Fairy tale "Selfless Hare". fairy tale "The Sane Hare"

The theme of exposing cowardice to "The Wise Gudgeon" draws closer to him at the same time the written "Selfless Hare". These tales do not repeat, but complement each other in exposing slave psychology, illuminating its different sides.

The tale of the selfless hare is a vivid example of the crushing irony of Shchedrin, exposing, on the one hand, the wolfish habits of the enslavers, and on the other, the blind obedience of their victims.

The tale begins with the fact that a hare ran near the wolf's den, and the wolf saw him and shouted: “Zainka! Stop, darling! " And the hare only increased its pace. The wolf got angry, caught him, and says: “I am sentencing you to deprivation of your belly by being torn apart. And since now I am full, and my wolf is full ... then you sit here under this bush and wait in line. Or maybe ... ha-ha ... I'll have mercy on you! " What is a hare? I wanted to run away, but as soon as he looked at the wolf's den, “the hare's heart pounded”. A hare sat under a bush and lamented that he had so much left to live and his hare dreams would not come true: “I counted on getting married, bought a samovar, dreamed of drinking tea and sugar with a young hare, and instead of everything, where did I go? ! ". One night, the bride's brother rode up to him and began to persuade him to run away to the sick bunny. More than ever, the hare began to lament about his life: “For what? how did he deserve his bitter fate? He lived openly, did not start revolutions, did not go out with arms in his hands, fled according to his need - is it really death for that? " But no, the hare cannot even move from the spot: “I can’t, the wolf didn’t tell me!”. And then the wolf and the wolf climbed out of the den. The hares began to make excuses, persuaded the wolf, pity the wolf, and the predators allowed the hare to say goodbye to the bride, and leave her brother as an amanat.

The hare, released on leave, “like an arrow from a bow,” hurried to the bride, ran, went to the bathhouse, circled him, and running back to the den - would return by the specified date. The way back was hard for the hare: “He runs in the evening, runs at midnight; his legs are excised with stones, on the sides of the thorny branches the wool hangs in tufts, his eyes are dimmed, bloody foam oozes at his mouth ... ”. After all, he "gave the word, you see, and the hare is the lord to his word." It seems that the hare is very noble, he only thinks about how not to let his friend down. But nobility in relation to the wolf stems from slavish obedience. Moreover, he realizes that the wolf can eat him, but at the same time stubbornly harbors the illusion that "maybe the wolf ... ha-ha ... will have mercy on me!" This kind of slave psychology overpowers the instinct of self-preservation and is elevated to the level of nobility and virtue.

The title of the tale with surprising accuracy outlines its meaning, thanks to the oxymoron used by the satirist - a combination of opposing concepts. The word hare is always in a figurative sense synonymous with cowardice. And the word selfless in combination with this synonym gives an unexpected effect. Selfless cowardice! This is the main conflict of the tale. Saltykov-Shchedrin shows the reader the perversion of human properties in a society based on violence. The wolf praised the selfless hare, who remained true to his word, and issued him a mocking resolution: "... sit, for the time being ... and later I will ... ha-ha ... have mercy on you!"

The wolf and the hare not only symbolize the hunter and the victim with all the qualities corresponding to them (the wolf is bloodthirsty, strong, despotic, angry, and the hare is cowardly, cowardly and weak). These images are filled with topical social content. The exploitative regime is hidden behind the image of the wolf, and the hare is the man in the street who believes that a peace agreement with the autocracy is possible. The wolf enjoys the position of a ruler, a despot, the whole wolf family lives according to "wolf" laws: the cubs play with the victim, and the wolf, ready to devour a hare, pity him in her own way ...

However, the hare also lives by wolf laws. The Shchedrinsky hare is not just cowardly and helpless, but cowardly. He refuses to resist in advance, going into the wolf's mouth and making it easier for him to solve the “food problem”. The hare believed that the wolf had the right to take his life. The hare justifies all his actions and behavior with the words: "I can't, the wolf didn't order!" He is used to obeying, he is a slave to obedience. Here the author's irony turns into caustic sarcasm, into deep contempt for the psychology of a slave.

A hare from Saltykov-Shchedrin's fairy tale “A sane hare”, “although it was an ordinary hare, it was a premium one. And he reasoned so sensibly that a donkey would fit. " Usually this hare sat under a bush and talked to himself, discussed various topics: “Everyone, he says, is left to the beast. To a wolf - a wolf, a lion - a lion, a hare - a hare. Whether you are satisfied or dissatisfied with your life, no one asks you: live, that's all ", or" They eat us, eat, and we, hares, that year, we breed more ", or" These vile people, these wolves - this is the truth. ... All they have is only robbery on their minds! ". But one day he decided to flaunt his common thoughts in front of the hare. “The hare spoke and spoke,” and at this time the fox crawled up to him and let's play with him. The fox stretched out in the sun, told the hare to "sit closer and wiggle," and she "plays comedies in front of him."

