Summary of the story: The Stingy Knight. Stingy Knight

“I am considered a mystery to everyone, no one has completely solved me” (From Gogol’s letters).

Gogol, as a person, represents such a complex and mysterious mental organization in which the most heterogeneous and sometimes directly opposite principles collide and intertwine. Gogol himself was aware of this mystery and complexity of his mental world and repeatedly expressed this consciousness in his letters. Even in his youth, at school, in one of his letters to his mother, he declared himself this way: “I am considered a mystery to everyone; no one has figured me out completely.” “Why God,” he exclaims in another letter, “having created a heart, perhaps the only one, at least rare in the world, a pure soul, flaming with hot love for everything high and beautiful, why did He give it all such a rough shell ? Why did He dress all this in such a strange mixture of contradiction, stubbornness, daring self-confidence and the most abject humility? Gogol was such an unbalanced, incomprehensible nature in his youth, and he remained so in his subsequent life. “A lot seemed to us in him,” we read in Arnoldi’s “Memoirs of Gogol,” “inexplicably mysterious.” How, for example, can we reconcile his constant striving for moral perfection with his pride, which we have all witnessed more than once? his amazing, subtle, observant mind, visible in all his works, and, at the same time, in ordinary life - some kind of stupidity and lack of understanding of the simplest and most ordinary things? We also remembered his strange manner of dressing and his ridicule of those who dressed funny and without taste, his religiosity and humility, and sometimes too strange impatience and little condescension towards his neighbors; in a word, they found an abyss of contradictions that seemed difficult to combine in one person.” And, in fact, how to combine in one person the naive idealist of the beginning of his literary activity with the crude realist of later times - the cheerful, harmless humorist Rudy Panko, who infected all readers with his laughter; - with a formidable, merciless satirist, from whom all classes got it, - a great artist and poet, creator of immortal works, with an ascetic preacher, author of the strange “Correspondence with Friends”? How to reconcile such opposing principles in one person? Where are the explanations for this complex interweaving of a wide variety of mental elements? Where, finally, is the solution to the psychic riddle that Gogol posed with his entire existence? We are told that “the answer to Gogol may lie in the psychology of that complex, vast whole that we call by the name of the “great man.” But what is a “great man” and what does he have to do with Gogol? What are the special laws governing the soul of a “great man?” - In our opinion, the answer to Gogol should be sought not in the psychology of a great man in general, but in the psychology of Gogol’s greatness, combined with extreme self-abasement, - Gogol’s mind, combined with a strange “misunderstanding of things” the simplest and most ordinary - Gogol's talent, combined with ascetic self-denial and painful impotence - in a word, in the psychology of the only, exceptional specially Gogol personality.

So, what is Gogol’s personality like? Despite the complexity and diversity of his inner world, despite the many contradictions contained in his personality, upon closer acquaintance with Gogol’s character one cannot help but notice two main trends, two predominant sides, absorbing all other mental elements: This, firstly , a side that is directly related to Gogol as a person, and is expressed in his penchant for constant moral introspection, moral self-exposure and denunciation of others; and, secondly, the other side, which characterizes Gogol as a writer and consists in the visual power of his talent, artistically and comprehensively reproducing the world of reality around him as it is. These two sides of personality can always be easily distinguished in Gogol. Thus, he appears before us as Gogol the moralist and as Gogol the artist, as Gogol the thinker and as Gogol the poet, as Gogol the man and as Gogol the writer. This duality of his nature, which is reflected in him very early and which can be traced in him from the beginning of his life to the end of it, this division of his “I” into two “I,” constitutes a characteristic feature of his personality. His whole life, with all its vicissitudes, contradictions and oddities, is nothing more than the struggle between these two opposite principles with an alternating preponderance of one side or the other, or rather with a preponderance of first predominantly one side, and then the other; his final, tragic fate is nothing more than the final triumph of Gogol the moralist over Gogol the artist. The task of a psychologist-biographer should be to trace in various phases this complex psychological process, which gradually led the cheerful humorist beekeeper Rudy Panko to sharp, painful asceticism, and the formidable satirist-writer to self-denial and denial of everything that he lived, and that it was written to them earlier. Without taking upon ourselves to resolve this difficult and complex task, in this essay we want to outline only the main points of this process and at least outline the general outline of Gogol’s personality.

The son of the somewhat famous writer Vasily Afanasyevich Gogol-Yanovsky and his somewhat exalted wife Marya Ivanovna, Gogol naturally inherited outstanding literary talent and an impressionable, receptive nature. His father, the author of several comedies from Little Russian life, who had a cheerful and good-natured character, who had a strong passion for theater and literature, undoubtedly had a very beneficial influence during his life on the development of his son’s literary talent and on the formation of his sympathies. Having seen from childhood an example of respect for books and a passionate love for the stage, Gogol very early became addicted to reading and acting. At least in the Nizhyn gymnasium, soon after Gogol entered it, we meet him as the initiator and main figure in the organization of the gymnasium theater, in the organization of amateur reading of books for self-education, and finally, in the publication of the student magazine “Stars”. He retained this passion for literature and theater, instilled in him as a child, throughout his life. But at this time, just as the father could and undoubtedly had a beneficial influence on the development of his son’s literary talent, his religiously-minded and extremely pious mother had a strong influence on education moral personality Gogol. She tried in her upbringing to lay a solid foundation for the Christian religion and good morality. And the impressionable soul of the child did not remain deaf to these mother’s lessons. Gogol himself subsequently notes this influence of his mother on his religious and moral development. With a special sense of gratitude, he later recalls these lessons, when, for example, his mother’s stories about the Last Judgment “shocked and awakened all his sensitivity and subsequently gave rise to the highest thoughts.” One should also look at the fact that a fiery spirit awakened in Gogol very early as a fruit of maternal upbringing. thirst for moral benefit, which he dreams of providing to humanity. Under the influence of this desire to be useful, he very early, while still at school, stops thinking “on justice,” thinking; that here he can provide the greatest benefit to humanity. “I saw,” he writes from Nezhin to his uncle Kosyarovsky, “that there is more work here than anything else, that here only I can be a blessing, here only I will be truly useful for humanity. Injustice, the greatest misfortune in the world, tore my heart more than anything else. I vowed not to lose a single minute of my short life without doing good.” Gogol retained this desire for moral benefit, a passionate thirst for achievement, until the end of his life, changing his view only on types of activity, and this trait should be recognized as the true expressive of his moral physiognomy. His hatred of everything vulgar, self-righteous, insignificant was a manifestation of this trait of his character. And Gogol, indeed, hated all this as much as he could, and pursued vulgarity with special passion, pursued it wherever he found it, and pursued it as only a well-aimed, caustic word of Gogol could pursue.

But along with the good seeds, the mother for the first time threw some tares into the receptive soul of her son, which later, having grown greatly, bore bitter fruits. Loving her “Nikosha” to the point of oblivion, she, with her immoderate adoration, gave rise to extreme conceit and an exaggerated assessment of her personality in him. Later, Gogol himself realized this extreme of maternal upbringing. “You made every effort,” he writes in one of his letters to his mother, “to raise me as best as possible; but, unfortunately, parents are rarely good educators of their children. You were still young then, for the first time you had children, for the first time you dealt with them, and so could you - did you know how to proceed, what was needed? I remember: I didn’t feel anything strongly, I looked at everything as if it were something created to please me .

