Egorova E.
Research "The Theme of Freedom in Russian Literature" (the works of Pushkin, Lermontov, Bulgakov are considered)
Download:
Preview:
To use presentation previews, create a Google account and log in to it: https://accounts.google.com
Slide captions:
Introduction Purpose Objectives Hypothesis Progress of the research Etymology Lexicology Words of foreign authors From modern foreign literature Survey results Works of Russian writers about freedom and their assessment Poem by the author of the research work Conclusion Information sources Contents
Russian literature is incredibly rich. Rich in talents and their creations. Through literary works of various types and genres, the great ancestors pass on their experience to us and educate us through time. Often prose and poems are devoted to the theme of freedom. Surely most readers ask themselves: “Why is the author focusing on this?” So I asked myself this question and decided to direct all my hard work and perseverance to give a clear answer to it. Introduction
Establishing the meaning of the theme of human freedom in the works of Russian poets and writers. Target
Study the meaning of the concept of “freedom” Find statements of great people about freedom Conduct a survey among teenagers Find out which Russian writers touched on the topic of freedom in their works Evaluate books devoted to the named problem Draw a conclusion Objectives
Is the theme of freedom really reflected in the works of great writers and is still one of the main problems in literature? Hypothesis
Finding out the etymological and lexical meaning of the word “freedom” Searching for catchphrases dedicated to the theme of freedom Surveying students Working on your own poem dedicated to this topic Progress of the research
According to the inspector of public schools of the Oryol province G. A. Milovidov, this word comes “... from the ancient and little-known noun svoba, which, according to Czech interpreters of 1202, served as the name of one of the pagan goddesses,” in connection with which he concluded: “ Thus, the concept of “freedom” is based not on any specific impression or sensation, but on a higher, mystical principle, a preferential right inherent in the deity.” Modern secular views on the etymology of this word, however, do not imply anything divine or mystical. The Old Russian word freedom clearly correlates with the Old Indian svapati (one’s own master: “svo” - one’s own and “poti” - master). Etymology
FREEDOM - one’s own will, space, the opportunity to act in one’s own way; absence of constraint, bondage, slavery, subordination to someone else's will. Freedom is a comparative concept; it can relate to a private, limited expanse, related to a certain matter, or to different degrees of this scope, and finally to complete, unbridled arbitrariness or self-will. IN AND. Dahl "Explanatory Dictionary" Lexicology
This is freedom: to feel what your heart strives for, no matter what others say. Paulo Coelho Freedom is not a poster you read on a street corner. This is living power that you feel in yourself and around you. F. Lamennais Freedom is a conscious necessity. F. Engels When you escape persecution, every day is a whole life for you. Every minute of freedom is a separate story with a happy ending. G.D. Roberts "Shantaram" Great - about freedom
To find out how the topic of freedom in literature is perceived by readers, a survey was conducted among students. “Why do you think Russian poets and writers attached special importance to human freedom in their works?” Previously, times were very difficult and strict. One person's freedom depended on another, and complete freedom was a dream. Therefore, she received a lot of attention. Ekaterina, 14 years old Survey
I believe that each of us will have our own opinion on this. All people are limited by invisible boundaries beyond which we cannot go. In general terms, freedom is something unknown and unfamiliar to us. Only birds soaring in the sky, not limiting themselves in anything, can know what freedom really is. Every person needs freedom, and if he does not receive it, thoughts begin to “burn” him, after which the soul dies, leaving no traces behind. Danil, 14 years old In the literature of the 19th and 20th centuries, the work of writers mainly reflected the life of society. During this period there were many revolutions and mostly a dictatorial system in the state, which in itself did not imply either freedom of speech or freedom of man as such, which was often reflected in the works of writers. Kirill, 19 years old
PRISONER I'm sitting behind bars in a damp dungeon. A young eagle, raised in captivity, My sad comrade, flapping his wing, pecks at bloody food under the window, pecks, and throws, and looks out the window, As if he had the same idea with me. He calls me with his gaze and his cry And wants to say: “Let's fly away! We are free birds; it's time, brother, it's time! To where the mountain turns white behind a cloud, To where the sea edges turn blue, To where only the wind walks... yes me!..." A.S. Pushkin A. S. Pushkin (1799-1837) 1799, Moscow, Russian Empire Died: February 10, 1837
In the poem “The Prisoner,” the eagle personifies nature and calls on the lyrical hero to fly away with him. By this, A.S. Pushkin shows that the call of nature is the call of freedom, it is as necessary for any living creature as food, water, warmth, and safety. Man is born free and strives for independence.
M.Yu. Lermontov M.Yu. Lermontov (1814-1841) Mtsyri Do you want to know what I did when I was free? I lived - and my life, without these three blissful days, would have been sadder and gloomier than your powerless old age. A long time ago I decided to look at the distant fields, to find out whether the earth is beautiful, to find out whether we are born into this world for freedom or prison. And at the hour of the night, the terrible hour, When the thunderstorm frightened you, When, crowded at the altar, You lay prostrate on the ground, I ran away. Oh, I, like a brother, would be glad to embrace the storm! I watched the clouds with my eyes, I caught the lightning with my hand... Tell me, what among these walls could you give me in return for That short but living friendship, Between a stormy heart and a thunderstorm?..
Mtsyri declares: “... and my life, without these three blissful days, would be sadder and gloomier than your powerless old age.” Lermontov wants to convey to readers that not a single sweet taste can replace the taste of freedom. Life cannot be called such if you have never been free.
M. A. Bulgakov M. A. Bulgakov (1891-1940) A morphine addict has one happiness that no one can take away from him - the ability to spend life in complete solitude. And loneliness is important, significant thoughts, it is contemplation, calmness, wisdom... “Morphine” How can a person manage if he is not only deprived of the opportunity to draw up any plan for at least a ridiculously short period of time, well, years, let’s say , in a thousand, but cannot even vouch for his own tomorrow? Woland, "The Master and Margarita"
According to Bulgakov, freedom is the highest human value, a great reward for the difficulties and hardships that one or another character has endured in life. Even a morphine addict is free: he is able to “spend his life in complete solitude.” Under the influence of morphine, the hero’s desire to be free still did not die. Woland says that even if a person is free, throughout his entire life he has no control over his circumstances. Therefore, they are the ones who limit our ability to do things our own way.
I am free and you are free: We can do what we want. If you want, we’ll immediately jump into the water, If you want, we’ll fly into the sky. Do you want to know what joy means? Do you want to know what pain means? First, put some sweetness in your mouth, then sprinkle salt on the wound. If you want, we’ll drown in the pool, If you want, we’ll fall asleep in the poppies, If you’re afraid we’ll lose our honor, we’ll forget ourselves in an ordinary sleep. When we get bored with freedom, We will sit down together and attach (Let freedom no longer torment us) powerful chains of responsibility to each other. About freedom What if the desire appears To fight the darkness of the oncoming storms, So that the legends of the Forest, the thunderstorm and the azure shores will be written about us.
Working on a project is not just an exciting activity where I can express myself, generalize previously acquired knowledge and learn to present information. These are, first of all, discoveries, clarifications in unclear and exciting issues, as well as enormous experience. Through my research work, I realized the true meaning of freedom and why this topic plays an important role in Russian literature. In modern works, the role of human independence still does not fade into the background. Conclusion
G.D.Roberts “Shantaram” V.I.Dal “Explanatory Dictionary” https://ru.wikipedia.org http://citaty.info/ https://www.livelib.ru/ Information sources
\What is freedom? Many writers answer this question differently. Lermontov said that freedom is peace, Beredyaev is the secret of the world. But it is impossible to say exactly what freedom is. One thing is clear: freedom is the most important condition for human self-expression. Most often, freedom in works of literature is symbolized by the image of a bird. Let us recall at least the ancient Greek legend of Daedalus and Icarus.
The fate of the captive, the great artist Daedalus, was cruel and unbearable; his dreams were always associated with freedom, will, and peace. To escape from the greedy Minos, Delal invented wings. Yes, yes, exactly wings, because he compared the flight of a bird with freedom.