Yes, the fox taunts the "sane" hare in order to eventually eat it. Both she and the hare understand this perfectly, but they cannot do anything. The fox is not even very hungry to eat a hare, but since "where has it been seen that the foxes themselves let go of their dinner", then one has to obey the law willy-nilly. All the clever, justifying theories of the hare, the idea of ​​regulating the wolf's appetites that has completely mastered him, are smashed to smithereens against the cruel prose of life. It turns out that hares were created to eat them, and not to create new laws. Convinced that the wolves of hares "will not stop eating," the sane "philosomph" developed a project for a more rational eating of hares - so that not all at once, but in turn. Saltykov-Shchedrin here ridicules attempts at theoretical justification of slavish "hare" obedience and liberal ideas about adapting to a regime of violence.

The satirical sting of the tale of the "sane" hare is directed against petty reformism, cowardly and harmful populist liberalism, which was especially characteristic of the 1980s.

The Tale "The Sane Hare" and the preceding tale "The Selfless Hare", taken together, give an exhaustive satirical description of "hare" psychology, both in its practical and theoretical manifestations. In The Selfless Hare we are talking about the psychology of the irresponsible slave, and in The Sane Hare - about the perverted consciousness that has developed servile tactics of adaptation to the regime of violence. Therefore, the satirist treated the "sensible hare" more severely.

These two works are one of the few in the cycle of Shchedrin's tales, which end in a bloody denouement (also "The idealist carp", "The wise gudgeon"). With the death of the main characters of fairy tales, Saltykov-Shchedrin emphasizes the tragedy of ignorance of the true ways of fighting evil with a clear understanding of the need for such a struggle. In addition, these tales were influenced by the political situation in the country at that time - the fierce government terror, the defeat of populism, police persecution of the intelligentsia.

Comparing the tales "The Selfless Hare" and "The Sane Hare" artistically, not ideologically, one can also draw many parallels between them.

The plots of both fairy tales are based on folklore, the spoken language of the characters is consonant. Saltykov-Shchedrin uses elements of lively, folk speech that have already become classical. The satirist emphasizes the connection of these tales with folklore with the help of numerals with non-numerical meaning ("the distant kingdom", "from beyond the distant lands"), typical sayings and sayings ("the track is cold," "runs, the earth trembles," to say, not to describe with a pen "," soon the fairy tale will tell ... "," don't put your finger in your mouth "," no stake, no yard ") and numerous constant epithets and colloquialisms (" pesytekhonka "," fox-klyaznitsa " , "The other day", "oh you, grief, grief!"

When reading the tales of Saltykov-Shchedrin, it is always necessary to remember that the satirist wrote not about animals and about the relationship between a predator and a prey, but about people, covering them with animal masks. It is the same in the tales of the "sane" and "selfless" hares. The language, beloved by the author of the Aesopians, gives the tales a richness, richness of content and does not in the least complicate the understanding of all the meaning, ideas and morality that Saltykov-Shchedrin puts into them.

In both fairy tales, elements of reality are intertwined in fantastic, fairy-tale plots. The "sensible" hare daily studies "statistical tables published by the Ministry of Internal Affairs ...", and about the "selfless" hare they write in the newspaper: he is like ... running away! " The "sensible" hare also tells the fox a little about real human life - about peasant labor, about bazaar entertainment, about the recruiting share. In the tale of the "selfless" hare, events are mentioned that were invented by the author, unreliable, but in essence real: “It rained in one place, so that the river, which the hare jokingly swam a day earlier, swelled and overflowed ten miles. In another place, King Andron declared war on King Nikita, and on the very hare's path, the battle was in full swing. In the third place, cholera manifested itself - it was necessary to go around a whole quarantine chain a hundred miles ... ”.

Saltykov-Shchedrin, in order to ridicule all the negative traits of these hares, used the appropriate zoological masks. Since a coward, obedient and humble, then this is a hare. The satirist wears this mask on faint-hearted townsfolk. And the formidable force that the hare fears - a wolf or a fox - personifies autocracy and the arbitrariness of the royal power.

Evil, angry ridicule of slave psychology is one of the main tasks of the tales of Saltykov-Shchedrin. In the tales "The Selfless Hare" and "The Sane Hare" the heroes are not noble idealists, but ordinary cowards, hoping for the kindness of predators. Hares do not doubt the right of the wolf and the fox to take their lives, they consider it quite natural that the strong eat the weak, but they hope to touch the wolf's heart with their honesty and obedience, and to speak to the fox and convince them of the correctness of their views. Predators remain predators.

Mikhail Evgrafovich Saltykov-Shchedrin is one of the most famous Russian writers of the mid-19th century. His works are written in the form of fairy tales, but their essence is far from being so simple, and the meaning does not lie on the surface, as in ordinary children's counterparts.

About the work of the author

Studying the work of Saltykov-Shchedrin, one can hardly find at least one children's fairy tale in it. In his writings, the author often uses such a literary device as grotesque. The essence of the technique lies in a strong exaggeration, bringing to the point of absurdity both the images of the characters and the events that happen to them. Therefore, the works of Saltykov-Shchedrin may seem creepy and too cruel even to an adult, not to mention children.