Along with this conceit and, perhaps, as a direct result of it, the desire for teaching and reasoning is evident in Gogol very early on. Already in his youthful letters from Nizhyn to his mother we find clear traces of this trait. He often addresses his mother in them with reproaches, advice, instructions, teachings, and their tone often takes on a rhetorical, pompous tone. The further you go, the more prominent this feature becomes. He begins to teach and instruct in his letters not only his mother and sisters, but also his scientists, his more educated friends and acquaintances - Zhukovsky, Pogodin, etc. This desire for teaching, together with self-conceit, in the end served Gogol a disservice: it paved the way for his so famous “Correspondence with Friends”...

All these traits - the desire for moral benefit, extreme conceit and passion for teaching - conditioning and complementing each other and gradually intensifying, later received predominant significance in Gogol’s soul and, over time, formed him into that strange and sharp teacher - moralist as he appears to us at the end of his life.

But, along with this side of Gogol’s personality, another side gradually developed, matured and strengthened in him: his great artistic talent, combined with an outstanding gift of observation. The extraordinary impressionability and receptivity of his nature did him a great service: they awakened his feelings, nourished his mind and tempered his talent. Impressions of the reality around him early began to sink into the soul of the gifted boy: nothing escaped his observant gaze, and what the latter noted was long and firmly stored in his soul. This is how Gogol himself testifies to this feature of his spiritual nature. “First,” he says about himself in Chapter VI. I vol. Dead Souls, - long ago, in the years of my youth, in the years of my irrevocably flashed childhood, it was fun for me to drive up for the first time to an unfamiliar place: it didn’t matter whether it was a village, a poor provincial town, a village, a settlement – a child’s curious gaze revealed a lot of curious things in him. Every structure, everything that bore the imprint of some noticeable feature, everything stopped me and amazed me... Nothing escaped fresh, subtle attention and, sticking my nose out of my traveling cart, I looked at the hitherto unprecedented cut of some a frock coat and wooden boxes with nails, with sulfur, yellowing in the distance, with raisins and soap, flashing from the doors of a greengrocer's shop along with jars of dried Moscow sweets; I looked at the infantry officer walking to the side, brought from God knows which province - to the boredom of the district, and at the merchant who flashed in Siberia in a racing droshky - and was carried away mentally after them into their poor life. A district official walked past - and I was already wondering where he was going.”... “Approaching the village of some landowner,” Gogol, in his house, in the garden, in everything around him, “tried to guess who the landowner himself was,” etc. d. This property of Gogol’s mind determined the fact that in his works he could reproduce only what he saw and heard, what he observed directly in life. The creative reproduction of the real world, determined by this feature of its nature, informed and should have informed Gogol’s talent realistic direction.“I have never created anything in my imagination,” he says about himself, in the Author’s Confession, “and did not have this property. The only thing that worked out well for me was what was taken from reality, from what was known to me. “ These traits - poetic observation and artistic creativity were of great importance for Gogol as a writer. His subtle observation, looking into the very depths of the human soul, helped him find and guess the characteristic features of his contemporary society, and his artistic creativity gave him the opportunity to embody these features in a whole collection of the most real and truthful types - types not only of Little Russia - which was his homeland poet, but also Great Russia, whom he hardly knew. They formed him into that great realist artist who was the most expressive writer of contemporary life and with his creations had a powerful influence on contemporary society.

In May 1821, Gogol, a twelve-year-old boy, entered the Nizhyn Gymnasium of Higher Sciences. This gymnasium belonged to that type of old school, in which, in Pushkin’s words, they studied “little by little,” “something and somehow.” It was a time when students were in many ways ahead of their teachers and found it possible to ridicule their backwardness almost to their faces. In addition, the Nizhyn gymnasium, during Gogol’s studies there, was in particularly unfavorable conditions. It had just been opened and needed to organize and put in order all aspects of its teaching and educational work. Many of the subjects taught there during this time were so poorly taught that they could not provide students with any preparation. Among such subjects was, by the way, the history of Russian literature. Prof. Nikolsky, who taught this subject, according to the testimony of one of Gogol’s school friends, “had no understanding of ancient and Western literatures.” In Russian literature, he admired Kheraskov and Sumarokov, found Ozerov, Batyushkov and Zhukovsky not quite classical, and Pushkin’s language and thoughts trivial.” Such was the school of that time, such were the professors and such was the state of education. And if Pushkins, Gogols, Redkins, Kukolniki and many others came out of such schools. etc., then they owed all their acquisitions not so much to the school as to their own talents and initiative. True, there was, however, one good side to the schools of that time, which had a beneficial effect on the development of their pupils. Precisely: these schools, if they didn’t give anything to their students, at least. nothing was taken from them. They did not restrict the freedom of their students, allocated a spacious circle for their amateur activities and thus, although negatively, contributed to the development of their individuality and the disclosure of natural talents.

If, along with the general shortcomings of the school of that time, we take into account the properties related to Gogol as a student, namely, that he was indifferent to the subjects taught and was considered a lazy and sloppy pet, then the veracity of Gogol’s testimony about himself, which we find in his Author's Confession. “It must be said,” he testifies here, “that I received a rather poor upbringing at school, and therefore it is no wonder that the idea of learning came to me in adulthood. I started with such initial books that I was ashamed to even show them and hid all my studies.”

“The school, according to the statement of one of his mentors, namely Mr. Kulzhinsky, taught him only a certain logical formality and consistency of concepts and thoughts, and he does not owe us anything else. This was a talent that was not recognized by the school, and, to tell the truth, that did not want or was not able to admit to the school.” True, he later sought to fill these gaps in education; in his “Confession” he speaks of reading and studying “books of legislators, spiritualists and observers of human nature,” but his writings, both artistic and journalistic (“Correspondence”) do not confirm this evidence, and even reading learned books without prior preparation could hardly bring him significant benefit. Thus, he was forced to remain for the rest of his life with pitiful scraps of the simple wisdom of the Nezhin school... Therefore, without being a prophet, it would not be difficult to predict that no matter how great a man he later became in the field of art, he certainly had to be a mediocre thinker and a bad moralist.

But then Gogol finishes school and enters life. He is beckoned and attracted to St. Petersburg, service, glory. School - “after all, this is not life yet,” argues one of Gogol’s heroes, who (i.e. Gogol) at that time had a lot in common with him, “it is only preparation for life: real life in the service: there are exploits!” And according to the custom of all ambitious people, Gogol notes about this hero, “he rushed to St. Petersburg, where, as we know, our ardent youth strives from all sides.” Gogol is horrified at this time by the thought of a traceless existence in the world. “To be in the world and not signify your existence,” he exclaims, “is terrible for me.” His gigantic spiritual forces ask out, rush to “mean his life with one good deed, one benefit to the fatherland” and push him “into the active world.” He is in a hurry to determine his calling, changes many positions and places one after another, and nowhere can he find peace for his restless soul. Either he is an official of the Department of Destinations, then he is a history teacher at the Patriotic Institute, then it seems to him that his calling is the stage, then he thinks of devoting himself entirely to painting. Finally, the publication of his “Evenings on a Farm near Dikanka” decides his fate and determines his vocation. His short stories from Little Russian life, published under this title, evoke universal sympathy from both critics and the public. Pushkin himself was “amazed by this curious literary novelty.” Now before us is Gogol the poet, Gogol the writer. From now on, everything that his artistic inspiration dictates to him will be significant, beautiful, great.