The theme of freedom was relevant for Pushkin throughout his creative career. It takes on a romantic character. In the poem > the theme of freedom echoes philosophy. The freedom-loving romantic hero is not only a prisoner of the highlanders, but also a prisoner of his passions, his dreams. He escapes from captivity to freedom, but even there he does not find complete peace, does not feel the trembling of his heart.
Pushkin believed that there is inner and creative freedom, which are the main ones for the poet. And in the poem > both types of freedom are combined. After all, the Decembrists performed a feat not for themselves, but for the people, for their freedom and will. Pushkin writes to the Decembrists about the usefulness of everything that was done and about what is inevitable > >. The freedom of the poet is one of the themes present in Pushkin’s work:
Depends on the king, depends on the people.>>
> N.V. Gogol is one of the best works of the writer. The poem contains the theme of freedom, expressing the author's position. At the end of the poem, the words about > are heard, where the comparison of the road with freedom is clearly expressed. For Gogol, the road is the entire Russian soul, its entire scope and fullness of life. The Russian soul is what it is > where there are no restrictions or prohibitions: > Mother Rus' will pass all obstacles, no obstacles will stop her, she will remain, no matter what, spiritually free, great. Rus', like the Russian soul, knows no restrictions; they are connected with each other by close, strong chains. Thus, Gogol, drawing the road, contemplates all of Rus' in it, and Russia is unconstrained, majestic freedom.
The bright image of a bird runs through Ostrovsky's entire play. This image is Katerina herself with an inspired soul and spiritual perfection: >. It is necessary to pay special attention to the fact that dreams of flight are closely related to freedom. Indeed, in the Kabanovsky kingdom, where all living things wither and dry up, Katerina is overcome by longing for her lost will. Her main desire is to raise her arms, wave them and fly. Katerina is a proud, strong-willed woman, but she was married to the weak-willed Tikhon. A spiritual, dreamy nature, caught in an atmosphere of cruel laws and inequality, thinks most of all about freedom as a means of life on earth. The desire for freedom in this case is spiritual emancipation.
It must be said that the thought > causes surprise not only among Varvara, but also among many contemporaries, but even critics of that time. There is something unusual and mystical in these words. Meanwhile, there is nothing special here. The words came out of her mouth naturally. Katerina, living in severe captivity, dreams of freedom, like a bird dreams of flight. So she said this to Varya, specifically to her, because she is closest to Katerina in the Kabanovsky house.
The novel by L.N. Tolstoy > is modern and widely read at all times. It echoes not only the theme of love and historical reality, but also the theme of liberty and freedom. Let us at least remember the unforgettable episode when Natasha Rostova, opening the window, said: > here the main character dreams of freedom, liberty. She, like a light spring breeze, charges everyone with her happiness, while striving for love and freedom. Natasha was looking for the meaning of life in freedom and found it in a noble man - Pierre Bezukhov.
Gorky has one of the most interesting works >. The main images embody the images of the Snake and the Falcon, as two forms of life. In order to more clearly show the fighter’s courage and craving for freedom, the author contrasts the Falcon with the Snake, whose soul is rotting because of its own spiritual qualities. Gorky pronounces a merciless verdict on Uzh, and with him on the entire society: >. In this work, Gorky sings a song >, also about those unworthy of freedom, affirming all this as wisdom and knowledge of life.
Gogol's heroes are freedom lovers. Without hiding the dark sides of the lives of his heroes, he autopoeticized many of them. These are strong-willed, beautiful and proud people who have >.
Loiko Zobar is a young gypsy. For him, the highest value is freedom, frankness and kindness. >. Radda is so proud that her love for Loiko cannot break her: >. These heroes are characterized by the pathos of freedom. The insoluble contradiction between Radda and Loiko - love and pride, according to Makar Chudra, can only be resolved by death. And the heroes themselves refuse love, happiness and prefer to die in the name of will and absolute freedom.
Makar Chudra believes that pride and love are incompatible. Love makes any person humble and submit. Makar, speaking about a person who, from his point of view, is not free, will say: >. In his opinion, a person born a slave is not capable of accomplishing a feat. But on the other hand, we see that Maka admires Loiko and Radda. He believes that this is how a real person worthy of imitation should perceive life, and that only in such a position in life can one preserve one’s own freedom.
In this story, Gorky, using the example of Loiko Zobar and Radda, proves that man is not a slave. They die by refusing love and happiness. Rada and Loiko sacrifice their lives for freedom. Gorky strives with his work to excite and inspire the reader, so that he, like his heroes, feels himself >. Pride makes the slave free, the weak strong. The heroes of the story > Loiko and Radda prefer death to an unfree life, because they themselves are proud and free. In the story, Gorky performed a hymn to a wonderful and strong man. He put forward a new measure of a person’s value: his will to fight, activity, and ability to rebuild his life. Bulgakov's novel is autobiographical: Bulgakov is the Master, his wife is Margarita. In the novel there is a dependence of society, since it is completely subordinated to the communist system, they are chasing labor records and socialist ideas, while forgetting about spiritual values. The master, as a free person, does not find any free space here. His novel was not published due to the fault of mediocre critics.
There is no place for true talent in Moscow, so the Master destroys the novel about Pontius Pilate and Yeshua Ha-Nozri and goes to the Stravinsky clinic. Bulgakov wanted to show us that spiritual independence is the main thing at all times. The relationships between the main characters are unequal. Margarita is a slave to her love, unlike the Master. She does everything to meet him again: she becomes a witch, goes to the devil’s ball, follows her lover to the other world.
In general, the novel is very interesting for its plot and the skill of the author; it is not for nothing that Bulgakov worked on it for twelve years. But despite its fantastic nature, this work touches on many philosophical topics that we can talk about for a long time, but for me the main one here is the theme of freedom. It will exist in all centuries, as Bulgakov showed us.
Freedom is the law. The law that everyone, young and old, is looking for. Freedom must come from liberty, and liberty from freedom.
“Liberty” (1817), “To Chaadaev” (1818), “Village” (1819), “Desert Sower of Freedom...” (1823), “To the Sea” (1824), “Anchar” (1828), “ (From Pindemonti)" (1836).
The theme of freedom is one of the brightest, most sincere themes of Pushkin's lyrics. According to the 20th century critic-philosopher G.P. Fedotov, “freedom belongs to the main elements of Pushkin’s creativity and, of course, his spiritual being. Pushkin is unthinkable without freedom, and its meaning goes far beyond the poet’s political sentiments.” Freedom from cruel tyrannical power, from the vulgar self-confident crowd, from pettiness, greed, fear, envy lurking in the dark corners of the soul, freedom in the highest philosophical meaning occupies the thoughts of Pushkin the poet. It takes on different faces in different periods of his work, but one thing remains unchanged: the poet never ceases to feel the highest moral value of freedom. Without it, life is impossible, true creativity is impossible.
The motif of freedom first appears in the Lyceum poem "Licinia"(1815). Here, young Pushkin, analyzing ancient Roman history, saw in freedom a guarantee of the progress of society, and in “slavery” the source of the death of civilization.
The St. Petersburg period of 1817-1820 was the time of Pushkin’s closest contacts with freethinkers and leaders of pre-December societies. Their views, in particular constitutional-monarchical ideals, were undoubtedly reflected in the concept of freedom of the young Pushkin.
Oh yeah "Liberty"(1817) made a strong impression on his contemporaries and became a landmark in the evolution of Pushkin. It is surprising that the Arzamas resident Pushkin writes an ode - a genre rejected by Karamzinists and accepted in “Conversation...”. The point is not even in Pushkin’s independence in relation to the literary groups of that time, but rather in tradition: the ode “Liberty” was already in Russian literature and belonged to A.N. Radishchev (it is included in “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow”). By naming his work the same way, Pushkin wanted to emphasize continuity and point out the significant differences in his political concept. Radishchev, as is known, justified the rebellion of the people against the tyrant. Pushkin's position is not so radical. This concept is based on the ideas of moderate liberalism. By the way, the idea of a constitutional monarchy was already in the air. The next year, 1818, Alexander I himself would speak about this.
