Corneille's tragedies of the "first manner" ("Cid", "Horace"). Ideological and artistic originality of P. Corneille's tragedy "Horace" Pierre Corneille Horace read

Longtime allies Rome and Alba went to war with each other. Until now, only minor skirmishes had occurred between the enemy armies, but now, when the Albanian army stood at the walls of Rome, a decisive battle was about to take place.

The heart of Sabina, the wife of the noble Roman Horace, is filled with confusion and sorrow: now either her native Alba or Rome, which has become her second homeland, will be defeated in a fierce battle. Not only is the thought of defeat on either side equally sad for Sabina, but by the evil will of fate, in this battle the people dearest to her must draw their swords against each other - her husband Horace and her three brothers, the Albanians of Curiatia.

Horace’s sister, Camilla, also curses the evil fate that brought two friendly cities together in mortal enmity, and does not consider her position easier than Sabina’s, although her and Sabina’s friend and confidante Julia tells her about this. Julia is sure that Camilla should root for Rome with all her soul, since only her birth and family ties are connected with it, and the oath of fidelity that Camilla exchanged with her fiancé Albanian Curiatius is nothing when the honor and prosperity of the homeland are placed on the other side of the scale.

Exhausted with worry about the fate of her hometown and her fiancé, Camilla turned to the Greek soothsayer, and he predicted to her that the dispute between Alba and Rome would end peacefully the next day, and she would unite with Curiatius, never to be separated again. The dream that Camilla had that same night dispelled the sweet deception of the prediction: in her dream she saw a cruel massacre and piles of dead bodies.

When suddenly the Curiatia, alive and unharmed, appears before Camilla, the girl decides that for the sake of love for her, the noble Albanian sacrificed his duty to his homeland, and in no way condemns the lover.

But it turns out that everything is not so: when the armies came together for battle, the leader of the Albanians turned to the Roman king Tull with the words that it was necessary to avoid fratricide, - after all, the Romans and Albanians belong to the same people and are connected by numerous family ties; he proposed to resolve the dispute by a duel of three fighters from each army, with the condition that the city whose warriors were defeated would become a subject of the victorious city. The Romans gladly accepted the offer of the Albanian leader.

By the choice of the Romans, three Horace brothers will have to fight for the honor of their hometown. Curiatius envies the great fate of the Horatii - to exalt their homeland or lay down their lives for it - and regrets that no matter the outcome of the duel, he will have to mourn either the humiliated Alba or his dead friends. Horace, the embodiment of Roman virtues, does not understand how one can grieve for someone who died for the glory of his native country.

An Albanian warrior finds his friends speaking such speeches, bringing the news that Alba has chosen three Curiatius brothers as her defenders. Curiatius is proud that it was he and his brothers who were chosen by his compatriots, but at the same time, in his heart he would like to avoid this new blow of fate - the need to fight with his sister’s husband and the bride’s brother. Horace, on the contrary, warmly welcomes the choice of the Albanians, who destined him for an even more exalted lot: it is a great honor to fight for the fatherland, but at the same time overcome the ties of blood and human affections - few have ever achieved such perfect glory.

Camilla tries with all her might to dissuade Curiatius from entering into a fratricidal duel, conjures him in the name of their love and almost achieves success, but the noble Albanian still finds the strength not to betray duty for the sake of love.

Sabina, unlike her relative, does not think of dissuading her brother and husband from the duel, but only wants this duel not to become fratricidal - for this she must die, and with her death the family ties connecting the Horatii and Curiatii will be broken.

The appearance of old Horace stops the heroes' conversations with women. The honored patrician commands his son and son-in-law, relying on the judgment of the gods, to hasten to fulfill their high duty.

Sabina is trying to overcome her emotional grief, convincing herself that no matter who falls in battle, the main thing is not who brought him death, but in the name of what; she inspires herself that she will certainly remain a faithful sister if her brother kills her husband, or a loving wife if her husband kills her brother. But everything is in vain: Sabina admits again and again that in the winner she will first of all see the murderer of the person dear to her.

Sabina's sorrowful thoughts are interrupted by Julia, who brought her news from the battlefield: as soon as six fighters came out to meet each other, a murmur swept through both armies: both the Romans and the Albanians were outraged by the decision of their leaders, who doomed the Horatii and the Curiatii to a criminal fratricidal duel. King Tullus heeded the voice of the people and announced that sacrifices should be made in order to find out from the entrails of animals whether the choice of fighters was pleasing to the gods or not.

Hope again settles in the hearts of Sabina and Camilla, but not for long - old Horace informs them that, by the will of the gods, their brothers entered into battle with each other. Seeing the grief this news plunged the women into, and wanting to strengthen their hearts, the father of the heroes starts talking about the greatness of the lot of his sons, performing feats for the glory of Rome; Roman women - Camilla by birth, Sabina by marriage - both of them at this moment should only think about the triumph of their homeland...

Appearing again before her friends, Julia tells them that two sons of old Horace fell from the swords of the Albanians, while the third, Sabina’s husband, is fleeing; Julia did not wait for the outcome of the fight, because it was obvious.

Julia's story strikes old Horace to the heart. Having paid tribute to the two gloriously deceased defenders of Rome, he swears that the third son, whose cowardice covered the hitherto honest name of the Horatii with indelible shame, will die by his own hand. No matter how Sabina and Camilla ask him to moderate his anger, the old patrician is implacable.

Valery, a noble young man whose love was rejected by Camilla, comes to old Horace as a messenger from the king. He starts talking about the surviving Horace and, to his surprise, hears from the old man terrible curses against the one who saved Rome from shame. Only with difficulty interrupting the bitter outpourings of the patrician, Valery talks about what, having prematurely left the city wall, Julia did not see: Horace’s flight was not a manifestation of cowardice, but a military ploy - running away from the wounded and tired Curiatii, Horace thus separated them and fought with each in turn, one on one, until all three fell from his sword.

Old Horace is triumphant, he is filled with pride for his sons - both those who survived and those who laid down their heads on the battlefield. Camilla, struck by the news of the death of her lover, is consoled by her father, appealing to reason and fortitude, which have always adorned Roman women.

But Camilla is inconsolable. And not only is her happiness sacrificed to the greatness of proud Rome, this very Rome demands that she hide her grief and, together with everyone else, rejoice in the victory won at the cost of crime. No, this will not happen, Camilla decides, and when Horace appears before her, expecting praise from his sister for his feat, he unleashes a stream of curses on him for killing his groom. Horace could not imagine that in the hour of triumph of the fatherland one could be killed after the death of its enemy; when Camilla begins to use her last words to revile Rome and call terrible curses on her hometown, his patience comes to an end - he stabs his sister with the sword with which her fiancé was killed not long before.

Horace is sure that he did the right thing - Camilla ceased to be his sister and her father’s daughter the moment she cursed her homeland. Sabina asks her husband to stab her too, because she, too, contrary to her duty, grieves for her dead brothers, envying the fate of Camilla, whom death saved from hopeless grief and united with her beloved. It takes a lot of effort for Horace not to fulfill his wife’s request.

Old Horace does not condemn his son for the murder of his sister - having betrayed Rome with her soul, she deserved death; but at the same time, by executing Camilla, Horace irrevocably ruined his honor and glory. The son agrees with his father and asks him to pass a verdict - whatever it may be, Horace agrees with him in advance.

In order to personally honor the father of the heroes, King Tullus arrives at the Horatii’s house. He praises the valor of old Horace, whose spirit was not broken by the death of his three children, and speaks with regret about the villainy that overshadowed the feat of the last of his surviving sons. However, there is no talk of the fact that this crime should be punished until Valery takes the floor.

Appealing to royal justice, Valery speaks of the innocence of Camilla, who succumbed to a natural impulse of despair and anger, that Horace not only killed a blood relative for no reason, which in itself is terrible, but also violated the will of the gods, sacrilegiously desecrating the glory bestowed by them.

Horace does not even think of defending himself or making excuses - he asks the king for permission to pierce himself with his own sword, but not to atone for the death of his sister, for she deserved it, but in the name of saving his honor and the glory of the savior of Rome.

Wise Tullus also listens to Sabina. She asks to be executed, which will mean the execution of Horace, since husband and wife are one; her death - which Sabina seeks as deliverance, unable to either selflessly love the murderer of her brothers or reject her beloved - will satisfy the wrath of the gods, while her husband will be able to continue to bring glory to the fatherland.

When everyone who had something to say spoke out, Tull pronounced his verdict: although Horace committed an atrocity usually punishable by death, he is one of those few heroes who, on decisive days, serve as a reliable stronghold for their sovereigns; These heroes are not subject to the general law, and therefore Horace will live and continue to be jealous of the glory of Rome.