But “Evenings” were only the first experience of his literary activity, a test of his strength and pen. Other plans flash in Gogol’s head, other thoughts are ripening in his soul. “Evenings” do not satisfy him, and he wants to create something greater and more significant than these “fairy tales and sayings.” “Let them be doomed to obscurity,” he writes about them shortly after their publication to M.P. Pogodin, “until something weighty, great, artistic comes out of me.” Soon, indeed, “The Inspector General” (1836) appears, and five or six years later “Dead Souls” (I volume). In these works, the power of Gogol's rich literary talent unfolded in all its breadth and power. Everything vulgar and self-satisfied in its vulgarity, everything insignificant and arrogant in its insignificance, “all the injustices that are committed in those places and in those cases where justice is most required from a person,” all this was collected in these works “in one heap.” and branded with the seal of bitterly poisonous laughter, deep hatred and the greatest contempt. There is no need to dwell on how widely the Russian life of the author’s time with its social phenomena is captured in them and how deeply the soul of the contemporary man is revealed in its most intimate recesses: history has already managed to appreciate these works, and has paid due tribute to the surprise of gratitude to the genius their author. Suffice it to say that Gogol appeared in them completely at the height of his calling - to be an artist exposing the vices of his contemporary society and the shortcomings of the social system - and conscientiously fulfilled the duty that he was called to fulfill.

Meanwhile, while Gogol’s great works were ready to make a radical revolution not only in the literary world, but also in public life, while both Gogol’s friends and enemies had already counted him among the leading people of his contemporary society, - in this time, his worldview continues to remain at the same level as it was in the days of his conscious childhood and in the years of his youth that followed. Apparently, St. Petersburg did not have any noticeable influence in this case. The Pushkin circle, which Gogol joined soon after his arrival in the capital, if it could have a beneficial effect on him, it was only in an artistic and literary sense; all other aspects of Gogol's spiritual development remained outside the scope of this influence. It is also not clear that Gogol’s trips abroad brought him any significant benefit. His worldview—if only this name can be used to describe the stock of everyday views and traditional beliefs he learned from his home upbringing and school education—even in St. Petersburg remains completely untouched and completely virgin. Warm, immediate faith in the field of religious matters, ardent love for the motherland and respectful recognition of the existing order of social life as it is - not subject to any critical analysis - in the field of political and social questions - these are the features that should be noted, as essential, in this primitive, somewhat patriarchal worldview. But with such views, a characteristic and typical feature of Gogol’s personality was, as we noted, a passionate desire for moral benefit for the fatherland, a fiery thirst for moral achievement. This feature of his personality constantly pushed Gogol onto the path of practical activity and informed his worldview active, character. It was this that brought Gogol, as a person and a citizen, into a collision with the other side of his activity, with Gogol as a writer.

While Gogol’s youthful ardor was strong, while Pushkin, that good genius of his, was alive, Gogol had the opportunity to devote himself inseparably to artistic creativity. But over the years, with the appearance of various illnesses and with other adversities of life that came to his head, the thought of a fruitlessly lived life more and more troubled his mind, more and more often confused his conscience. It began to seem to him that the benefit he brings with his literary works is not so significant, that the path he has embarked on is not entirely correct and that in another place he could be much more useful. The first strong impetus for this turn in Gogol’s mood was given by the first performance of his “The Inspector General”. As you know, this performance made a stunning impression on the audience. It was a sudden thunder on the clear horizon of public life. The Inspector was seen as a libel on society, undermining the authority of civil authorities, undermining the very foundations of the social system. Gogol did not expect this conclusion, and it horrified him. It seemed that Gogol the artist for the first time did not calculate his strength here and produced something that embarrassed Gogol the citizen. “The first work, conceived with the aim of producing a good influence on society,” not only did not achieve its intended goal, but was accompanied by precisely

with the opposite result: “they began to see in comedy,” says Gogol, “a desire to ridicule legalized order of things and government forms, while my intention was only to ridicule arbitrary retreat of some persons from the formal and legal order.” Gogol the citizen could not come to terms with the accusation of civil unreliability, which Gogol the writer discovered. How? - to ridicule not only persons, but also the positions they occupy, to ridicule not only human vulgarity, but also the shortcomings of the social system - such thoughts never even entered his head. That is why, when Belinsky began to reveal the great social significance of his works, Gogol hastens to renounce everything that the great critic attributed to him, which, indeed, was all his merit, but which so much went against his social views. In his opinion, the social system, whatever it may be, has, as a “legalized order,” an unshakable, enduring significance. The source of evil is rooted not in social disorder, but in the corrupt soul of a person who is stagnant in his wickedness. Evil comes from the fact that people are too morally corrupt and do not want to get behind their shortcomings, do not want to improve. His Skvoznik-Dmukhanovskys, Plyushkins, Nozdrevs, Sobakeviches, Korobochkis, etc. seem to him to be simply random phenomena, as having nothing in common with the flow of social life. If they are like that, then they themselves are to blame. It is enough for them to repent and morally improve in order to become good people. This was Gogol’s own view of his types and the meaning of his creations. But from under the inspired pen of a true writer-artist, as the fruit of unconscious creativity, something often pours out that he does not foresee and does not expect. This happened this time too. Social ills, contrary to the author’s wishes, surfaced so clearly in “The Inspector General” that it was impossible not to pay attention to them. Everyone saw them and everyone understood them well, and first of all to you, Emperor Nicholas I, who, after viewing the play, said: “everyone got it, and most of all I myself.” There were cries of indignation against the author and cries of protest against his creations. "Liberal! Revolutionary! Slanderer of Russia! To Siberia it “! - these were the general cries of the indignant public. And all these terrible words rained down on the head of one who did not even understand the full significance of the accusations brought against him, and even more so did not know what caused them on his part. It is therefore not difficult to imagine the despair into which all these attacks plunged Gogol. “Against me,” he complains to Pogodin, “all classes have now resolutely rebelled.”... “Consider the position of the poor author, who meanwhile loves his fatherland and his compatriots very much.” “Gogol the Citizen” was embarrassed and deeply shocked. He hastens to justify himself, referring to the ignorance and irritability of the public, who do not want to understand that if several rogues are brought out in a comedy, this does not mean that all are rogues; that his heroes, the Khlestakovs, etc., are far from being as typical as myopic people imagine, But it was already too late. The comedy did its job: it branded those who deserved it with the seal of vulgarity and contempt. Confused and alarmed, Gogol hurries to retire abroad to rest from his worries and recover from the blow that was dealt to him by his own hand. He goes “to unwind his melancholy” and “ think deeply about your responsibilities as an author“. A very significant and fraught goal: Gogol the moralist collided sharply with Gogol the artist here for the first time, and they did not recognize each other; Not only did they not recognize each other, did not extend their hand to each other for the fraternal pursuit of the same goal, - no! - they for the first time turned somewhat away from each other: Gogol the moralist thought about Gogol the artist and did not fully understand and appreciate but, not appreciating him, looked at him somewhat sideways. From then on, a noticeable turn began in him on the path that led him to “Correspondence with Friends,” “a great turning point,” “a great era of his life.” His previous works begin to seem to him like “a student’s notebook, in which carelessness and laziness are visible on one page, impatience and haste on the other”... He expresses the desire that “such a moth would appear that would suddenly eat all the copies of “The Inspector General”, and with them “Arabesques”, “Evenings” and all other nonsense.” He had the idea of combining poetry with teaching in order to bring one benefit with his writings, avoiding the harm that, as it seemed to him, they could bring by carelessly exposing and ridiculing human vulgarity. He is now conceiving a new great work, in which the entire Russian person should be shown, with all his properties, not only negative, but also positive. This thought about the positive qualities of the Russian person was a direct product of the fear that Gogol experienced before the all-destroying power of his satirical laughter after the performance of “The Inspector General.”