At the beginning of Pushkin’s famous ode, there is a rejection of the past poetic path, of the love theme: the poet drives away the “weak queen Cythera,” that is, the goddess of love and beauty Aphrodite, whose cult dominated on the Greek island of Cythera, or Kythera. In place of this charming image, the poet calls on the “thunderstorm of kings” - the proud singer of Freedom. Please note that the words Liberty, Fate, Power, etc. are written with capital letters - these are the foundations of political life, the most important concepts with the help of which the concept of freedom is formed. Away with the “wreath”, “pampered lyre” - attributes of the poetry of love and pleasures; harsh and bloody reality requires different images and intonations:
I want to sing Freedom to the world,
Smite vice on thrones.
A world divided into “tyrants” and “slaves” is an unrighteous world, freedom is violated in it. The young poet addresses the “slaves,” calling on them to “rise up,” that is, stand up and be filled with dignity. The main condition for freedom in society, Pushkin asserts in this poem, is compliance with the laws by both the king and the people:
Only there did suffering not fall over the royal head of the Peoples, Where powerful Laws were firmly combined with holy liberty.
To prove this idea, Pushkin cites two arguments from French and Russian history. The execution of Louis XVI on January 21, 1793 during the Great French Revolution was, Pushkin believes, an act of violation of the law by the people. History took revenge on the French - a dictatorship came, and the “autocratic villain” Napoleon came to power. Pushkin's attitude towards Napoleon will change. 7 years later, in the poem “To the Sea,” Pushkin will write about Napoleon, who has already died, in a completely different way. But for now he does not spare angry and harsh assessments, which is understandable after the recent events of 1812: “you are a reproach to God on earth.”
The second episode is Russian: on the night of March 11-12, 1801, Paul I was killed in St. Petersburg, in the Mikhailovsky Castle. This murder was villainous, insidious, committed by the tsar’s entourage (there were persistent rumors that the tsar’s son, the future emperor Alexander I, knew about the impending murder and did not stop it). Regicide is not justified by Pushkin, but the fact is that the tyrant - the “crowned villain” - himself violated the law and was punished for it.
The ode contains the image of the poet (“singer”) himself, anxiously reflecting on the bloody event:
When on the gloomy Neva
The midnight star sparkles
And a carefree chapter
A restful sleep is burdensome,
The pensive singer looks
On menacingly sleeping in the midst of the fog
Desert monument to the tyrant,
A palace abandoned to oblivion...
The poem ends with an order to modern autocratic rulers: kings must obey the laws, and then the strength of their rule will be ensured by the freedom of peoples:
And freedom and peace will become the eternal guardians of the throne of the Peoples.
This poem by Pushkin could not be published and was circulated in lists, like another - "To Chaadaev"(1818). As already mentioned, P.Ya. Chaadaev had a strong influence on the formation of Pushkin’s liberal political views. Pushkin highly valued the intelligence and will of his older friend and considered him underestimated in his homeland. Later he would write about Chaadaev:
He would be Brutus in Rome,
in Athens Pericles,
And here he is a hussar officer. -
connecting the name of a friend with the figures of prominent tyrant fighters, legislators of antiquity, bitterly complaining about the unrealization of the high talents of Chaadaev the thinker “in the shackles of the royal service.”
The message “To Chaadaev” is remarkable for its inextricable unity of personal and public. The struggle for the freedom of the homeland is felt like the “desire” of a young heart. This lyrical masterpiece of Pushkin is about insight; it is the depiction of the evolution of the young soul that determines the composition of the poem. In his stanzas, the motives of liberation from the “deception” of love, hope, “quiet” (poetic) glory, awakening to real, harsh life are consistently developed; the poet reflects on the time when young citizens heard the call of their homeland with “impatient souls.” Of course, this call is for help. And the young author calls on his “friend”, “comrade” to devote “the beautiful impulses of his soul” to his homeland. The nobility of this knightly impulse lies in the desire to help the suffering. It penetrates so deeply into the poet’s soul that for him the distinction between personal and universally significant, internal and external disappears; the “common” itself - the civic ideal - begins to be recognized as the deepest intimate feeling:
We wait with languid hope for the holy moment of freedom, Just as a young lover waits for the minute of a faithful meeting.
Love and freedom-loving impulse are equally all-encompassing feelings of the lyrical hero. The wisdom of this movement of the heart lies in the keen knowledge that youth is a guarantee against dishonor. Hence these temporary restrictions: “while we are burning with freedom,” “while our hearts are alive for honor.” It is in “impulses” that this young, impatient, beautiful soul manifests itself. Freedom is called here unusually - “the star of captivating happiness.” In Russian poetry of that time, love feelings, beauty, and quiet personal experiences were usually called captivating. And here this metaphor is an expression of the happiness of life without “autocracy,” understood as unlimited autocracy. “Young fun” disappeared “like a dream”, and Russia “will awaken from sleep.” The condition for the awakening of a country is the awakening of its young citizens. From “quiet” glory to heroic glory - this is the path of maturation, nobility, and insight:
Comrade, believe: she will rise,
Star of captivating happiness,
Russia will wake up from its sleep,
And on the ruins of autocracy
They will write our names!
Another freedom-loving poem by Pushkin from this time - "Village". A visit to Mikhailovsky, his mother’s Pskov estate, in the summer of 1819 allowed the young humanist poet to experience the true happiness of creativity and made him horrified by the cruelty of serfdom. The poem carries this contrast: the adversative conjunction “but” (“But a terrible thought here darkens the soul...”) separates the first, idyllic part of the poem from the second, accusatory part. At first glance, the village is “a haven of peace, work and inspiration.” Comfort is a necessary condition for peace for a person, and the young poet, who arrived from the capital, felt the village as a “corner” close to his heart. Rejoicing at this feeling, loving this place, Pushkin turns to Mikhailovsky as to a friend: “I greet you,” “I am yours.” The charming hero of the poem came to the village not for fun, laziness, or household chores, but for liberation from vanity, delusions, and for creative work.
Pushkin considered peace of mind to be a necessary condition for inspiration. And the poet found it in rural solitude. The description of the garden, meadow, two Mikhailovsky lakes, fields, pastures, barns (sheds for drying bread), and mills is done in an idyllic manner - everywhere there are “traces of contentment and labor.” This is genuine happiness, and therefore the poet does not notice how the days go by (“an invisible stream flows through my days // In the bosom of happiness and oblivion”). By this, the village sharply opposes the “vicious court” with the “Circes” (that is, sorceresses, enchantresses), the city where “delusions” reign. This clarification of consciousness under the influence of the “peaceful noise of oak trees”, “silence of fields” is especially joyful for a creator, poet, thinker.
Having freed himself from the “vain shackles” of unreal life, the hero finds the only bliss in the truth, and with a free soul he idolizes the “law” (remember the idea of the ode “Liberty”). He is closed to the murmurs of the "unenlightened" crowd and hears the call of shy pleas for help; here envy of the fate of the “villain or fool” died.
Surprisingly, here, far from the city with its cultural life, in the countryside, in solitude, the thoughts of philosophers and writers become clearer (“oracles,” that is, Pushkin calls them predictors). Reading, however, is not at all a passive process for our hero: the “sleep of laziness” disappears, and the “ardor” for work is born. “Free idleness” surprisingly coexists with work, reading and reflection - it is even called “the friend of reflection.” The cherished Pushkin theme of freedom has been transformed here into yet another facet: freedom, “free idleness,” it turns out, can be found far from the light, close to nature, in the peace of solitude.
But before us is not only a thinker, before us is a true bearer and creator of moral values: he cannot help but notice the misfortune of others. The poet’s humane soul is “darkened” by the terrible thought of the misfortunes of mankind. Corvée, desecration of personality, debauchery - these vices of serfdom are fiercely branded by Pushkin in his uncensored poem. “Slavery” must be destroyed by the tsar - Pushkin is convinced of this; The peasant revolt was not recognized by him as a means of solving the bleeding Russian problem.
