Punishment by Love The film by director Sergei Snezhkin "Bury Me Behind the Skirting Board", an adaptation of the famous autobiographical story by Pavel Sanaev, is being released.

With a love for the game Let's be clear about professionalism: a professional, although he gets paid, does his job with love. He must love her. Otherwise, he would not have been able to devote his life to her. However, the professional knows that too much love is harmful. Too strong

The author begins the comedy with a preface, where he describes the reasons why the writer undertakes to create. The first is the thirst for fame; the second is the pursuit of wealth; and the third - personal reasons, for example, the desire to annoy someone. Lukin, in turn, pursues a different goal - to benefit the reader.

The events of the comedy take place in Moscow in the house of a widow from a princely family, who has sincere feelings for one of the Dobroserdov brothers. Waiting for the owner to wake up, the servant Vasily reflects on the sad fate of the owner, who wasted to smithereens, because of which the threat of imprisonment hangs over him. Dokukin, the landlord's creditor, appears with a demand to repay the debt. Vasily's attempts to send him out were unsuccessful, and Dokukin went with the servant to the bedroom of Dobroserdov, who had already woken up from loud voices. Seeing Dokukin in front of him, he calms him down with a message about his marriage to a princess, who in honor of the wedding promised to give so much money that it would be enough to pay off the debt without difficulty. Dobroserdov goes to his bride, and Vasily explains that Dokukin should not be seen in the house, since no one should find out about the owner's duty and misery. The creditor leaves, promising to find out about everything from Zloradov.
The servant Stepanida appears from the princess’s half of the house and, noticing Dokukin, asks Vasily who he is. He tells Stepanida in detail how his master ended up in debt. When Dobroserdov was fourteen, his father sent him to Petersburg to look after his brother there. But the young man did not get carried away by the sciences, preferring an idle way of life to them. Later he became friends with Zloradov, with whom, after the death of his uncle, they settled in the same house. Not without Zloradov's participation, Dobroserdov squandered his entire fortune in a month, and four months later owed a total of thirty thousand to many merchants, one of whom was Dokukin. Zloradov, among other things, quarreled Dobroserdov with another uncle, because of which he left all the inheritance to his second nephew and left with him out of town.

You can only earn your uncle's forgiveness by marrying a good girl, and Dobroserdov sees this in the princess's niece, Cleopatra. Vasily turns to Stepanida with a request to persuade the girl to secretly flee with Dobroserdov. Dobroserdov, who has approached the conversation, joins the conversation, and also asks the servant for such a service. Stepanida is happy to help the mistress get away from her aunt, who spends her money on her whims, but doubts that her upbringing will allow Cleopatra to do this.
Stepanida leaves, and the princess appears in her place. She, without shame, invites the young man to take part in her preparation for going out, but Dobroserdov shies away from the prospect of choosing the princess's outfits, and then going to visit someone, pretending to be very busy. After that, he sends Vasily to Zloradov, as it seemed to him, his only friend, in order to tell him everything and ask him to borrow money to escape. Vasily's persuasions that this man is only plotting evil do not help.

Waiting for news from Stepanida, Dobroserdov curses himself for his former frivolity. Stepanida appears with the news that she was unable to talk to Cleopatra, so she advises Dobroserdova to tell her about her feelings for the girl in a letter. Dobroserdov goes to write a letter, and Stepanida comes to the conclusion that the reason why she helps the lovers lies in her own indifference to Vasily, whose kindness overrides the shortcomings of appearance and age.

The princess comes in and scolds the servant, the latter makes excuses that she came here to find out about Dobroserdov for her. He himself appears and, noticing the princess, carefully hands the letter to Stepanida, after which the princess and the maid leave, and the young man remains to wait for Vasily.
Later Stepanida arrives with bad news. The princess went to her daughter-in-law to arrange Cleopatra's wedding with the wealthy breeder Srebrolyubov, who promised not only not to ask for a dowry, but also to give the princess a large house and ten thousand from above. However, Stepanida invites the young man to help with this.

Vasily arrives with the news of the meanness of Zloradov, who persuaded Dokukin not to wait and immediately claim the debt from Dobroserdov, explaining that he was planning to leave the city. However, this does not cure the young man of gullibility, and he tells everything to Zloradov. The latter promises to draw three hundred rubles from the princess, judging for himself that Cleopatra's wedding with Srebrolyubov is very beneficial for him. Zloradov punishes writing a letter to the princess asking for a loan of this money to pay off the card debt, so that she can then take it to the princess. Dobroserdov agrees, and Vasily is furious with the gullibility and simplicity of the young man.

Stepanida comes with the news that Cleopatra has received a letter, and although she hardly dared to flee, she also has feelings for Dobroserdov. Suddenly, Panfil, a servant of Dobroserdov's brother, appears with a letter. It said that his uncle had forgiven Dobroserdov, having learned from his brother about the young man's desire to marry a virtuous girl. However, due to the slander of the neighbors, who reported that Dobroserdov, together with the princess, was spending the bride's fortune, the uncle abandoned his previous words, and only the arrival of a young man with a girl to clarify the situation can save the situation.

With the help of the solicitor Prolazin, Dobroserdov seeks to postpone the decision of the magistrate, but the methods that the solicitor offers him do not suit him, because he cannot steal bills, give bribes or renounce his signatures on bills. In the meantime, all creditors, who have learned about Dobroserdov's departure, are arriving, demanding to return their debts. And only Pravdolyubov, also his creditor, agrees to wait.

Zloradov appears. Everything is going according to his plan, it remains only to arrange so that the princess finds Dobroserdova and Cleopatra during their meeting. Then a monastery awaits Cleopatra, a prison for a young man, and money for Zloradov. Dobroserdov receives money from his "friend" and again, without foresight, talks about his conversation with Cleopatra. After that Zloradov leaves.
Cleopatra arrives with Stepanida. In the midst of their explanation, the princess appears along with Zloradov. Stepanida takes the situation into her own hands and tells the princess about Dobroserdov's plans, and then offers to entrust her with sending the girl to the monastery. The princess agrees in a rage, and attacks Dobroserdov with abuse, reproaching him for ingratitude. Zloradov throws off his mask and echoes it. The couple leaves, and Dobroserdov can only complain about the fate of the servant.

One of the creditors appears - a poor widow and her daughter - with a request to return a one and a half year debt. Dobroserdov immediately gives the three hundred rubles brought by Zloradov, and after the widow leaves, he punishes Vasily to sell his entire wardrobe in order to pay her the rest of the debt. The owner himself offers the servant freedom, but Vasily refuses to leave the owner at a difficult hour for him. At this time, creditors and clerks gather around the house, who came at the invitation of Zloradov.
Unexpectedly for everyone, Dobroserdov Jr. appears. He announces that their uncle has died and left the entire inheritance to his elder brother, forgiving him for everything. So now you can easily pay off all your debts. But Dobroserdov Sr. grieves only one thing - the absence of Cleopatra. But here, too, fate favors him. Stepanida actually took the girl to Dobroserdov's uncle, where they told everything.