Retold

War began between longtime allies Rome and Alba. The time has come for the decisive battle between the two opposing armies. Before this, only local skirmishes occurred between them. Alba's troops are already standing under the walls of Rome. A decisive battle is about to begin that will change history. The war divided the hearts of the Albian Sabina and her Roman husband Horace on both sides. Sabina is desperate and confused about the upcoming battle. Only one army will survive the battle. But this is not the only thing that worries Sabina. What worries her more is that her three Abcian brothers will participate in the battle on one side and her husband Horace on the side of the Roman army.
Sabina is not the only one who is in despair. Camilla, Horace's sister, also hates the damned war, which pitted two armies on the battlefield, two great cities of the world. Her friend Julia tells her that her situation is much better than Sabina's. She agrees with her. After all, she also has a lover, but from the other side, and his name is Curiatius. And the loyalty and duty that she promised him are nothing compared to her hometown. Camilla is worried about the outcome of the battle. In lamentation, she turns to the local soothsayer with a question about the outcome of the battle. He tells her that there will be no battle and the simple relationship between Rome and Alba will end in peace. Camilla calms down, but not for long. At night she has a terrible dream. A terrible battle takes place there. The outcome of the battle is clear - piles of dead people.
Her lover Curiatius comes to Camilla. At first she thinks that he abandoned his hometown and his army on the battlefield, but later it turns out that the leader of the Albanian army summoned the Roman king Tula to the world. He said that the Roman and Albanian people had common roots and therefore should be friendly to each other. The leader of the Alban army offers Tull a deal. The essence of which is this: from each army, three warriors enter the field. Those wars that remain alive, thereby defeating the other three, will bring victory to the city. And the losing city will be a subject of the winning one. The Roman king Tula accepted this agreement. The parties can only choose those warriors who will take to the battlefield.
At a general meeting of the leaders of the Roman army, it was decided to choose three Horatii brothers as three warriors. Curiatius's heart was filled with confusion. On the one hand, he envies the brothers’ right to glorify their hometown, and thereby enter great history under their great names. On the other hand, Curiatius deeply regrets that if the brothers die in battle, then the hometown of Alba will assume the obligation of citizenship to Rome. After some time, an Albanian warrior came to Curiatius and told him the news that he and his brothers had been chosen as the heads of the Albanian army to defend the honor of their hometown. Curiatius is glad that he and his brothers were chosen. But he is not happy at the prospect of killing his own sister's husband and his own fiancée's brother. His beloved. Horace, on the contrary, is happy about this opportunity. Now he has the right not only to defend the honor of the city and overcome the bonds of brotherhood. In his opinion, they are nothing compared to the glory of their hometown.
Camilla throws herself at the feet of Curiatius. With all her might she persuades him not to participate in this battle. It will be very painful for her to see the fratricidal battle. But Curiatius is not a man of many words. He doesn't want to answer her. His duty comes before love. These were Camille's thoughts, but not Sabina's. Sabina calmly reacted to the fact that people so dear to her heart could die in battle. The thought of her own death creeps into her head. After all, if she is gone, then all ties of kinship and brotherhood will be broken. Old Horace appears. All the heroes stop talking to women. The son and son-in-law are urged by the old patrician to rely only on the judgment of the gods. There’s no point in delaying, he says, it’s time to do your duty. Mental pain filled Sabina. The main thing in her thoughts is what her loved ones will die for, and not who will kill them. She passionately convinces herself that she will and will remain the most faithful sister to the brother who will kill her husband, or the faithful wife to the husband who will thrust a sword into the heart of her brother. Thoughts and thoughts. But everything remains to no avail. The outcome of the battle doesn't matter. After all, no matter how you look at it, one of her favorite people still won’t come back safe and sound.
Suddenly Julia comes to Sabina. She tells her the news from the field where the battle of the warriors is taking place. As soon as all six fighters entered the field, rustling and murmurs rang out on both sides of the troops. Everyone was surprised that the brothers Horatii and Curiatii came out against each other. The murmur reached King Tulla. He heeded the words of his warriors and said that it was better to sacrifice an animal and understand from its entrails whether God needed such a choice or not. Sabina and Camilla began to hope again for a favorable outcome of the battle. Horace arrives and says that the will of the gods is that the chosen warriors will take to the battlefield. Thus began the battle. Horace says that the great lot fell on the shoulders of the sons of Rome. And they, Sabina and Camilla, by their blood and by marriage, being Romans, should only care for the victory of Rome in this battle. Justice, he says, will be that the Roman brothers will defeat their enemies from the city of Alba.
Julia comes to Camilla and Sabina again, she brings news from the battlefield. Horace's two brothers were killed by the Albans. Horace's third brother, Sabina's husband, flees. Julia left the battlefield without waiting for the outcome of the entire fight. For it is obvious to Julia. Old Horace fell into great anger. He is indignant at how his sons could so disgrace the honest and good name of their father and all their ancestors. He shouts threats towards his runaway son. He says that he will certainly kill him with his own hand as soon as he sees him. Thus, washing away all the shame from the Horatii family. Camilla and Sabina ask him to moderate his fiery anger. But old Horace is adamant. After some time, a messenger from the king named Valery comes to Horace. He hears threats against Horace's son and wonders how he can say such words about his own son. Valery tells old Horace that his third son did not flee from the battlefield because of cowardice. He fled from the battlefield to separate the three Curiatii, wounding them and killing them individually. Which is what he did. Old Horace fell into joy. He is so proud of his sons that he consoles Camilla for losing her lover in this ill-fated battle. Old Horace encourages her to remain calm and have a sound mind. After all, the great Rome won.
But there is no longer any consolation for Camille. Her heart is filled with sadness and longing. And Rome demands to completely hide this melancholy in her soul, not giving it an outlet in words and gestures. Camilla should rejoice at Rome's victory in this war. The same Horace who killed her lover comes to her. He expects praise from her for his valiant battle and victory. But she does not tell him words of her joy. Instead, she curses him, the entire Horatian family and Rome. She says the worst words about her native state. After all, this state took her loved one from her. Horace did not understand her words at all. How, he thought, can one be killed after the death of an enemy when Rome won the war. When did an enemy city become a vassal to Rome? Horace cannot stand Camilla's words and decides to kill her by stabbing her in the very heart with a sword. Inside himself, Horace understands that he did the right thing by killing his sister. She stopped being his sister by saying those words. Sabina also wants to die at the hands of Horace. After all, she mourns the death of her brothers on the battlefield. She believes that Camilla is now united with her husband after death. She also wants to be with her brothers. Of course, Horace can kill her too. It is not worth the trouble for him to make another blow with a sword to the heart. He asks Horace if he condemns him for killing his own sister? Old Horace tells him that he does not condemn him. After all, she betrayed Rome, so she must accept death. The Roman king Tullus himself comes to the house of Horace the Elder. He says warm words to old Horace and regrets that he lost his two sons in battle and now his daughter has died at the hands of his own son. But there is no talk of any justice for young Horace. But Valery stands up for Camilla.
Valery tells the Roman king Tull that Camilla died without her fault. She was inflamed only with anger and despair. He also said that Horace desecrated the faith of the gods and the triumph they bestowed on Horace the Younger. In turn, young Horace does not say any words in his defense. He tells the king that he will gladly pierce his heart, thereby saving him, the king, from the difficulty of justice. He will kill himself for the glory and honor of his hometown. Native Rome. Sabina also decided to express her words. She said that it was better for her to die, because now the younger Horace had killed her brothers and she had no reason to live. As soon as everyone present had spoken, King Tull took the floor. After thinking a little, he made his verdict on all issues. Yes, he said, Horace the Younger committed a terrible crime, killing his own sister. Usually such murder is punishable by death. But the glory of the younger Horace overshadows all the crimes he committed. Therefore, he is not subject to general laws. Having said this, the Roman king Tullus decided. Horace will continue to live, cherishing the glory of his hometown and the state of Rome.

Please note that this is only a summary of the literary work “Horace”. This summary omits many important points and quotes.

Corneille dedicated the tragedy “Horace” (1639) to Cardinal Richelieu. K. borrowed the plot for his tragedy from the Roman historian Tito Livy. We are talking about the initial semi-legendary events of the formation of the ancient Roman state. Two city-polises: Rome and Alba Longa, which later merged into one state, still remain separate, although their inhabitants are already connected with each other by common interests and family ties. To decide under whose leadership the cities should unite, they decided to resort to a duel.

In “Horace” (1640), there is a unique image of the main character, who does not reason, blindly obeys the decision made and at the same time amazes with his determination. Horace inspires admiration for his integrity and confidence in his rightness. Everything is clear to him, everything is decided for him. Corneille's position does not completely coincide with the position of Horace, who is closer not to Corneille, but to Richelieu, to the real political practice and ideology of absolutism. It is no coincidence that next to Horace in the tragedy there is Curiatius, a character who accepts someone else’s principle, only after personally convinced of the correctness of this principle. The triumph of the sense of duty to the homeland comes to Curiatius only as a result of long hesitations and doubts, during which he carefully weighs this feeling. In addition, in the play, other characters other than him act alongside Horace, and among them is his direct antagonist Camilla. The success of the tragedy during the years of the French Revolution is explained precisely by the fact that its patriotic pathos, and it is to him that the play owes its success in 1789-1792, permeates not only the image of Horace, but also the images of his father, Sabina, Curiatius.

The moral and philosophical conflict between passion and duty is transferred here to a different plane: the stoic renunciation of personal feelings is carried out in the name of a high state idea. Debt takes on a super-personal meaning. The glory and greatness of the homeland, the state form a new patriotic heroism, which in “Sid” was only just outlined as the second theme of the play.

The plot of “Horace” is borrowed from the Roman historian Titus Livy and refers to the semi-legendary period of the “seven kings”. However, the theme of monarchical power as such is not raised in the tragedy, and King Tull plays an even less significant role in it than the Castilian king Fernando in “The Cid”. Corneille is interested here not in a specific form of state power, but in the state as the highest generalized principle, requiring unquestioning submission from an individual in the name of the common good. In the era of Corneille, ancient Rome was considered a classic example of a powerful power, and the playwright sees the source of its strength and authority in the stoic renunciation of citizens from personal interests for the benefit of the state. Corneille reveals this moral and political problem by choosing a laconic, tense plot.

The source of the dramatic conflict is the political rivalry of two cities - Rome and Alba Longa, whose inhabitants have long been connected by family and marriage ties. Members of one family find themselves drawn into a conflict between two warring parties.

But the main dramatic conflict does not receive a harmonious resolution. The central problem of the play - the relationship between the individual and the state - appears in a tragic aspect, and the final triumph of stoic self-denial and the affirmation of the civic idea does not remove this tragedy. Nevertheless, throughout the long stage life of Horace, it was precisely this civic spirit of the play that determined its social relevance and success; this was the case, for example, during the years of the French bourgeois revolution, when Corneille's tragedy was very popular and was staged many times on the revolutionary stage.

In its structure, “Horace” meets the requirements of classical poetics much more than “Cid”. External action here is reduced to a minimum; it begins at the moment when the dramatic conflict is already evident and then it only develops. No extraneous, incidental plot lines complicate the main one; the dramatic interest is centered around the three main characters - Horace, Camilla and Curiatius. The symmetrical arrangement of the characters, corresponding to their family relationships and origin (Romans - Albanians), also attracts attention. Against the background of this strict symmetry, the contrast between the internal positions of the heroes appears especially clearly. The device of antithesis permeates the entire artistic structure of the play, including the construction of the verse, which, as a rule, breaks up into two hemistiches that are opposite in meaning. “Horace” finally established the canonical type of classical tragedy, and Corneille’s next plays, “Cinna” and “Polyeuctus,” consolidated it.

7.Analysis of the problems of Corneille’s tragedy “Cinna or the Mercy of Augustus”, its connection with French life in the 17th century.

In Zinna, Corneille, developing the theme of the relationship between state and personal principles, again turns to Roman history, this time to Rome in the era of the formation of the empire. The full title of the tragedy is “Cinna, or On the Mercy of Augustus.” Its plot is borrowed from Seneca’s treatise “On Mercy”. But there were other, more pressing prerequisites for choosing such an unusual topic. The 1630s in the history of France were marked by numerous brutal repressions against participants in the conspiracies, a bloody massacre of the rebel Norman peasants (the so-called “barefoot revolt” in 1639). Corneille wrote his tragedy in his native Rouen, where torture and execution of rebels were carried out on the main square. The problem of strong and at the same time merciful, humane power is solved by Corneille using material from the initial period of the reign of Augustus, the first Roman emperor. Having learned about a conspiracy that threatens his power and life, Augustus first wants to mercilessly deal with those responsible, as he has done more than once. He acts under the influence of his “passions” - ambition, vindictiveness, fear for his safety. But his wife Livia appeals to the voice of “reason,” warning Augustus against continued bloodshed and cruelty.

Thus, in “Zinna” the humane and state principles are not opposed to each other, as in “Horace,” and do not give rise to a tragic conflict, but are harmoniously consistent. State wisdom, the good of the state and the ruler lie in mercy. Forgiving the conspirators who encroached on the life of the emperor is not only an act of humanity, but also a prudent political step that can gain popularity for the new ruler and strengthen his still shaky throne. The true hero of the play is not Cinna, whose name appears in the title, but Augustus. It is he who faces the solution to the moral and political problem that forms the ideological core of the tragedy, and therefore, his will determines the development of the action and the denouement. Compared to Augustus, Cinna appears weak and wavering in his beliefs. The main motive of his fight against Augustus is not so much his commitment to republican freedoms, trampled by Augustus, but his love for Emilia, who seeks revenge on the emperor for the execution of her father. All three conspirators - Emilia and Cinna and Maxim, who are in love with her - although they pronounce fiery pathetic monologues in defense of freedom, act, in fact, under the influence of personal motives - love, revenge, rivalry, in other words - they follow “passions” and not "reason". Accordingly, their moral “rebirth” at the end of the tragedy, under the influence of the humane act of the emperor, who forgave the conspirators and united Cinna and Emilia (Maxim, having learned about the discovery of the conspiracy, commits suicide), looks too hasty and psychologically unconvincing. Meanwhile, the “rebirth” of Augustus himself is the fruit of reflection, internal struggle, suppression of “passions” in the name of the triumph of reason and justice. In “Zinna,” unlike “Horace,” the tragedy is removed not only by a happy ending for the main characters, but also by the internal triumph of a reasonable and humane principle.

However, the illusory nature of such an optimistic solution to a serious moral and political problem stood out too clearly against the backdrop of the real political situation of the time. The idealized image of a merciful and reasonable sovereign had no support in modern reality - neither the weak and insignificant, suspicious and capricious Louis XIII, nor Cardinal Richelieu, inexorable in his cruelty, corresponded to the main character of Corneille's tragedy.

The new approach to resolving a dramatic conflict was also reflected in the external form of the tragedy. The action here is reduced to a minimum (even that action behind the scenes, which was not shown on stage, but which, according to the rules of classical poetics, was only told); it is much poorer in events than in “Horace”. But the stories about the historical events of previous years, creating the precondition for the initial dramatic situation, are growing enormously.

The stage expressiveness of “Cinna” is created not by an acute plot or psychological conflict, but by the pathetic eloquence with which the characters express their point of view on general state and moral problems. In this sense, “Cinna” anticipates the tragedies of the Enlightenment classicism of the 18th century.

The tragedy "Horace", written by Pierre Corneille, was staged on the Paris stage in early 1640. The premiere did not bring immediate fame to the playwright, but gradually its success grew. Constantly in the repertoire of the Comédie Française theater, her production went through a huge number of performances.

Brief biography of the author

The author of the tragedy "Horace" Corneille Pierre - a famous French playwright, translator, poet, founder of French tragedy, was born in 1606 in the city of Rouen, France. As he grew up, he studied at a Jesuit college, trained as a lawyer, and worked as a prosecutor. In total, until 1635 he worked in various bureaucratic positions. Subsequently he devoted himself to drama, and from 1647 a member of the French Academy. He lived in Paris since 1662. Pierre Corneille died in 1684 alone and in deep need.

The tragedy "Horace"

Corneille completed the monumental tragic work “Horace” at the end of 1639. It was first staged at the Théâtre du Marais in the spring of 1640. At the beginning of 1641, the tragedy was published in printed form.

Researchers of Pierre Corneille's work and critics are unanimous in their opinion that the author created a work that shows with incredible force the political goals of the absolutist state. Namely:

the nation must be united;
feudal anarchy must be abolished;
the monarch's power is unconditional;
civic duty and responsibilities must be above personal interests and passions.

In “Horace,” Corneille shows a hero who is faced with a choice - to be guided in his behavior by feelings, family responsibilities, or to fulfill his duty to the state. The ancient Roman setting of the tragedy is only a screen for showing the current social problems of the period in which Pierre Corneille lives. The conflict situation in the tragedy is extremely exposed. And the situation is masterfully shown through the symmetry of the characters in the work.

Pierre Corneille, “Horace”: summary, beginning of the plot

The events of the tragedy unfold in a period when Ancient Rome had not yet become the center of the Ancient World. It was just a small city-state ruled by kings. Ruler Tullus is shown by Cornelius as a wise ruler. During his reign, Rome had a rival - the powerful city of Alba Longa.

Until recently, the cities were allies. However, as the play unfolds, they are at war. Small battles and skirmishes take place between the warring armies. The situation escalated when the Albanian army approached the walls of Rome and a major battle was expected.

Selection of warriors for the duel

However, before the decisive battle, the leader of Alpa Longa turned to the Roman king Tul with a proposal on the need to take measures to prevent mutual complete destruction. He convinced the Roman to submit the resolution of the existing contradictions to a duel of warriors, three people on each side. But the battle must be abandoned, since the Albanians and Romans are one people, and moreover, they are connected to each other by numerous blood and family ties. According to the terms of the duel, the kings agreed that whose wars would be defeated, that city would become a vassal of the city of the winners.

On the Roman side, the lot falls on three brothers from the Horace family. On the opposite side, from the city of Alba Longe, three brother fighters from the Curiatsi family will perform. The Horatii and Curiati clans are bound by friendly and family ties. The eldest brother of the Horatii family has a wife, Sabina, who is the sister of the Curiatii brothers. And the Horatii sister Camila is engaged to her older brother from the Curiati clan.

Before the fight

As the plot of P. Corneille's tragedy “Horace” develops, men and women communicate with each other. They discuss the problem of choice, namely, what is most important is duty or feelings. All the main characters agree that duty comes first, but they approach this conclusion in different ways. Thus, the elder brother Curiatius considers such a debt “sad.” Accepting the battle, he remains true to his friendly feelings towards the Horaces. But the elder Horace believes that feelings are insignificant and must be swept aside.

The head of the family, old Horace, stops communication between the heroes and orders his son-in-law and son to surrender to the will of the gods and go fulfill their high duty.

But the brothers' duel may not take place. After the warriors turned against each other, murmurs began in the ranks of both armies. The soldiers were dissatisfied with the decision of their kings. In their opinion, a duel is a crime, a fratricidal massacre.

The king of the Romans, Tullus, listened to the voice of the soldiers and declared: sacrifices would be made in order to find out from the internal organs of the killed animals whether the gods confirmed the choice of the fighters or not.

However, hopes that the duel will be canceled fade away after old Horace reports: the gods agree to a duel between the brothers.

Duel of the Horatii with the Curiatii

From the content of Pierre Corneille's tragedy "Horace" it is clear that there are no battle scenes in it. Witnesses report on the progress of the fights. There are no fights between friends who became enemies out of duty. Thus, one of those present at the battles informs old Horace and the women present that his eldest son fled from the battlefield from the Curiatii pursuing him. At the same time, his other two sons have already been killed. Old Horace is beside himself with grief and believes that his eldest son has brought an indelible shame to the family. However, after some time, another news comes - the flight of his eldest son is just a military ruse. The Curiatia brothers who were chasing him fell behind each other due to the various wounds they received during the duel with their opponents. Horace Sr., exhausted during the chase, killed his pursuers one by one.

The Romans celebrate Horace's victory as he brought victory to their city. At the same time, the author shows the suffering of his sister Camilla. She lost two brothers and her betrothed. But the winner tells her that he has fulfilled his sacred duty to Rome. However, Camilla curses the city for allowing her lover to be killed.

Trial of Horace

Hearing such words, the enraged Horace kills Camilla. At the trial that follows this crime, old Horace comes to the defense of his son. He declares that having struck his sister with a sword, he was guided by a sense of duty, since he could not tolerate the words of blasphemy uttered by Camilla in relation to the fatherland.

King Tullus, appearing before the audience as a wise judge, also comes to Horace’s defense and forgives him. Tells everyone present that he is a hero who has glorified Rome with his actions on the battlefield. Such people, according to the Roman king, are a reliable support for their rulers. The general law has no power over them, and Horace will live on.

Brief conclusions

Pierre Corneille's tragedy "Horace", like his other works, shows people as they should be for an absolutist state. His heroes have an unyielding will in the performance of severe duty.