These three poems of 1817-1819 formed the most important part of Pushkin’s freedom-loving lyrics, had a powerful influence on the Decembrists, and were used by them as propaganda poems. Before us is lyric poetry, where the abstract concepts of “civil” poems of classicism with their rationalism and enlightenment organically merged with the impulses of the “soul” - this ensured their fame and the love of their contemporaries and descendants.
A new stage in Pushkin’s understanding of freedom is the period of southern exile. 1823 was a crisis year in Pushkin’s life: the exiled poet had to endure personal, philosophical, and political disappointment. At this time, Pushkin was impressed by the failures of European revolutions from Spain to the Danube. Pessimistic thoughts about the fate of political freedom are reflected in the poem “Desolate sower of freedom...”(1823). The epigraph to it is taken from the Gospel of Matthew (13:3) - “The sower went out to sow his seed.” Did this work bear fruit? Pushkin’s hero, the “sower,” feels the tragic uselessness of his efforts: it is pointless to throw “life-giving seed” “into the enslaved reins,” the result of efforts is only disappointment:
I only lost time, good thoughts and works...
Bitter experience and life's hardships in the struggle for freedom lead to the fact that peoples ultimately exchange freedom for material stability. The romantic poet likens nations to “herds,” predicting the only possible future for them:
Graze, peaceful peoples! The cry of honor will not wake you up. Why do the herds need the gifts of freedom? They should be cut or trimmed. Their inheritance from generation to generation is a yoke with rattles and a whip.
The following year, 1824, Pushkin wrote a poem "To sea": the poet, deprived of freedom, turns to the “free elements”. The genre of the poem is an elegiac message to the sea. Usually messages are written to a friend, but the sea is a friend for Pushkin (“a mournful murmur like a friend”). The poet addresses the sea using “you”, he loved its “feedback”, heard its “calling noise” - as if not only the poet’s appeal to the sea, but also the response of the sea is heard in the poem.
The author loves the sea, because for him it is the embodiment of freedom, a “free element.” The sea will want it - and will preserve a small boat with a “humble sail”; it will want it - and will drown the “flock of ships”. The sea is capricious and gusty. In addition, the sea, according to Pushkin’s plan, was supposed to become for him, so to speak, a means of liberation - he wanted to escape from Odessa abroad by sea (we are languishing about this in the lines “with a cherished intention”).
The image of the sea in this message is truly beautiful: always free, in the brilliance of “proud beauty”, hiding a dangerous “abyss”, playing with its own forces... The names of two famous people of the era are associated with the sea - Napoleon, who died in 1821 on the island of St. Helena in the middle of the sea, and Byron, who died in 1824 for the freedom of Greece, on the seashore.
Byron’s characterization is surprisingly sharp and talented: the image of the sea is imprinted on him, the poet was created by the “spirit” of the sea:
Like you, powerful, deep and gloomy, Like you, indomitable by anything.
After the death of these two heroes, “the world was empty” for the author of the message. Actually, there is nowhere to go... The fate of the earth is the same everywhere:
Where there is a drop of good, there is enlightenment or a tyrant on guard.
It is characteristic that good is measured in “drops” (and in this way it is, as it were, connected with the sea), and bondage is identified with “land”. The romantic interpretation of enlightenment brings it closer to political bondage (the existence of a “tyrant”). The author of the poem “To the Sea,” writes A.A. Smirnov, “is hostile to everything domestic, closed, intimate, everyday, he strives to embrace the infinity of the distance, expand his vision to a universal scale, rise and triumph over the abyss of the universe, personified in the image of the ocean.” Everything that encroaches on individual freedom, be it “enlightenment” or “tyrant”, is assessed negatively, even enlightenment as distorting the original, natural freedom of man.
This poem is about freedom not so much of the elements as of man. With the power of his creative impulse, his imagination, a person can “transfer” the image of the sea, its noise “to forests, to silent deserts.” Grateful human memory is the form in which the sea now exists for the poet of freedom and love.
In 1828, Pushkin writes a poem "Anchar". Already the first stanza of the poem sets up a feeling of gloomy solemnity. Almost mystical horror sounds in these lines:
In the desert, stunted and stingy,
On the ground, hot in the heat,
Anchar, like a formidable sentry,
There is only one in the whole universe.
Hidden alliteration (repetition of consonants in words “stunted”, “on the soil”, “ancharu”, “sentinel”) here it embodies the enchanting, consciousness-enslaving power of heat and the very power of the anchar, as if its name permeates the sound structure of the stanza. This prepares the leading theme of the poem: the theme of the tragic power of evil, cruelty, destruction and death both in nature and in human society.
In the mythology of different nations, there are many legends about the so-called “world tree”, the roots of which go to the world of the dead, the trunk pierces the world of the living, and the crown and top are in the world of the gods. Divine energy circulates along this tree of life; it was created by the creator at the beginning of time, as the original axis of the universe, holding together all spheres of existence. But the mythological image of the world tree appears in Pushkin in its tragic form. Anchar in the desert - the only thing tree, he stands on the border of the world, “like a formidable sentinel,” he is “alone in the entire universe” (note how gradually the power of the anchar grows in Pushkin’s description!). But he is the “tree of death”; holding the world together, he only sows evil in it and destroys all living things. All living things run away from this “tree of death”: “Not even a bird flies to it, // And the tiger doesn’t come...” The hyperbole in the image of the anchar (“alone in the whole universe”) creates a majestic feeling of proud, self-contained loneliness, contempt for the environment. This feeling makes possible the symbolic likening of anchar to tyrannical power.
And so this tree of death turned out to be included in human relationships. One “man” needed the life of another to extract the poison:
But man is man
Sent to the anchor with an imperious glance,
And he obediently went on his way
And in the morning he returned with poison.
The entire inhumane essence of relations between people in society is shown by Pushkin’s famous construction with a caesura: “But man is man...” This pause demonstrates the horror of the situation when one can send another to death not even by force, but only with an “imperious gaze.” And this other, also a “man,” did not fight, did not resist, did not grumble, but, like water, “obediently flowed on his way” and carried out the order. The thing is that some of them are “lord”, “king” (the censored version is “prince”), and the other is “slave”; Having lost his freedom, he lost the power to resist evil. “The imperious gaze”, “the ruler” - all these are signs of power, which is also, like anchar, both a product of nature (this time human) and a denial of it. War is a terrible means used by the authorities in the struggle for their dominance, and the arrows “obedient” to the king, saturated with anchar poison, carried death further, “to the neighbors in alien borders.” The evil of unfreedom tends to spread.
One of Pushkin's last poems from 1836 - "(From Pindemonti)". This poem, despite the indicated source (Italian poet Pindemonte, 1753-1828), is not a translation. This reference, according to Pushkinists, is a way to divert the attention of censors. Pushkin's poem is in many ways paradoxical and polemical. This polemic determines the two-part composition of the text. In the first part, the poet consistently rejects seemingly undoubted political values: parliamentarism (the right to “challenge taxes // Or prevent kings from fighting each other”), freedom of the press (“... I don’t care if the press is free // Fooling the boobies , or sensitive censorship // In magazine plans, the joker is constrained"). Hamlet's formula (“All this, you see, words words words...-") shows in the best possible way the illusory, unsteady nature of those soulless and godless ideals that often stand behind them. In contrast to these political freedoms, any form of political structure - both monarchy (“depend on the tsar”) and democracy (“depend on the people”) - Pushkin the artist praises “other, better... rights.” This is an exciting, fruitful freedom of creativity, an unaccountable, blissful existence, subject only to the laws of poetry and beauty:
To wander here and there at your whim, Marveling at the divine beauty of nature, and before the creations of art and inspiration, trembling joyfully in the raptures of tenderness. What happiness! that's right...
Indeed, such a free existence of an artist is immeasurably happier than the life of a citizen in a so-called politically free society.
