Little trilogy man in a case. Little trilogy
Includes three stories: "Man
Comment in the case "," Gooseberry "," On Love ". What unites so different in the story stories?
Compositionally combine three narrator: veterinarian
Ivan Ivanovich Chimsza-Himalayan, teacher of gymnasium Burkin and landowner
Alekhin.
The first story "Man in the case" - generally accepted masterpiece
Chekhov, in which the formula is enclosed in oneself
A man who made the name Belikov is nominal.
Belikov, the teacher of the Greek language, was afraid of life. His story
Teacher of gymnasium Burkin says two months after him
of death. Belikova was a manic fear of life forced
His hide into the case. He had everything in a case (case):
and an umbrella, and a clock, and a penny knife, and his face was hidden for
High collar as in a case. In short, this strange person
his such manic passion for the partnership was injected at all
fear. Burkin says: "His sighs, whining, with its dark
glasses on pale, little - you know, a small face, like a ferret, -
He pressed us all - and we were inferior ... "Moreover, he kept in fear
the whole city.
Belikov himself caused incomprehensible visits to the apartments where it was sitting
And silent. He was always afraid, no matter how it did not happen, and its fear
infected everyone. Nobody understood why he had such power himself
Being insignificant? After all, Burkin did not allocate any dignity
Even moreover, he was bitterly recognized: "Yes. Things
decent people read both generous and turgenev, different there
Boards and so on, but obeyed the same, tolerated ... "
Chekhov explored the psychology of fear on such a character as
Belikov. He was afraid because he constantly appealed to the law,
And the law is afraid of all, on his side. The law is a rough tool
power, and thin, since it acts irresistible. Where
Out of fear, there is nothing to do, and Czech exposes
Psychology of fear in the story.
Belikov dies from an insignificant incident - he was not afraid,
And they descended from the stairs and quenched. Life can not be driven
In the case, it does not obey paragraphs, protocols, and Belikov
I did not know that. From fear of life, he climbed into the case where there was
Pretty selflessly for yourself. But as soon as he touched
To the real life, and died.
In the image of Belikov, the theme of the power based on fear was embodied.
Czechs debunk the image of human power, because a person
In the case of terrible for non-free people, and in the eyes of free he -
Note And such as Belikov, a lot. Maybe not in Belikov
a business? The words of Burkina Chekhov gives a generalized picture of life
Russian man: "But is that what we live in the city, in a lumber,
In the crashes, write unnecessary papers, play the screw - is it not
case? And the fact that we spend the whole life among idlers, Soutag,
Stupid, idle women, say and listen to different nonsense -
Isn't it a case? " Burkin gives his questions to the question
"Why are we so bad and bored?", Which asked for
Who answered Chekhov in all their stories.
The second story "Gooseberry". The story of his brother Nicholas
Ivanovich tells the veterinary doctor Chimsza-Himalayan.
Nikolai Ivanovich had a dream to buy an estate and so that
Ros gooseberry. And, how exactly notes the story, he wanted
Enclose yourself in the case. He passionately dreamed of a secluded estate,
And the brother who loved this kind, soft man, did not understand
This desire. "It is customary to say that a person needs three ARSHIN
Earth. But after all, three Arsshina is not needed by a person, at a man ... man
Need not three ARSHINA Earth, not a manor, but the whole globe, all
Nature, where he could show all properties and features
His work. "
But Nikolay Ivanovich needed a manor with a gooseberry,
Therefore, he commemorates himself on deprivation of various kinds. He married the calculation
on elderly and ugly widow, kept her injigned, and all her
Money put on my own expense, it became terrible, that is, gradually
turned into a thousandth. The goal was achieved: he bought
Manor and discharged twenty gooseberry bushes. In a word, the dream came true.
But what happened to a man? He became a real landowner,
But what did he cause feelings? "Half, swallowed, frozen, cheeks,
The nose and lips stretch forward - that and look shily in the blanket. "
The scene in which the evaluation of the "Dream" is given for which
man, leads to very deep reflections and pursues
on broad generalizations.
Sold a plate with a gooseberry grown in his garden.
"Nikolai Ivanovich laughed and a minute looked at the gooseberry silently,
with tears, - he could not speak from excitement, then put in his mouth
One berry, looked at me with a child's celebration, which finally
got his favorite toy, and said:
-So tasty!
And he ate with greed and repeated everything:
Oh, how delicious! You try!
It was hard and sour, but, as Pushkin said, "Darkness of Truths to us
It is more expensive than the elevator deception. " I saw a happy man
The cherished dream of which was realized so obvious
reached the goal of life, got what he wanted, who was pleased
With my destiny, yourself. " Gooseberry turns into a symbol
insignificance and meaningless man's aspirations. it
The same case in which you can hide from around the world.