In 1842, the first volume of “Dead Souls” appears, where Gogol’s talent still remains true to itself, where Gogol the artist still gains an advantage over Gogol the moralist. But, alas! - the lyrical digressions scattered in abundance throughout this work - were an ominous symptom of the disaster awaiting all of educated Russia, which was soon to occur - a significant sign of the defeat that Gogol the artist would soon suffer at the hands of Gogol - moralist. No one had yet suspected the impending storm, no one had yet sensed the approaching disaster: only Belinsky’s keen eye saw this split in Gogol’s talent, reflected in this creation of his, only his subtle ear overheard the false note that slipped here...

Meanwhile, Gogol himself looks at the first volume as the threshold to a great building, that is, as a preface to that work in which other motives should be heard, other images should pass through. But Belinsky had already prophesied to him that if he followed this road, he would ruin his talent.

Belinsky's prophecy, unfortunately, soon came true. No more than five years have passed since the publication of the first volume of “Dead Souls” and all of reading Russia, instead of the promised second volume of the same creation, sadly unfolded a strange book that bore the unusual title “Selected Passages from Correspondence with Friends.” No one, except Gogol's closest friends, knew what this meant; but everyone understood that Russian literature was losing a great and talented writer, who had enriched it with not only wonderful works, but now presented some vague sermon of well-known, sometimes rather dubious, truths, only stated in some extraordinary, doctoral, arrogant tone. Screams, screams and moans were heard again - this time already screams of reproaches, screams of bewilderment, groans of despair!!! But it was too late: Gogol the moralist dealt the final blow to Gogol the artist, and Gogol the artist died forever. He fell victim to internal division, moral introspection and painful reflection. He died in an impossible struggle against a forcibly imposed unnatural tendency; - died prematurely, in such years when a person’s strength is still in full bloom. Let us not ask fruitless questions about what, under other conditions, Gogol’s mighty talent could have given to Russian literature—what other pearls he would have enriched it with. Let us better express our gratitude to him for what he did... All his life he steadily strove to fulfill his duty as a writer as best as possible, to justify his high calling by his deeds - and with sad doubts about his fulfilled duty, he passed away into eternity. So let us calm his spirit once again by recognizing that he sacredly fulfilled his duty, fulfilled it completely, although not in the way he thought he would do it. After all, it is not because Gogol is great, of course, that he left behind a meager book of commonplace morality - a book, the likes of which were not a few before him, are many now and will continue to appear in the future, but the theme of the great works of art with which he marked the history of Russian literature a new era, made a radical revolution in it and laid the foundation for a new trend - realistic, which continues in it to this day.

Panaev, Literary Memoirs, SPV. 1888 p. 187.

Historical Bulletin, 1901 XII, 977 pp. Engelhardt, Nikolaev censorship.

Ibid., p. 976

Ibid page 378.

Ibid., Wed. page 377.

Ibid., p. 378.

Ibid., p. 384

Albert, another knight, wants to attend the tournament, so he orders his servant to bring a helmet. The headdress is damaged - there are holes from the previous fight. It is impossible to wear such a helmet, but the humble servant tries to console him with the fact that the enemy was defeated and barely recovered after the blow. Albert says that he was driven by dissatisfaction because the helmet was damaged. The reason for heroism was ordinary stinginess. Albert has poor parents, but still he did not allow himself to remove the helmet from the defeated man. He also needs a new dress, many people wear satin at dinner, but he sits in armor. Nobody lends him money.

Solomon arrives, Albert again asks for loans, but he gently refuses. After which he hints that his father’s death can be accelerated by using poison. Albert, enraged by the answer, wants to hang Solomon for such words. Solomon hurries to hide.

The Baron admires his gold in the basement, thinks about the stories of each coin he earns, and he does not like the thought that after his death all this will go to Albert. He comes to the conclusion that Albert has no right to receive this money, only if his son earned it himself, in which case he would not spend it on anything.

The meeting between the baron and the duke does not go very well, the baron condemns his son for wanting to rob him and not being worthy of his respect at all. Hearing this, Albert comes out of hiding and accuses the Baron of lying. The Baron becomes furious and throws a white glove to his son, thereby showing that this is the first gift from a father to his son. The Duke is horrified by what he sees and drives the father and son away. After which the baron dies, and the duke speaks of a terrible century and the terrible hearts of people.

Pushkin's story teaches that no matter how much money a person earns for a living, he will still die. The Baron diligently saved money, but he didn’t have to use it, so why skimp?

The tragedy also shows the relationship between father and son, this relationship is terrible - they were ruined by money, the father was so stingy that he spared money for a new robe for his son. Therefore, enmity arose between them; the son did not understand why his father treated him with contempt. This teaches that there should be no barriers between people in the form of money, especially if people are related to each other, otherwise this will lead to hatred and cruelty.

Another lesson that can be learned from the play is to be more humane towards other people, treat them with respect, and not humiliate or try to insult them.

Picture or drawing of the Stingy Knight

Other retellings and reviews for the reader's diary

Summary of The Nutcracker and the Mouse King Hoffmann
On Christmas Eve, Fritz and Marie spend the whole day in the bedroom. They were forbidden to enter the living room, as they were decorating the Christmas tree and placing gifts there. The boy tells his sister that his godfather came in with a large box.
Summary of the Smell of Cossack Bread
The heroine of the work is named Dusya. She lives in the capital with her husband. The story begins on the first of January. A drunken husband opened the door and found a telegram with a message that his wife's mother had died.
Summary of Dubov Boy by the Sea
In the works of Nikolai Dubov you can find a variety of characters, good and evil, smart and stupid, cheerful and gloomy. Their characters were masterfully conveyed by the author
Summary of The Legend of Robin Hood

Malaria, which overtook the boy Vitya, changes his life in many ways. Having lost his hearing for a while and forced to be alone with himself all his time, the child builds his own small world in the far corner of his grandmother’s garden.