This is how Pushkin’s political lyrics develop. The ideal of love of freedom in the poet’s work evolves from the traditional educational ideas of Fr. a just social order through the romantic rejection of any form of unfreedom and enslavement to a philosophical understanding of higher, spiritual freedom, which alone no tyrant can take away from a person. How important it is to remember that God gave man freedom and placed on him the responsibility for choosing between good and evil; This means that, deprived of freedom, a person is deprived of the opportunity to distinguish between these moral poles, loses the meaning of his existence, the ability to build relationships with people, and creative power. That is why the high ideal of freedom inspires Pushkin’s poetry throughout his life.
Test questions and assignments
1. Why was the theme of freedom so important for Pushkin?
2. How did communication with the Decembrists influence Pushkin’s political views in the early 1820s?
3. Whose tradition does Pushkin continue in his ode “Liberty”? Name the main motives and ideas of Pushkin's ode.
4. What is the significance of the motives of “youth”, the unity of personal and public in Pushkin’s message “To Chaadaev”?
5. How is the theme of freedom revealed in the poem “Village”, in its first and second parts? What political statements are made in this poem?
6. How do you understand the meaning of the epigraph to the poem “The Desert Sower of Freedom...”? How do Pushkin characterize the images of the sower and the people? What are the pessimistic motives in this poem?
7. What is the attitude of the lyrical hero of the poem “To the Sea” to the “free elements”, why? How does the image of the sea appear in the poem, what motives and ideas are associated with this image? How does the motif of “natural” human freedom sound in the poem?
8. Read the poem “Anchar”. How many parts are there in a poem? What ideas does Pushkin associate with the “tree of poison”? Determine the meaning of artistic details, epithets in the description of anchar: greenery, roots, etc. What natural elements carry the poison of anchar? Why did people start spreading it too? What is the meaningful meaning of the antithesis “slave” - “king”?
9. What new motifs appear in the poem “(From Pindemonti)”?
Test essays
1. The theme of freedom in Pushkin’s poetry: the dynamics of the main motives and ideas.
In the work, it is important to avoid assessing the poet’s freedom-loving lyrics as something established and unchangeable once and for all. How Pushkin’s attitude to freedom changed from the Lyceum poem “Licinia”, the Decembrist “Liberty” and “Village” to the poems of the second half of the 1820s and 1830s - an analysis of this should become the basis of the work. What changes in the poet’s lyrical hero, in his idea of the ideal of freedom, how do the poetic images and symbols that express this ideal change?
2. The idea of the need for freedom - political, creative, moral - is in Pushkin’s lyrics.
Pushkin's understanding of freedom is multifaceted. This is political freethinking (“Licinia”, “Liberty”, “Village”, “Desert Sower of Freedom..."), and the poet’s creative freedom from the dictates of the crowd, the power of vulgarity, the rude demand for “use” (“Poet”, “To the Poet” “,” “The Poet and the Crowd”), and, finally, internal, spiritual freedom, which is most important, since it is the only thing that no one can take away from a person (“(From Pindemonti)”). How are the different “faces” of freedom depicted in Pushkin’s works? Is it by chance that the image of spiritual freedom appears already in the poet’s mature poems? The answer to the last question can become the conclusion of the essay.
3. Political declarations in Pushkin’s freedom-loving lyrics.
Pushkin's freedom-loving political lyrics: what ideal does it affirm? This is the liberation of the people from cruel serfdom (“Village”), and the equality of all classes before the law (“Liberty”), and an enlightened monarchical government that respects the law and strives for the good of the Fatherland. The ideal of the poet is the freedom-loving personality of a hero-citizen, whose bold political statements correspond to his entire life (“To Chaadaev”). Why does it become impossible to liberate a person (“Freedom is a desert sower...”), what makes a person a slave (“Anchar”)? The analysis of Pushkin's poetic statements about this will be the content of the work.
4. Problems of relations between power and people, power and man in Pushkin’s freedom-loving lyrics.
The problem of power is conceptualized by Pushkin in both political and moral aspects. Power and people - what is the source of their clashes? Power and personality - why is human individuality suppressed by the power of the ruler? Finding answers to this question will be the content of the work.
5. The meaning of poetic metaphors and symbols in Pushkin’s poems about freedom.
Pushkin's creative thinking is the ability to find bright, visible images to express the most complex abstract ideas. Symbols of freedom in his lyrics- star, muse (“Freedom's proud singer”), sea, ship, eagle, wind, heaven; bondage is often expressed in the images of chains, bars, fortresses, dungeons, earthly captivity, etc. The poetic allegories (metaphors) in the freedom-loving lyrics of the poet are bizarre and unexpected. Find them in poetry, comprehend their artistic significance for the development of Pushkin’s understanding of freedom,- All this is included in the tasks of the work.
Creative tasks
1. Compare the poems “Village” and “Anchar”. What is the meaningful meaning of the two-part form of the works? What is common and different in the ideological sense of the first two parts of the poems? What common ideas are heard in the second parts of the two poems?
2. Analyze the landscape in Pushkin’s poem “Village”. What is the role of definitions and color vocabulary in describing nature? Is the image of nature connected with the idea of freedom?
3. Analyze the phonetic structure of the first six stanzas in the poem “To the Sea”. Do they contain assonance, alliteration, and other sound repetitions? If so, what is their substantive meaning?
4. Expand the list of Pushkin’s freedom-loving lyrics. What motives and ideas are heard in other poems on the theme of freedom?
“For some reason I have to talk about that...”: Favorites Gershelman Karl Karlovich
The theme of “secret freedom” in Pushkin
The theme of “secret freedom” in Pushkin
Love and secret freedom
They inspired a simple hymn in the heart -
There was an echo of the Russian people.
A. Pushkin
Pushkin, secret freedom
We sang after you,
Give us your hand in bad weather,
Help in the silent struggle!
A. Blok
Pushkin was the first to use it, Blok picked up the expression “secret freedom”, “Response to a challenge to write poems in honor of the Empress Elizaveta Alekseevna”, from which the above Pushkin quote was taken, written in 1819, during the period of glorification of “freedom” (message to Chaadaev, “Village” etc.): the reference to “secret freedom” was apparently supposed to explain the appearance of poems in honor of the empress. This expression emphasized the basic property of all creativity - its autonomy, independence from any extra-creative goals. Poetry is not bound by anything; it has the right to glorify everything that it finds worthy of it.
In the article “On the Appointment of the Poet,” Blok pointed to “three tasks assigned to the poet”:
“First, to free sounds from their native, beginningless element in which they reside; secondly, to bring these sounds into harmony, to give them form; thirdly, to bring this harmony into the outside world.”
If the third task depends on many circumstances lying outside the poet: material conditions, censorship, approval and disapproval of the reader, etc., then the first and second tasks depend only on the poet himself: no one can forbid him to see what he sees sees the world, nor force him to see what he does not see. The core of the creative process is independent of external pressure; only its shell, its manifestation in the external world, is dependent. You can ban publishing, even writing poetry, but you cannot ban writing them. And this is exactly what is important. It is more important that “Venus was found in marble than the fact that her statue exists” (Blok). It is important that at least in one point of the world a new value has been realized, a new reality has been “discovered”; whether anyone knows about this is less significant. Once created, a work of art is essentially immortal, even if its material carrier is destroyed or even never exists.
This independence of the “secret freedom” from any external influence makes it invulnerable. Only the poet himself can betray his “secret freedom”, be afraid of persecution or indifference, be tempted by money or fame, but no one can force him to do this. The invulnerability of “secret freedom” gives the poet the opportunity to be truthful whenever he wants. But it is precisely from this opportunity to be truthful that the obligation to be truthful arises.
“Secret freedom” is absolute truthfulness, fearlessness, incorruptibility. A poet must have two virtues: he must be sensitive and sincere.
He touched my ears.
And they were filled with noise and ringing:
And I heard the sky tremble.
And the heavenly flight of angels,
And the bastard underwater passage.
And the valley of the vine is vegetated.
And he came to my lips,
And my sinner tore out my tongue,
And idle and crafty,
And the sting of the wise snake
My frozen lips
He put it with his bloody right hand.
Pushkin. "Prophet"
At one time, Vyacheslav Ivanov objected to the generally accepted rapprochement between the poet and the prophet and pointed out that Pushkin himself demarcated these concepts, emphasizing in the poem “The Poet” the episodic nature of poetic creativity in contrast to the long service of the prophet:
Doesn't require a poet yet
To the sacred sacrifice Apollo,
In the cares of the vain world
He is cowardly immersed;
His holy lyre is silent,
The soul tastes a cold sleep,
And among the insignificant children of the world,
Perhaps he is the most insignificant of all.
Vyacheslav Ivanov's remark is correct, and it is unlikely that Pushkin was inclined to identify these two concepts. But this does not contradict the correctness of the similarity, the parallelism of the poetic vocation to the prophetic: the poet and the prophet have the same task - to serve as the voice of the people's and even universal conscience.
And he spoke the truth to the kings with a smile.
Derzhavin
Already a particular question is whether this task is carried out with constant, continuous burning of the prophet or short-term ones. Scattered flashes of poetic inspiration.
The concepts “poet” and “prophet” are multidimensional concepts. Being a poet, you can be a prophet, or not, and vice versa. A poet is a vocation, a prophet (in the sense in which he is taken here) is an attitude towards a vocation. A prophet, like a saint, can be a person of any profession - a poet, a doctor, an inventor, a statesman... Equating a poet with a prophet is only common because among people of artistic professions a selfless, devoted, “heroic” attitude to one’s calling is more common than among people of other professions. In principle, Pushkin’s “prophet” can be set as a task for every person. It is important for prophetic thought - “be fulfilled by My will”; whether the “verb that burns the hearts of people” will be rhymed or unrhymed - this is already a technical detail.
In Pushkin, the rapprochement of poetic and religious service is undeniable. Very often he uses images and adjectives that equate the first with the second.
“O muse, be obedient to the command of God.”
“Until Apollo demands the poet to make a sacred sacrifice.”
“His holy lyre is silent.”
“But only a divine verb.”
"Heaven's chosen singer."
"Heaven's chosen one."
"Divine Messenger".
“But, forgetting my service.
Altar and sacrifice.
Are the priests taking your broom?”
“And spits on the altar where your fire burns,
And your tripod shakes in childish playfulness.”
A contradiction is often seen between Pushkin’s “Monument” and “Mobile”: in “Monument” the poet is supposedly given the task of moral improvement of his neighbors:
And for a long time I will be so kind to the people,
That I awakened good feelings with the lyre.
That in my cruel age I glorified freedom
And he called for mercy for the fallen;
in “Mob” the demand of the crowd - “correct the hearts of your brothers” - is sharply rejected by the poet:
Go away, what's the matter?
To the peaceful poet before you!
Feel free to turn to stone in debauchery:
The voice of the lyre will not revive you.
Not for everyday worries,
Not for gain, not for battles -
We were born to inspire
For sweet sounds and prayers.
This apparent contradiction arises due to the fact that because of the given penultimate stanza of the “Monument” the last one that dominates it is forgotten:
By the command of God, O muse, be obedient.
Without fear of insult, without demanding a crown,
Praise and slander were accepted indifferently
And don't challenge a fool.
In “Monument” as in “Mob” (as in “Poet”), the supreme task of poetry turns out to be submission to the “command of God.” “The awakening of good feelings” is not denied, but is relegated to a subordinate position. It is not set as the goal of poetic creativity, but is noted as its consequence.
Poetry is not subordinate to ethics, but gives rise to ethics. She reconsiders ethics, explores and complements it. The task of art is to develop new moral norms, and not to promote or adapt to old ones.
Art, like nature, does not teach anyone anything, it only creates. Everything that is created is created for its own sake. The poet wants one thing, for his creation to exist. Art stands above the division into moral and immoral, stands “beyond good and evil.” Is the existence of the world moral or immoral? Ridiculous question; the question of the morality or immorality of the existence of Natasha Rostova, Khlestakov, Tatyana, Onegin is just as absurd. All of them are something incomparably greater than beings that are only good or bad - they are all living beings. In the life of each of us, Evgeny Onegin or Tatiana play no less a role than any of our “real” acquaintances. By thinking about the fate of both, you can learn something, but this is not the most important thing. The most important thing is that we know them, love them, that they constitute some part of our life, of ourselves, that they exist. If someday the world is finished, paradise becomes a reality, then among the inhabitants of this paradise should be Tatyana and Onegin - real and living, no less real and living than each of us.
Pushkin's approach to the theme of "secret freedom" can be better understood if we resort to a somewhat hackneyed comparison of his "Prophet" with Lermontov's "Prophet". Strictly speaking, they could not be compared at all, because we are dealing here with two completely different themes: Lermontov gives the relationship of the prophet to the crowd, Pushkin gives the relationship of the prophet to God. Pushkin describes the moment of the election of the prophet, Lermontov - the collision of the prophet, who had already come out to preach, with the crowd and the persecution he endured. But in a number of other Pushkin poems (“Mob”, “Monument” and especially in the sonnet “To the Poet”) Lermontov’s theme of the non-recognition of the poet (= prophet) by the crowd is envisaged:
Poet, do not value people’s love:
A moment's noise will pass away with enthusiastic praise,
You will hear the judgment of a fool and the laughter of a cold crowd...
Pushkin does not, however, derive from this the need for the prophet to go into the desert, to abandon his mission, as Lermontov does; on the contrary, he orders the poet to completely ignore the voice of the mob:
Pushkin sees the same thing in the same way as Lermontov, without at all overestimating reality: but, seeing the same thing, he reacts differently. Where the theme ends for Lermontov, for Pushkin it is just beginning. Where Lermontov agrees to lay down his arms, Pushkin demands a fearless continuation of the struggle. The justification for creativity lies for Lermontov on a social plane, and for Pushkin on a religious plane. According to Lermontov, poetry is written for the “neighbor,” according to Pushkin, for “God.”
For whom are poems written? A candle is lit, “let it shine for everyone in the house.” It is not the poet's fault if there are only blind people around the candle. The candle is lit for the sake of the few sighted people. Art exists for the sake of “the lucky few” (Stendhal’s expression).
Not everyone will love happiness,
Not everyone was born to be crowned.
Blessed is he who knows voluptuousness
High thoughts and poems,
Who enjoys the beautiful
I received a wonderful destiny
And I understood your delight
With fiery and clear delight.
Pushkin. “Zhukovsky. For the publication of his book “For the Few”"
Poems are written for the sake of those who will understand and pick them up, simply for the sake of those who will like them. Very often, the poet has to transmit them far over the heads of his closest neighbors.
So, the dialogue between Pushkin and Lermontov develops in the following sequence:
Pushkin (“Prophet”):
Arise, prophet, and see and listen.
Be fulfilled by My will,
And, bypassing the seas and lands.
Burn the hearts of people with your verb!
Lermontov (“Prophet”):
I began to proclaim love
And the truth is pure teachings:
All my neighbors are in me
They threw stones wildly.
I sprinkled ashes on the head.
I fled the cities as a beggar.
And so, I live in the desert,
Like birds, God's gift of food.
Pushkin (“To the Poet”):
Poet! Don’t value people’s love!
There will be a momentary noise of enthusiastic praise:
You will hear the judgment of a fool and the laughter of a cold crowd,
But you remain firm, calm and gloomy.
You are the king: live alone. On the road to freedom
Go where your free mind takes you,
Improving the fruits of your favorite thoughts,
Without demanding rewards for a noble deed.
They are in you. You are your own highest court,
You know how to evaluate your work more strictly than anyone else.
Are you satisfied with it, discerning artist?
Satisfied? So let the crowd scold him,
And spits on the altar where your fire burns,
And your tripod shakes in childish playfulness.
In Lermontov, the prophet ends up a beggar, in Pushkin, a king.
The convergence of creativity “for God” with creativity “for oneself,” which is revealed when comparing the above sonnet with “Monument,” is very significant. The subordination of creativity to the “command of God” is replaced here by the supreme subordination of the poet to himself: “You are a king: live alone,” “You are your own highest court.” The only measure of the authenticity of the “divine verb” is the poet’s creative conscience. To write “for oneself” - for the sake of pure creativity, not diluted by any extraneous considerations - this means writing “for God”. Writing “for God” means writing for your highest, strictest court. Ultimately, both tasks merge.
The poet's artistic conscience is the supreme legislator and judge of his creativity - this is his “secret freedom.” Each poet approaches his creation as an unrestricted, self-reporting, willful, autocratic genius. He can listen to advice and instructions, weigh them, take them into account, and follow them. But advice and instructions are different - what is the objective scale of the correctness of one or another of them? What can make an artist blindly trust any authority? The last decision, the last creative “to be or not to be” is imposed by himself. This is his highest privilege and at the same time his most sacred duty.
Poetic vocation is a mission, not a profession. “Inspiration”, “sweet sounds” and “prayers” are on the same level: poetry is not entertainment, not instruction, but a religious act. “The words of a poet are already his deeds” (Pushkin). For a poet, writing good poetry (this means: the best he is capable of) is a moral and religious duty. Blok speaks of “liberating sounds from their native, beginningless element” and of “bringing these sounds into harmony”: neither one nor the other depends in the least on the demands of the market, on considerations of earnings, success, the topic of the day, on any preconceived notions - deliberately -optimistic or pessimistic. The whole interest of poetry is concentrated on the reality that it first perceives, on those “sounds” that it tries to capture and formulate,
Only in relation to the third task of the poet - the task of publishing his work - “demand determines supply” and influences it; creativity as such does not depend on any demand. Pushkin expressed this position in the formula: “I write for myself, I print for money.” But at the same time: “God knows, I can’t write for money.”
Pushkin not only could not write for money, but also could not redo what he had written for any material reasons. “I regret that I am not able to redo what I once wrote” (from a letter to Benckendorf, 1826). In this regard he was very persistent. In response to some critical remarks made by Emperor Nicholas I regarding “Boris Godunov,” he, at the risk of incurring the sovereign’s disfavor, wrote to the same Benckendorff:
“...You should pay attention only to the spirit that permeates the entire work, and to the general impression it produces. My tragedy is a truthful work, and I cannot in good conscience exclude from it what seems essential to me.
I ask His Majesty to forgive me the courage with which I decide to contradict him. I know that this protest of the poet may seem ridiculous; however, until now I have rejected all the offers of the booksellers, silently making this sacrifice to the will of His Majesty. But at present I am in straitened circumstances and I beg His Majesty to untie my hands with permission to publish my tragedy in the form I wish” (April 16, 1830).
When censorship found the lines of “Prisoner of the Caucasus” insufficiently moral:
Fate has sent her a few joyful nights!
And replaced them:
Fate has sent her a few joyful days. –
Pushkin wrote to Vyazemsky:
“Censorship killed me! I have no power to say, I must not say, I do not dare to tell her the days at the end of the verse. Nights, nights - for Christ's sake, nights fate sent her to share. Either way. Nights, because during the day she did not see him - see the poem. And why is night more indecent than day? Which of the 24 hours are exactly contrary to the spirit of our censorship? Birukov (censor) is a good fellow, persuade him or I’ll go to jail.”
Pushkin not only created new poetry, but also very precisely indicated the moral requirements that determine the poet’s attitude towards poetry. At the same time, he did not at all deny the poet’s financial dependence on his profession. On the contrary, he was proud of the fact that he depended on his literary earnings, emphasized and even, rather, exaggerated this dependence. The poets of the pre-Pushkin era were either rich themselves, or were entirely dependent on the generosity of a patron (in most cases, the court). This reduced the position of the poet to that of a highly skilled jester. Pushkin was one of the first Russian professional writers.
Financial dependence on the sovereign and the government, in which Pushkin became entangled at the end of his life, was one of the reasons for his death. He allowed himself to be drawn into financial obligations, was seduced, and betrayed his “secret freedom.” He was forced to some extent to bend his soul, to take on topics that suited his patrons, and not himself, he had to violate his creative freedom. This put him in a false position in relation to the government and society and led to a tragic outcome.
“Secret freedom” fundamentally denies the possibility of any kind of “order” (social or any other). An order makes creativity superfluous; it predetermines in advance what exactly should be said; when ordering, the poet says not his own, which is unexpected for the listener, but someone else’s, essentially already known, that is, unnecessary. When ordering there is no creativity, but only confirmation, repetition. Art has the power not only to confirm and popularize old values, but also to discover new values. Therefore, limiting art to order means deliberately narrowing its field of action, setting boundaries for it. Art (at least of the first quality) is a leading force, not a serving one. Or rather, his ministry lies in the fact that he leads.
Genius is not a leaf on the tree of life, but its flower; not a means, but a goal of the historical process. Genius is what a people uses to justify its existence to other nations; it is a gift from the people to the rest of humanity. In genius, the people manifest themselves, spend themselves, and do not nourish them. The people serve the genius, and not the genius - the people, just as a mother serves the child, and not the child serves the mother.
“Secret freedom” not only excludes any order, but excludes any tendency: “to write cheerfully”, “to describe positive types and phenomena”, “to be an optimist”, etc. If Schopenhauer had been asked to create a system of optimistic philosophy, then there would not have been Schopenhauer. The “positive types” that criticism and society demanded from Gogol brought him to his grave. If a poet sees death and decay in the world, and not growth and prosperity, but this seems wrong to me, then I must oppose his poetry with my poetry, his philosophy with my philosophy, but not close the pages of my journal to him on this basis. This is precisely what is interesting about him. What he says is not what I say.
Pushkin embraced the entire poetic culture of the century, fully preserving his originality. He learned from everyone, imitating no one. He always remains the master of the situation and retains the ability to make sober choices. This is also “secret freedom”: not to be afraid of influences and never surrender to them blindly; take what is needed, reject what is unnecessary; process what you take as you please. “Secret freedom” is to write whatever I want, whatever I like, whatever I love, without fear of banality or loneliness.
The concept of “secret freedom” can be expanded from the aesthetic to the ethical realm. “Secret Freedom” is not only loyalty to one’s artistic identity, but also loyalty to one’s human face. “You are your own highest court” is applicable both in art and in life. Both there and here, “secret freedom” means the ultimate independence of the individual from everything external: the result of an action may not correspond to a person’s desire, but the action itself always corresponds to his desire, if only he is completely truthful. “Secret freedom” is the domination of the internal over the external, of “conscience” over “law.” She willingly obeys the law as long as she feels it is right, but is not afraid to act outside the law when it is insufficient. Pushkinskaya Tatiana in one case violates the “law” - she is the first to open up to Onegin in love, and in another case she obeys the “law” - she refuses to cheat on her husband. In both cases, she is guided only by a sensitive moral taste: in the first case, her act does not affect anything except a number of empty conventions, only her own good name is at stake: in the second, the happiness and honor of another person - her husband - depends on her decision.
Freedom and duty are not in contradiction: duty is disciplined freedom, freedom that has ceased to be a fleeting whim, but has become a firm, lasting will.
The highest moral duty of the poet is the fulfillment of his calling: but still, “secret freedom” is autonomous, and in this regard, the essence of man is broader than his calling. A calling is for a person, not a person for a calling - it is better to “bury a talent” than to bury oneself under a talent.
What is higher - poetry, family, honor? There can be no rules here, everything is decided by “secret freedom”, the correctness or incorrectness of the path depends on its sensitivity. It is unthinkable that Pushkin would refuse a duel, citing unfinished poems; and equally unthinkable - that out of love for his wife he would change at least one line of poetry. Pushkin could forget his wife for poetry and poetry for his wife and in both cases remain right.
But still, the meaning and justification of Pushkin’s life is his poems, not his wife, not his children, not his duel. Pushkin, in contrast to Tolstoy, is alien to the desire for moral self-improvement (in the theosophical-moralistic sense).