One of the most famous works of Mikhail Evgrafovich Saltykov-Shchedrin is the tale "The Selfless Hare". She, like all his creations, has a deep meaning. But before you start analyzing Saltykov-Shchedrin's fairy tale "The Selfless Hare", you need to remember its plot.

Plot

The tale begins with the protagonist, a hare, running past the house of a wolf. The wolf calls out to the hare, calls him to him, but he does not stop, but even more adds speed. Then the wolf catches up with him and accuses that the hare did not obey the first time. The forest predator leaves it near the bush and says that it will eat it in 5 days.

And the hare ran to his bride. Here he sits, counts the time to death and sees - the bride's brother is hurrying to him. The brother tells how bad the bride is, and this conversation is heard by the wolf with the she-wolf. They go out into the street and report that they will let the hare go to the betrothed to say goodbye. But with the condition that he returns to be eaten in a day. And the future relative will remain with them for the time being and, in case of non-return, will be eaten. If the hare returns, then perhaps both of them will be pardoned.

The hare runs to the bride and comes running quickly enough. He tells her and all his relatives his story. I don't want to go back, but the word is given, and the hare never breaks the word. Therefore, having said goodbye to the bride, the hare runs back.

He runs, and on the way he meets various obstacles, and he feels that he does not make it on time. He fights off this thought with all his might and only adds speed. He gave his word. In the end, the hare barely makes it and saves the bride's brother. And the wolf tells them that until they eat them, let them sit still under the bush. Maybe when he will have mercy.

Analysis

In order to give a full picture of the work, you need to analyze the tale "Selfless Hare" according to the plan:

• Characteristics of the era.
• Features of the author's creativity.
• Characters.
• Symbolism and imagery.

The structure is not universal, but it allows you to build the necessary logic. Mikhail Evgrafovich Saltykov-Shchedrin, whose analysis of the tale "Selfless Hare" must be carried out, often wrote works on topical topics. So, in the 19th century, the topic of dissatisfaction with the tsarist power and oppression from the government was very relevant. This must be taken into account when analyzing the tale of Saltykov-Shchedrin "The Selfless Hare".

Different strata of society reacted to the authorities in different ways. Someone supported and tried to join, someone, on the contrary, tried with all their might to change the situation. However, most people were enveloped in blind fear, and they could do nothing but obey. This is what Saltykov-Shchedrin wanted to convey. The analysis of the tale "The Selfless Hare" should begin by showing that the hare symbolizes precisely the last type of people.

People are different: smart, stupid, brave, cowardly. However, none of this matters if they do not have the strength to resist the oppressor. In the form of a hare, the wolf makes fun of the noble intelligentsia, which shows its honesty and loyalty to the one who oppresses them.

Speaking about the image of the hare described by Saltykov-Shchedrin, the analysis of the tale "The Selfless Hare" should explain the motivation of the protagonist. The word of the hare is an honest word. He could not break it. However, this leads to the fact that the life of the hare is crumbling, because he shows his best qualities in relation to the wolf, who initially behaved cruelly to him.

The hare is not guilty of anything. He just ran to the bride, and the wolf decided to leave him under the bush without permission. Nevertheless, the hare steps over himself to keep his word. This leads to the fact that the whole family of hares remains unhappy: the brother could not show courage and escape from the wolf, the hare could not help but return so as not to break his word, and the bride remains alone.

Output

Saltykov-Shchedrin, whose analysis of the tale "The Selfless Hare" was not so simple, described the reality of his time in his usual grotesque manner. After all, there were a lot of such people-hares in the 19th century, and this problem of unrequited obedience greatly hindered the development of Russia as a state.

Finally

So, this was an analysis of the tale "The Selfless Hare" (Saltykov-Shchedrin), according to a plan that can be used to analyze other works. As you can see, a seemingly simple fairy tale turned out to be a vivid caricature of the people of that time, and its meaning lies deep inside. In order to understand the work of the author, you need to remember that he never writes anything just like that. Every detail in the plot is needed in order for the reader to understand the deep meaning that lies in the work. This is what makes the fairy tales of Mikhail Evgrafovich Saltykov-Shchedrin interesting.

Grotesque is a term meaning a type of artistic imagery (image, style, genre) based on fantasy, laughter, hyperbole, bizarre combination and contrast of something with something.

In the genre of the grotesque, the ideological and artistic features of Shchedrin's satire were most clearly manifested: its political acuteness and purposefulness, the realism of its fantasy, the ruthlessness and depth of the grotesque, the crafty sparkling humor.

Shchedrin's “Fairy Tales” in miniature contain the problems and images of the entire work of the great satirist. If, apart from “Tales,” Shchedrin had written nothing, then they alone would have given him the right to immortality. Of the thirty-two tales of Shchedrin, twenty-nine were written by him in the last decade of his life and, as it were, sum up the forty-year creative activity of the writer.

Shchedrin often resorted to the fabulous genre in his work. There are elements of fairy-tale fantasy in The History of a City, while the satirical novel Modern Idyll and the chronicle Abroad include completed fairy tales.