The young knight Albert is about to appear at the tournament and asks his servant Ivan to show him his helmet. The helmet was pierced through in the last duel with the knight Delorge. It is impossible to put it on. The servant consoles Albert with the fact that he repaid Delorge in full, knocking him out of the saddle with a powerful blow, from which Albert’s offender lay dead for a day and has hardly recovered to this day. Albert says that the reason for his courage and strength was his rage over his damaged helmet. The fault of heroism is stinginess. Albert complains about poverty, about the embarrassment that prevented him from removing the helmet from a defeated enemy, says that he needs a new dress, that he alone is forced to sit at the ducal table in armor, while other knights flaunt in satin and velvet. But there is no money for clothes and weapons, and Albert’s father, the old baron, is a miser. There is no money to buy a new horse, and Albert’s constant creditor, the Jew Solomon, according to Ivan, refuses to continue to believe in debt without a mortgage. But the knight has nothing to pawn. The moneylender does not give in to any persuasion, and even the argument that Albert’s father is old, will soon die and leave his entire huge fortune to his son does not convince the lender.

At this time, Solomon himself appears. Albert tries to beg him for a loan, but Solomon, although gently, nevertheless resolutely refuses to give money even on his word of honor. Albert, upset, does not believe that his father can survive him, but Solomon says that everything happens in life, that “our days are not numbered by us,” and the baron is strong and can live another thirty years. In despair, Albert says that in thirty years he will be fifty, and then he will hardly need the money. Solomon objects that money is needed at any age, only “a young man looks for nimble servants in it,” “but an old man sees in them reliable friends.” Albert claims that his father himself serves money, like an Algerian slave, “like a chained dog.” He denies himself everything and lives worse than a beggar, and “the gold lies quietly in his chests.” Albert still hopes that someday it will serve him, Albert. Seeing Albert's despair and his readiness to do anything, Solomon hints that his father's death can be hastened with the help of poison. At first, Albert does not understand these hints. But, having understood the matter, he wants to immediately hang Solomon on the castle gates. Solomon, realizing that the knight is not joking, wants to pay off, but Albert drives him away. Having come to his senses, he intends to send a servant for the moneylender to accept the money offered, but changes his mind because it seems to him that they will smell of poison. He demands to serve wine, but it turns out that there is not a drop of wine in the house. Cursing such a life, Albert decides to seek justice for his father from the Duke, who must force the old man to support his son, as befits a knight.

The Baron goes down to his basement, where he stores chests of gold, so that he can pour a handful of coins into the sixth chest, which is not yet full. Looking at his treasures, he remembers the legend of the king who ordered his soldiers to put in a handful of earth, and how as a result a giant hill grew from which the king could survey vast spaces. The baron likens his treasures, collected bit by bit, to this hill, which makes him the ruler of the whole world. He remembers the history of each coin, behind which are the tears and grief of people, poverty and death. It seems to him that if all the tears, blood and sweat shed for this money came out of the bowels of the earth now, a flood would occur. He pours a handful of money into the chest, and then unlocks all the chests, places lighted candles in front of them and admires the shine of gold, feeling like the ruler of a mighty power. But the thought that after his death the heir will come here and squander his wealth makes the baron furious and indignant. He believes that he has no right to this, that if he himself had accumulated these treasures bit by bit through hard work, then he certainly would not have thrown gold left and right.

In the palace, Albert complains to the Duke about his father, and the Duke promises to help the knight, to persuade the Baron to support his son as it should be. He hopes to awaken fatherly feelings in the baron, because the baron was a friend of his grandfather and played with the duke when he was still a child.

The baron approaches the palace, and the duke asks Albert to hide in the next room while he talks with his father. The Baron appears, the Duke greets him and tries to evoke memories of his youth. He wants the baron to appear at court, but the baron is dissuaded by old age and infirmity, but promises that in case of war he will have the strength to draw his sword for his duke. The Duke asks why he does not see the Baron’s son at court, to which the Baron replies that his son’s gloomy disposition is a hindrance. The Duke asks the Baron to send his son to the palace and promises to teach him to have fun. He demands that the baron assign his son a salary befitting a knight. Turning gloomy, the baron says that his son is unworthy of the duke’s care and attention, that “he is vicious,” and refuses to fulfill the duke’s request. He says that he is angry with his son for plotting parricide. The Duke threatens to put Albert on trial for this. The Baron reports that his son intends to rob him. Hearing these slander, Albert bursts into the room and accuses his father of lying. The angry baron throws the glove to his son. With the words “Thank you.” This is my father’s first gift.” Albert accepts the baron’s challenge. This incident plunges the Duke into amazement and anger; he takes away the baron’s glove from Albert and drives father and son away from him. At this moment, with words about the keys on his lips, the baron dies, and the duke complains about “a terrible age, terrible hearts.”

In the tower, the knight Albert shares his misfortune with his servant Ivan: at the knight's tournament, Count Delorge pierced his helmet, but there is no money for a new one, because Albert's father, the baron, is stingy. Albert regrets that Delorge pierced his helmet and not his head. The knight was so angry about the damaged armor that he threw the count twenty steps, causing the admiration of the ladies. Albert needs money for a dress and a new horse, because Emir’s horse is limping after the fight.

Albert wants to borrow money from the Jew Solomon through a servant in order to buy the Bay Chest inexpensively, but the Jew does not give money

Without a mortgage, “he groans and squeezes.” There was no money to even buy wine; the last bottle the day before the servant had taken to the sick blacksmith.

The Jew himself comes and asks to pay at least part of the debt. Albert gives his word to repay the debt, because he is the heir to the baron’s wealth. The Jew objects that the baron can live another thirty years.

Solomon talks about the importance of money: any young man sees money as nimble servants, any old man sees reliable friends. But Albert knows that his father, the baron, sees money as masters and serves them, denying himself warmth, food, drink and peace.

Jide offers to introduce Albert to a pharmacist who makes poison to give to the baron father. Albert is outraged by this proposal and kicks Solomon out. He doesn’t even want to take his chervonets because they “smell of poison.”

The baron's son is going to seek justice from his father from the duke.

Scene 2

In the basement with hidden treasures, the baron pronounces his famous monologue. He compares the anticipation of a date with “faithful chests” with the anticipation of a date between a young rake and a crafty libertine. The baron pours a handful of gold into the sixth incomplete chest, “the usual tribute” brought daily.

He compares himself with a certain king who ordered his soldiers to fill up a mound of earth (each had to bring only a handful) and from there he examined the conquered lands. From the height of his wealth, the baron can look at the world; everything is subject to him, like a demon: genius, virtue, sleepless work, bloody villainy. Everything is obedient to the Baron, but he himself is obedient to nothing.

He is above all desires; the consciousness of his power is enough for him.

The Baron examines the wealth and reflects on how he got it. He remembers a widow with three children, who stood on her knees all day in the rain, but, in the end, gave away an old doubloon - a husband’s duty, so as not to be in prison tomorrow. Another stolen coin, brought by the robber Thibault.