And among the insignificant children of the world,
Perhaps he is the most insignificant of all, -
This is said without the slightest “repentance” or desire to “improve.” The poet justifies himself with something else - his selfless readiness to immediately obey the “divine verb” as soon as the latter sounds:
But only a divine verb
It will touch sensitive ears,
The poet's soul will stir,
Like an awakened eagle.
The poet's justification is in creative tension. God wants to know what a simple, average, sinful person is like and how he sees the world created by God. The poet peers into himself, peers into the world and, without further ado, directly and honestly tells God about this.
The approach to art, especially literature, as a prophetic and even religious service was so widespread in Russia before the revolution that it seemed self-evident to many. In reality, this was not the case: to the West, for example, such a view was alien. In the West they looked and look at the profession of a writer like any other: before choosing it, they weigh material possibilities and material prospects, take into account their strengths and inclinations, acquire the appropriate education, etc. The approach to art as a sacred service is purely Russian tradition: this is how all our classics approached it; the drama of Gogol and Tolstoy, their very refusal of artistic creativity is due to the excessively high demands that society placed on the writer and writers on themselves. After the revolution, the point of view on this issue changed: “We look at a writer as a priest,” one Russian critic wrote after the revolution, “or as a parasite, depending on his mood. The revolution needs neither priests nor parasites.” However, the restoration of this tradition would be very desirable. Among the corrupt, myopic, greedy, stupidly self-interested modernity, a tradition of creative honesty (at least simple professional decency) would be extremely valuable.
From the book World Art Culture. XX century Literature author Olesina E“Twilight of Freedom” Sensitive to the movement of time, O. E. Mandelstam did not remain indifferent to revolutionary events. The theme of the dramatically complex relationship between creative personality and power appears in his poetry. What was happening was associated with the French Revolution (“When
From the book The Invisible Bird author Chervinskaya Lidiya DavydovnaA breath of freedom In December 1953, the magazine “New World” published an article by V. M. Pomerantsev “On Sincerity in Literature,” which criticized the idealization of life, the artificiality of plots, and the posterity of the characters in modern works of art.
From the book History of Russian Literature of the 19th Century. Part 1. 1800-1830s author Lebedev Yuri Vladimirovich“From the sun, from strength - freedom...” From the sun, from strength - freedom... Freedom, leading where? High, dusty years, Like summer days in the city. As in the hour of non-sad separation, An anxious station in vain... But from inspiration, from boredom, Who is not yet tired at heart? By the sea - the most tender in
From Giuseppe Bossi's book about Leonardo da Vinci's "Last Supper" author Goethe Johann WolfgangHistorical theme in Pushkin's works of the 1830s. On February 18, 1831, Pushkin’s wedding took place with N.N. Goncharova in Moscow, in the Church of the Great Ascension on Nikitskaya. The young couple spent the spring and summer in Tsarskoe Selo, and in the fall the Pushkins moved to St. Petersburg. Arrived
From the book Collected Works in ten volumes. Volume ten. About art and literature author Goethe Johann Wolfgang From the book Innocent Reading author Kostyrko Sergey PavlovichGIUSEPPE BOSSI ON THE LAST SUPPER OF LEONARDO DA VINCI The author of this significant work, a Milanese born in 1777, was gifted by nature with excellent, precociously developed abilities, especially an inclination and talent for the visual arts; with his development he
From the book Psychodiachronology: Psychohistory of Russian Literature from Romanticism to the Present Day author Smirnov Igor PavlovichCOPIES OF THE “THE LAST SUPPER” Now we can conclude with varying degrees of probability what we should expect from copies of the “Last Supper”, although the earliest of them were made at the same time, because the picture aroused great interest, and other monasteries also wanted to have something
From the book Rope Ladder author Berg Mikhail Yurievich4. The weight of freedom
From the book Philosophy and Religion by F.M. Dostoevsky author (Popovich) Justin From the book Both Time and Place [Historical and philological collection for the sixtieth anniversary of Alexander Lvovich Ospovat] author Team of authorsThe Pledge of Freedom (about “feelings of guilt” in Russia and Germany) This article (in which I will allow myself a few autobiographical digressions), like the once “truest and greatest teaching,” has three sources, three components. Events after the referendum, instability of power,
From the book Favorites: Prose. Dramaturgy. Literary criticism and journalism [collection] author Gritsenko Alexander Nikolaevich From the book Works of Alexander Pushkin. Article five author Belinsky Vissarion Grigorievich From the book Freedom Training by Nadash Peter From the author's bookEscape from freedom In our time, a rollback to the old days is possible, no matter what optimists say. Let the rollback not be complete, but partial, because our people do not need freedom. Not because they are not ready, but because they are not needed and will never be needed: such chemical
From the author's bookA look at Russian criticism. – The concept of modern criticism. – Study of the poet’s pathos as the first task of criticism. – The pathos of Pushkin’s poetry in general. – Analysis of Pushkin’s lyrical works In harmony, my rival Was the noise of the forests, or the violent whirlwind, or the melody of the orioles
Composition
The concept of “freedom” cannot be defined unambiguously. This is a social, political, philosophical, and moral-epic category. This theme occupies a central place in Pushkin’s worldview and work.
In the poem “a conversation between the Bookseller and the Poet,” when asked by the Poet what he would choose, “leaving the noisy world, and the muses, and the windy fashion,” he proudly answers: “Freedom.” The bookseller gives useful advice: “Our age is a huckster; in this iron age there is no money and no freedom.” It can be noted that for the Poet “freedom” is an independent concept, it is self-sufficient. In the mouth of a bookseller, this is only a relative concept included in life’s dependencies. On the other hand, there is a division between the external freedom and the internal freedom of the poet: “inspiration is not for sale, but you can sell the manuscript.” The poet believes that he cannot “sell his inspiration,” that is, write what the political regime or specific people want. He cannot fulfill someone’s order with his creativity, even for a large reward. The poet is free only when he creates on his own, without any pressure, and when the Muse tells him.
In 1823, the poem “The Desert Sower of Freedom” appears, striking with the hopelessness and despair of the lyrical hero: the world of dreams has melted, and the real world is spiritless. The hero is condemned because he is not needed in this world, he has no place and nowhere to run. The Lord sent a prophet to earth, to people, to sow seeds of goodness and truth. The poem is, as it were, the prophet’s answer to the one who sent him: “...I only lost time, good thoughts and works...”. The poet considered the work of liberation to be his main purpose. But people do not accept his gifts; they do not need freedom. The Prophet addresses them:
Graze, peaceful peoples.
The word “peaceful” has a contemptuous connotation, that is, those who are unable to rebel against their own slavery. This is the tranquility of the herd, and “why do the herds need the gifts of freedom” and the poets proclaiming this freedom.
The year this poem was written - 1823 - was a crisis for the poet, which is why the mood of the poem “The Desert Sower of Freedom” is so tragic. Pushkin considers himself a free poet, ready to create for people. However, they do not need his creativity.
If romanticism argued that a poet is a person who is in no way similar to other people, then Pushkin comes to the conviction that a poet is just a person. The concept of the poetic is now identified with the ordinary, everyday, and the exceptional begins to seem devoid of truth and poetry.
A completely different mood is heard in the poem “Arion”. Pushkin, along with summing up the spiritual quest of the Decembrists, also defined his role: the singer’s task is to sing to the swimmers, tell everyone about them and pass this story on to descendants. Therefore, it seems logical to save the swimmer: the one who is given free speech is saved. The cause of these people is alive until the singer betrays himself:
I sing the same hymns...
Pushkin conceives of himself as a free person, and that is why his work is free. He remained faithful to the ideals of his youth, did not betray them, and this is reflected in his work. A free poet is not afraid of the condemnation of the crowd. Her contempt or anger of power.
Thus, Pushkin always considered himself a free person, which is why his work was free. A free poet is not afraid of the condemnation of the crowd, its contempt or the wrath of the authorities. The theme of freedom of creativity, somewhat varying, persisted throughout Pushkin’s life and is considered by him as the spiritual and creative freedom of a true humanist writer.