From the comments of critics it follows that in “Horace” the author successfully embodied the Aristotelian principle that tragedy is a reproduction of only important events, the heroes in it are strong people, and their emotional experiences lead exclusively to irreversible and negative consequences. At the same time, Pierre Corneille skillfully lures the audience into the plots of the tragedy, remembering that they are attracted only by the suffering and disasters that are characteristic of themselves.

Judging by the reviews of classics lovers who want to familiarize themselves in more detail with Corneille’s work “Horace,” it is not worth reading a summary of this work. Only the style of this work, courageous and chiseled, most fully conveys the high spirit of the heroes of the tragedy.

From most reader reviews of this work by Corneille, it follows that the play constantly keeps you in suspense. It has plenty of unpredictable plot twists. They cannot leave the reader indifferent and make them worry about the fate of the main characters.

Plot

The first novel, The Life and Surprising Adventures of Robinson Crusoe, is written as a fictional autobiography of Robinson Crusoe, a sailor from York who spent 28 years on a desert island after a shipwreck. During his life on the island, he faced various difficulties and dangers, both natural and emanating from savages, cannibals and pirates. All events are recorded in the form of memories and create a realistic picture of a pseudo-documentary work. Most likely, the novel was written under the influence of a real story that happened to Alexander Selkirk, who spent four years on an uninhabited island in the Pacific Ocean (today this island, part of the Juan Fernandez archipelago, is named after the literary hero Defoe).

The tragedy of P. Corneille “The Cid”: the source of the plot, the essence of the conflict,
system of images, ideological meaning of the ending. Controversy surrounding the play.

In the days of Corneille, the norms of classicist theater were just beginning to take shape, in particular the rules of three unities - time, place and action. Corneille accepted these rules, but followed them very relatively and, if necessary, boldly violated them.

Contemporaries greatly valued the historical writer of everyday life in the poet. “Cid” (medieval Spain), “Horace” (the era of kings in Roman history), “Cinna” (imperial Rome), “Pompeii” (civil wars in the Roman state), “Attila” (Mongol invasion), “Heraclius” ( The Byzantine Empire), “Polyeuctus” (the era of initial “Christianity”), etc. - all these tragedies, like others, are built on the use of historical facts. Corneille took the most acute, dramatic moments from the historical past, depicting the clashes of various political and religious systems, the fate of people at moments of major historical shifts and revolutions, Corneille is primarily a political writer.

Psychological conflicts, the history of feelings, the vicissitudes of love in his tragedy faded into the background. He, of course, understood that theater is not parliament, that tragedy is not a political treatise, that “a dramatic work is... a portrait of human actions... the more perfect the portrait it is, the more it resembles the original” (“Reflections on three unities"). And yet he built his tragedies according to the type of political disputes.

The tragedy of the Cid (according to Corneille's definition - a tragicomedy) was written in 1636 and became the first great work of classicism. Characters are created differently than before. They are not characterized by versatility, acute conflict in the inner world, and inconsistency in behavior. The characters in Sid are not individualized; it is not by chance that a plot was chosen in which the same problem faces several characters, and they all solve it in the same way. Classicism tended to understand character as one trait that seemed to suppress all the others. Character is possessed by those characters who can subordinate their personal feelings to the dictates of duty. Creating such characters as Ximena, Fernando, Infanta, Corneille gives them majesty and nobility. The majesty of the characters and their civic spirit color the feeling of love in a special way. Corneille denies treating love as a dark, destructive passion or gallant, frivolous entertainment. He fights against the precise idea of love, introducing rationalism into this area, illuminating love with deep humanism. Love is possible if lovers respect each other's noble personality. Corneille's heroes are taller than ordinary people, they are people with feelings, passions and suffering inherent in people, and - they are people of great will... (images for reading days) Of the many stories associated with the name of Sid, Corneille took only one - the story of his marriage. He simplified the plot scheme to the limit, reduced the characters to a minimum, moved all events off the stage and left only the feelings of the characters

Conflict. Corneille reveals a new conflict - the struggle between feeling and duty - through a system of more specific conflicts. The first of these is the conflict between the personal aspirations and feelings of the heroes and the duty to the feudal family, or family duty. The second is the conflict between the hero’s feelings and his duty to the state, to his king. The third is the conflict between family duty and duty to the state. These conflicts are revealed in a specific sequence: first through the images of Rodrigo and his beloved Ximena - the first, then through the image of the Infanta (the king's daughter), who suppresses her love for Rodrigo in the name of state interests - the second, and finally, through the image of the King of Spain Fernando - third.

An entire campaign was launched against the play, which lasted 2 years. She was attacked by a number of critical articles written by Mere, Scuderi, Clavere and others. Mere accused K. of plagiarism (apparently from Guillen de Castro), Scuderi analyzed the play from the point of view. "Poetics" of Aristotle. K. was condemned for not observing the 3 unities, and especially for the apology of Rodrigo and Jimena, for the image of Jimena, for the fact that she marries her father’s murderer. A special “Opinion of the French Academy on the Cide”, edited by Chaplin and inspired by Richelieu, was also formed against the play. The attacks affected the playwright to such an extent that he first fell silent for 3 years, and then tried to take into account the wishes. But it’s no use – Richelieu didn’t like “Horace” either.

The reproaches hurled at “Sid” reflected real features that distinguished it from modern “correct” tragedies. But it was precisely these features that determined the dramatic tension and dynamism that provided the play with a long stage life. “Sid” is still included in the world theater repertoire. These same “shortcomings” of the play were highly appreciated two centuries after its creation by the romantics, who excluded “The Cid” from the number of classicist tragedies they rejected. The unusual nature of its dramatic structure was also appreciated by the young Pushkin, who wrote to N.N. Raevsky in 1825: “The true geniuses of tragedy never cared about verisimilitude. Look how Corneille deftly dealt with Sid: “Oh, do you want to comply with the 24-hour rule? If you please” - and piled up events for 4 months.”

The discussion about the "Sid" served as an occasion for a clear formulation of the rules of classical tragedy. “The opinion of the French Academy on the tragicomedy “Cid”” became one of the program manifestos of the classical school.

5.Lope de Vega as a theorist of new drama.
The originality of the genre of love comedy in the work of the playwright.

The Spaniards created a "theater for everyone." Its creation and approval is rightly associated with the name of Lope de Vega. It is his titanic figure that stands at the beginning of the original Spanish drama. New dramatic art and Lope de Vega are almost synonymous.

Lope de Vega created a new “theatrical empire” and became, as Cervantes put it, “its autocrat.” The empire was created with difficulty and not immediately. Lope relied on the experience of his predecessors, searched, improvised. The first disputes were often compromises; the usual literary consciousness collided with a living feeling. It was not enough to be a supporter of traditional folk poetry, to cultivate romances and to profess Platonic ideas about nature. “Introducing” them into dramaturgy did not mechanically solve the matter.

“A New Guide to Writing Comedies in Our Time,” which Lope de Vega wrote seven years after this motto, is precisely dedicated to substantiating the new principles. Its essence comes down to several basic provisions. First of all, we must abandon admiration for the authority of Aristotle. Aristotle was right for his time. Applying the laws he derived today is absurd. The legislator should be ordinary people (that is, the main viewer). New laws are needed that correspond to the most important of them: to provide pleasure to the reader and viewer.

Dwelling on the notorious three unities, a law derived by the learned theoreticians of the Renaissance from Aristotle, Lope leaves only one thing as unconditional: the unity of action. Let us note that Lope himself and, especially, his students and followers brought this law to such an absolute that it sometimes turned into a burden no less than the unity of place and time among the classicists. As for the other two unities, here the Spanish playwrights really acted with new freedom. Although in many comedies the unity of place was, in essence, protected, which was caused partly by the technique of the stage, partly by excessive observance of the unity of action, that is, its extreme concentration. In general, it must be said that both in the time of Lope de Vega and in the polemics of the romantics with the classicists, the question of the “law of three unities” acquired almost paramount importance in theoretical disputes, but in practice it was taken into account only on the basis of the specific needs of one or the other works.

Lope also speaks in his “Manual” about the fundamental mixture of the comic and the tragic. As in life - so in literature. In the era of young Lope, the term “comedy” had a militant, polemical meaning. It denoted plays built on a fundamental mixture of tragic and comic in the name of greater life verisimilitude. Some types of dramatic works appeared, intermediate between comedy and tragedy in the classicist understanding. The indignant keepers of scientific traditions called these new species “monstrous hermaphrodite,” and Lope de Vega, who made fun of their indignation, called them a more elegant and classic word “minotaur.”

The goal of the playwright, according to Lope de Vega, is to please the audience. Therefore, he recognized the main nerve of comedy as intrigue, which should capture and captivate the viewer from the very first scene and keep him in suspense until the last act.

The role of Lope de Vega in the development of Spanish theater is incomparable to that of any other playwright. They laid all the foundations

Based on the theme, Lope de Vega's plays are divided into several groups.

The largest Soviet researcher of Spanish literature, K. Derzhavin, believes that they are grouped around problems of a state-historical (so-called “heroic dramas”), socio-political and family-domestic nature. The latter are usually called "comedies of cloak and sword."

In love comedies, Lope had no equal in Spanish drama. He may have been inferior to Tirso or Alarcón in the development of characters, in the technique of building intrigue to Calderon and Moreto, but in sincerity and intensity of feelings they were inferior to him, all together. According to the scheme, in all comedies of this type, love is always an “obstacle race”, where the finish is the reward.

In most cases, especially among Lope's followers, interest is based on the maximum accumulation of obstacles. In such comedies, the interest is in overcoming obstacles, not the feeling itself. It’s different in Lope de Vega’s best comedies. There, interest rests primarily on the development of feelings. This is the main subject of comedy. In this sense, “Dog in the Manger” is remarkable. In it, love step by step sweeps away class prejudices, overcomes selfishness and gradually, but without a trace, fills the entire being of the heroes with its highest meaning.

Lope gave many samples for different types of love comedy: for the comedy of “intrigue,” and for the “psychological” comedy, and the “moral and edifying” comedy. But in the best examples there was always a feeling as the main core of the action; literally all varieties of comedy, which later, under the pen of his students, filled Spanish theaters with varying success, were given by the great teacher. Over time, he turned them into diagrams. What remains are love comedies “without love”.