All the tears, blood and sweat shed for the baron’s wealth could drown him in the “cellars of the faithful.”

The baron protects his wealth with “honest damask steel,” that is, with a sword. When he unlocks the chests, he feels the same as a murderer stabbing a victim with a knife: “It’s nice and scary together.” The money that the baron sleeps in his chests with “the sleep of strength and peace” is for him like gods sleeping in heaven.

The baron opens the chests and reigns, but he is consumed by the thought that after his death his son will squander his wealth. The Baron acquired all this by enduring abstinence, curbing passions, caring, and not sleeping at night. He is afraid that his son will accuse him of having no conscience and a heart overgrown with moss, but only one who has suffered through wealth will not squander it.

The Baron would like to protect his basement from unworthy glances and from the living even after death.

Scene 3

In the palace, Albert complains to the Duke about his father’s stinginess, and the Duke promises to rebuke him in private, because the Baron was a friend of the Duke’s grandfather, played with the Duke when he was still a child. By order of the nobleman, the baron arrives, and the duke asks Albert to go into the next room. After renewing acquaintance and remembering the baron’s friendship with the duke’s grandfather, the nobleman asks the baron why his son is not at court. The Baron first says that Albert is being shy, then he “confesses” that his son spends his youth in violence and base vices, and finally declares that he is angry with his son, he is ashamed, since his son wanted to kill and rob him.

Albert cannot stand it, rushes into the room and accuses his father of lying. The Baron challenges his son to a duel, throwing down his gauntlet. The Duke takes the glove from Albert, who accepted the challenge, and drives them both out, calling the old man a madman and the young man a tiger cub. Albert leaves, and the Baron suddenly dies with the words “Where are the keys?” The Duke is indignant: “Terrible age, terrible hearts!”

(No Ratings Yet)