But the following reflections of Ivan Ivanovich about human
Life suggests: "What about the story?" The story ends
With the words "rain pounded". Why "pounded", and not "lil"? And two
Pages previously appears the image of a "man with a hammer": "It is necessary
To be behind the door of each satisfied, happy man standing
anyone with a hammer and constantly reminded the knock that there is
Unhappy that no matter how happy, life is sooner or later
will show him his claws, the trouble will shave, poverty, loss,
And no one will see him and will not hear how he does not see and not
Hears others. But there is no man with a hammer, happy lives
yourself and small everyday worries worry him slightly like the wind aspen, -
And everything is safe. " Analyzing the story "Gooseberry",
M. Dunaev writes: "People await some special sign, a special knock
hammer, but the nature itself is constantly knocking them
in the windows, reminding that in the boundless rainy space -
Many troubles and misfortunes, but in vain. People are comfortable sleep and do not want
hearing anything.
And then Dunaev gives examples of statements from the New Testament,
who prove that Chekhov was a religious man wide
the sense of the word, and the "gooseberry", he believes, is
a kind of disclosure of these New Testament truths in circumstances
Russian reality.
The thought of Chekhov about the awakening of indifferent given in reflections
character, but these reflections arose with him at sight
The fed, satisfied person, happy and indifferent.
The story "On Love". Last story completing trilogy
about the part of life, Alekhin told, the third storytellor, visit
To which two others entered. Story - about love between a man
and married woman. Many people treated this topic
Chekhov's predecessors, the most vivid example - Roman Tolstoy
"Anna Karenina", where the love of the heroine ended in the tragedy. The third
The story in the trilogy is called "On Love". Heroes hide their own
feelings for several years before the last parting,
When they both understand that they will never meet, and when both are aware of
What made a mistake hiding your love. Long years
Alekhin was with his beloved at a distance and at the same time close, she
Also waiting for him, was happy from his presence. But she was
Married and she had two children.
But her husband was transferred to another province, and they should have been
breake down. "When, in the coupe, our views met, spiritual
Forces left us both, I hugged her, she pressed his face to my
Breasts, and tears flowed out of the eyes, - Oh, as we were unhappy with her! -
I admitted to her in his love, and with burning pain in my heart I understood how
Unnecessary, finely and how deceptively was what bother to love. "
Unnecessary, finely, deceptively - this is the assessment of those restrictions that
man closes his life, makes her case, even if
These are restrictions on religious or moral order. But here
The following arguments of the character of the narrator are forced to think:
"I realized that when you love, then in my arguments about this love
It is necessary to come from the highest, from more important than happiness or misfortune,
sin or virtue in their walking sense, or not
reason at all. What did the narrator mean when he used
Word "Higher"? - what is genuine that destroys everything
Bargains between people interfering to them to be together.
All three stories in the trilogy unites the topic of living parties,
which is revealed at different levels. "Man in a case" -
Apotheosis of limited, self-limiting life that gets
The author is completely terrible embodiment at the very end of the story:
"Now, when he lay in a coffin, his expression had meek,
pleasant, even cheerful, surely he was glad that she finally put it
Vfutlyl, on the outlorn-fogogogogovschevt \u003e\u003e. Studyingness-death.
In the "gooseberry" - the life of a person closed in the borders of the estate,
became a symbol of meaninglessness and insignificance of man's desire.
In the story "On love" representations of religious and moral
Character created insurmountable obstacles to love.
In 1898, three Chekhov stories appeared in the press - "Man in the case", "Gooseberry" and "On Lyuby", united not only by the general copyrighted scrap, but also a similar composition ("story in the story"). Already the name of the first product of this cycle is significant. It is built on an explicit pro-tivopaging, antithesis: human and case. Bel-cings hiding from the world, the most limiting its space, preferring to a wide and free life of a close and dark case, which becomes a symbol of philistine cosup, a hood, immobility. In Belikov, teacher ancient-Greek (dead) language, there is something dead, inhuman. Only when he was already lying in the coffin, "his expression had a meek, pleasant, even cheerful, for sure he was glad that he finally had polo-lived in the case from which he would never come out." However, the death of Belikova has not meant victory over Belician ...
Brother Ivan Ivanovich (one of the narrator), "good, meek man," having completed the dream of his life and bought a manor, becomes like a pig ("gooseberry"). His story gives the basis of a storytellor to join the controversy with the idea of \u200b\u200bone of the folk stories L. Tolstoy: "It is customary to say that a person needs only three ARSHA Earth. But after all, three Arsshina need a corpse, not a man ... Che is a deck need not three Arsshina of the Earth, not a manor, but the whole globe, all nature, where he could have to show all the properties and peculiarities of his free spirit. " So the artistic image of simple-wing is becoming one of the main ways of the author's concept. A narrow, closed space (case, three ARSHINA, manor), is unprecedented wide space - the whole globe needed to be a free person.
Causes a small trilogy story "On any-V", which continues the study of the problem "Parties". Back in the "gooseberry" Ivan. Iva-Novich said: "... these estates are the same three Arsshchi Earth. Get away from the city, from the struggle, from everyday noise, go away and hide in the estate is not life, it is egoism. " These words are directly related to Alekhina, who himself tells about himself. The life that Alekhin chose for himself is the same case. He, similar more than a professor or artist, than on the landowner, for some reason it makes it necessary to live in close little room (narrow space), although at its disposal a whole house. It's no time to wash him, and he only got used to the cereal, hay and nut ... Material from site.