6. The genre of religious and philosophical drama in the works of P. Calderon.
The play “Life is a Dream” as the “quintessence” of the Baroque worldview.

"LIFE IS A DREAM" P. Calderon. Reality and dream, illusion and reality here lose their uniqueness and become similar to each other: sueno in Spanish is not only a dream, but also a dream; therefore, “La vida es sueno” can also be translated as “Life is a dream.” Pedro Calderon is a prominent representative of Baroque literature, in particular Baroque drama. He was a follower of Lope de Vega. Pedro Calderon de la Barga (1600-1681) from an old noble family graduated from college and university, where he studied scholasticism. Potto he began to write and gained fame; since 1625 he has been the court playwright. His worldview was greatly influenced by the teachings of the Jesuits - Life and death, reality and dreams form complex interweavings. This complex world is impossible to understand, but the mind can control feelings and by suppressing them a person can find the path, if not to truth, then to peace of mind.

Features of dramaturgy: 1) harmonious exposition, composition 2) intense dramatic action and its concentration around 1-2 characters 3) schematism in the depiction of the characters' characters 4) expressive language (often it refers to metaphor, transition)

Creativity can be divided into 2 periods: 1) early - until the 1630s. – the comedy genre predominates 2) from 30 to the end of life. Late period, he takes the priesthood, his worldview and the direction of his work change. A new genre appears - it denotes a sacred action (today it is a moral and philosophical religious drama)

Drama “Life is a Dream.” Written in 1635 The story of the Polish prince Sigismund, when his father was born with a prediction - his son would be cruel. Since childhood, he imprisoned his son; he had only a teacher. Time passes, the father decides to check the prediction. He gets to the ball and shows his temper. Captivity again.

Sigismund is shown as a man as he emerged from the bosom of nature. He morally depends on nature, on his passions. Confirmation is the words of Sigismund himself: “the combination of man and beast.” A man, because he thinks and his mind is inquisitive. A beast, because he is a slave of his nature.

He does not believe that the animal nature is only from nature. From birth he was placed in such harsh conditions that he turned into a human beast. He blames his father. It is ironic that they tried to have the bestial nature in him, bringing him to an animal state. Believes that humanity should not be asserted by force. After awakening, the prince is transformed. He asks the servant what happened. He says that everything was a dream, and a dream is something transitory. He awoke from the dream of being a prince, but did not awaken from the sleep of life. At this moment he comes to the conclusion: everything he lives with (royal power, wealth) is a dream, but a dream of a rich man. Poverty is a poor man's dream. These are all dreams anyway. All human life is a dream. This means that all this is not so important, neither aspirations nor vanity, having understood this, the prince becomes a wise man.

The topic is raised, the idea of human self-education (which is associated with reason). Reason helps the prince overcome passions.

The theme of freedom. The prince discusses this already in the first act of the drama, where he discusses the human right to freedom. He compares himself with a bird, an animal, a fish and is surprised that he has more feeling and knowledge, but he is less free than them.

In the finale, the prince is wise. The king saw this and decides to choose another heir (a foreign man). The prince became king as a result of his upbringing. The king is in his power, but Sigismund was not for the restoration of his dynastic rights, but for the sake of restoring human rights. Remembering his path from beast to man, Sigismund pardoned his father and left him alive.

Calderon's dramatic method consists of exposing life's contradictions. HE guides his hero through hostile circumstances and reveals his inner struggle, leading the hero to spiritual enlightenment. This work meets the laws of the Baroque. 1

) the action takes place in Polonia (Poland), but this is an abstract place, there is no specification of time, the characters are schematic and express the author’s idea, and do not represent a value image. 2) The hero is not static (changes and is formed under external circumstances) 3) The introduction reflects the idea of hostility, chaos of the world around us, and human suffering (Rosaura’s monologue)

Ideological and artistic originality of P. Corneille’s tragedy “Horace”.

The fate of the cities must be decided in a triple duel of fighters fielded by each side - the Roman Horatii and the Albanian Curiatii, who were related to each other. Faced with the tragic necessity of fighting for the glory of the fatherland with close relatives, Corneille's heroes perceive their civic duty differently. Horace is proud of the exorbitant demand presented to him, and sees in this a manifestation of the highest trust of the state in its citizen, called upon to protect him: But the main dramatic conflict does not receive a harmonious resolution. The central problem of the play - the relationship between the individual and the state - appears in a tragic aspect, and the final triumph of stoic self-denial and the affirmation of the civic idea does not remove this tragedy. Nevertheless, throughout the long stage life of Horace, it was precisely this civic spirit of the play that determined its social relevance and success; this was the case, for example, during the years of the French bourgeois revolution, when Corneille's tragedy was very popular and was staged many times on the revolutionary stage. In its structure, “Horace” meets the requirements of classical poetics much more than “Cid”. External action here is reduced to a minimum; it begins at the moment when the dramatic conflict is already evident and then it only develops. No extraneous, incidental plot lines complicate the main one; the dramatic interest is centered around the three main characters - Horace, Camilla and Curiatius. The symmetrical arrangement of the characters, corresponding to their family relationships and origin (Romans - Albanians), also attracts attention. Against the background of this strict symmetry, the contrast between the internal positions of the heroes appears especially clearly. The device of antithesis permeates the entire artistic structure of the play, including the construction of the verse, which, as a rule, breaks up into two hemistiches that are opposite in meaning. “Horace” finally established the canonical type of classical tragedy, and Corneille’s next plays, “Cinna” and “Polyeuctus,” consolidated it.

21. The tragedy of J. Racine “Andromache”: the source of the plot,
conflict, system of images, psychologism.

Racine's appeal to the ancient Greek mythological plot differs from Thebaid primarily in the scale of the moral problem, the organic cohesion of the various elements of the ideological and artistic structure of the work. The main dramatic situation of "Andromache" was drawn by Racine from ancient sources - Euripides, Seneca, Virgil. But it also returns us to the typical plot scheme of pastoral novels, seemingly infinitely far in their artistic principles from the strict classical tragedy: In “A” the ideological core is the collision of the rational and moral principle in a person with the elemental passion that leads him to crime and death .

Three - Pyrrhus, Hermione and Orestes - become victims of their passion, which they recognize as undue, contrary to the moral law, but beyond their control. The fourth - Andromache - as a moral person stands outside passions and above passions, but as a defeated queen, a captive, she finds herself, against her will, drawn into the whirlpool of other people's passions, playing with her fate and the fate of her son. The primordial conflict on which French classical tragedy grew, especially the tragedy of Corneille - the conflict between reason and passion, feeling and duty - is completely rethought in this tragedy of Racine, and in this for the first time his inner liberation from the shackles of tradition and models is manifested. The freedom of choice that Corneille's heroes possessed, in other words, the freedom of rational will to make a decision and implement it at least at the cost of life, is not available to Racine's heroes: the first three because of their internal powerlessness, doom in the face of their own passion; A - because of her external lack of rights and doom before someone else’s ruthless and despotic will. The alternative facing Andromache - to betray her husband's memory by becoming the wife of the murderer of her entire family, or to sacrifice her only son - does not have a reasonable and moral solution. And when A finds such a solution - in suicide at the wedding altar, then this is not just a heroic refusal of life in the name of a high duty. This is a moral compromise, built on the double meaning of her marriage vow - after all, the marriage with which the life of her son will be purchased will not actually be consummated.

Thus, if the heroes of Corneille knew what they were going to, what and in the name of what they were sacrificing, then the heroes of Racine frantically fight with themselves and with each other in the name of imaginaries that reveal their true meaning too late. And even the outcome that is favorable for the main character - the rescue of her son and her proclamation as queen of Epirus - bears the stamp of imaginaryness: without ever becoming the wife of Pyrrhus, she nevertheless accepts as an inheritance, along with the throne, the obligation to avenge the one who should have taken Hector's place.

The novelty and even the well-known paradox of the artistic construction of "A" is not only in this discrepancy between the actions of the heroes and their results. The same discrepancy exists between the actions and external position of the heroes. The consciousness of the spectators of the 17th century. was brought up on stable stereotypes of behavior, fixed by etiquette and identified with the universal laws of reason. Heroes "A" violate these stereotypes at every step, and this also shows the strength of the passion that gripped them. Pyrrhus not only loses interest in Hermione, but plays an undignified game with her, designed to break A’s resistance. Hermione, instead of rejecting Pyrrhus with contempt and thereby maintaining her dignity and honor, is ready to accept him, even knowing about his love to the Trojan. Orestes, instead of honestly fulfilling his ambassadorial mission, does everything to ensure that it is unsuccessful.

Reason is present in tragedy as the ability of heroes to realize and analyze their feelings and actions and ultimately pass judgment on themselves, in other words, in the words of Pascal, as awareness of their weakness. The heroes of “A” deviate from the moral norm not because they are not aware of it, but because they are unable to rise to this norm by overcoming the passions that overwhelm them.

22. Moral and philosophical content of Racine’s tragedy “Phaedra”:
interpretation of the image of Phaedra in the ancient tradition and in the plays of Racine.

Over the years, changes have occurred in Racine's artistic outlook and creative style. For the playwright, the conflict between humanistic and anti-humanistic forces increasingly develops from a clash between two opposing camps into a fierce combat between a person and himself. Light and darkness, reason and destructive passions, muddy instincts and burning remorse collide in the soul of the same hero, infected with the vices of his environment, but striving to rise above it, unwilling to come to terms with his fall.

However, these trends reach the peak of their development in Phaedrus. Phaedra, constantly betrayed by Theseus, who is mired in vices, feels lonely and abandoned, and a destructive passion for her stepson Hippolytus arises in her soul. Phaedra fell in love with Hippolytus to some extent because in his appearance the former, once valiant and beautiful Theseus seemed to be resurrected. But Phaedra also admits that a terrible fate weighs down on her and her family, that the tendency towards corrupting passions is in her blood, inherited from her ancestors. Hippolytus is also convinced of the moral depravity of those around him. Addressing his beloved Aricia, Hippolytus declares that they are all “engulfed in the terrible flames of vice” and calls on her to leave “the fatal and defiled place where virtue is called upon to breathe polluted air.”