Scene I In the tower. Albert and his servant Ivan are discussing a knight's tournament. Albert complains that he bent his helmet and has nothing to buy a new one. Albert does not have decent clothes to appear at court. The reason for Albert's victory in the tournament was his rage at his opponent for bending his helmet. Albert is interested in what the Jew Solomon conveyed […]...
A. S. Pushkin The Stingy Knight The young knight Albert is about to appear at the tournament and asks his servant Ivan to show him his helmet. The helmet was pierced through in the last duel with the knight Delorge. It is impossible to put it on. The servant consoles Albert with the fact that he repaid Delorge in full, knocking him out of the saddle with a powerful blow, from which Albert’s offender lay dead for a day and barely […]...
Pushkin A. S. The Miserly Knight (Scenes from Chenston's tragicomedy: The covetous knight) Tragedy (1830) The young knight Albert is going to appear at the tournament and asks his servant Ivan to show him his helmet. The helmet was pierced through in the last duel with the knight Delorge. It is impossible to put it on. The servant consoles Albert with the fact that he repaid Delorge in full, knocking him out of the saddle with a powerful blow, [...]
History of creation “The Miserly Knight” was conceived in 1826, and completed in the Boldin autumn of 1830. Published in 1836 in the magazine “Sovremennik”. Pushkin gave the play the subtitle “From Chenston’s tragicomedy.” But the writer is from the 18th century. Shenston (in the tradition of the 19th century his name was written Chenston) there was no such play. Perhaps Pushkin referred to a foreign author, [...]
The full title of the first of the small tragedies is “The Miserly Knight (scenes from Chenston’s new tragicomedy: Te soue! oiz Ksh§Y:).” Why did Pushkin make a reference to the non-existent work of the English poet Chanston? What is this: a literary device to intrigue the reader, or a desire to hide the essence of modern egoism embodied in historical, albeit fictitious, images? Apparently, both [...]
1. The mystical aura of Pushkin’s text. 2. The unspiritual power of money. 3. Devalued human relationships. A person, by ruling over others, loses his own freedom. F. Bacon In 1830, A.S. Pushkin went to Boldino to take possession of the estate. But because of cholera he is forced to stay there for three months. This period in the work of the great prose writer and poet is called Boldinskaya […]...
Scene 1 At the gates of Madrid, the Spanish grandee Don Juan talks with his servant Leporello. Don Guan was expelled from Madrid into exile by the king because he was threatened by the family of the man killed in a duel, and the king wanted to protect his favorite. But Don Guan returned from exile without permission, because he was bored in exile. He was especially upset by women, [...]
THE STINGY KNIGHT (Scenes from Chenston’s tragicomedy “The covetous Knight”, 1830) Albert is a young knight, the son of a stingy baron, the hero of a tragedy stylized as a translation from a non-existent work by Chenston (Shenston). The plot centers on the conflict between two heroes, father (Baron) and son (A.). Both belong to the French knighthood, but to different eras of its history. A. is young and ambitious; For […]...
Scene I The action takes place in the house of the famous composer Salieri. The owner talks about how he fell in love with music as a child after hearing an organ in church. He rejected all science and childish games and devoted himself to art. Salieri perfectly mastered the technique of playing musical instruments and thoroughly studied the theory. Only after mastering all the secrets and techniques did Salieri begin to compose himself. The first […]...
Why do we love theater so much? Why do we rush to the auditorium in the evenings, forgetting about fatigue, the stuffiness of the gallery, leaving the comfort of home? And isn’t it strange that hundreds of people tensely stare for hours at the stage box open to the auditorium, laugh and cry, and then exultantly shout “Bravo!” and applaud? Theater arose from a holiday, from the desire of people to merge […]...
The era of the Middle Ages is a noble and sublime world of knightly tournaments, consecrated by beautiful rituals, the cult of the lady of the heart, beautiful and unattainable as an ideal, inspiring deeds. Knights are bearers of honor and nobility, independence and selflessness, defenders of all the weak and offended. But that's all in the past. The world has changed, and maintaining the knightly code of honor has become an unbearable burden for [...]
The play takes place in the Russian Empire in the mid-1830s Act I Scene One. The action takes place at the gaming table. Prince Zvezdich is lost to smithereens. At this moment, Evgeny Aleksandrovich Arbenin appears - a former player and socialite, and in the present - a married and wealthy nobleman who has not appeared in the world for a long time. He meets with an old […]...
The feudal regime strictly regulated the places of people on the social ladder of society. The title of baron, which Philip inherited, helped him take a place at court. Personal qualities ensured friendship with the Duke. He couldn't hope for more. And he was burned by ambition, the thirst for power. The new, bourgeois century opened up a different, cynical, but reliable path to power and [...] unknown to the old system.
Pushkin provided the play with the subtitle “Scene from Chanston’s tragicomedy: The covetous Knight.” Chanston in Russia in the 18th century. called the English writer Shenstone, but he does not have such a play. It was found that there is no such work in English literature at all. Pushkin's instruction is a hoax. The genre definition – “tragicomedy” – hints at the dramatic tradition in developing the theme of stinginess. In the history of drama [...]
THE STINGY KNIGHT (Scenes from Chanston’s tragicomedy “The covetous Knight”, 1830) The Baron is the father of the young knight Albert; brought up in a previous era, when belonging to knighthood meant, first of all, to be a brave warrior and a rich feudal lord, and not a servant of the cult of a beautiful lady and a participant in court tournaments. Old age freed B. from the need to put on armor (although in the final scene he […]...
Act I Scene 1 In the throne room of King Lear's palace, the Earl of Kent and the Earl of Gloucester discuss the division of the kingdom. Gloucester introduces Kent to his natural son Edmond. King Lear appears in the hall with his daughters, the Dukes of Cornwall and Albany and his retinue. He orders Gloucester to go for the King of France and the Duke of Burgundy. King Lear asks his daughters about [...]
Act I Scene 1 Palace of the Duke of Illyria. Orsino, in love, enjoys the music. Curio wonders if the Duke would like to go hunting? Orsino says that he himself has turned into a deer, driven by a pack of greedy desire dogs. Valentine brings the news that the beautiful Countess Olivia has decided to spend seven years in mourning due to the death of her brother. Scene 2 On the seashore, the captain consoles Viola, [...]
Act I Scene 1 Athens, Ducal Palace. Theseus can't wait to get closer to his wedding day with the queen of the Amazons, Hippolyta. He orders the entertainment manager, Philostratus, to organize a holiday for the Athenian youth. Aegeus complains to Theseus about his daughter being in love with Lysander. He wants to give Hermia as a wife to Demetrius, and if the girl does not agree to this, then, in accordance with Athenian […]...
In a plague city, young people are feasting on the street at a laid table. The young man suggests remembering the merry fellow Jaxon, whose funny jokes enlivened the conversation and dispersed the darkness of the infection, but today he was the first of the whole company to go into the cold underground dwellings. Chairman Walsingham calls for a drink in silence, although the young man would like to drink with a cheerful clink of glasses, as if a friend […]...
Act one Scene one The old Count von Moor and his youngest son Franz are talking in one of the chambers of the castle. A letter was delivered from Leipzig with information about Karl, the eldest son of the count. The news came disappointing: Karl lost a large sum of money at cards, dishonored the banker's daughter, killed her lover and fled from justice with his friends. Behind […]...
The dramatic poem “Manfred” by George Byron is his first step in drama. Initially intended for reading, and not for stage production, it was called by the author “a poem in blank verse dialogue.” The play was staged after numerous revisions 17 years after it was written. The poem is imbued with mysticism. The epigraph is Shakespeare's lines about things that “philosophy never dreamed of.” Byron himself calls […]...
Act one Scene one Elsinore. The square in front of Kronberg Castle. Soldier Francisco stands guard. He is replaced by Officer Bernardo. Hamlet's friend Horatio and officer Marcellus appear in the square. The latter asks Bernardo if he has encountered a ghost already seen twice by the castle guards? Horatio, who does not believe in spirits, sees a ghost that resembles [...]
Act I Scene 1 Wasteland. Storm. The three witches arrange to meet in the heather after the battle, where they plan to see Macbeth before dark. Scene 2 The camp near Forres is the residence of King Duncan of Scotland (between Fife - the place of the battle and Invernes - the place of Macbeth's stay). The bloodied sergeant who saved Duncan’s son Malcolm from captivity tells the king […]...
Act one Scene one Othello's lieutenant Iago convinces the Venetian nobleman Rodrigo that he has nothing to love the Moor for, since the latter took away his officer position. Roderigo invites Iago to quit his service, but he replies that he serves for himself. Roderigo and Iago wake up Senator Brabantio. The latter scolds Rodrigo for not […]...
Prologue The chorus tells about the events of the play that took place in Verona, where the children of two families at war with each other fell in love and died. Act one Scene one Verona's shopping area. The Capulet servants Samson and Gregorio, armed with swords and shields, plan to beat up the Montague servants. Samson proposes to properly provoke the enemies so that they rush into battle first, and [...]
Nekrasov N. A. Knight for an hour is one of the main incarnations of the lyrical hero Nekrasov. Tormented by insomnia, R. leaves the house at night and surrenders “to the power / of the surrounding vigorous nature.” Contemplation of her beauty awakens conscience and “thirst for action” in his soul. Majestic landscapes open to his eyes, the solemn sounds of the village bell to his ears, the smallest details to his memory […]...
On Trinity Sunday, in the chambers of the noble and good King Arthur, the brilliant nobility feasts. The knights have a pleasant conversation with the ladies. As everyone knows, in those blessed times, ardent tenderness and courtesy were valued above all else - now morals have become much rougher, no one thinks about purity, genuine feeling is defeated by deceit, lovers are blinded by vice. One interesting story follows another, [...]
(1862) This poem is one of the author’s most sincere and lyrical works. It is conventionally divided into three parts. In the first part, the hero, tormented by insomnia, goes out into the street and, in the moonlight, admires the autumn landscapes of his native, long-suffering village. Pictures of distant childhood emerge in his memory, conscience and “thirst for action” awaken in his soul. In the second part […]...
Rosaura, dressed in men's clothing, and the jester Clarin find Prince Segismundo's prison among the wild rocks. Hearing the prisoner's voice, the couple gets scared and wants to run, but pity for the man chained takes its toll, and the heroes remain in place. Segismundo appears in front of them. The prince asks heaven what his sin is? The hero believes that he [...]
A new senior officer, Baron von der Behring, arrives on the corvette stationed in the Singapore roadstead. The ship has been sailing around the world for two years now, is maintained in exemplary order and shines with breathtaking cleanliness. Suddenly, in a secluded corner, the baron sees in horror an unsightly, out-of-breed dog with gnawed ears and a stump of a tail, but with unusually intelligent and kind eyes. On […]...
Living in a wealthy house are Vasily Vasilyevich Bessemenov, 58 years old, a foreman of a painting shop, who is aiming to be a deputy to the city duma from the guild class; Akulina Ivanovna, his wife; son Peter, a former student expelled for participating in unauthorized student meetings; daughter Tatyana, a school teacher who has been a long-term bride; Bessemenov's student Neil, a driver at the railway depot; church singer Teterev and student Shishkin […]...
Sir James Damry, who is reputed in high society to be an expert in settling sensitive cases, turns to Sherlock Holmes for help. The daughter of his friend General de Morville, Violet, a young, beautiful, educated and rich girl, fell in love with Baron Gruver, a man who was accused of murdering his wife. Only a legal formality and the sudden death of a witness helped him to be acquitted. Violetta is going for [...]
Main characters: Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya - landowner. Anya is her daughter, 17 years old. Varya is her adopted daughter, 24 years old. Leonid Andreevich Gaev is Ranevskaya’s brother. Ermolai Alekseevich Lopakhin - merchant. Boris Borisovich Simeonov-Pishchik is a landowner. Firs – footman, 87 years old. Semyon Panteleevich Epikhodov – clerk. Lopakhin and the maid Dunyasha are waiting in the children's room, [...]
I Galileo demonstrates the Copernican model of the solar system to the boy Andrea Sarti, the son of his housekeeper and future student, using simple examples. Galileo says that the time of new knowledge is coming, the time of revision of all previous truths and the birth of new ones. The Ptolemaic system viewed the earth as a fixed, reliable support. Now everything is different, it turns out that there are no supports - everything is movable. […]...
Landowner Ikharev and his servant Gavryushka arrive at a tavern in a provincial town. He immediately asks the tavern servant Alexei about the guests. He reports that Colonel Krugel, Shvokhnev, Ushetelny and other gentlemen now live here. When asked by the new guest about the game, Alexey replies that the men are playing little by little and have already beaten several people. Ikharev is also interested in who and where […]...
The action takes place in the provincial town, in the house of the Prozorovs. Irina, the youngest of the three Prozorov sisters, turns twenty years old. “It’s sunny and fun outside,” and a table is being set in the hall, waiting for guests - officers of the artillery battery stationed in the city and its new commander, Lieutenant Colonel Vershinin. Everyone is full of joyful expectations and hopes. Irina: “I don’t know why I have [...]
The events take place on the estate of landowner Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya. It’s May, the cherry orchard is in full bloom, and the owners will have to sell it to repay their debts. For five years, Ranevskaya lived abroad with her seventeen-year-old daughter Anna. All this time, the estate remained under the supervision of Ranevskaya’s brother, Leonid Andreevich Gaev, and his adopted daughter, twenty-four-year-old Varya. Ranevskaya […]...
OUR PEOPLE - LET'S COUNT Nineteen-year-old merchant daughter Lipochka talks privately to herself about how she likes to dance, but not with students: “What a difference it is to be different from the military! And mustaches, and epaulettes, and a uniform, and some even have spurs with bells!” In her dreams - outfits, entertainment, brilliant gentlemen. Lipochka is an empty-headed girl, yes [...]
Elsinore. The square in front of the castle. The clock strikes twelve. Francisco and Bernardo are on duty. Marcellus arrives, and with him Horatio, who was attracted by rumors that a ghost appeared twice in a row at midnight, “with the posture of the dead king.” The friends decide to “inform Prince Hamlet of what they have seen,” hoping that the spirit will “break the silence before him.” They find the prince […]...