The creditors, realizing that there was no need to expect interest from Dobroserdov, remembered Zloradov's debts and presented the promissory notes to the clerks. Vasily and Stepanida receive freedom, but decide to stay with their former masters.

Please note that this is only a brief summary of the literary work "Mot Corrected by Love". Many important points and quotes are missing in this summary.

The comedy is preceded by a lengthy author's introduction, which states that most writers are mistaken for the pen for three reasons. The first is the desire to become famous; the second - to get rich; third - the satisfaction of their own base feelings, such as envy and the desire to take revenge on someone. Lukin, on the other hand, seeks to benefit his compatriots and hopes that the reader will treat his work with condescension. He also expresses his gratitude to the actors involved in his play, believing that they all have the right to share the praise with the author.

The action takes place in the Moscow house of the dowager princess, who is in love with one of the Dobroserdov brothers. Servant Vasily, waiting for the awakening of his master, reflects with himself about the vicissitudes of the fate of his young master. The son of a decent man has completely squandered and lives in fear of imprisonment. Dokukin appears, who would like to receive a long-standing debt from the owner of Vasily. Vasily is trying to get rid of Dokukin under the pretext that his owner is about to receive the money and will soon return everything in full. Dokukin is afraid of being deceived and not only does not leave, but follows Vasily into the master's bedroom, who was awakened by loud voices. Seeing Dokukin, Dobroserdov consoles him by informing him about his marriage to the local mistress, and asks to wait a little, since the princess promised to give such an amount of money for the wedding that she would be enough to pay back the debt. Dobroserdov goes to the princess, while Dokukin and Vasily remain. The servant explains to the creditor that no one should see him in the princess's house - otherwise, Dobroserdov's debts and ruin will become known. The lender (creditor) leaves, muttering to himself that he will make inquiries with Zloradov.

The servant Stepanida, who has appeared with the princess’s half, manages to notice Dokukin and asks Vasily about him. The servant tells Stepanida in detail about the circumstances due to which his master, Dobroserdov, found himself in distress. At the age of fourteen, his father sent him to Petersburg in the care of his brother, a frivolous man. The young man neglected the sciences and indulged in entertainment, making friends with Zloradov, with whom he settled after his uncle died. In a month he was completely ruined, and in four months he owed thirty thousand to various merchants, including Dokukin. Zloradov not only helped squander the estate and borrowed money, but also quarreled Dobroserdov with another uncle. The latter decided to leave an inheritance to his younger brother Dobroserdov, with whom he left for the village.

There is only one way to beg your uncle's forgiveness - by marrying a prudent and virtuous girl, which Dobroserdov considers Cleopatra, the princess's niece. Vasily asks Stepanida to persuade Cleopatra to flee with Goodheart secretly. The maid does not believe that the well-behaved Cleopatra will agree, but she would like to save her mistress from her aunt-princess, who spends her niece's money on her whims and outfits. Dobroserdov appears, who also asks Stepanida for help. The maid leaves, and the princess appears, not hiding her attention to the young man. She invites him to her room to dress in his presence for the upcoming exit. Not without difficulty Dobroserdov, embarrassed by the need to deceive the princess who is in love with him, is so busy that he happily avoids the need to be present at the princess's dressing room, all the more to accompany her on a visit. The delighted Dobroserdov sends Vasily to Zloradov, his true friend, to open up to him and lend money to escape. Vasily believes that Zloradov is not capable of good deeds, but he fails to dissuade Dobroserdov.

Dobroserdov finds no place for himself while waiting for Stepanida and curses himself for the recklessness of the old days - disobedience and extravagance. Stepanida appears and reports that she did not have time to talk to Cleopatra. She advises Dobroserdov to write a letter to the girl telling her about her feelings. The delighted Dobroserdov leaves, and Stepanida reflects on the reasons for her participation in the fate of the lovers and comes to the conclusion that the matter is in her love for Vasily, whose kindness is more important to her than the unsightly appearance of an elderly age.

The princess appears and pounces on Stepanida with abuse. The maid excuses herself by the fact that she wanted to serve the mistress and came to find out something about Dobroserdov. The young man, who has appeared from his room, at first does not notice the princess, but upon seeing her, he unnoticed puts the letter to the servant. Both women leave, and Dobroserdov remains waiting for Vasily.

Stepanida unexpectedly returns with sad news. It turns out that the princess went to visit her daughter-in-law in order to sign documents (inline) for Cleopatra's dowry. She wants to marry her off to the rich breeder Srebrolyubov, who undertakes not only not to demand the dowry, but also gives the princess a stone house and ten thousand in addition. The young man is indignant, and the maid promises him her help.

Vasily comes back and tells about the mean act of Zloradov, who incited Dokukin (the creditor) to immediately claim the debt from Dobroserdov, since the debtor intends to escape from the city. Dobroserdov does not believe, although some doubt settles in his soul. Therefore, at first it is cold, and then, with the same innocence, he tells Zloradov who has appeared about everything that happened. Zloradov feigned promise to help get the necessary three hundred rubles from the princess, realizing to himself that Cleopatra's wedding with the merchant would be very beneficial to him. To do this, you should write a letter to the princess asking for a loan in order to pay off the card debt and take him to the house where the princess is staying. Dobroserdov agrees and, forgetting about Stepanida's warnings not to leave the room, leaves to write a letter. Vasily is indignant at the credulity of his master.

The newly appeared Stepanida informs Dobroserdov that Cleopatra read the letter, and although it cannot be said that she decided to run away, she does not hide her love for the young man. Suddenly, Panfil appears - the servant of Dobroserdov's younger brother, sent secretly with a letter. It turns out that the uncle was ready to forgive Dobroserdov, as he learned from his younger brother about his intention to marry a virtuous girl. But the neighbors hastened to inform about the dissipation of the young man, allegedly squandering the estates of Cleopatra together with her guardian, the princess. My uncle was furious, and there was only one way: to immediately come with the girl to the village and explain the true state of affairs.

Dobroserdov desperately tries to postpone the magistrate's decision with the help of the solicitor Prolazin. But none of the solicitor's methods suits him, since he does not agree to renounce his signature on the bills, nor to give bribes, let alone solder creditors and steal bills, accusing his servant of this. Having learned about Dobroserdov's departure, one after another, creditors appear and demand the return of the debt. Only one Pravdolyubov, who also has promissory notes from the ill-fated Dobroserdov, is ready to wait until better times.

Zloradov arrives, pleased with how he managed to twist the princess around his finger. Now, if it is possible to arrange the sudden appearance of the princess during Dobroserdov's meeting with Cleopatra, the girl faces a monastery, her beloved prison, all the money will go to Zloradov. Dobroserdov appears and, having received money from Zloradov, recklessly devotes him to all the details of his conversation with Cleopatra. Zloradov leaves. Cleopatra appears with her maid. During a fervent explanation, the princess appears, accompanied by Zloradov. Only Stepanida was not taken aback, but the young man and his servant were amazed at her speech. Rushing to the princess, the maid reveals Dobroserdov's plan for her niece's immediate escape and asks the princess's permission to take the girl to the monastery, where their relative serves as abbess. The enraged princess entrusts the ungrateful niece to the servant, and they leave. Dobroserdov tries to follow them, but the princess stops him and showered him with reproaches for black ingratitude. The young man tries to find support from his imaginary friend Zloradov, but he reveals his true face, accusing the young man of dissipation. The princess demands from Dobroserdov respect for her future husband. Zloradov and the overripe coquette leave, and Dobroserdov rushes with belated regrets to his servant.

A poor widow appears with her daughter and reminds the young man of the debt that she has been waiting for for a year and a half. Dobroserdov without hesitation gives the widow three hundred rubles brought from Princess Zloradov. After the widow leaves, he asks Vasily to sell all his clothes and linen in order to pay off the widow. Vasily offers freedom. Vasily refuses, explaining that he will not leave the young man in such a difficult time, especially since he has retired from a dissolute life. Meanwhile, lenders and clerks invited by Zloradov are gathering around the house.

Suddenly, Dobroserdov's younger brother appears. The older brother is even more desperate because the younger has witnessed his shame. But things take an unexpected turn. It turns out that their uncle died and left his estate to his elder brother, forgiving all his sins. The younger Dobroserdov is ready to immediately pay debts to creditors and pay for the work of the clerks from the magistrate. One thing upsets Dobroserdov Sr. - the absence of his beloved Cleopatra. But she's here. It turns out that Stepanida deceived the princess and took the girl not to the monastery, but to the village to her lover's uncle. On the way, they met their younger brother and told him everything. Zloradov was trying to wriggle out of the situation, but, failing, began to threaten Dobroserdov. However, creditors who have lost their future interest from the rich debtor present Zloradov's promissory notes to the clerks. The princess regrets her actions. Stepanida and Vasily receive their freedom, but they are going to continue to serve their masters. In addition, Vasily makes a speech that all the maidens should be like Cleopatra in their good deeds, that the “outdated coquettes” would abandon their coquetry, like the princess, and “the god of villainy does not leave without punishment”.

Option 2

A very strange prologue begins the comedy. It provides three reasons why writers start to create. These include: the thirst for fame, money and the third reason is the desire to satisfy base needs. The author himself wants to benefit the reader and thanks the actors playing in his play. One Moscow princess is in love with one of the Dobroserdov brothers. His servant, reflects on the life of his master, who lives in fear of prison.

Dokukin comes for his debt. Dobroserdov assures that by marrying the princess, he will return the entire debt. Vasily convinces Dokukin not to tell anyone about the plight of the owner. The departing guest was noticed by the princess's maid and asked Vasily about him. He tells her everything. As a debt collector, Dobroserdov fell out with his uncle, and reconciliation is possible only on the condition that he marries a decent girl, such as Cleopatra, the princess's niece. Vasily convinces the maid that Dobroserdov should flee with Cleopatra. Dobroserdov also asks to help Stepanid. Vasily goes to Zloradov to borrow money from him to escape.

Stepanida offers to write a letter about her feelings to Cleopatra. Dobroserdov leaves, and the maid comes to the conclusion that she herself is in love with Vasily. The princess scolds the servant, but she makes excuses. Dobroserdov, who appeared imperceptibly, handed the letter to Stepanida. Later, she appears with bad news: her aunt wants to marry Cleopatra for the breeder Srebrolyubov. Returning Vasily tells how Zloradov himself persuaded Dokukin to demand the debt, telling him that he wanted to leave the city. Not believing this, Dobroserdov himself talks to Zloradov and he allegedly promises to give three hundred rubles. Stepanida tells Dobroserdov that Cleopatra finally read the letter, and it turned out that their feelings are mutual.

Panfil, a servant of Dobroserdov's second brother, brings another letter. The uncle is ready to forgive him, but the neighbors slandered the young man, and the uncle demands an immediate arrival with the girl for an explanation. Upon learning of the imminent departure, creditors frequently visited Dobronravov. Zloradov wants to substitute Dobroserdov in front of the princess, and take all the money for himself. Cleopatra arrives with a maid and an explanation takes place. At this moment the princess appears. The maid, not bewildered, lays out all the plans of the lovers and offers to take the girl to the monastery. Zloradov reveals his true face to Dobrserdov.

The exit was found unexpectedly. The brothers' uncle died and left all his savings to his elder brother. Another good piece of news: Stepanida hid Cleopatra with her uncle in the village. The princess repented, but Stepanida and Vasily are free.

Essay on literature on the topic: Summary of Mot, corrected by love Lukin

"COMEDY OF MORALS" IN THE WORKS OF V. I. LUKIN (1737-1794)

Thus, the comedic character Neumolkov, who was present at the premiere of the comedy "The Enchanted Belt", in its real status turns out to be quite equal to those spectators who were sitting in the St. Petersburg theater hall on the evening of October 27, 1764. On the stage there are original characters, in theatrical chairs - their real prototypes. Flesh and blood people move easily onto the stage like mirror images; the reflected characters just as easily descend from the stage into the hall; they have one life circle, one common reality. Text and life stand against each other - life looks in the mirror of the stage, Russian comedy realizes itself as a mirror of Russian life. Perhaps, it is precisely thanks to this visualization that another aspect of its relevance for the Russian literary tradition comes to the forefront of the mirror comedic world image: moral teaching, the social functionality of comedy - the nerve of the "prepositional direction" and the higher meaning for which it took shape as an aesthetic theory:

Chistoserdov. You saw comedies several times and I was glad that they<...>appeared in their true form. You considered them not as a delight for the eyes, but as a benefit to your heart and mind ( "Nibble", 192-193).

The passion of the first Russian spectators, who got a taste for theatrical performances, to see in the play the same life that they led outside the theater, and in the characters of the comedy - full-fledged people, was so strong that it provoked an incredibly early act of self-awareness of the Russian comedy and gave rise to the phenomenon of mistrust of the author to its text and the inadequacy of the literary text itself to express the whole complex of thoughts that are embedded in it. All this required auxiliary elements to clarify the text. Lukin's prefaces and commentaries, accompanying each artistic publication in the Works and Translations of 1765, bring comedy as a genre very close to journalism as a form of creativity. A cross-cutting motive of all Lukin's prefaces is “good for the heart and mind”, the ideological purpose of comedy, designed to reflect social life with the sole purpose of eradicating vice and to represent the ideal of virtue with the aim of introducing it into public life. The latter is also, in its own way, a mirror act, only the image in it precedes the object. This is what serves as Lukin's motivation for comedy creativity:

<...>I took up the pen, following only one heartfelt impulse, which makes me look for the ridicule of vices and my own in the virtue of pleasure and benefit for my fellow citizens, giving them an innocent and amusing time. (Preface to the comedy "Mot Corrected by Love", 6.)

The same motive of the direct moral and social benefit of the spectacle determines, in Lukin's understanding, the purpose of comedy as a work of art. The aesthetic effect that Lukin thought was the result of his work had for him primarily an ethical expression; the aesthetic result - the text as such, with its own artistic characteristics - was secondary and, as it were, accidental. Characteristic in this respect is the twofold orientation of comedy and the theory of the comedy genre. On the one hand, all of Lukin's texts pursue the goal of changing the existing reality distorted by vice in the direction of the moral norm:

<...>The mockery of Pustomiela should have hoped for correction in people who were subject to this weakness, that in those who had not yet completely destroyed goodwill,<...>(Preface to the comedy "Empty space", 114).

On the other hand, this denying attitude towards correcting a vice by means of its accurate reflection is complemented by a directly opposite task: by reflecting a nonexistent ideal in a comedic character, comedy seeks to cause by this act the emergence of a real object in real life. In essence, this means that the transforming function of comedy, traditionally recognized for this genre by European aesthetics, is adjacent to Lukin's directly creative one:

Some condemners, armed against me, told me that we had never had such servants. It will, I told them, but Vasily was made by me for this, to produce people like him, and he should serve as a model. (Preface to the comedy "Mot Corrected by Love",12.)

It is easy to see that the goals of comedy, realized in this way, organize the direct relationship of art as reflected reality with reality as such, according to the already known Russian literature of modern times, the setting models of satire and ode: negative (eradicating vice) and affirmative (demonstrating the ideal). Thus, in the background of ideology and ethics, Lukin finds himself aesthetics: the ubiquitous genre traditions of satire and ode. Only now these previously isolated tendencies have shown a tendency to merge in one genre - the genre of comedy. The rapid self-determination of comedy in Russian social life, accompanied by the theoretical self-awareness of the genre as a way of self-determination in the ideological Russian life, has caused consequences, albeit of two kinds, but closely related. First, comedy, which became part of the national social life with its own place in its hierarchy (the main means of social education), immediately caused a parallel process of intensive expansion of this very life into its own framework. Hence the second inevitable consequence: the national life, which for the first time became the object of comedic attention, entailed a theoretical crystallization of the idea of ​​a national Russian comedy, especially paradoxical against the background of the West European genesis of plots and the sources of his comedies, which Lukin insistently emphasized. One's own, however, can be realized as such only against the background of someone else's. So, for example, Sumarokov's comedies evoked a sharp rejection of Lukin for their obvious international plot-thematic realities. However, against the background of these realities, the national originality of the genre model of Sumarokov's comedies is especially obvious. Lukin's comedy shows an inverse relationship between the same aesthetic categories: realities are our own, but the genre model is alien. The emphasized opposition of comedy "inclined to Russian mores", foreign, which served as a strong point for it, which constitutes the whole meaning of the term "presentation", automatically brings to the fore the category of national specificity of life and genre, reflecting this way of life. But at the same time, the actual aesthetics of Lukin's comedy, and it is precisely this that should be considered the theory of "transposition" and "inclination to our mores", i.e. saturation of the original text with national everyday realities, since this is what distinguishes the Russian “text at the exit” from the European “text at the entrance”, is secondary in relation to ideology and ethics. Attention to national signs of everyday life is dictated not by artistic interest in this very life, but by the "higher content" of comedy, by an extraneous goal:

<...>I will incline all comic theatrical compositions to our customs, because the audience does not get any correction from comedy in other people's morals. They think that it is not them, but the strangers who are being ridiculed. " (Preface to the comedy "Awarded Consistency" 117.)

The result is not so much a comedy "in our morals" as the idea of ​​a comedy "in our mores", which is just about to appear. But such a situation, when the idea, the idea of ​​what should be, is primary and outstrips its embodiment in a material object, completely corresponds to the ideas of the 18th century. about the hierarchy of reality. That specific and deeply nationally peculiar turn, which the concept of "our mores" acquired under Lukin's pen, had a decisive influence first of all on poetics, and then on the problems and formal characteristics of the comedy genre, serving its aesthetic transformation in a fundamentally unconventional structure beyond the borders of Lukin's system of comedy, from Fonvizin, his successors and heirs. Obviously, central to Lukin's comedy theory and practice is the concept of “our mores,” which constitutes the shift between “alien” and “our own,” perceived as the national specificity of Russian theater. Lukin so firmly managed to introduce the category of "our mores" into the aesthetic consciousness of his era that according to the criterion of conformity to "morals" they were evaluated until the end of the 18th century. all notable comedic innovations. (Compare N. I. Panin's review of the comedy "Brigadier" "<...>the first comedy is in our morals. ") Therefore, it is absolutely necessary to find out what exactly Lukin understood by the word" morals ", which concentrated in itself the whole meaning of his comedic innovation. And at the very first attempt to define the concept of "our mores" from Lukin's declarative statements, an amazing thing is revealed, namely, that the traditional understanding of the category of "morals" is only partially relevant for Lukin. Actually, out of all his theoretical statements about “our morals,” only the clerk with a marriage contract, who angered Lukin in Sumarokov's first comedy with an unnatural alliance of the native Russian word with an overly European function, falls into this series:

<..>A Russian clerk, having come to any house, will ask: "Is there Mr. Orontes's apartment here?" “Here,” they will say to him, “but what do you want from him?” - "To write a contract for the wedding."<...>This will twist the head of a knowledgeable viewer. In a genuine Russian comedy, the name Orontovo given to the old man and the writing of the marriage contract are not at all peculiar to the clerk (118-119).

It is characteristic that already in this passage, falling under the same category of "morals", the Russian clerk in the function of a European notary is adjacent to "Orontovo's name given to the old man" - a name, that is, a word that is especially clearly not Russian in meaning, neither in sound, nor in a dramatic semantic load. All the widespread statements of Lukin about the "declension" of Western European originals "to our mores" ultimately run up against the problem of anthroponyms and toponyms. It is in this category of words that Lukin sees a concentrate of the concepts of "national" and "morals". So the plenipotentiary representative of Russian customs and Russian characters in the "true Russian comedy" becomes the word emphasized by its exclusive belonging to the national culture:

It has always seemed unusual for me to hear foreign expressions in such compositions, which should, by depicting our morals, correct not so much the common vices of the whole world as the vices of our people; and I have repeatedly heard from some spectators that it is disgusting not only to their reason, but also to hearing, if the faces, although somewhat similar to our mores, are called in the presentation Cleitandre, Dorant, Tsitalis and Kladina and speak speeches that are not our behavior signifying.<...> There are many more and the smallest expressions: for example, I recently came from Marseille, or I walked in Tulleria, was in Versailles, saw the Wicompte, sat with the Marquis and other foreign things.<...> And what kind of connection there will be if the characters are named like that: Geront, the clerk, Fonticidius, Ivan, Fineta, Crispin and the notary. I cannot penetrate, from where these thoughts can come to make such a composition. This business is truly strange; or even stranger, to consider it correct (111-113,119).

Perhaps, this apology of the Russian word as the main pictorial means of Russian life was embodied especially vividly in the preface to the comedy "The Pinch", written specifically about the native Russian word and its pictorial capabilities:

I am writing this preface in defense of a single word only.<...>, and must certainly defend the name given to this comedy.<...>how to explain the French word Bijoutier in our language, and found no other means than to enter into the essence of the trade from which the French had this name, to reconcile with our bargaining and consider whether there is something like it that I am without a great I found work and here I propose.<...>And so, having to foreign words, our ugly language, complete disgust, I called the comedy "The Nibble"<...> (189-190).

And if Russian comedians even before Lukin happened to play with the clash of barbarisms with indigenous Russian words as a laughing device, a caricature of Russian vice (compare the macaroni speech of Sumarokov's Gallomaniacs), then Lukin for the first time not only begins to consciously use a stylistically and nationally colored word as a characterological and evaluative reception, but also draws special attention to it from the public. In the comedy "Mot Corrected by Love" to the Princess's remark: "You will stand at my toilet", a note is made: "A foreign word is spoken by a coquette, which is decent for her, and if she did not speak, then of course Russian would have been written" (28 ). The same kind of note is found in the comedy "The Nibble":

Polydor. If and where there are people like us, two or three guests, then a small company is not honored. All foreign words speak the patterns to which they are peculiar; and Pinch, Chistoserdov and Nephew always speak Russian, except occasionally they repeat the word of some idler (202).

Thus, the word comes to the center of the poetics of Lukin's comedy "transformations" not only in its natural function of the building material of the drama, but also as a signal of additional meanings. From material and means, the word becomes an independent end. A halo of associativity arises over its direct meaning, expanding its internal capacity and allowing the word to express something more than its generally recognized lexical meaning. It is precisely with the additional purpose of the word that Lukin is associated with the poetics of significant surnames, which he was the first to introduce into comedyography not just as a separate device, but as a universal law of the nomination of characters. Sometimes the concentration of Russian words in meaningful surnames, names of cities and streets, mentions of cultural events of Russian life, turns out to be so great in Lukin's “transformations” that the life-like coloring of Russian life they create contradicts the content of the comedy action unfolding against this Russian background, the nature of which defined by the Western European mentality and which does not undergo significant changes in Lukin's comedies "inclined to Russian manners". Just as the idea of ​​"our mores" inevitably and visually emerged against the background of the "alien" source text, "inclined" by Russian words to Russian customs, so the general points of non-coincidence of "alien" and "our" were outlined against this verbal background with the utmost relief ... “Alien” is emphasized by “our” no less than “ours” by “alien”, and in this case “alien” is revealed primarily as the inappropriateness of the constructive foundations of the Western European comedy type of action for reflecting Russian life and its meanings. The opposition of "ours" and "aliens" posed for Russian comedy not only the problem of national content, but also the task of finding a specific form for expressing this content. Lukin expressed in a direct declaration the desire to orient his translated comedy texts to the Russian way of life (“The French, the British, the Germans and other peoples who have theaters, always stick to their models;<...> why should we not hold on to our own? " - 116) automatically entailed not formalized in the word, but literally hovering over the "Works and Translations", the idea of ​​a nationally peculiar comedy structure, in which the nature of the conflict, the content and nature of the action, the typology of artistic imagery would acquire correspondence with Russian aesthetic thinking and Russian mentality. And although the problem of the nationally unique genre form of Russian comedy will find its solution in full only in the work of the mature Fonvizin, that is, already outside the "prescriptive direction", however, Lukin, in his "inclined to Russian manners" solutions. Mainly in his comedy, further experiments on combining everyday and ideological world images within one genre are noteworthy. In this sense, Lukin's comedies are a link between the comedyography of Sumarokov and Fonvizin. First of all, attention is drawn to the composition of Lukin's collection "Works and Translations". The first volume included the comedies "Mot Corrected by Love" and "Pustomel", which were presented on one theatrical evening, the second - "Awarded Constancy" and "The Pincher"; both comedies never saw the stage. In addition, both volumes are arranged according to the same principle. The first positions in them are occupied by large five-act comedies, according to Lukin's classification, "forming deeds", which is reflected in the typologically similar titles: "Mot Corrected by Love" and "Awarded Constancy". But as if tending to moralizing, comedies close in form turn out to be completely different in essence. If "Mot Corrected by Love" is a comedy "characteristic, pitiful and filled with noble thoughts" (11), then "Rewarded Constancy" is a typical light or, according to Lukin, "funny" comedy of intrigue. On the second positions in both parts - small one-act "characteristic" comedies, "Empty" and "The Pinch". But again, with the formal identity, there is an aesthetic opposition: "Empty space" (a pair of "Motu, corrected by love") is a typical "funny" comedy of intrigue; moral assignment. As a result, the publication as a whole is framed by serious comedies ("Mot Corrected by Love" and "Nibble"), which are connected by semantic rhyme, and inside are placed funny ones that also overlap with each other. Thus, "The Works and Translations of Vladimir Lukin" appear before their readers as a distinctly cyclical structure, organized according to the principle of a mirror exchange of properties in its constituent microcontexts: comedies alternate in terms of volume (large - small), ethical pathos (serious - funny) and genre typology (character comedy - intrigue comedy). In this case, the macrocontext of the cycle as a whole is characterized by a circular composition, in which the ending is a variation on the theme of the beginning. So the properties of the comedic world image, which will have a long life in the genre model of Russian high comedy, are found, if not in a single comedy text, then in the aggregate of Lukin's comedy texts. Lukin arrives in other ways to the same result that Sumarokov the comedyographer will arrive at. For both, the genre of comedy is not particularly pure: if Sumarokov's comedies tend to the denouement of the tragic type, then Lukin is very inclined towards the genre of "tearful comedy". For both, there is an obvious split between the genre form of comedy and its content, only in Sumarokov the Russian model of the genre is masked by the international verbal realities of the text, while in Lukin, on the contrary, the national verbal color does not fit well in the European genre form. Both systems of comedy cannot pretend to be close to the national public and private life, but in both, against the background of equally obvious borrowings, the same elements of the future structure emerge equally clearly: "higher content" is an extraneous goal that subordinates comedy as an aesthetic phenomenon to higher ethical and social tasks; gravitation towards a holistic universal world image, expressed in an obvious tendency to cyclization of comedy texts.