But Phaedra, who seeks reciprocity from her stepson and slanderes him, appears in Racine not only as a typical representative of her corrupt environment. She simultaneously rises above this environment. It was in this direction that Racine made the most significant changes to the image inherited from antiquity, from Euripides and Seneca. Racine's Phaedra, for all her spiritual drama, is a person of clear self-awareness, a person in whom the heart-corroding poison of instincts is combined with an irresistible desire for truth, purity and moral dignity. Moreover, she does not forget for a moment that she is not a private person, but a queen, a bearer of state power, that her behavior is intended to serve as a model for society, that the glory of a name doubles the torment. The culminating moment in the development of the ideological content of the tragedy is Phaedra’s slander and the victory that a sense of moral justice then wins in the heroine’s mind over the egoistic instinct of self-preservation. Phaedra restores the truth, but life is no longer bearable for her, and she destroys herself.

3. The problem of baroque in modern literary studies. The character of baroque light. Baroque aesthetics. Baroque tipi

Instead of a linear Renaissance perspective, there was a “strange baroque perspective”: double space, mirroring, which symbolized the illusory nature of ideas about the world.

The world is split. But not only that, it is also moving, but it is not clear where. Hence the theme of the transience of human life and time in general (“the traces of centuries, like moments, are short” - Calderon). Luis de Gongora's sonnet is about the same thing, which, unlike the above-quoted sonnet by Calderon, is formally baroque: repetition of the same thought, a string of metaphors, a bunch of historical reminiscences, which testified to the scope of time, the instantaneity of not only people, but also civilizations. (Vannikova spoke about this sonnet at a lecture; no one was obliged to read it. Just like talking about it in the exam).

But it would be good to say that the Baroque poets were very fond of metaphor. It created an atmosphere of intellectual play. And play is a property of all baroque genres (in metaphors, in the combination of unexpected ideas and images). In dramaturgy, the game led to a special theatricality and the technique of “scene on stage” + the metaphor “life-theater” (Calderon’s autograph “The Great Theater of the World” is the apotheosis of this metaphor). Theater is also used to reveal the elusiveness of the world and the illusory nature of ideas about it.

And in such conditions, when everything is bad, a certain beginning begins to emerge, on the basis of which natural chaos is overcome - the resilience of the human spirit.

At the same time, classicism emerges. Both of these systems arise as an awareness of the crisis of Renaissance ideals.

Artists of both Baroque and Classicism rejected the idea of harmony underlying the humanistic Renaissance concept. But at the same time, Baroque and classicism clearly oppose each other.

in dramaturgy: there is no strict norming, no unity of place and time, a mixture of tragic and comic in one work, and the main genre is tragicomedy, baroque theater - theater of action.

Let me remind you that classicism opposed baroque. Classicism seems to resurrect the style of the High Renaissance. The most vile monster should be written in such a way that it pleases the eye, which is what Boileau writes about. Moderation and good taste should be observed in everything. The peculiarity of classicism is that the rules are clearly formulated and fixed and mainly relate to the form of the work.

1670s - “Poetic Art” by Boileau. Manifesto of classicism. In this work, B. relies on Aristotle and Horace. The work consists of three parts: 1 – about the poet. art in general, 2 - about small poetic genres, 3 - large genres (tragedy, epic, comedy), 4 - again in general.

General principles: love reason and choose nature as your mentor.

Two quotes on this matter:

If you love the thought in poetry, let it be the only one

They owe both brilliance and price.

You should always go towards common sense.

Whoever leaves this path dies immediately.

There is one path to reason - there is no other.

Reason is clarity, harmony of the world, the most important sign of beauty. What is unclear is unreasonable and ugly (medieval myths, for example). In dramaturgy there is a movement from medieval to ancient drama (and they called it modern art). B. generally rejected all medieval art (what a fool!).

He also denied baroque, namely preciosity and burlesque (these were varieties of French baroque). Precision was a reaction to sobriety, rationalism, and lack of spirituality. She contrasted all this with the sophistication of morals, the height of feelings and passions. Not the best kind of baroque, but within its framework the novel developed with its psychologism and plot intrigue. Precious works were distinguished by a complicated plot, a large number of descriptions, exuberant metaphors and play on words, which infuriated Boileau.

Burlesque opposed precision. It was a lower form of baroque with a desire for brutal truth, the triumph of the vulgar over the sublime. It was based on a humorous adaptation of ancient and medieval heroic tales. The language was, accordingly, superficial, which B did not like.

Another divergence from the Baroque, this time imaginary. This is a question of imitation and imagination. Baroque artists rejected the ancient principle of imitation of nature, instead - unfettered imagination. And B. seems to be faithful to imitation. But he believes that art reproduces not primordial nature, but nature transformed by the human mind (see about the monster). The principle of imitation is combined with the principle of imagination, and the true way of imitating nature is according to the rules created by the mind. They are the ones who bring beauty to the work that is impossible in reality. I quote Vannikova’s favorite phrase:

Incarnated in art, both monster and reptile,

We are still pleased with the wary look.

B.'s focus is on tragedy (in passing about the novel - a novel, an entertaining read; one can forgive him for what cannot be forgiven for a tragedy, for example, not a great hero, incongruity). Rejects tragicomedy. Tragedy is cruel and terrible, but the world of art is beautiful because the rules allow it to be so. Tragedy works through horror and compassion. If the play does not evoke compassion, the author’s efforts were in vain. Orientation towards a traditional plot, where the poet competes with his predecessors. The author creates within the framework of tradition. They comprehended their problems in the mirror of ancient stories.

But B. proposed to interpret the antique. the stories are believable. Truth does not equal credibility! The truth may be such that the viewer will not believe it, but the untruth may be plausible. The main thing is for the viewer to believe that everything happened. Such a misfortune happened to Corneille’s “The Cid”: he was reproached that the plot was implausible. And he replied that this was recorded by history. Quote from B. regarding truth (literal translation): “The mind of a person will not be moved by what it does not believe.” In Neserova's translation:

Don’t torment us with the incredible, disturbing the mind.

And the truth is sometimes unlike the truth.

I will not be delighted with wonderful nonsense.

The mind does not care about what it does not believe.

Truth is compliance with the universal laws of reason.

Classical heroes are sublime and noble natures. But heroism must necessarily be combined with weakness (this is plausible and explains the hero’s mistakes). The requirement for consistency in the character of the heroes in all circumstances (but a variety of feelings and aspirations is not excluded). In a tragic hero, multidirectional feelings must collide, but they are set from the very beginning.

The notorious 3 unities are also explained by the requirement of verisimilitude. They had to minimize all the conventions that a theatrical production implies. The main thing is unity of action, i.e. intrigue, which should begin immediately, develop quickly and logically end. Unity liberated the theater from medieval entertainment and shifted the emphasis from external action to internal action. Classical theater is a theater of internal action, where attention is focused on analyzing the feelings of the characters; intrigue does not play a dominant role here. The most poignant moments of the play should be off stage; they are not worthy of entertainment. Here is what Racine writes on this occasion in the first preface to Britannicus (this is about what should not be done): “Instead of a simple action, not too overloaded with events - as an action limited to one day should be - supported only with the interests, feelings and passions of the characters who gradually lead it to the end, it would be necessary to fill this very action with many incidents for which a whole month would not be enough, with a large number of vicissitudes, all the more amazing the less believable they are, with endless declamation, during in which the actors would be forced to say exactly the opposite of what should be said.”

B. created his theory of tragedy in the 70s, when Corneille and Racine had already written their plays.

Boileau also ordered not to write about low subjects:

Avoid the low, it is always ugliness.

In the simplest style there should still be nobility.

5. Renaissance traditions in dramaturgy of the 17th century. Theater Lope de Vega.

Renaissance origins of the theater of the 17th century. At the end of the Renaissance, a great tradition of dramatic art took shape in two countries - Spain and England. The Golden Age of Drama lasted from the mid-16th to the mid-17th centuries.

The memory of the past lives in combination with the features of new art. They are most distinct in Spain.

Spanish influence spread throughout Europe until, by the beginning of the second half of the 17th century, the center of European culture finally moved to Paris. This geographical movement will be accompanied by a change in the dominant style - from Baroque to Classicism. Spain is an example of the first, France of the second. In England, where neither one nor the other style certainly triumphed, the commonality of the Renaissance basis is most noticeable. Both styles originated in the same literary circle - Shakespeare's younger contemporaries and associates.

A special place was given to the theater. In Jacob's coronation procession on July 25, 1603, there were actors from Shakespeare's Globe Theater, who from then on began to be called "the king's servants" and actually became a court troupe. Theatrical performance became a part of court life. The court, including the monarch himself, took part in the staging of allegorical court performances - masks. Until this time, their main authors were the composer and the artist, but with the advent of Ben Jonson (1573–1637) to the court, the text began to play a much greater role.

From Ben Jonson a direct path to classicism opens, but he himself only outlined it as one of the possibilities. Sometimes he writes didactic comedy, observing the rules, sometimes he easily deviates from them. Many playwrights still don't think about rules, just as Shakespeare didn't think about them. However, his younger contemporaries sometimes allow even more freedom, especially those who became acquainted with Italian and Spanish theater. These are primarily the most popular among viewers, John Fletcher (1579–1625) and Francis Beaumont (1584–1616). They wrote many plays together, earning the reputation of entertaining the gentry, that is, the nobility. Having a social address is also a new feature: Shakespeare wrote for everyone; Now London artisans have their own favorites, and the nobles have their own. And in the sphere of art there is a division of tastes.