The young knight Albert decides to go to the tournament and turns to his servant Ivan with a request to show him his helmet. The helmet turns out to be pierced through from the last fight with the knight Delorge. It is impossible to put it on. The servant tries to console Albert, saying that he repaid Delorge in full, knocking him out of the saddle with a powerful blow. After this blow, Delorge lay dead for a whole day and has still barely recovered. Albert replies that he was given courage and strength by the rage caused by his damaged helmet.

The fault of his heroism was stinginess. Albert complains of poverty, of embarrassment that prevented him from removing the helmet from his defeated enemy. The knight needs a new dress, because he is the only one sitting at the ducal table in armor, while the other knights flaunt in velvet and satin. But he has no money for clothes, weapons, or a horse. One cannot expect help from Father Albert, an old baron and a famous miser.

The Jew Solomon, Albert's constant creditor, no longer lends money without a mortgage. However, the knight has nothing to pawn. The moneylender does not give in to any persuasion; he is not even convinced by the argument that Albert’s old father will soon die and his son will receive a huge fortune.

Meanwhile, Solomon himself appears. The young knight tries to ask him to borrow money, but Solomon gently but decisively refuses him; even an honest knight’s word is not a convincing argument for a Jew. Albert is upset, he can’t believe that his father can survive him. Solomon believes that anything happens in life, that our days are not numbered by us, the baron is strong, full of strength and can live for a very long time. Albert is in despair, he says that if his father lives thirty years, then by that time he will already be fifty, and at this age he is unlikely to need money. The Jew replies that money is needed at any age, but for a young man it is nimble servants, and for an old man it is reliable friends. Albert believes that his father serves money “like a chained dog,” like an Algerian slave. He denies himself everything, living worse than a beggar, and all his gold lies in his chests. Albert expresses the hope that someday this gold will serve him too. Solomon sees Albert's despair and the fact that he is ready for anything, and hints that his father's death can easily be hastened through poison.

At first, Albert does not understand these hints. But when he understands what Solomon is telling him, he immediately wants to hang the moneylender on the castle gates.

It becomes clear to Solomon that Albert is not in the mood for jokes, and he wants to pay off, but the knight drives him out. Having cooled down a little, he first wants to send a servant for the Jew in order to accept the money offered by him, but quickly changes his mind, because it seems to him that they smell of poison. Albert demands to serve wine, but finds out that there is not a drop of wine in the house. The knight curses such a life and decides to turn to the duke for help in order to find justice for his father. In his opinion, the Duke can force the old baron to support his son so that he looks like a true knight.

Albert's father goes down to the basement where his chests of gold are stored. Now he intends to pour a handful of coins into the not yet full sixth chest. He looks at his treasures, and he is reminded of the legend about the king who ordered his soldiers to throw handfuls of earth, from these handfuls a giant hill grew, and the king was able to survey vast spaces from it. The Baron likens his treasures, which were collected bit by bit, to the same hill, making him the ruler of the whole world. He remembers the history of each coin, and behind it are human tears and grief, death and poverty. He thinks that if now all the tears, sweat and blood that were shed for this money rose from the bowels of the earth, then a real flood would happen. The baron pours a handful of coins into the chest, then unlocks all the chests, lights candles in front of them and enjoys the shine of gold, feeling like the ruler of a mighty power. However, he is indignant and furious at the thought that someday, after his death, an heir will appear here and all his wealth will be thrown away. The Baron believes that his son has no right to this, that if Albert himself had accumulated these treasures little by little, through hard work, he probably would not have spent gold, wasting his wealth.

Albert complains to the duke about his father's stinginess, and he promises to help the knight and persuade the old baron to support his son in a manner befitting his status. He hopes to awaken fatherly feelings in the baron, since the baron was a friend of the duke's grandfather and played with him when he was still a child.

The Baron approaches the palace, the Duke asks Albert to hide in the next room and wait while he talks with the knight's father. The Baron enters, the Duke greets him and tries to remind him of his youth. The Duke invites the Baron to appear at court, but the Baron refuses, citing old age and infirmity, but at the same time makes a promise that if war breaks out, he will be strong enough to raise the sword for the Duke. The Duke asks why the baron’s son is not at court, to which the old man replies that the reason for this is Albert’s gloomy disposition. The Duke asks the Baron to send his son to the palace and promises to teach him to have fun. In addition, he demands that the baron assign his son a salary appropriate for a knight. Growing gloomy, the baron replies that his son is unworthy of the duke’s attention and care, since “he is vicious,” and denies the duke his request. The old man says that he is angry with his son because he was plotting his murder and intended to rob him. The Duke promises to bring Albert to trial for this. Hearing these slander, Albert bursts into the room and accuses his father of lying. The Baron is angry and throws the glove to his son. Albert accepts his father’s challenge, saying: “Thank you. This is my father’s first gift.” The Duke is amazed, he is overcome with anger, he takes the glove from the young knight and drives them both away from him. At this moment the baron dies, remembering the keys, the duke is outraged by the “terrible age, terrible hearts.”

Summary of the story: The Stingy Knight. Stingy Knight

Picture or drawing of the Stingy Knight

Other retellings and reviews for the reader's diary

Scene 2

Scene 3

Related posts: