - survival, but man became a predator, a beast, killing his own kind not for food, but for the sake of achieving political the goals of enslaving other tribes and capturing the living space occupied by competitors. This is a milestone, the line that separated man from the animal world, which for millions of years lived according to the laws of nature, very fair and humane, where the strongest won, but without cruelty, malice and hatred. In the animal world, generosity and nobility in fights for territory or for females are still preserved. For example, if two leaders of wolf packs enter into a duel for power over the pack, then, having given all their strength to achieve victory, the weaker one recognizes himself as defeated, lying on his back and opening his neck. This fight ends and the loser leaves the pack. No one finishes off and no one mocks. Predators never kill excessively, i.e. more than they can eat according to physiological natural needs. The principle of minimum necessity and sufficiency in the animal kingdom is impeccably observed. The man became proud and rejected him.
Only the human developed greed and cruelty, apparently as a developmental pathology, an unexpected side effect. Since then, specialized weapons have appeared for killing people by people, designed to realize ambition, greed and cruelty. leaders who later became known as politicians. The era of wars without "rules of the game" began, the purpose of which was the destruction of people and their places of residence. Entire cities were wiped off the face of the earth along with cultural heritage, knowledge and skills. To increase the productivity of destruction, weapons of destruction, sophisticated methods and tools for killing people began to be created and improved. This process is still going on, the apogee of which was the creation and use of nuclear, chemical and bacteriological weapons, and "conventional" types of weapons have become very perfect and effective in use. Consequently, mankind has lost humanity, morality and humanity in constant wars among themselves. Political ambitions have become priorities in making decisions of national importance, and people have become consumables in achieving political goals by military means. Trade in weapons and their use has become a very profitable business. It is a fact. Who will dispute?
Against this background, consider the theme of creativity. It would seem that creativity is creation for the benefit and prosperity of mankind, but each type of activity has two sides of the coin. The law of unity and struggle of opposites is universal and manifests itself in everything material. Man is dual in nature and his activity is dual in terms of the facts of final results. Creativity of creation and destruction has a common basis - novelty is created from thoughts and the mechanisms of creativity are one, and the technology for creating innovations in different fields of activity is one. What are the differences, especially the opposites in creativity?
Firstly, in the worldview of the creators, in their moral principles, principles, views, i.e. in the subjective factor.
Secondly, for the purposes pursued and citizenship.
Thirdly, in a sense of belonging to humanity and responsibility for the results of creative activity on a global scale.
Fourth, in the "selfishness" of interests.
The opposite lies in the fact that in creative activity aimed at creation, the material and spiritual values of mankind are multiplied and accumulated, which leads to prosperity and prosperity, strengthening and development of each person and humanity as a whole - everyone becomes richer. Culture is a world of created values. Wars destroy culture.
In creative activity aimed at destruction and annihilation, material and spiritual values are withdrawn from the possession, use and disposal of each person and society as a whole - everyone becomes poorer, but a separate group of politicians and those in power become richer, because for them, war is a profitable business. They then hire creators and pay them for the creation of inhumane and immoral products, ordering research and development aimed at the destruction of life and culture.
In all states, scientific discoveries and developments are censored, and all achievements of scientific and technological progress are first evaluated from the point of view of the possibility of being used in the military-industrial complex for the production of weapons or at least for political blackmail of states and the public, and what is unsuitable for these purposes , are allowed to be launched into the civilian sphere of activity, for so-called peaceful purposes. Hence the whole secrecy regime and a colossal diversion of the intellectual and material resources of mankind, which, in addition to the direct extermination of people in military conflicts, really robs all of humanity, creating a shortage of resources for people's lives. This is the main cause of mass poverty on earth.
As a result of competition, the latest research and development results quickly become obsolete and the loss of resources becomes irreplaceable, thrown to the wind. The stupidity becomes apparent. Despite the understanding that the Earth's natural resources are exhaustible and irreplaceable, the insane arms race continues through the fault of individual, powerful politicians, super-rich people who turn politics into business. To satisfy the ambitions of this handful of people, millions of creators, high professionals are hired quite consciously to work at enterprises and institutions of the military-industrial complex in any country, because. the most favorable conditions for creative activity are created there, which allows creators to realize themselves and have a livelihood. Creators are faced with a choice: to work for good, but at the same time to be poor with a high moral level, or to work for evil, prospering materially, but degrading spiritually, because. by drowning out the voice of conscience, spiritual development becomes impossible.
A person has free will and the right to choose who to be and what to do.
Human duality creates a paradox in creativity as well. It is impossible to create and destroy at the same time - you can go crazy trying to find a compromise. For example, Nobel invented dynamite for mining and earthworks, but the military used it to destroy and kill. Here it is appropriate to give a harsh but convincing allegory: after the birth of a child, parents nurture and educate him in order to kill him. However, the comedy of the absurd is popular with modern politicians.
Good and evil in creativity is a philosophical and inexhaustible topic, but is the problem solvable in principle?
Homework and essay topic for module test:
Topic 1. "My understanding of creativity of creation and creativity of destruction."
Topic 2. "Can politicians be creators?".
Topic 3. "Can there be destroyers in humanitarian creativity, or is this phenomenon inherent only in technical creativity?"
Topic 4. "Is it possible to creatively kill or creatively destroy?".
Topic 5. "Can creativity be neutral, and the creator indifferent?".
Topic 6. "Can a creator be an executioner?".
Good and evil is the most popular topic that students choose in the process of passing the final exam. To write such an essay for the maximum score, you need high-quality and outstanding arguments from the literature. In this selection, we have given just such examples from various sources: the novel by M. A. Bulgakov "The Master and Margarita", the novel by F. M. Dostoevsky "Crime and Punishment" and Russian folklore. There are 4 arguments under each heading.
- Good and evil people perceive differently. It often happens that one replaces the other, but the appearance remains, which a person takes for granted: he attributes evil intent to virtue, and takes outright evil for good. For example, Mikhail Bulgakov in the novel "The Master and Margarita" describes the life and customs of Soviet writers and critics. Writers from MOSSOLITA compose only what pleases the authorities. In a conversation with Ivan Bezdomny, Berlioz directly points out that in his poem it is necessary to clearly identify the atheistic position, which is part of the ideology of the USSR. It does not matter to him what the artist of the word wants to say, he is only concerned with how a superior person will evaluate the book. Such slavish involvement in the political process only harms art. The real genius of the Master was hounded by critics, and mediocrity in the role of creators only sat in a restaurant and ate people's money. This is an obvious evil, but society, represented by the same writers and critics, saw this as a blessing, and only a few honest people like Margarita and the Master saw that this system was vicious. Thus, people often make mistakes and mistake evil for good and vice versa.
- The great danger of evil lies in the fact that it often disguises itself as good. An example is the situation described by M. A. Bulgakov in the novel The Master and Margarita. Pontius Pilate believed that he was doing good by sentencing Yeshua to death. He was afraid that because of his conflict with the local elite over the decision of who should be pardoned in honor of the holiday, a mob riot would break out against the Roman soldiers, and much blood would be shed. With a small sacrifice, the procurator hoped to prevent major upheavals. But his calculation was immoral and selfish, because Pilate, first of all, feared not for the city entrusted to him, which he hated with all his soul, but for his position in it. Yeshua was martyred because of the cowardice of his judge. Thus, the hero took an evil deed for a good and wise decision, and was punished for it.
- The theme of good and evil was of great concern to M. A. Bulgakov. In his novel The Master and Margarita, he interpreted these concepts in his own way. So, Woland, the embodiment of evil and the king of shadows, did truly good deeds. For example, he helped Margarita get the Master back, despite the fact that she had already used her wish by helping Frida out. He also gave them the opportunity to live in eternal peace and finally find harmony in their life together. Unlike representatives of the forces of light, Woland tried to find a suitable solution for the couple, without condemning them as strictly as Levi Matvey. Probably, the creation of his image of the author was inspired by the character of Goethe, Mephistopheles, who strove for evil, but did good. The Russian writer showed this paradox on the example of his heroes. So he proved that the concepts of good and evil are subjective, their essence depends on what the person evaluating them comes from.
- A person throughout his life forms and supplements his ideas about good and evil. Often he turns off the right path and makes mistakes, but still it is never too late to reconsider his views and take the right side. For example, in the novel by M. A. Bulgakov “The Master and Margarita”, Ivan Bezdomny served party interests all his life: he wrote bad poems, put propagandistic meaning into them and convinced readers that everything was fine in the Soviet Union, and the only problem was those who envied general happiness. He blatantly lied, as did most of his colleagues. In the USSR, the consequences of the devastation after the civil war were clearly felt. For example, M. A. Bulgakov subtly ridicules the absurdity of what is happening, citing as an example Likhodeev’s speech, where he boasts that he orders “pike a la naturel” in a restaurant. He believes that this gourmet dish is the height of luxury that cannot be prepared in an ordinary kitchen. But the irony lies in the fact that pike perch is a cheap fish, and the prefix "a la naturel" means that it will be served in its natural form, even without any original presentation or recipe. Under the tsar, every peasant could afford this fish. And this wretched new reality, where pike perch has turned into a delicacy, the poet defends and exalts. And only after meeting the Master, he realizes how wrong he was. Ivan admits his mediocrity, stops being rude and writing bad poetry. Now he is not attracted to serving the state, which fools its population and brazenly deceives it. Thus, he abandoned the generally recognized false good and began to profess faith in the true good.
- The struggle between good and evil is depicted by F. M. Dostoevsky in the novel Crime and Punishment. The main character is a very kind person. This fact convincingly proves his dream, where he, being a little boy, regrets the beaten horse to tears. His deeds also speak of the exclusivity of his character: he leaves the last money to the Marmeladov family, seeing her grief. But there is also a dark side in Rodion: he longs to prove to himself that he has the right to decide the fate of the world. To do this, Raskolnikov decides to kill, evil has prevailed over him. However, gradually the hero comes to the idea that he needs to repent of sin. Sonya Marmeladova directed him to this step, who managed to strengthen Rodion's protesting conscience. He confessed to the evil he had committed, and already in hard labor began his moral rebirth for goodness, justice and love.
- The confrontation between good and evil was depicted by F. M. Dostoevsky in his novel Crime and Punishment. We see a hero who lost in this fight. This is Mr. Marmeladov, whom we meet in a tavern, his habitat. Before us appeared a middle-aged man addicted to alcohol, who brought his family to poverty. And once he did a very kind and merciful deed by marrying a poor widow with children. Then the hero worked and could support them, but then something broke in his soul, and he started drinking. Left without service, he began to lean on alcohol even more than brought the household to the verge of physical death. Because of this, his own daughter began to earn money through prostitution. But this fact did not stop the father of the family: he continued to drink away these rubles, obtained with shame and disgrace. Evil, dressed in vice, finally captured Marmeladov, he could no longer fight him due to lack of willpower.
- It happens that even in the midst of absolute evil sprouts of goodness sprout. An example was described by F. M. Dostoevsky in the novel Crime and Punishment. The heroine, trying to feed her family, began to work as a prostitute. In the midst of vice and sin, Sonya was bound to become a cynical and dirty corrupt woman. But the persistent girl did not lose faith in God and kept purity in her soul. Outer dirt did not touch her. Seeing human tragedies, she sacrificed herself to help people. It was very hard for her herself to live, but Sonya overcame the pain and was able to get rid of the vicious craft. She sincerely fell in love with Raskolnikov and followed him to hard labor, where she gave her sympathy to all the needy and oppressed inhabitants of prisons. Her virtue overcame the malice of the whole world.
- The battle between good and evil takes place everywhere, not only in the human soul. For example, F. M. Dostoevsky in "Crime and Punishment" described how good and evil people collide in life. Oddly enough, most often those who bring good, not harm, win, because we are all subconsciously drawn to the good. In the book, Dunya Raskolnikov defeats Svidrigailov with his will, escaping from him and not succumbing to his humiliating persuasion. Its inner light cannot be extinguished even by Luzhin with his reasonable egoism. The girl realizes in time that this marriage is a shameful deal, in which she is only a product at a discount. But she finds a soul mate and life partner in Razumikhin, a friend of her brother. This young man also defeated the evil and vice of the world around him, embarking on the right path. He earned in an honest way and helped his neighbors, without taking credit for it. Remaining true to their beliefs, the heroes were able to overcome temptations, trials and temptations in order to bring good to the people around them.
- Russian folklore is rich in examples of the struggle between good and evil. For example, in the fairy tale "Tiny-Havroshechka" the heroine was a modest and kind girl. She became an orphan early, and strangers took her in. But her patrons were distinguished by malice, laziness and envy, so they always strove to give her impossible tasks. The unfortunate Khavroshechka only meekly listened to the abuse and set to work. All her days were filled with honest labor, but this did not stop her tormentors from beating and starving the heroine. And yet, Khavroshechka did not hide anger at them, she forgave cruelty and insults. That is why mystical powers helped her fulfill all the wishes of the hostesses. The kindness of the girl was generously rewarded by fate. The master saw her industriousness, beauty and modesty, appreciated them and married her. The moral is simple: good always triumphs over evil.
- The victory of good over evil is often found in fairy tales, because people want to teach their children the main thing - the ability to do good deeds. For example, in the fairy tale “Morozko”, the main character honestly and zealously worked around the house, did not argue with her elders and was not capricious, but her stepmother still disliked her. Every day she tried to bring her stepdaughter to complete exhaustion. Once she got angry and sent her husband into the forest with a demand: to leave her own daughter there. The man obeyed and left the girl to certain death in the winter more often. However, she was lucky to meet Morozko in the forest, who was immediately captivated by the kind and modest disposition of her interlocutor. Then he rewarded her with valuable gifts. But her evil and rude half-sister, who came to him demanding a reward, he punished for impudence and left with nothing.
- In the fairy tale "Baba Yaga", good triumphs over evil very clearly. The heroine was disliked by her stepmother and sent to the forest to Baba Yaga while her father was away. The girl was kind and obedient, so she fulfilled the order. Before that, she went to her aunt and received a life lesson: you need to treat everyone like a human being, and then even an evil witch is not afraid. The heroine did just that when she realized that Baba Yaga intended to eat her. She fed her cat and dogs, oiled the gates, and tied up a birch in her path so that they would let her through and teach her how to escape from their mistress. Thanks to kindness and affection, the heroine was able to return home and ensure that her father drove the evil stepmother out of the house.
- In the fairy tale "The Magic Ring", the rescued animals helped the owner in difficult times. One day, he spent the last of his money to save them from certain death. And now he found himself in a difficult situation. Having found a magic ring, the hero married the princess, because he fulfilled the condition of her father - he built a palace, a cathedral and a crystal bridge in one day with the help of magical powers. But the wife turned out to be a cunning and evil woman. Finding out the secret, she stole the ring and destroyed everything that Martin had built. Then the king locked him in prison and doomed him to starvation. The cat and the dog decided to pull out the owner by finding the ring. Then Martyn returned his position, his buildings
Crime and Punishment
Folk tales
If the list does not contain arguments from the work that you need, write to us in the comments what to add!
Interesting? Save it on your wall!