The recipe for entertainment is not sought from ancient authors. It is found in Italy, where the genre of tragicomedy arose for the first time at the end of the 16th century. From the name it is clear that this genre is a combination of comic and tragic. Isn't he in Shakespeare's tragedies? Yes, but it happens differently. Tragicomedy is more reminiscent of Shakespeare's late comedies, where the nature of the conflict changes. Evil enters deeper into him, and therefore it ceases to seem as if all is well that ends well. The happy ending, as a surprise, crowns the intricate intrigue, but does not remove the feeling that the world has ceased to be happy and harmonious.

In the preface to one of his plays (“The Faithful Shepherdess”), Fletcher defined the genre: “Tragic-comedy received such a nickname not because it contains both joy and murder, but because there is no death in it, which is enough for it to not to be considered a tragedy, but death in it turns out to be so close that this is enough for it not to be considered a comedy, which represents ordinary people with their difficulties that do not contradict ordinary life. So in a tragicomedy the appearance of a deity is just as legitimate as in a tragedy. ordinary people, like in a comedy."

In England, tragicomedy coexists with satirical comedy of characters. The didactic task does not negate the possibility of unbridled entertainment; the mixedness and chaos of the new genre does not negate the desire for orderliness. Both trends emerge from Renaissance theater and worldview. The Renaissance heritage is strong in Spain, but the nature of the changes made there is more consistent, associated with one direction and one name - Lope de Vega.

Lope Felix de Vega Carpio (1562-1635) is an example of another Renaissance figure. His father, a goldsmith, a lover of poetry, gave his son a good education: in addition to university knowledge, he was a master of a dancer, mastery of a sword and poetry. However, in poetry Lope had a gift for improvisation, without which he simply would not have had time to create more than two thousand plays (about five hundred have survived), not counting sonnets, poems and novels in verse.

From his youth, he was possessed by a thirst for achievement, which forced him, together with the “Invincible Armada,” to set off to conquer England in 1588. The fate of the Spanish fleet was sad. Lope de Vega, fortunately, escaped. He's back to conquer the stage. In Spain, theater is a folk spectacle. This is the last bastion of freedom that neither the harsh Spanish monarchs nor the threats of the Inquisition could break: the bans were renewed, but the theater lived on. The troupes continued to play in hotel courtyards - corrals (theatres were also called that) and on the capital's stages. It is impossible to imagine a performance without music, dance, and dressing up, just as it is impossible to imagine Spanish drama bound by strict rules. She was born and continued to be part of the carnival action.

Nevertheless, in the heyday of his creativity, Lope de Vega wrote a treatise “The New Art of Composing Comedies in Our Time” (1609). This is not so much a set of rules as a justification of the freedom of the Spanish theater with its predilection for confusing, unpredictable intrigue, the brightness of passions. All this is still quite close to the Renaissance, the ideals of which will be reminded more than once by Lope de Vega, who begins the treatise with the goal of “... gilding // I want the people’s delusions.” However, we must not forget about Aristotle, who rightly taught that “the subject of art is Verisimilitude...” The general principle of art was inherited from Horace - to teach by entertaining.

In Spain, a dramatic action is divided not into five acts, but into three parts - jornadas (from the word day), and therefore each jornada should not contain more than a day. The first hornada is the beginning, the second is the complications, the third is the denouement. This gives consistency and speed to the development of intrigue. Is it necessary to maintain unity? Only one thing is required - unity of action, and the rest:

There is no need to observe the boundaries of the day,

Although Aristotle orders them to be observed,

But we've already broken the laws

Mixing up the tragic speech

With comic and everyday speech.

(Translated by O. Rumer)

The difference between comedy and tragedy is preserved in the choice of material: “... history feeds tragedy, // Comedy is fiction...” The dignity of historical characters is higher than modern ones, and this determines the dignity of each genre. Among the many plays written by Lope de Vega, there are many that are kept within fairly strict genre boundaries, but most of all, others are remembered - mixing high characters with low ones, history and modernity. Lope called them comedies. Later, based on the title of the treatise, they will be referred to as “new comedy,” although the term “tragicomedy”, which has already entered European languages, would be quite appropriate.

The genre, which developed in Spain, is also known as the “comedy of the cloak and sword.” This term has theatrical origins - in reference to the necessary props for the performance of these plays, where most of the characters were nobles, that is, they had the right to wear a cloak and sword. However, in Lope’s most famous plays, the intrigue is built precisely around who has this right, and with it, possesses noble honor.

“Dog in the Manger” (published 1618; the exact time of creation of most of Lope de Vega’s plays is unknown) is the best work of this genre, which to this day has not left the stages of the whole world. Wit, play of passions, carnival, secret dates - in their totality weave the intrigue characteristic of this type of comedy. Teodoro must decide who he loves - his mistress (he is her secretary) Diana de Belleflore, a young widow, or her maid Marcella. Pie in the sky or bird in the hand? The play, however, is named after another proverb that defines the choice of a mistress who does not know what to sacrifice - love or honor, having associated herself with her secretary, a man of ignoble origin. In the meantime, she is jealous of Marcella, does not let him go and does not allow him to come to her.

Love triumphs, resorting to carnival techniques - dressing up and substituting. Teodoro's servant Tristan, a jester by his theatrical pedigree, finds the old count, whose son disappeared many years ago, appears to him in the form of an overseas merchant, and then introduces Teodoro, who allegedly turned up as his son. He who has human dignity is worthy of honor - such is the poetic justice of this ending. Here it is achieved through cunning intrigue, but in other cases it requires truly heroic effort.

Along with comedies, Lope de Vega created dramas. Based on their pathos, the genre is often called heroic drama. Its most memorable example from Lope is “The Sheep Spring”, or (after the Spanish name of the place in which the action takes place) “Fuente Ovejuna” (published 1619). The play is also an example of tragicomic confusion. Its material, like a tragedy, is history: the action is related to the events of the Reconquista (the liberation of Spain from the Moors) in 1476. The main characters are peasants, that is, characters appropriate in a low genre - comedy.

The commander of the Order of Calatrava (one of the spiritual and secular orders of knighthood created during the Reconquista) Fernando Gomez de Guzman meets the resistance of the girl Laurencia who liked him from the town of Fuente Ovejuna that came under his rule. All the peasants are on her side, one of whom says to the commander: “We want to live as before, // Honoring your honor and our honor” (translated by M. Lozinsky). The commander does not understand the speech about honor from the lips of a peasant. He persistently pursues his goal, becoming increasingly angry, and finally appears at the head of an armed detachment, inciting the peasants to revolt. The commander is killed. The investigation is led by the king, but to the question: “Who killed?” - even under torture, the peasants repeat: “Fuente Ovejuna.”

The play, which ends with the readiness of people from the people to defend their dignity up to the point of armed uprising, begins with the fact that one of them - Laurencia - in response to the declaration of love by the young peasant Frondoso, laughingly replied that she loves only her honor. Are these different scale events connected? Undoubtedly. Between the initial love for oneself (for to love honor is to love oneself) and the final scene, the formation of the heroine’s personality takes place. She fell in love with Frondoso, and their love was accompanied not by the silence of the pastoral, but by the threat emanating from the powers that be. Against this formidable background, the feeling of love emerges in its former Renaissance quality as a path to dignity, not in the sense of social privilege, but as an integral property of humanity.

There is a return to Renaissance values, which Lope de Vega did not abandon, but which are leaving his contemporary world, being replaced by new ones, devoid of universal human meaning. They are designed for an individual, and not for everyone, but only for someone who can confirm his right with a charter of nobility. The former dignity is achievable only as a result of a heroic act.

Lope de Vega was not only the finalizer of a certain tradition of Spanish drama, but also a person reminiscent of the heights of the Renaissance ideal, which in new conditions is exposed to new dangers and temptations. Previous values are rethought, sometimes distorted, as happens with love. One of those who is considered to be part of the “Lope school”, Tirso de Molina (1583?–1648), introduced the image of Don Juan (“The Mischief of Seville, or the Stone Guest”) into world literature from the Spanish legend. This image seems to be one of the projections of the Renaissance idea of a free, loving person. However, love now, as the name implies, is mischief, and freedom is self-will. The story of the mischievous man will immediately turn into one of the eternal (archetypal) images of world culture and will receive a philosophical interpretation back in the 17th century (see Moliere).

6.Creativity of P. Calderon in the context of Baroque literature. The name of the work is called “Life is a dream” in a vaguely metaphorical place. The problem of the share in the drama is its role in the development of the main conflict of the soul. Philosophical sense drama.

His worldview was greatly influenced by the teachings of the Jesuits - Life and death, reality and dreams form complex interweavings. This complex world is impossible to understand, but the mind can control feelings and by suppressing them a person can find the path, if not to truth, then to peace of mind.

1) the action takes place in Polonia (Poland), but this is an abstract place, there is no specification of time, the characters are schematic and express the author’s idea, and do not represent a value image.

2) The hero is not static (changes and is formed under external circumstances)

3) The introduction reflects the idea of hostility, the chaotic nature of the world around us, and human suffering (Rosaura’s monologue)

The language of drama is replete with decorations, especially metaphors and allegories, and complex syntactic constructions. Multi-layered composition: several storylines (central: love-themed line).

Considering the problem of struggling with fate (traditional for this genre), Calderon, in the process of developing the plot, shows that the fatal prediction is fulfilled precisely because this was facilitated by the blind will of his despot father, who imprisoned him in a tower, where the unfortunate man grew up in savagery and, naturally, could not go wild. Here Calderon touches on the thesis of free will and the fact that people only fulfill the will of heaven, playing the roles predetermined for them, and they can improve and change their fate in only one way - by changing themselves and constantly fighting against the sinfulness of human nature. “In Calderon, the implementation of the thesis about free will is distinguished by extreme tension and drama in the conditions of hierarchical reality, fraught in the understanding of Baroque writers with contradictory extremes - mysterious, but inhuman heavenly predestination and the destructive self-will of man or weak-willed obedience and humility, which suddenly turn out to be a tragic delusion (the image of Basilio )" (3, p. 79). The Baroque understanding of the world as the triumph of two opposing essences - divinity and non-existence - deprives man of the place of honor that the Renaissance assigned to him. Therefore, the activity of the individual in a situation where his fate is predetermined from above does not mean the atheistic deification of man; free will is synonymous with “the identity of the individual, who threatens to dissolve in the uncontrollable element of higher forces and his own passions” (3, p. 79). The episode of the prince's test of power allows us to understand the measure of moral responsibility that Calderon places on the ideal ruler. In his understanding (characteristic of the Baroque), a person who has achieved a moral victory over himself has the highest value.