And it is no coincidence that the flowering of the fairytale genre falls on Shchedrin in the 80s of the 19th century. It was during this period of rampant political reaction in Russia that the satirist had to look for a form most convenient for circumventing censorship and at the same time the closest, understandable to the common people. And the people understood the political acuteness of Shchedrin's generalized conclusions hidden behind the Aesopian speech and zoological masks. The writer created a new, original genre of political fairy tale, which combines fantasy with real, topical political reality.

In Shchedrin's tales, as in all of his work, two social forces are opposed: the working people and their exploiters. The people appear under the masks of kind and defenseless animals and birds (and often without a mask, under the name "man"), the exploiters - in the guise of predators. And this is already grotesque.

"And I, if they saw: a man is hanging outside the house, in a box on a rope, and smears the wall with paint, or on the roof, like a fly, walks - this is he who I am!" - says the generals the savior-man. Shchedrin laughs bitterly at the fact that the peasant, on the orders of the generals, twists a rope himself, with which they then tie him up. Almost in all fairy tales the image of the peasant-people is described by Shchedrin with love, breathes with indestructible power and nobility. The man is honest, straightforward, kind, unusually sharp-witted and clever. He can do anything: get food, sew clothes; he conquers the elemental forces of nature, jokingly swims across the "ocean-sea". And the peasant treats his enslavers mockingly, without losing his self-esteem. The generals from the fairy tale "How One Man Fed Two Generals" look pitiful pygmies in comparison with the giant man. To depict them, the satirist uses completely different colors. They do not understand anything, they are dirty physically and spiritually, they are cowardly and helpless, greedy and stupid. If you are looking for animal masks, then a pig mask is just right for them.

In the fairy tale "The Wild Landowner" Shchedrin summarized his thoughts on the reform of the "emancipation" of the peasants, contained in all of his works of the 60s. Here he raises an unusually acute problem of the post-reform relationship between the serf-nobility and the peasantry, which was finally ruined by the reform: “The cattle will come out to drink - the landowner shouts: my water! the chicken goes out to the outskirts - the landowner shouts: my land! And earth, and water, and air - everything became him! "

This landowner, like the aforementioned generals, had no idea about work. Abandoned by his peasants, he immediately turns into a dirty and wild animal, becomes a forest predator. And this life, in essence, is a continuation of his previous predatory existence. The wild landowner, like the generals, acquires an external human appearance only after his peasants return. Scolding the wild landowner for his stupidity, the police chief tells him that the state cannot exist without peasant taxes and duties, that without the peasants everyone will die of hunger, at the bazaar it is impossible to buy a piece of meat or a pound of bread, and the gentlemen will not have any money. The people are the creators of wealth, and the ruling classes are only consumers of this wealth.

The crucian carp from the tale “Crucian carp the idealist” is not a hypocrite, he is truly noble, pure in soul. His socialist ideas deserve deep respect, but the methods of their implementation are naive and ridiculous. Shchedrin, being himself a socialist by conviction, did not accept the theory of the utopian socialists, he considered it the fruit of an idealistic view of social reality, of the historical process. “I don’t believe ... that struggle and quarrels were a normal law, under the influence of which everything living on earth was supposedly destined to develop. I believe in bloodless success, I believe in harmony ... ”- the crucian ranted. It ended up being swallowed by a pike, and swallowed mechanically: she was struck by the absurdity and strangeness of this sermon.

In other variations, the idealist crucian carp theory was reflected in the tales “The Selfless Hare” and “The Sane Hare”. Here, the heroes are not noble idealists, but ordinary cowards, hoping for the kindness of predators. Hares do not doubt the right of the wolf and the fox to take their lives, they consider it quite natural that the strong eat the weak, but they hope to touch the wolf's heart with their honesty and obedience. "Or maybe the wolf ... ha-ha ... will have mercy on me!" Predators remain predators. Zaitsev is not saved by the fact that they “didn’t start up revolutions, they didn’t come out with weapons in their hands”.

Shchedrin's wise gudgeon, the hero of the fairy tale of the same name, became the personification of the wingless and vulgar philistine. The meaning of life of this "enlightened, moderately liberal" coward was self-preservation, avoiding collisions, from struggle. Therefore, the gudgeon lived to a ripe old age unharmed. But what a humiliating life it was! It all consisted of a continuous trembling for its skin. "He lived and trembled - that's all." This fairy tale, written during the years of political reaction in Russia, hit the liberals, creeping in front of the government because of their own skin, without a miss, at the townsfolk who were hiding in their holes from the public struggle.

The toptygins from the fairy tale "The Bear in the Voivodeship", sent by the lion to the voivodeship, set the goal of their rule to commit "bloodshed" as much as possible. By this, they aroused the anger of the people, and they suffered the “fate of all fur-bearing animals” - they were killed by the rebels. The same death from the people was accepted by the wolf from the fairy tale “Poor Wolf”, which also “robbed day and night”. In the fairy tale "The Eagle the Patron" is given a destructive parody of the tsar and the ruling classes. The eagle is the enemy of science, art, protector of darkness and ignorance. He destroyed the nightingale for his free songs, literate the woodpecker “dressed up. ... "Let this be a lesson for the eagles!" - the satirist concludes the tale meaningfully.

All of Shchedrin's tales were subjected to censorship persecution and alterations. Many of them were published in illegal publications abroad. The masks of the animal world could not hide the political content of Shchedrin's tales. The transfer of human traits - psychological and political - to the animal world created a comic effect, clearly exposed the absurdity of existing reality.

The images of fairy tales have come into use, have become common nouns and live for many decades, and the common human types of objects of Saltykov-Shchedrin's satire are still found in our life today, it is enough just to take a closer look at the surrounding reality and reflect.

9. Humanism of Fyodor Dostoevsky's novel "Crime and Punishment"

« The willful murder of even the last of people, the most harmful of people, is not permitted by the spiritual nature of man ... The eternal law came into its own, and he (Raskolnikov) fell under his rule. Christ did not come to violate, but to fulfill the law ... Those who were truly great and genius, who performed great deeds for all mankind, did not act like that. They did not consider themselves supermen, to whom everything is permitted, and therefore could give a lot to the "human" (N. Berdyaev).

Dostoevsky, by his own admission, was worried about the fate of "nine-tenths of humanity", morally humiliated, socially disadvantaged in the conditions of his contemporary bourgeois system. Crime and Punishment is a novel that reproduces pictures of the social suffering of the urban poor. Extreme poverty is characterized by "nowhere else to go". The image of poverty is constantly changing in the novel. This is the fate of Katerina Ivanovna, who remained after the death of her husband with three young children. This is the fate of Mar-Meladov himself. The tragedy of a father forced to accept the fall of his daughter. The fate of Sonya, who committed the "feat of crime" over herself for the sake of love for her loved ones. The torment of children who grew up in a dirty corner, next to a drunken father and a dying, irritated mother, in an atmosphere of constant quarrels.

Is the destruction of an "unnecessary" minority acceptable for the sake of the happiness of the majority? Dostoevsky answers with all the literary content of the novel: no - and consistently refutes Raskolnikov's theory: if one person arrogates to himself the right to physically destroy an unnecessary minority for the sake of the happiness of the majority, then "simple arithmetic" will not work: apart from the old woman-pawnbroker, Raskolnikov also kills Lizaveta - that the most humiliated and insulted, for the sake of which, as he tries to impress upon himself, the ax was raised.

If Raskolnikov and others like him take on such a lofty mission - defenders of the humiliated and insulted, then they must inevitably consider themselves extraordinary people who are allowed everything, that is, they inevitably end up with contempt for the very humiliated and insulted whom they defend.

If you allow yourself "blood according to your conscience", you will inevitably turn into Svidrigailov. Svidri-gailov is the same Raskolnikov, but already finally "corrected" from all prejudices. Svid-rigailov blocks all paths to Raskolnikov, leading not only to repentance, but even to a purely official confession. And it is no coincidence that only after Svidrigailov's suicide Raskolnikov makes this confession.

The most important role in the novel is played by the image of Sonya Marmeladova. Active love for one's neighbor, the ability to respond to someone else's pain (especially deeply manifested in the scene of Raskolnikov's confession of murder) make the image of Sonya ideal. It is from the standpoint of this ideal that the verdict is pronounced in the novel. For Sonya, all people have the same right to life. No one can achieve happiness, his own or someone else's, by crime. Sonya, according to Dostoevsky, embodies the folk principle: patience and humility, immeasurable love for man.

Only love saves and reunites a fallen man with God. The power of love is such that it can help save even such an unrepentant sinner as Raskolnikov.

The religion of love and self-sacrifice acquires an exceptional and decisive significance in Dostoevsky's Christianity. The idea of ​​the inviolability of any human person plays a major role in understanding the ideological meaning of the novel. In the image of Ras-Kolnikov, Dostoevsky executes the denial of the intrinsic value of the human person and shows that any person, including the disgusting old woman-usurer, is sacred and inviolable, and in this respect people are equal.

Raskolnikov's protest is associated with acute pity for the poor, suffering and helpless.

10. The theme of the family in the novel by Leo Tolstoy "War and Peace"

The idea of ​​the spiritual foundations of nepotism as an external form of unity between people received a special expression in the epilogue of the novel "War and Peace". In the family, as it were, the opposition between the spouses is removed, in the communication between them, the limitations of loving souls complement each other. Such is the family of Marya Bolkonskaya and Nikolai Rostov, where such opposite principles of the Rostovs and Bolkonsky are combined in a higher synthesis. Wonderful is the feeling of Nikolai's “proud love” for Countess Marya, based on surprise “before her soulfulness, before that almost inaccessible to him, sublime, moral world, in which his wife has always lived”. And the submissive, tender love of Marya "for this person who will never understand everything that she understands, and as if from this she loved him even more, with a tinge of passionate tenderness, is touching."

In the epilogue of War and Peace, a new family gathers under the roof of the Lysogorsk house, uniting in the past the heterogeneous Rostov, Bolkonian, and through Pierre Bezukhov, also the Karataev principles. “As in a real family, in the Lysogorsk house several completely different worlds lived together, which, each holding its own peculiarity and making concessions to one another, merged into one harmonious whole. Every event that happened in the house was equally important - joyful or sad - for all these worlds; but each world had completely its own, independent of others, reasons to rejoice or grieve at any event. "

This new family did not arise by accident. It was the result of the nationwide unity of people born of the Patriotic War. This is how the epilogue reaffirms the connection between the general course of history and individual, intimate relationships between people. The year 1812, which gave Russia a new, higher level of human communication, removed many class barriers and restrictions, led to the emergence of more complex and wider family worlds. The keepers of family foundations are women - Natasha and Marya. There is a strong, spiritual union between them.

Rostovs. The writer's special sympathy is aroused by the patriarchal family of the Rostovs, in whose behavior a high nobility of feelings, kindness (even rare generosity), naturalness, closeness to the people, moral purity and integrity are manifested. The Rostovs' courtyards - Tikhon, Prokofiy, Praskovya Savvishna - are devoted to their masters, feel like one family with them, show understanding and show attention to the interests of the lord.

Bolkonsky. The old prince represents the flower of the nobility of the era of Catherine II. He is characterized by true patriotism, breadth of political horizons, understanding of the true interests of Russia, indomitable energy. Andrey and Marya are progressive, educated people looking for new ways in modern life.

The Kuragin family brings only troubles and misfortunes to the peaceful "nests" of the Rostovs and Bolkonskys.

Under Borodin, on the Rayevsky battery, where Pierre falls, one can feel "common to everyone, like a family revival." “The soldiers ... mentally took Pierre into their family, appropriated and gave him a nickname. "Our master" they nicknamed him and they laughed affectionately about him among themselves. "

So the feeling of family, which in a peaceful life is sacredly cherished by those close to the people of Rostov, will turn out to be historically significant during the Patriotic War of 1812.

11. Patriotic theme in the novel "War and Peace"

In extreme situations, in moments of great shocks and global changes, a person will definitely show himself, show his inner essence, certain qualities of his nature. In Tolstoy's novel War and Peace, someone utters loud words, is engaged in noisy activities or useless vanity, someone experiences a simple and natural feeling of "the need for sacrifice and suffering in the face of common misfortune." The former only think of themselves as patriots and loudly shout about love for the Fatherland, while the latter, essentially patriots, give their lives for the sake of common victory.

In the first case, we are dealing with false patriotism, repulsive with its falseness, selfishness and hypocrisy. This is how secular nobles behave at a dinner in honor of Bagration; when reading poems about the war, "everyone stood up, feeling that dinner was more important than poetry." A pseudo-patriotic atmosphere reigns in the salon of Anna Pavlovna Scherer, Helen Bezukhova and in other St. Petersburg salons: “... calm, luxurious, concerned only with ghosts, reflections of life, St. Petersburg life was going on in the old way; and because of the course of this life it was necessary to make great efforts to realize the danger and the difficult situation in which the Russian people found themselves. There were the same exits, balls, the same French theater, the same interests of the courtyards, the same interests of service and intrigue. This circle of people was far from understanding all-Russian problems, from understanding the great misfortune and need of the people in this war. The world continued to live by its own interests, and even in the moment of national disaster, greed, promotion, and service reign here.

Count Rostopchin also displays pseudo-patriotism, posting stupid "posters" around Moscow, urging residents of the city not to leave the capital, and then, fleeing the people's wrath, deliberately sends the innocent son of the merchant Vereshchagin to death.

Berg is presented as a false patriot in the novel, who, in a moment of general confusion, is looking for an opportunity to profit and is preoccupied with buying a wardrobe and a toilet "with an English secret." It does not even occur to him that now it is a shame to think about wardrobes. Such is Drubetskoy, who, like other staff officers, thinks about awards and promotions, wants to "arrange for himself the best position, especially the position of adjutant to an important person, which seemed to him especially tempting in the army." Probably, it is no coincidence that on the eve of the Battle of Borodino Pierre notices this greedy excitement on the faces of the officers, he mentally compares it with "another expression of excitement", "which spoke of not personal, but general issues, matters of life and death."

What "other" persons are we talking about? These are the faces of ordinary Russian men, dressed in soldier's greatcoats, for whom the feeling of the Motherland is sacred and inalienable. True patriots in Tushin's battery are fighting without cover. And Tushin himself "did not experience the slightest unpleasant feeling of fear, and the thought that he could be killed or hurt painfully did not occur to him." The living, bloodthirsty feeling of the Motherland forces the soldiers to resist the enemy with inconceivable staunchness. The merchant Ferapontov, who gives up his property for plunder when Smolensk is abandoned, is also, of course, a patriot. "Bring everything, guys, don't leave it to the French!" he shouts to the Russian soldiers.

Pierre Bezukhov gives his money, sells his estate to equip the regiment. A sense of concern for the fate of his country, involvement in common grief makes him, a wealthy aristocrat, go into the heat of the Battle of Borodino.

Those who left Moscow, not wanting to submit to Napoleon, were also true patriots. They were convinced: "It was impossible to be under the control of the French." They "simply and truly" did "that great deed that saved Russia."