Poetics of the Comedy "Mot Corrected by Love": the Role of a Speaking Character The acuteness of Lukin's literary intuition (far exceeding his modest creative capabilities) is emphasized by the fact that, in most cases, he chooses texts where a talkative, chatty, or preaching character takes the central place as a source for his "suggestions". This increased attention to the independent dramatic possibilities of the act of speaking in its plot, everyday-descriptive or ideological functions is an unconditional evidence that Lukin had a peculiar feeling of the specificity of “our mores”: Russian enlighteners, all without exception, attached a fateful meaning to the word as such. The practical exhaustion of most of the characters in "Mote Corrected by Love" and "Scribbler" by a pure act of ideological or everyday speech, not accompanied on stage by any other action, is quite symptomatic. A word spoken aloud on stage absolutely coincides with its carrier; his role obeys the general semantics of his word. Thus, the word is, as it were, embodied in the human figure of the heroes of Lukin's comedies. Moreover, in the oppositions of vice and virtue, talkativeness is characteristic not only of protagonist characters, but also of antagonistic characters. That is, the very act of speaking appears to Lukin as variable in its moral characteristics, and talkativeness can be a property of both virtue and vice. This hesitation of a general quality, sometimes humiliating, sometimes uplifting, is especially noticeable in the comedy Mot Corrected by Love, where a pair of dramatic antagonists - Dobroserdov and Zloradov - equally share large monologues directed to the audience. And these rhetorical declarations are based on the same basic motives for a crime against moral norms, repentance and remorse, but with a diametrically opposite moral meaning:

Dobroserdov.<...>Everything that an unhappy person can feel, I feel everything, but I am more tormented by him. He only has to endure the persecution of fate, and I repentance and gnawing conscience ... Since the time I parted with my parent, I have been incessantly living in vices. Cheated, cheated, pretended<...>, and now I suffer with dignity. <...> But I am very happy that I recognized Cleopatra. With her instructions I turned to virtue (30). Zloradov. I’ll go and tell her [the princess] all his [Dobroserdova’s] intentions, bring him to the extreme chagrin, and immediately without wasting time I will open myself as if I myself fell in love with her a long time ago. She, enraged, despises him, and prefers me. It will certainly come true.<...>Repentance and remorse are completely unknown to me, and I am not one of those simpletons who are terrified by the future life and hellish torments (40).

The straightforwardness with which the characters declare their moral character from the first appearance on the stage, makes us see in Lukin a diligent student not only of Detush, but also the “father of Russian tragedy” Sumarokov. Combined with the complete absence of a laughing principle in Mote, such straightforwardness prompts us to see in Lukin's work not so much a “tearful comedy” as a “philistine tragedy”. After all, it is precisely on the tragic poetics that the psychological and conceptual verbal leitmotifs of the play are oriented. The emotional pattern of the action of the so-called "comedy" is determined by a completely tragic series of concepts: some characters of the comedy tormented by despair and longing, lament, repent and restless; their torments and gnaws at my conscience his ill-fated they revere payment for guilt; their permanent state - tears and cry. Others feel for them a pity and compassion, serving as incentives for their actions. For the image of the main character Dobroserdov, such undoubtedly tragic verbal motives as the motives of death and fate are very relevant:

Stepanida. Is that why Dobroserdov is a completely lost person? (24); Dobroserdov.<...>must endure the persecution of fate<...>(thirty); Tell me, should I live or die? (31); Oh, fate! Reward me with such happiness<...>(33); Oh, merciless fate! (34); Oh, fate! I must thank you and complain about your severity (44); My heart trembles and, of course, a new beat portends. Oh, fate! Do not spare me and fight quickly! (45); A rather angry fate is driving me. Oh, angry fate! (67);<...>Best of all, forgetting resentment and vengeance, make an end to my frantic life. (68); Oh, fate! You have added that to my grief, so that he would be a witness to my shame (74).

And it is quite in the traditions of Russian tragedy, as this genre took shape in the 1750s and 1760s. under Sumarokov's pen, the fatal clouds that thickened over the head of the virtuous character fall down with just punishment on the vicious one:

Zloradov. Oh, perverse fate! (78); Little dobroserdov... May he receive a worthy retribution for his villainy (80).

Such a concentration of tragic motives in the text, which has the genre definition of "comedy", is reflected in the stage behavior of the characters, deprived of any physical action except for the traditional kneeling down and attempts to draw the sword (62-63, 66). But if Dobroserdov, as the main positive hero of a tragedy, even a philistine, by his very role is supposed to be passive, redeemed in dramatic action by speaking, akin to tragic declamation, then Zloradov is an active person leading an intrigue against the central hero. It becomes all the more noticeable against the background of traditional ideas about the role that Lukin prefers to endow his negative character not so much with action as with informative speaking, which can anticipate, describe and summarize the action, but the action itself is not equivalent. The preference for word over action is not just a flaw in Lukin's dramatic technique; it is also a reflection of the hierarchy of reality in the educational consciousness of the 18th century, and an orientation towards the artistic tradition already existing in Russian literature. Lukin's comedy, which is publicistic in its original message and seeks the eradication of vice and the implantation of virtue, with its emphasized ethical and social pathos, resurrects the tradition of Russian syncretic word-preaching at a new stage in the literary development. The artistic word, placed at the service of intentions that are alien to him, hardly accidentally acquired a tinge of rhetoric and oratory in Lukin's comedy and theory - this is quite obvious in his direct appeal to the reader and viewer. It is no coincidence that among the merits of an ideal comedian, along with “graceful qualities”, “extensive imagination” and “important study”, Lukin in the preface to Motu also calls “the gift of eloquence,” and the stylistics of individual fragments of this preface is clearly focused on the laws of oratory. This is especially noticeable in the examples of constant appeals to the reader, in enumerations and repetitions, in numerous rhetorical questions and exclamations, and, finally, in the imitation of the written text of the preface to the spoken word, sounding speech:

Imagine, reader.<...>imagine a crowd of people, often more than a hundred people constituting.<...>Some of them sit at the table, others walk around the room, but all construct punishments worthy of various inventions to outplay their rivals.<...>These are the reasons for their meeting! And you, my dear reader, having imagined this, tell me impartially, is there even a spark of good behavior, conscience and humanity here? Of course, no! But you’ll still hear it! (eight).

However, the most curious thing is that Lukin draws the entire arsenal of expressive means of oratorical speech in the most vivid moral-descriptive fragment of the preface, in which he gives a peculiar genre picture of the life of card players: “Here is a vivid description of this community and the exercises in it” (10) ... And it is hardly by chance that in this seemingly bizarre alliance of high rhetorical and low everyday descriptive style traditions, the national idea, beloved by Lukin, reappears:

Others are like the pallor of the face of the dead<...>; others with bloody eyes - to terrible furies; others by the gloom of spirit - to criminals who are attracted to execution; others with an extraordinary blush - cranberries<...>but no! Better to leave the Russian comparison! (9).

To the “cranberry berry”, which really looks like a kind of stylistic dissonance next to the dead, furies and criminals, Lukin makes the following note: “This assimilation will seem strange to some readers, but not to all. Nothing Russian should be in Russian, and here, it seems, my pen did not sin<...>" (9). So again, the theoretical antagonist Sumarokova Lukin is actually getting closer to his literary opponent in practical attempts to express the national idea in the dialogue of older Russian aesthetic traditions and attitudes of satirical everyday life and oratorical speaking. And if Sumarokov in his "Guardian" (1764-1765) first tried to stylistically differentiate the world of things and the world of ideas and bring them together in conflict, then Lukin, parallel to him and simultaneously with him, begins to figure out how the aesthetic arsenal of one literary series is suitable for recreating realities another. Oratorical speaking in order to recreate the material world image and everyday life, pursuing the lofty goals of moral teaching and edification, is the result of such a crossover of traditions. And if in "Mote" Lukin mainly uses oratorical speech in order to create a reliable everyday flavor of the action, then in "The Spinner" we see the opposite combination: everyday descriptive plastic is used for rhetorical purposes.

Poetics of the Comedy "The Pinch": a synthesis of odo-satirical genre formants Lukin 'swayed the comedy The Pinch to Russian manners from the English original, Dodeli's moral-descriptive comedy The Toy-shop, which already in Lukin's time was translated into French under the name Boutique de Bijoutier (Haberdashery Shop). It is quite noteworthy that Lukin himself in his "Letter to Mr. Yelchaninov" stubbornly refers to both his original and its version "inclined to Russian customs" as "satire":

<...>Began to get ready for the transformation into a comic composition of this Aglinskaya satire.<...>. (184). <...>I noticed that this satire for our theater is pretty well redone (186). He [Dodeli's text], having turned into a comic composition, both in content and in satire, can be called pretty good<...> (186). <...>I got the opportunity to deliver this satirical composition into Russian (188).

Obviously, the word “satire” is used by Lukin in two meanings: satire as an ethical tendency (“caustic satire”, “satirical composition”) coexists with satire as a genre definition (“this Aglinskaya satire”, “this satire”). And in full accordance with this second meaning is the world image, which is created in "The Scribbler" primarily as an image of the world of things, dictated by the very motives of the haberdashery shop and small haberdashery trade, which serve as a plot core for stringing episodes with a satirical moral descriptive task: an absolute analogy with the genre model of the cumulative satire of Cantemir, where the vice expressed by the concept is developed in the gallery of everyday portraits-illustrations, varying the types of its carriers. Throughout the action, the scene is densely filled with the most diverse things, quite physical and visible: "Both workers, putting the basket on the bench, take out things and talk."(197), discussing the merits of such objects hitherto unseen on the Russian stage, such as telescope, groups of cupids depicting, arts and sciences, gold watch with alarm clock, snuff boxes alagrek, alasaluet and alabucheron, notebook, framed in gold, glasses, scales, rings and rarities: shells from the Euphrates River, in which, no matter how small, predatory crocodiles fit and stones from the island of Nowhere Unprecedented. This parade of objects, migrating from the hands of the Shpipelnik to the hands of his buyers, is symptomatically opened with a mirror:

Pincher. The mirrors are very expensive! Glass is the best in the world! The coquette will immediately see in him all her vile antics; pretender - all deceit;<...>many women will see in this mirror that blush and whitewash, although they spend two pots a day, cannot shamelessly smooth them out.<...>Many people, and especially some great gentlemen, will not see here either their great merits, about which they shout every minute, or favors shown to poor people; however, there was no blame for that (203-204).

It is no coincidence that it is the mirror, which in its relations with the reality it reflects, unites the object and the mirage in assimilating them to complete indistinguishability, reveals the true nature of the material-attributive series in the comedy "The Pinch", which, despite all the formal adherence to satirical everyday descriptive poetics, is still ideological. a high comedy, since the entire pictorial arsenal of everyday life-descriptive plastics serves as a starting point for speaking quite oratorically, if not in its form, then in its content. The thing in "Shpipetelnik" is a strong point and a formal reason for ideological, moralistic and didactic speaking. Lukin's fundamental plot innovation in relation to the original text - the introduction of additional characters, Major Chistoserdov and his nephew, Shchepitelnik's listeners, radically changes the scope of the genre gravitation of the English-French moral-descriptive scene. In the "inclined to our mores" version, the presence of listeners and observers of the action of haberdashery trade directly on the stage unfolds the meaning of the comedy towards education, instilling ideal concepts of position and virtue:

Chistoserdov. I am already too sorry that to this day there is no that mocking Nibbler<...>; you already heard about him from me more than once. Standing beside him, you will recognize more people at two o'clock than if you are tenacious in the city at two years (193);<...>I brought my nephew here on purpose to listen to your descriptions (201); Chistoserdov. Well, nephew! Do you see his admonitions like that, as I said? Nephew . They are very pleasant to me, and I wish to listen to them more often (201); Chistoserdov. This evening enlightened my nephew a lot. Nephew (To the scribbler).<...> I am for happiness mail, if<...>I will receive useful advice from you (223).

Thus, the everyday narrative plot of the comedy is relegated to the background: the dialogues of the Scribbler with buyers are filled with "higher content" and acquire the character of demonstrating not so much a thing and its properties as concepts of vice and virtue. The everyday act of selling and buying becomes a kind of form of exposure and edification, in which a thing loses its material nature and turns into a symbol:

Pincher. In this snuffbox, no matter how small, some of the courtiers can accommodate all their sincerity, some of the clerks all their honesty, all the coquettes without withdrawal of their good manners, whip all their reason, solicit all their consciences, and the poets all their wealth (204) ...

Such a crossing at one point of two plans of action - description of life and morality on the one hand, instruction and upbringing - on the other hand, gives the word, in which both actions of the "Scribbler" are carried out, a certain functional and semantic vibration. It is, the word, in "The Nibble" is quite bizarre. According to its closest content, it is closely related to the material series and, therefore, is pictorial; It is no coincidence that Shchepetylnik's monologues are called descriptions by himself and his partners:

Pincher. I needed to make this description (204);<...>with or without description? (205); Chistoserdov. You described them alive with paints (206);<...>here is the true description of the wife (212); Pincher. I will briefly describe to you all their kindness (213).

But this property characterizes the word in "The Scribbler" only at first glance, because ultimately it has a high meaning and claims to immediately transform reality in the direction of its harmonization and approximation to the ideal of virtue:

Pincher. Sevodni I ridiculed twenty exemplary fellows, and only one corrected himself, and everyone was angry.<...>everyone who listens to my jokes will deign to amuse themselves with mocked models and thus prove that, of course, they do not find themselves here, so that no one likes to laugh at themselves, and everyone is ready at their neighbors, from which I will wean them until then , as long as my strength becomes (224).

Addressed and addressed not only to the audience, but also to the listening characters (Chistoserdov and his nephew), Shchepetilnik's word is everyday and pictorial only in form, in fact it is a lofty oratorio seeking an ideal, and therefore two opposite rhetorical attitudes are combined in it: panegyric things turn into blasphemy to the vicious buyer; both the thing and the human character are equalized with their argumental function in action, serving as nothing more than a visual illustration of the abstract concept of vice (or virtue). Consequently, immersed in the element of everyday life and descriptions of vicious morals, the action of the "Scribbler" actually acquires a high ethical goal and pathos; it operates with ideologems of honor and office, virtue and vice, although stylistically these two spheres are not delimited. And in this capacity, the synthesis of everyday and ideological world images, carried out by Lukin on the material of European comedy, turned out to be incredibly promising: Russified comedy, as it were, began to suggest in which direction it should be developed so that it could become Russian. Let us recall that the action of raising a pure-Serdian nephew begins with a mirror (cf. the famous epigraph of The Inspector General), reflecting the curves of the faces of the pettimeters, coquettes, nobles, etc. looking at him, and ends with a quote from the 7th satire of Boileau, pushing together laughter and tears in one affect and already heard earlier in Russian literature: “<...>often the same words that make readers laugh, tears are extracted from the writer<...>"(224), as well as thinking that" no one likes to laugh at themselves "(224), in which, with all desire, it is impossible not to hear the first weak sound, which is to reach the power of fortissimo in the cry of the soul of the Gogol Governor:" Why are you laughing ? "You're laughing at yourself!" And isn't it strange that Lukin, who reproached Sumarokov for the lack of ties and denouements in his comedies, ended up writing the same one himself? And after all, not only wrote, but also theoretically emphasized these properties of it: “I also regretted a lot that this comedy can hardly be played, because there is no love plexus in it, below the tie and denouement<...>"(191). The absence of a love intrigue as the driving force of comedy and a specific action, as it were, without beginnings and ends, because the end is closed to the beginning, like life itself - is it possible to more accurately describe the productive genre model that lies ahead of Russian drama in the 19th century? Batyushkov once remarked: "Poetry, I dare say, requires the whole person." ... Perhaps, this judgment can be applied almost more successfully to the Russian high comedy from Fonvizin to Gogol: Russian comedy demanded immeasurably more than the whole person: the entire artist. And absolutely all the modest possibilities that the writer V.I.Lukin possessed of average dignity and democratic origin were exhausted by his comedies of 1765. But in them he left the future Russian literature, and above all to his colleague in the office of Count N.I. Panin, Fonvizin, a whole scattering of semi-conscious finds, which under the feathers of other playwrights will sparkle with their own brilliance. However, the moment of the first loud glory of Fonvizin (the comedy "Brigadier", 1769) coincides with his participation in an equally important literary event of the era: the cooperation of the playwright in the satirical magazines N.I. Novikov's "Truten" and "The Painter", which became the central aesthetic factor of the transitional period of Russian history and Russian literature of the 1760s-1780s. The genres of publicistic prose, developed by the staff of Novikov's journals, became a particularly vivid embodiment of the tendencies towards the intersection of everyday and everyday world images in the totality of their inherent artistic methods of world modeling, those tendencies that were first identified in the genre system of Sumarokov's creativity and found their first expression in the comedy of Lukin's mores.

The term of P. N. Berkova. See his monograph: A History of Russian Comedy in the 18th Century. L., 1977.S. 71-82.
Lukin V.I., Elchaninov B.E. Compositions and translations. SPb., 1868. S. 100. In the future, Lukin's prefaces and comedies are cited from this edition with the page indicated in brackets.
Toporov V.N."Declination to Russian customs" from a semiotic point of view (On one of the sources of the Fonvizin "The Minor") // Proceedings on sign systems. XXIII. Tartu, 1989 (Issue 855). P.107.
D. I. Fonvizin Sincere confession in my deeds and thoughts // D. I. Fonvizin Collected cit .: In 2 volumes, Moscow; Leningrad, 1959, vol. 2. P. 99.
"The general expression of the properties of a person, the constant aspirations of his will<...>... The same property of an entire people, population, tribe, not so much dependent on the personality of each, as on the conventionally accepted; everyday rules, habits, customs. See: Dal V.I. Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language. Moscow, 1979, vol. 2. P.558.
See about this: Berkoy P. Ya. The history of Russian comedy in the 18th century. L., 1977.S. 77-78.
Before Fonvizin, the “ready-made and tested framework” of comedic action, with which his original Russian nature was poorly combined, are evident in almost all comedians: in Sumarokov - in the form of plot fragments, behind which Western European texts are guessed, in Lukin and playwrights of Elagin's school - these plots themselves as a whole (slightly modified) form, and Fonvizin did not go anywhere from the "transformation" even in the "Brigadier". It was only in The Minor that the “framework” of the comedy became completely “our own”: they caused a lot of bewilderment and critical judgments in their unusual form, but in the absence of originality and national originality, it was already impossible to reproach them.
The symmetric-circular composition of the edition, subject to the principle of parity (two parts, two comedies in each), in its structural foundations is extremely reminiscent of the symmetrical-mirror structure of the four-act comedy "Woe from Wit", in the compositional units of which scenes with a predominance of love and public issues. Cm.: Omarova D.A. Griboyedov's comedy plan // A.S. Griboyedov. Creation. Biography. Traditions. L., 1977. S.46-51.
Remarks in the texts of Lukin's comedies, as a rule, note the addressing of speech ("brother", "princess", "employee", "Scribbler", "nephew", "to the side", etc.), its emotional saturation ("angry", “With annoyance”, “with humiliation”, “crying”) and the movement of the characters around the stage with registration of the gesture (“pointing to Zloradov”, “kissing her hands”, “falling on her knees”, “making different movements and expressing his extreme confusion and detuning ").
As O. M. Freidenberg noted, a person is passive in tragedy; if he is active, then his activity is guilt and error, leading him to disaster; in comedy he must be active, and if he is still passive, another is trying for him (the servant is his double). - Freidenberg O. M. The origin of literary intrigue // Transactions on sign systems VI. Tartu, 1973. (308) S.510-511. Wed in Roland Barthes: the sphere of language is “the only sphere to which tragedy belongs: in tragedy they never die, for they talk all the time. And vice versa - leaving the stage for the hero is in one way or another tantamount to death.<...>For in that purely linguistic world, which is tragedy, action appears to be the extreme embodiment of impurity. " - Bart Roland. Racine man. // Bart Roland. Selected works. M., 1989. S. 149,151.
Wed from Kantemir: “And poems that put laughter on the lips of the readers // Often they cry for the publisher as a reason” (Satire IV. To his muse. On the danger of satirical works - 110).
Batyushkov K. N. Something about poet and poetry // Batyushkov K. N. Experiments in poetry and prose. M., 1977. P.22.