Alekhin is afraid of change. Even big, infusion love is not able to force him to break the established norms, go to the gap with the prevailing stereotypes. So gradually he himself dinner, empty his life, becoming similar - not in detail, but in essence - the heroes of the "man in foot-lore" and "gooseberry".
The location of the stories in the "trilogy" was thoroughly thought out by Chekhov. If in the first of them, the "party" is shown and exposed directly and, so to speak, clearly, in the last we are talking about hidden and, perhaps, even more dangerous forms of human flight from reality, life, love, happiness ...
Didn't find what you were looking for? Use the search
On this page, material on the themes:
- little Trilogy Chekhov Creating History
- tELLOGY ANALYSIS
- similarity in the trilogy of Chekhov
- Chekhov trilogy
- mini Essay by Trilogy Chekhov
"Little trilogy". The famous "Little Trilogy" was written in Melikov, consisting of the stories "Man in the case", "Gooseberry", "On Love". They are called the trilogy because in all three works there are the same heroes - the teacher of the Gymnasium Burkin, the veterinarian Ivan Ivanovich Chimsza-Himalayan and the landowner Alekhin, each of whom tells his story. Stories, in turn, are united by one common theme - the theme "Foot-Fryingness". The meaning of this concept is most convenient to reveal on the example of the first story, from where it, in fact, is happening.
"Man in a case". A man in a case - so for the eyes of the teacher of the Greek Language Belikov, whose history tells his colleague Burkin. Describing the appearance and lifestyle of Belikov, Chekhov widely use expressive details, which, however, everyone indicates the same trait in his character - the desire to hide, get away from life, climb into yourself, like cancer-hermit. He always walked in caloes and with an umbrella, wearing dark glasses, the ears laid wool, and when he was driving on the cab, ordered to raise the top, etc. If this is a care for health, it is immediately evidenced that it has something painful, excessive, having some internal psychological reasons. The story refers to that one of such reasons is an innate fear of life. Indeed, Belikov is afraid of everything, especially the new one. But the fear that he constantly carries in himself (which, by the way, makes him like the hero of the "death of the official" before the head of the hero, not only urged his personality, but also paradoxically forces others to suffer because of his others. Since and his thought of Belikov also "snapped into the case", he believed only by ordering orders and only those newspaper articles, "in which something forbidden." Thus, according to Burkina, the modest teacher of the Greek language "held all the gymnasium in fear." On the one hand, Belikov is a fearful and weak man, on the other, it is this weakness that makes it in secretly aggressive and despotic. Belikov - the figure is pathetic and ominous at the same time. His fear of losing his "case", then what he is protected, closes from the world, it is so great that when life has given him the opportunity to open, marrying at a cheerful Ukrainian Varnik Kovalenko, he died even deeper into the "case" and at the end ends, unable to bring direct contact with a lively life, died (again an interesting parallel with a worm official).
In this story, as in all the "trilogy", for Chekhov is fundamentally important to oppose the closed, or "case", and an open human character, or a closed and open person. Belikov is a classic example of a closed nature in its aggressive and pathological option. Other form of closedness, from the life of Chekhov draws in two other cycle stories.
IN "Gooseberry" Closeful appears as a manic obsession with an idea or a dream, and not a high dream (as it was, for example, at the Kovrina in the story of the "black monk"), and the poor, Kutya, philistine. The dream of Nikolai Ivaniki Chimsi-Himalayansky (about which his brother is telling the veterinarian Ivan Ivanch) to purchase a manor with the clarops and the gooseberry, which became the goal of his life, turns into one of the end in some parody of the dream. Nikolai Ivanich with the same reverence and trembling, with what usually belong to things really high, seeks to things are purely material, and this is infinitely narrowing his spiritual horizon. Its brother, who came to spend it, he, is absolutely pleased with the "material wealth" that surrounds him in the manor, completely planted the gooseberry bushes, resembles a pig, which "Togo and Looks scolding in the blanket." Completely absorbed by his little, insignificant idea, he does not see anything around and even loses a feeling of reality: so, the gooseberry, bitter and sour, sacred from his own bushes, seems to be delightedly sweet, and he even gets up his bed at night, to enjoy beloved Berries.
In the story "About love", in which Alekhin's landowner tells his love story, its own indecision is represented, the inability to act internally freely, openly, without careful, childily looking at how it will look from the point of view of the usual, ordinary behaviors. Alekhin is an intelligent person, and the situation in which he found himself, having loved the married woman, is a situation that has no simple solutions. But Czechs in the final of the story clear makes it clear that these decisions could be found if the hero could have been able to abandon all their fears and fears if he trusted his inner feeling, he opened him.
"Ionch". The story "Ionch" is adjacent to the "little trilogy" - another story about a person who voluntarily submitted to the "case".
In the life of Zemsky doctor, Dmitry Ionchcha Startsev, who served in the provincial wilderness, was a little joy: he was tired of the service, he truly rested only in the family of Turkish, which in the city of S., where the main action of the story occurs, was considered the most cultural and intelligent. At first, Startseva, everything pleases in this family: both father, constantly mixing guests with witty tricks and words, and mother, writing long novels and with undisguised pleasure reading them to guests and friends at home, and daughter Katya, who dreams of a musical career and every day for several hours Piano playing. Katya awakens in the soul of Starteva an exalted feeling of first love, which is so fascinating him that he is even solved on a kind of "romantic adventure" - goes at night in a cemetery, where Katya, wanting to jerks on him, prescribed a date. However, over time, when his practice increases and he gets used to taking more and large sums from patients, a passion for wealth, material security absorbs him (he already has the estate and two houses in the city, and he wants to acquire more The third; if earlier he traveled to the challenges "on a pair", now - "On the top three with the bubber"), that the light of the pure aspiration for the hill is the sublime and ideal, which once burned in it, finally goes out. Even the externally elders turns into a kind of "case", inside of which a living human soul died: it becomes thick, rude, similar, according to a direct authoring characteristic, on a self-satisfied "pagan God".
The peculiar form of "caseor" closedness from the real living life with its real problems and difficulties is the cultural template for which the Turkish family lives, which is intelligent in the city, and who actually has nothing to do with genuine culture, nor with genuine intelligence: from year to year Mother, Vera Josephovna, reads guests their long, boring novels, in which "what is never happening in life"; Father, Ivan Petrovich, about and without reason, pronounces all the same funny words and expressions, which, since all the time they repeat, the listeners are so imparted that they can no longer be perceived as the real vulgarity.
At the same time, the copyright attitude towards heroes, as often happens in Chekhov, far from unambiguity. The author's dislike and Turkish, and the older is quite obvious, and nevertheless, there is no other rectilinear condemnation in the story. All the characters of the story have something that albeit a little bit, but goes beyond the limits of their "case". So, not to anyone else, like Ionchu, it would seem that I had already made all the spiritual, the author heaves to say about the family of the Turkish phrase, extremely important for the entire ideological concept of the story: "... if the most talented people in the whole city are so bad, then What should be the city. " In addition, the father and mother of Turkish and their daughter Katya, with all their vulgar provincial pseudo-sensitive, in the final of the works are honored by notes of copyright sympathy - in the scene, when Ivan Petrovich escorts at the station to his wife and daughter driving out on vacation in Crimea. I mention that Katya rides in the Crimea because "noticeably aged" and "clings", and Ivan Petrovich, when the train trudges, eyes are filled with tears, Chekhov unexpectedly opens ordinary people in their heroes, defenseless, like all people, Before the threat of diseases, inevitable old age and, most likely, that is why so touchingly tied to each other and so painfully experiencing even brief separation.
In 1898, Russian writer-playwright Anton Pavlovich Chekhov, the "small trilogy" which opened a new topic, reflecting the life of a certain part of the Russian society, was removed to continue his survey. The topic promised to be quite extensive and the writer gave her the name "Story". Picoral, closedness, "own world", in which there is no place for other people, are the characteristic signs of "man in a case".
"Little Trilogy" Chekhov, Creating History
According to the testimony of the Creativity of the Great Writer, the idea of \u200b\u200bthe trilogy was prompted by Lev Nikolaevich Tolstoy. Anton Chekhov, the "Little Trilogy" of which became the "first swallow", suggested to create a whole series of works on the features of the "case of such" people, but he managed to write only three stories, after which the writer was disappointed in his creative aspirations. He so responded about the state of his soul: "I don't want to write, you write how about boring, fresh, lean food, without taste and smell ..."
"Little Trilogy" Chekhov, Features Composition
All three stories unites the overall composite scheme that reveals the essence of each plot. The "Little Trilogy" Chekhov, which included three stories: "Man in a case", "Gooseberry" and "On Love," was published in 1898. The trilogy took its place in a number of immortal works of the Great Russian Writer.
"Little trilogy", summary
Trilogy, like any literary work, follows a specific plot. The "Little Trilogy" Chekhov was built on the principle of "narrator and listeners", Chekhov united three dowy friends who were accustomed to sharing each other in their lives over the long years of friendship. Rural gymnasium Sompona Burkin, Berkrach Ivan Ivanovich Chimsza-Himalayan and Alekhin, an educated middle-aged person who lived in the estate of his father, who was inherited.
"Man in a case"
"On the edge of the village of Mironositsky, in the Sennaya Sarah, the heads of the procophia, settled for the night of rapidly hunters ..." The story of Anton Chekhov "man in a case" begins. These hunters were Burkin and Ivan Chievs-Himalayan. Conveniently setting around on the Seine, friends talked. I did not want to sleep, and Burkin began to tell the story of his colleague, the teacher of the Greek language Belikov.
Strange Belikov
Strange Belikov always walked in a warmed coat, in galosh and with an umbrella. He walked so at any time of the year, and in the summer too. The teacher carefully packaged his personal belongings into special covers and covers. The watch, peridiced knife, stalked on boxes that always wore with them. So unusual actions of the educated and not old person have explained his desire to protect themselves from the influence of the external environment, he reasoned like this: "... And suddenly there will be something like this ...".
Belikov systemfully created his defense, and the whole city has fun over the unlucky teacher, considering his fad signs of light mighty. But since he was good as a teacher, the performance of the gymnasists on his subject did not cause complaints, he did not touch him. There was one who lived alone, he was afraid, otherwise, after all, after all, the wife would have to put in the cover.
But a new teacher came to the gymnasium - a teacher of geography and history Mikhail Kovalenko. He recently came to the city along with his sister, Varna, a charming special part of thirty years, smiling fidget. All the gymnasium was conquered by a cheerful temper of Varniki, did not escape this fate and Belikov. He even became sometimes walking with a young woman, and walking, argued with a dark view that "marriage is an extremely serious thing." Varnka listened to him not very carefully, but soon I was tired of moraling.
Once Belikov met Misha Kovalenko and Varnot, when they rode bikes. Looking out from your case, he saw two happy free people, and the whole world turned over. Shocked Belikov The next day came to Kovalenko's house, wanting to prove, as it is unreasonable - ride a bike, indecent and dangerous, ugly and humiliating. There were no varets at home, and Mikhail took and descended his colleague from the stairs.
And here and the jam came up. She laughed cheerfully, seeing Belikov tumbling along the steps. And he was so shocked what happened that I was barely reached the house and run. Spelling a month, and died of spiritual disorder. At the funeral, everyone wanted to him "the kingdom of heaven," and I thought about myself: "Well, finally, a man received a real case, which now protects him from any trouble."
Gooseberry
The "Little Trilogy" Chekhov contains another story about the "case" life of a simple person. Once, Burkin and Ivan Ivanovich Chimsza-Himalayan, walking along the field, decided to go to her friend, Paul Konstantinovich Alekhina. He welcomed old familiar, invited to the garden. Friends among the scorched gooseberry bushes were sitting, and Chimsza-Himalayan told the story of his brother Nikolai Ivanovich.
The story hero from nineteen years worked in the Kazan Chamber for a small salary and barely and like any materially cramped man, he had a dream. Nikolay Ivanovich wanted to have his own estate, a good house, and most importantly, the gooseberry grew in the garden. Not that he loved jam from ripe berries, but he just dreamed of him about it. The years walked, and all the time before the eyes of the official stood a gooseberry bushes. To ever buy the estate, Nikolai Ivanovich saved every penny, he often had nothing, all the money he folded into the box and hid it in a cache.
When the time came to start a family, Nikolai Ivanovich rushed to widow, rich and very ugly, with a bad character. In addition, she was older than twenty years later. The wedding did not play - for considerations of savings, and all the money of the wife Nikolai Ivanovich put in the bank. They lived the injignment, went to what fell, the children did not give birth. From such a life, a woman soon died.
A dream come true
Nikolai Ivanovich acquired a small estate with pasta trees in the garden and healed in his pleasure. First of all, he bought twenty gooseberry bushes and put everything around them. Then he started a litigation with a nearby plant, which, according to his understanding, poisoned the air, and the gooseberry did not grow. The court proceedings were infinite and ruler for Nikolai Ivanovich. And yet he felt a happy man when he went to the garden in the morning and looked at the gooseberry bushes.
After two months, Nikolai Ivanovich fell ill, he was revealed by gastric cancer. Poor food for many years, nervous disorders, insomnia - all this was not in vain. When he could no longer stand out of bed, and death had to be about to come, the servants made a complete plate of the ripe gooseberry to the room. Nikolai Ivanovich did not even look at him.
About love
And finally, the "Little Trilogy" Chekhov ends with a story about love. In the morning charged the rain. Pavel Konstantinovich Alekhin called for the breakfast of his friends of Ivan Chimsza-Himalayan and Burkina, who were visiting him from yesterday. For coffee with a liqueur, a conversation began about that about Sez, and Alekhin told his friends the story of love that had happened to him in his youth.
Once Pavel Konstantinovich was elected a district judge as an educated person who knew the languages \u200b\u200band well-dismantling in jurisprudence. In court, he met the Deputy Chairman, Dmitry Luganovich, and there were good friendly relations between them. Somehow, after the confusing proceedings, the last two days in a row, when all the orders were tired, Luganovich invited Alehina for lunch to his home.
So Pavel Konstantinovich met Anna Alekseevna, Luganovich's wife, a young woman of twenty-two years old, intelligent, beautiful. He immediately felt in Anna a relative soul. At lunch, they talked about different trifles, having fun, all three perfectly understood each other, as if they were familiar for many years. Alekhin noticed that there was a complete mutual understanding between the spouses, and a lot was surprised, because Anna Alekseevna was headed with his refinement and deep inner culture. He was headed above the simple and superficial Dmitry Luganovich.
On the same day, Pavel Konstantinovich realized that Anna occupies all his thoughts, tried to remember every word, every look. Then he had not yet guessed that the young woman was also in a light confusion after Alekhin spoke and went home. Between them stretched invisible threads, which connected their souls.
Since then, Alekhin often began to be in the house of Luganovich, he shoved with them and tried to be useful in every way. Dmitry and Anna did not remain in debt, offered help with money, when Pavel Konstantinovich experienced difficulties with the payment of debts left from the Father. But for him, another was important, he wanted to see Anna's shining eyes every minute, hear her voice, be with her next.
Both were already in love with each other, but everyone understood that it was impossible to give will feelings, it would make the unfortunate all others and ultimately destroy the family of Luganovich and the life of Alekhina himself. I had to hold back nor Pavel Konstantinovich, nor Anna did not allow love to break free to the will, held it in a strong case.
And only once, when Anna Alekseevna went to the Crimea for treatment, Alekhin, being in a train coupe with her alone, was able to hug her beloved woman, kiss her. She answered him, pouring into tears, the lovers spent together a few happy minutes and then parted forever.
"Little Trilogy", Analysis
Creativity Anton Pavlovich according to his time, at the end of the 19th century there were plenty of problems in the life of Russian society. "Little trilogy" Chekhov could be created on any topic, the writer most stories can be combined on thematic signs. And if the writer was not disappointed in the essence of his research and continued to create, we would get a lot of works on the "case" topic. And "small trilogy" Chekhov could well become "big trilogies".
A classic example of a prose cycle can serve as a Chekhov composition of three stories (with a magazine publication of numbered Latin figures), the meaning of which is noticeably impoverished and somewhat changes with several perceptions: "Man in the case", "Gooseberry", "On Love".
The constructive moment of the relationship of independent artistic integers here is the compositional principle of "story in the story", and the storytellers (in turn heroes for the narrator) are speaking through cycle characters.
If the meaning of the first part of the cycle was reduced to the sarcastic exposure of "parties", "Belikovshchina", it would be possible to state that the literary crude in this case is already nothing to analyze. Is the Burkin himself, the history of "man in a case", did not make appropriate observations, generalizations, conclusions? Does the character of Belikova need our additional evaluation or revaluation?
In fact, expressive-symbolic detailing of the image, which in other cases the researcher has to fix and detect the grains, the narrator Burkin has already been implemented and interpreted. At the same time, the aesthetic position of sarcastically-minded Burkina coincides with the irony of the author in the "death of an official" or in the "Ionchcha" final. But this time Chekhov needed a mediator who tells the story of a character, endowed with enough cartoon appearance:
It was a man of a small height, thick, perfectly bald, with a black beard almost a belt. The caricature of this portrait is shared by the contrastful appearance of his interlocutor, turning them into a kind of "carnival pair": a high thin old man with long mustes. (Recall that Belikov himself was the hero of caricature "In Love Anthropos.)
Attention to the appearance of the narrator, completely excessive for the story of Belikova, it forces us to assume the incompleteness of the copyright position to the one that Burkin is quite definitely occupied. "The subject of consciousness," wrote B.O. Korman, - the closer to the author, than to a greater extent it is dissolved in the text and is not noticeable in it. " And on the contrary, "the more the subject of consciousness becomes a particular person with its special warehouse of speech, character, biography (not to mention the appearance. - V. G.), to a lesser extent, he directly expresses the copyright position."
The relative narrowness of the horizons of the narrator consists, for example, in the fact that it is easy and self-administratively separates himself from those whom he says: ... And how many more such people in the case there are, how many will be! Meanwhile, the patestical hymn is freedom, which sounds from the mouth of Burkina, unexpectedly issues limitations, some kind of "ethereal" of his own thinking:
No one wanted to detect this feeling of pleasure, - feelings similar to what we have experienced a long time ago, in childhood, when the elders left the house, and we ran around the garden for an hour, enjoying full of freedom. Ah, freedom, freedom! Even a hint, even a weak hope for her opportunity gives the soul of the wings, is it not true?
Such an infantile experience of freedom as a short-term permissiveness in the absence of elder, a timid aspiration only a hint of such an opportunity explains the "case" the reaction of Burkina on the bitter generalizations of his interlocutor: - Well, you are from another opera, Ivan Ivanch.<...> Let's sleep. (It should be noted that the allusion of unnecessary existence in Chekhovsky texts is the allusion of unnecessary existence in Chekhovsky texts, while insomnia usually demonstrates the tension of the hero's internal life.)
But isn't the fact that we live in the city in a stuffiness, in flavored, write unnecessary papers, play the screw - isn't it a case? And the fact that we spend the whole life among idlers, soutaig, stupid, idle women, speak and listen to different nonsense - isn't it a case?
But these words cannot serve as an exhaustive expression of their own position of the author, since they are also embedded in the mouth of the acting person depicted by the subject of speech.
Ivan Ivanovich is also a mediator, but no longer between the hero (Belikov) and the author like Burkin, but between the hero and the reader. The attentive listener of the story about Belikov is like an image of the reader introduced inside the work. It is not by chance that he speaks on behalf of some "We".
If Burkin, ironically distancing from Belikov, limited himself to the sarcastic interpretation of his story, then Ivan Ivanovich, including himself in the number of people burdened with "stiffness", dramatizes the situation:
See and hear how lgut<...> demolish the resentment, humiliation, do not lift openly declare that you are on the side of honest, free people, and lie yourself, smile, and all this because of a piece of bread, because of a warm corner, because of some renucker, which Price, - No, it is so impossible to live more!
However, Ivan Ivanovich is just one of the heroes of the work, melting a kind of "Matryushki effect": the moral horizon of Ivan Ivanich is wider than Sarcasm Burkina (which, in turn, is wider than humorous laughter Varenka over Belikov), but already the author's moral norm. To identify this latter, it is necessary to focus on the "meaning context" arising "at the boundaries of individual components" cycle.
In the "Gooseberry", the character of the storyteller moves to Ivan Ivanchuch, and he invites us a very dramatic picture of life.
True, the hero of his history is the Chimsza-Himalayan junior - replenishes a number of sarcastic Chekhov characters, but the story of Ivan Ivanovich turns his personal confession: but it's not about it, but in me. I want to tell you, what a change happened in me ...
The presentation of the history of the brother begins with the paintings of their free, healthy childhood. The mental intimacy of heroes is emphasized, not completely disappearing over the years. Directly following the portrait of a brother landowner in Gogolevsky, ending with the words of Togo and looked at the blanket, it follows: we hugged and fought from joy and from sad thought that once were young, and now both seats, and to die.
Ivan Ivanovich peers in the new character of Nikolai Ivanich, as in the mirror: I also affected the hunt, how to live, how to refer to how to manage the people, etc. That night, the narrator is experiencing a dramatic catharsis. Feeling itself by the subject of the wide inner definition of being (famous: a person needs not three Arshina of the Earth, not a manor, but the whole globe, all nature, where on the square he could show all the properties and features of his free spirit), Ivan Ivanovich in the shameful contentment of his brother It seems the narrowness of the external dense of everyday life. He comprehends inconsistency, incompatibility of these parameters of human life.
In this experience, a kind of formula of Chekhov's drama is born: ... there is no strength to live, and meanwhile you need to live and want to live! (like Gurov, Anna Sergeyevna from "Ladies with a dog" and many other heroes of the writer).
The second "story in the story" practically does not require interpretation. Points over I are convincingly arranged by Ivan Ivanov. Two fifth texts are given to the framing of this confessional story, which does not allow to completely identify the author's position with the final judgments of the storyteller.
The antagonism between the author and the narrator, apparently, can not be speech, but not only the younger, but also the senior Chimsza-Himalayan manifests the narrowness of the moral horizon, proclaiming the drama of the norm of life: there is no happiness, and should not be ...
At the sight of a happy man, I won a hard feeling, close to despair, "says Ivan Ivanovich. He does not quite aware that the brother's content is just an imaginary happiness of a purely "external" person who degenerate pseudolism. An existentialist position of despair themselves, which is expensive, sensitly dedicated by Czech in the atmosphere of the era, does not leave place in the life of the joy of being.
Meanwhile, this kind of joy by the will of the author constantly makes itself felt in the framework of the main story. That hunters are penetrated with love for this field and think about how great this country is beautiful. That Alekhin is sincerely rejoiced by guests, and those admire the beauty of the maid of Pelagiai. Elderly Ivan Ivanovich with a boyish passion and delight swims and dives in the rain among white lilies. Alekhin with visible pleasure feels warm, clean, dry dress, light shoes, rejoicing guests not about the cereal, not about the Seine, not about Note.
Not only about Alehine, but also about Burkina (and even as if he was invisibly present by the author and reader) it was said: I wanted to speak and listen about graceful people, about women (in the lips of Ivan Ivanovich Women are stupid and idle). A kind of formula of the feeling of the living joy of being, not fallen, not supplanted by the drama confession, sounds: ... and the fact that there is now silently walked beautiful Pelagia, - it was better than any story.
Ivan Ivanovich rejects the joy of life with a rigidly moralistic position. However, indeed, if all sorts of joy serve as a kind of "cases" of happy people, deaf to the suffering of those who are unhappy? We will try to extract the reasonable Chekhov reply to this question from the trilogy as a whole as cyclical education. In the meantime, we note some of the features of the storytellor's moral position in the "gooseberry".
Ivan Ivan's dramatic maximalism (now there is no more severe spectacle for me, like a happy family sitting around the table and drinking tea) is not harmless to others. He carries not only a thirst for good, but also a thin poison of despair. This indicates, in particular, close relationship at the level of focalization of the final situations of the first and second stories.
In the end of the "man in the case" Burkin, told the history of Belikov, quickly falls asleep, and the excitementful Ivan's prompt, who was unbearable Ivan Ivanch, and he sighed, and then got up, again came out and, Sev Khuchi near the door, lit the tube. In the final of the "gooseberry", the despair of despair, Chimsza-Himalayan, fell silent with his head (like Belikov!) And falls asleep, after which the narrator notes:
From his tube lying on the table, heavily smelled to tobacco alone, and Burkin did not sleep for a long time and could not understand where this heavy smell could not understand.
It is significant that the narrator is not demonstrative, but quite obviously changes its position in that this time awakes with Burkin, and not with Ivan Ivanch. It is also indicative of the fact that the heavy smell associated with the dormant thoughts of the owner of the tube, with his dramatic confession, poisoning the other smell, talking about the simple joys of being, - for two phrases to the quoted ending it was reported: ... from their beds, wide, cool, who messed up beautiful Pelagia, nice smelled of fresh linen.
It should be noted that Ivan Ivanovich, having blown in personal happiness, loses its confidence in the possibilities of the human person at all, placing his hopes only on the unknown top of being: ... And if there is a sense and purpose in life, then this sense and purpose is at all Not in our happiness, but in something more intelligent and great.
The narrator at the same time explicitly "removed" from this thesis (so liked Tolstoy), noticing some inconsistency of communicative behavior: the hero said it as if he asked for himself. There is no reproach in this comment, but there is a drastic author's thought in it that any meaning is rooted in the person's personal being. Czechs, as shown by the final text of the trilogy (and the general context of his creativity), does not know anything more intelligent and the great.
Confession of Alekhina, which makes up a third cycle story, is very dramatic. The grain of this drama, as well as a year written later, "lady with a dog," is the unrealisticity of personal secrecy: we were afraid of everything that could open our secret to themselves (the word of the mystery is still three times in speeches Alekhina).
The framing of the story tamed does not conflict with the aesthetic situation of the "story in the story", as it was in the "gooseberry", but in the reasoning of the main character themselves a lot of contradictory. The contradiction consists, for example, in the fact that, according to Alekhina (we emphasize: not the author!), It is necessary to explain every case individually, not trying to generalize, but Alekhin himself completes its history just a generalization.
By saying at the very beginning that the love of personal happiness is important in love (and thus indirectly entering into a dispute with Ivan Ivanovch), Alekhin at the end of his monologue, like the teller of the "gooseberry", claims: I realized that when you love, then in my arguments This love should be proceeded from the highest, from more important than happiness or misfortune ... and further adds: ... or it is not necessary to reason at all, "how does the highest source discredit as a source of reasoning.
The entire inner life of Alekhina in his relationship with Anna Alekseyevna is permeated ordinary for mature Chekhov prose with a dramatic contradiction between the identity of the hero and his character: I loved gently, deeply, but I reasoned ... The first comes from personality, the second is from character as a way of adapting this Personality to circumstances. The "part of the sarcastic characters of the first first stories is just in the absorption, the depression once a living person - the" shell "of character (not by chance both, by the will of the author dying).
The incrustration of Alekhinsky and his personality manifests itself, for example, in the following: the work in the estate was boiling by him, but, taking the most active participation in it, he missed and frowned. But this incolution in Chekhovsky testifies to the presence of a Hero of a living human "I".
This is his (confirmed by the love of Anna Alekseyevna) the advantage of Loubanovich, who keeps near the solid people, sluggish, unnecessary, with a submissive, indifferent expression, for sure they led to sell here. Calling Luganovich Dobrybar, Alekhin accompanies this characteristic with a paradoxical explanation: ... one of those sootimy people who hold the opinions tightly that once a person came under the court, then he is guilty.
Luhaganovich's commitment to the expression of opinion in a legitimate manner, on paper, it is clearly talking to the reader of the trilogy, which in front of him "the case" is a version of Belikov, still deciding to marry. But the narrator Alekhin himself does not realize this, characterizing the husband of Anna Alekseevna as a miley person.
The hidden author's irony gives herself to know and in the commitment of the hero-storyteller to the topic of sleep (the sleep in Chekhov is almost always alleylessly conjugate with spiritual death). Back in the previous story, Alekhin wanted to sleep. Now he enthusiastically tells how he slept on the go, as at first, I was going to sleep, read overnight, and later did not have time to get to my bed and fell asleep in Saraj, in a sleigh or somewhere in the forest stopping. Meetings of the District Court are represented by Alekhine luxury after the sponge in Sanya. At the same time, he complains Anna Alekseevna, which in rainy weather sleeps.
However, in general, Alekhina's story is noticeably closer to the author's manner of mature Chekhov than Burkina and Chimsi-Himalayan stories. This proximity consists "in the refusal of the mission of the teacher," that "Chekhov did not impose no postulate," and "the moral demands of them apply primarily to themselves"
These words are fully applicable to Alekhina - a storyteller, an individualizing his own history of love as a separate case, while the first two narrator of the trilogy sharply blame their characters, they strongly generalize and generally "teacher":
Burkin is a teacher by profession, and Ivan Ivanovich is passionately preach (by the way, his pathetic exclamation: do not put to sleep!<...> Do not talk to do good! - It is very inappropriate to be addressed to the Alekhina who worked for the day, whose eyes stick out of fatigue).
And nevertheless, some copyright removal from Sleepy Alekhina, who did not delve into the meaning of Ivan Ivanovich, and only rejoiced the conversation about something that was not directly related to his life. It is obvious and for the two other storytellers. And although in bringing to the reader of all three stories there is a considerable share of the internal consent of the narrator with each of them, the life positions of the heroes telling distant from the implementation of the moral norm of the author's consciousness.
In search of the textual tracks of this "clothed in silence" (Bakhtin) of consciousness, we draw attention to what unites all without exception of the cycle characters. The vital position of a solitary existence is common to them in one or another, as well as, apparently, the most profound meaning of the phenomenon of "parties". There is a significant phrase from the "gooseberry", which is reduced within one frame of the focalization of all three heroevistors: Then all three were sitting in chairs, in different ends of the living room, and silent.
Tyu V.I. - Analysis of art text - M., 2009