Petya Rostov is eager to go to the front, because "Fatherland is in danger." And his sister Natasha frees carts for the wounded, although without family good she will remain a dowry.

True patriots in Tolstoy's novel do not think about themselves, they feel the need for their own contribution and even sacrifice, but they do not expect a reward for this, because they carry in their souls a genuine sacred feeling of the Motherland.

The work of the great Russian satirist M.E.Saltykov-Shchedrin is a significant phenomenon, generated by the special historical conditions in Russia in the 50s-80s of the 19th century.

A writer, revolutionary democrat, Shchedrin is a vivid representative of the sociological trend in Russian realism and at the same time a profound psychologist, by the nature of his creative method different from the great writers-psychologists of his day. In the 80s, a book of fairy tales was created, since with the help of fairy tales it was easier to convey revolutionary ideas to the people, to reveal the class struggle in Russia in the second half of the 19th century, in the era of the formation of the bourgeois system. In this, the writer is helped by the Aesopian language, with the help of which he disguises his true intentions and feelings, as well as his characters, so as not to attract the attention of censorship. In the early works of Saltykov-Shchedrin, there are fabulous images of "zoological assimilation". In "Provincial Sketches", for example, there are sturgeons and piscari; the provincial aristocrats display the properties of either a kite or a toothed pike, and in the expression of their faces it is guessed that "she will remain without objections." Therefore, the writer explores in fairy tales the types of social behavior manifested by time.

He ridicules all kinds of adaptations, hopes, unrealizable hopes dictated by the instinct of self-preservation or naivety. Neither the dedication of a hare sitting under a bush in accordance with the "wolf resolution", nor the wisdom of a squirrel, huddled in a hole, save one from death. For what better, it seems, the dried roach has adapted to the policy of "iron grip".

“Now I have no extra thoughts, no extra feelings, no extra conscience - nothing like that will happen,” she rejoiced. But according to the logic of the time, "vague, wrong and cruel", and the vobla was "devoured", as "from a triumphant into a suspect, from a well-meaning - into a liberal." Shchedrin made fun of the liberals especially mercilessly. In letters from this time, the writer often likened the liberal to an animal. “... If only one liberal pig expressed sympathy! "- he wrote about the closure of the Notes of the Fatherland. "There is no animal more cowardly than the Russian liberal."

And in the artistic world of fairy tales, there really was no animal equal in meanness to a liberal. It was important for Shchedrin to name the social phenomenon he hated in his own language and to brand it for all time ("liberal"). The writer treated his fairy-tale characters differently. His laughter, both angry and bitter, is inseparable from the understanding of the suffering of a person who is doomed "to stare his forehead at the wall and freeze in this position." But with all his sympathy, for example, for the idealist crucian carp and his ideas, Shchedrin looked at life soberly.

By the fate of his fairy-tale characters, he showed that refusal to fight for the right to life, any concession, reconciliation with the reaction are tantamount to the spiritual and physical death of the human race. Lucidly and artistically convincingly, he inspired the reader that the autocracy, like a hero born of Baba Yaga, is rotten from the inside and it is pointless to expect help or protection from him ("Bogatyr"). Moreover, the activities of the tsarist administrators invariably boil down to "atrocities." "Atrocities" can be "shameful", "brilliant", "natural", but they remain "atrocities" and are caused not by the personal qualities of the "toptygins", but by the principle of autocratic power, hostile to the people, disastrous for the spiritual and moral development of the nation as a whole ( "The Bear in the Voivodeship"). Let the wolf once let the lamb go, let some lady donate “slices of bread” to the fire victims, and the eagle “forgive the mouse”.

But “why, however, did the eagle“ forgive ”the mouse? She ran across the road on her business, and he saw, flew, crumpled and ... forgiven! Why did he “forgive” the mouse, and not the mouse “forgave” him? " - the satirist directly puts the question. Such is the "established" order in which "wolves tear off the skin from hares, and kites and owls pluck the ravens," bears ruin the men, and the "bribery" rob them ("Toy business people"), idle talk, and the horsemen are sweating persons work ("Konyaga"); Ivan Rich also eats cabbage soup on weekdays "with a slaughter", and Ivan Poor and on holidays - "with nothing" ("Neighbors"). It is impossible to correct or soften this order, just as it is impossible to change the predatory nature of a pike or a wolf.

The pike, unwillingly, “swallowed the crucian carp”. And the wolf, not of its own free will, “is so cruel, but because its complexion is tricky: it cannot eat anything but meat.

And in order to get meat food, he cannot do otherwise than deprive a living creature of life. In a word, he undertakes to commit atrocity, robbery. " Predators are subject to destruction, Shchedrin's tales simply do not suggest any other way out. The personification of the wingless and vulgar philistine life was the Shchedrinsky wise piskar - the hero of the fairy tale of the same name. The meaning of life of this "enlightened, moderately liberal" coward was self-preservation, avoiding the struggle.

Therefore, the squeaker lived to a ripe old age unharmed. But what a foul life it was! It all consisted of a continuous trembling for its skin. He lived and trembled - that's all.

This fairy tale, written during the years of political reaction in Russia, hit without a miss the liberals, crawling in front of the government because of their own skin, at the townsfolk who were hiding in their holes from the public struggle. For many years the passionate words of the great democrat have sunk into the souls of the thinking people of Russia: “Those who think that only those piscari can be considered worthy are wrong. mi citizens, koi, mad with fear, sit in holes and tremble. No, these are not citizens, but at least useless piscari. " The fantasy of Shchedrin's tales is real, it carries a generalized political content.

Eagles are "predatory, carnivorous ..." They live "in alienation, in inaccessible places, they do not engage in hospitality, but they rob" - this is what the tale of the eagle-patron says.

And this immediately draws the typical circumstances of the life of the royal eagle and makes it clear that we are talking about the whole game of birds. And further, combining the atmosphere of the avian world with affairs by no means avian, Shchedrin achieves a comic effect and caustic irony.

The storyline of the work reveals the relationship between a predator and its prey, presented in the form of a cowardly hare and a cruel wolf.

The conflict of the fairy tale described by the writer is the fault of the hare, which did not stop at the call of a stronger animal, for which the wolf is sentenced to death, but at the same time the wolf does not seek to destroy the prey at the same second, but enjoys its fear for several days, forcing a hare to expect death under a bush.

The narration of the fairy tale is aimed at describing the feelings of the hare, who is frightened not only of the disastrous moment, but also worries about the hare left behind. The writer depicts the whole gamut of suffering of an animal unable to resist fate, timidly, humbly accepting its own dependence and lack of rights in front of a stronger beast.

The main feature of the psychological portrait of the main character, the writer calls the manifestation of slavish obedience by a hare, expressed in complete obedience to the wolf, overpowering the instincts of self-preservation and elevated to an exaggerated degree of vain nobility. Thus, in a fairy-tale-satirical manner, the writer reflects the qualities typical of the Russian people in the form of an illusory hope for a merciful attitude on the part of a predator, which have been brought up since ancient times by class oppression and are elevated to the status of virtue. At the same time, the hero does not even dare to think about any manifestations of disobedience to his tormentor, believing his every word and hoping for his false pardon.

The hare rejects not only his own life, being paralyzed by fears, but also the fate of his hare and future offspring, justifying his actions before the conscience of cowardice and inability to resist inherent in the hare family. The wolf, observing the torment of his victim, enjoys his apparent selflessness.

The writer, using the techniques of irony and humorous form, shows, using the image of a hare as an example, the need to reform one's own self-consciousness, driven into a dead end by fears, obsequiousness, admiration for the omnipotent and superiors, blind obedience to any manifestation of injustice and oppression. Thus, the writer creates a socio-political type of person who embodies unprincipled cowardice, spiritual limitation, submissive poverty, expressed in the perverted consciousness of the people, who have developed harmful servile tactics of adapting to a violent regime.

Option 2

The work "Selfless Hare" by M.Ye. Saltykova-Shchedrina tells about the relationship between the strengths and weaknesses of character.

The main characters of the story are the wolf and the hare. The wolf is a domineering tyrant who increases his self-esteem at the expense of the weakness of others. The hare is by nature a cowardly character, following the wolf's lead.

The story begins with the bunny hurrying home. The wolf noticed him and called out. The scythe increased his pace even more. For the fact that the hare did not obey the wolf, he condemns him to death. But, wanting to make fun of the weak and helpless bunny, the wolf puts it under a bush in anticipation of death. The wolf scares the hare. If he disobeys him and tries to escape, then the wolf will eat his entire family.

The hare is no longer scared for himself, but for his hare. He calmly submits to the wolf. And he just mocks the victim. He lets the poor fellow go to the hare for just one night. The hare must make offspring - a future dinner for the wolf. The cowardly hare must return by morning, otherwise the wolf will eat his entire family. The hare obeys the tyrant and does everything as ordered.

The hare is a slave to the wolf, fulfilling all his whims. But the author makes it clear to the reader that such behavior does not lead to good. The outcome was still disastrous for the hare. But he did not even try to fight the wolf and show the courage of his character. Fear clouded his brain and consumed everything without a trace. The hare justified himself before his conscience. After all, cowardice and oppression are inherent in his entire family.

The author describes most of humanity in the face of a hare. In modern life, we are afraid to make decisions, be responsible, go against the foundations and prevailing circumstances. This is the most common type of people who are spiritually limited and do not believe in their own strength. It's easier to adapt to bad conditions. And the outcome remains deplorable. It will be good only for the tyrant. Struggle is the key to success.

We, together with the hare, must fight violence and injustice. After all, every action has its own opposition. This is the only way to win.

Several interesting compositions

• Composition based on the work of Yushka Platonov (reasoning)

  The story "Yushka" is the story of the life of a man who knew how to love others selflessly and unselfishly. He gave all of himself to this love, completely dissolving in it. But it is also a story about the imperfection of this world.

  Probably, there is no such person who would not be offended at least once, and maybe more than once by his relatives or close people, and maybe even strangers. And each person reacts to it differently.