Calderon builds his philosophical drama, of course, on a somewhat pessimistic worldview arising from religious Christian mysticism. However, there is no true pessimism here - after all, there is always God next to a person, and a person endowed with free will can always turn to Him. Calderon, although in a certain sense inherits the thoughts of ancient Greek philosophers and moralists that life is just a dream, and everything around a person is only shadows of objects, and not the objects themselves, but to a greater extent he follows the early Christian moralists, who said that life is a dream compared to the reality of eternal life. The playwright never tires of asserting that eternal life is built by man himself, by his actions, and that good certainly remains good, even in a dream. The polemic with Renaissance moralists on the issue of human freedom is clearly visible in the drama in the line of Segismundo and Basilio. The king, frightened by terrible signs, imprisons the prince in a tower in order, as he thinks, to overcome fate with the power of reason and thus rid the state of the tyrant. However, reason alone, without love and without faith, is not enough. The prince, having lived his whole life in prison in dreams of being free, like a bird or like an animal, finds himself free and becomes like a beast. So Calderon shows that the king, wanting to avoid evil, created it himself - after all, it was the prison that embittered Segismundo. Perhaps this is exactly what the stars predicted? And it turns out that fate cannot be defeated? But the playwright objects: no, it’s possible. And it shows how. His hero, once again imprisoned, realizes that “animal freedom” is actually false. And he begins to seek freedom within himself, turning to God. And when Segismundo leaves prison again, he is freer than the beast - he is free precisely as a man, since he has learned the freedom of choice given to him by God. And Segismundo chooses good, and understands that he must constantly remember the choice he has made and follow this path.

7. “Simplicissimus” was published in 1669 in an atmosphere of mystery and mystification. The frontispiece depicts a strange creature. The title page states that this is “The Biography of an outlandish vagant named Melchior Sternfels von Fuchsheim,” and it was published by a certain Hermann Schleifheim von Suhlsfoort. Judging by the title page, the book was printed in the little-known city of Montpelgart by an unknown publisher Johann Fillion. In the same year, the Continuatio, or sixth book of Simplicissimus, appeared, where it was reported that this was the work of Samuel Greifensohn von Hirschfeld, who, for unknown reasons, placed a different name on the title page, for which he “rearranged the letters” of his original one. The work was published posthumously, although the author managed to submit the first five parts to print. He partially wrote the book while he was still a musketeer. The note was signed with mysterious initials: “N. I. C. V. G. R. zu Cernhein.” In 1670, the novel “Simplicity-in-contrary, or a lengthy and outlandish biography of the hardened deceiver and tramp Courage... dictated directly from the pen of the author, this time calling himself Philarch Grossus von Trommenheim, appeared. Printed in Utopia by Felix Stratiot." In the same year, on behalf of the same author, the novel “Outlandish Springinsfeld, that is, full of jokes, ridiculous and very amusing, a biography of a once vigorous, experienced and brave soldier, now exhausted, decrepit, but very insightful tramp and beggar, was published... Printed in Paphlagonia at Felix Stratiot's. Thus, the same publisher is indicated, but the place of publication is different and, moreover, obviously fictitious. But in 1672, the first part of the novel “The Wonderful Bird's Nest” appeared, related in content to the previous ones. Its author has already been named Michael Rehulin von Semsdorff. And when (around 1673) the last (second) part of the same novel was published, its author was indicated by a whole line of letters from which it was proposed to make up his name. It was as if the author was not so much hiding behind a mask as indicating the possibility of opening it slightly. And, apparently, for many this was not much of a secret. But he was too clever, and as soon as historical circumstances changed, the key to the riddle that he thrust into the reader’s hands was lost. Meanwhile, a whole hail of books began to fall, no longer connected in any way with the content of the series of novels mentioned above, but simply attached to the name of Simplicissimus. In 1670, a funny brochure “The First Lounger” was published, which is a reworking of the folk legend with the addition of “Simplicissimus’s Pocket Book of Tricks” - a series of engravings depicting merry jesters, townspeople, landsknechts, mythological creatures, images of a tent city, weapons, medals, maps and mysterious inscriptions. The author calls himself an Ignorant and even an Idiot. In 1672, an equally remarkable book was published, full of bizarre fiction and sharp satire, “The Intricate Simplicissimus The World Inside Out.” And a year after it, an essay appeared full of superstitious tales and legends about a magic root that supposedly grows under the gallows - “Simplicissimus’s Gallows Man.” And a little earlier, an intricate treatise on socio-political topics, “Pluto’s Judgment, or the Art of Getting Rich,” where Simplicissimus and all his relatives speak, gathered at a fashionable resort to talk about this and that. The treatise, presented in a theatrical form, is not without caustic satire and parodies the literary small talk and games common at that time. In 1673, a certain Senor Messmal published a serious discourse on the purity of the German language under the cheerful title “The World-famous Simplicissimus Boasting and Boasting of his German Michel, with permission for everyone who can, to read without laughing.” The place of publication is the country where the printing press was invented (Nuremberg), and the year of publication is simply classified by highlighting individual letters (as in the publication of some other books with the name of Simplicissimus). And in the same year, an anonymous book was published - a comic New Year's gift - “The War of the Beards, or the Removal of the Unnamed Red Beard from the World Famous Black Beard of Simplicissimus.” The question about the author (or authors) of all these works was far from idle. In those days they appropriated to themselves the names and works of very famous authors. Several “Simplicissimus” folk calendars appear, filled with economic advice and astrological predictions, funny anecdotes about Simplicissimus, and even entire stories serving as a continuation of the novel, attached to its later edition. As if at least these continuations should be attributed to one author. A new chain of novels, sometimes entertaining, sometimes watery stories about the adventures of various vagabonds, retired soldiers, jesters and rogues, filled either with descriptions of military operations or clownish tricks, such as “The Simplician Staring-Eyes-at-the-World, or The Adventures of Jan Rebhu in four parts" (1677 - 1679, "An ancient biography of the French warrior Simplicissimus" (1682), in addition released by the publisher Fillion, whose name appears on the first editions of "Simplicissimus", "Hungarian or Dacian Simplicissimus" (1683) and, finally, "Very amusing and intricate Malcolmo von Libandus... Composed for rare amusement by Simplicius Simplicissimus" (1686). In 1683 – 1684 The Nuremberg publisher Johann Jonathan Felsecker published a collection of Simplician works in three volumes with copious comments by an unknown author. The preface to the first volume proclaimed: “The highly respected reader will be pleased to know that this German Simplicissimus, risen from the grave of oblivion, is much improved, multiplied and adorned with the addition of excellent notes and euphonious verses, as well as with many more important recreational and instructive things than ever before.” . The words about the “grave of oblivion” should be considered a publishing trick, designed for the fact that Simplicissimus was still well remembered, but it was already difficult to get it. Otherwise, two more collections of works published by the heirs of I. Felsecker in 1685 - 1699 would not have been published soon. and 1713. The edition of Fel-sekers includes poetic addresses to the reader and explanations of the engraved title pages. The couplets outlining the contents of the chapters are carried throughout the entire publication. At the end of the novel “Springinsfeld” and “The Wonderful Bird's Nest” there are also moralizing poems that were missing in the first editions. It also included some little-known works associated with the name of Simplicissimus, about which for a long time it was impossible to say with complete certainty who they belonged to. All works included in this publication were published under the same pseudonyms under which they appeared in their time. The biography of the author reported by the Commentator, as we shall see, turned out to be confusing and illusory. We can safely say that by the end of the century the memory of him was erased. All that remains is the hero's name. In 1751, Jocher’s “General Lexicon of Scientists” reported under the heading “Simplicius” that this was “the false name of a satirist, under which the “Intricate Simplicius” was published in 1669. Simplicissimus", translated into German by Hermann Schleifheim; 1670 "Perpetual Calendar", "The Hanging Man", to which Israel Fromschmidt or Jog. Ludv. Hartmann wrote notes; "The World Topsy-Turvy"; 1671 "Satirical Pilgram"; 1679 "Gawk at the World" in 4o; and in 1681 the German translation of Francis from Claustro “Bestia Civitatus”. This information is fantastic. The author of “Simplicissimus” is credited with books to which he is not involved, and the most important ones are omitted, which are its continuation: “Courage” and “Springinsfeld”. Israel Fromschmidt is identified with the insignificant writer Johann Ludwig Hartmann (1640 - 1684). The compiler of the note apparently did not see a single copy of Simplicissimus, for he omitted the name “Zulsfort”, displayed on all editions of this book, and did not know what it was. was revealed as the pseudonym of Samuel Greifensohn von Hirschfeld. Lessing became interested in Simplicissimus and even intended to rework it for a new edition. He began to compile a note about its author for the “Additions” to the Jocher dictionary, where it was placed by Adelung in unfinished form: “Greifensohn (Samuel) from Hirschfeld lived in the last century and in his youth was a musketeer. Nothing more is known about him, although he wrote various works, namely: “Simplicissimus” - a favorite novel of his time, which he initially published under the false name of Germanie Schleifheim von Selsfort and which in 1684 was published again in Nuremberg in two parts in the 8th part of the sheet, together with other other people’s works “The Chaste Joseph”... also in two parts of the previous Nuremberg edition. “Satirical Pilgram... (From Lessing’s handwritten heritage).”

13.Landscape sketches play a big role in the poem. Nature is not just the background against which the action takes place, but a full-fledged protagonist of the work. The author uses the technique of contrast. In paradise, the first people are surrounded by ideal nature. Even the rains there are warm and beneficial. But this idyll surrounding still sinless people is replaced by another nature - a gloomy landscape. The stylistic originality of the poem lies in the fact that it is written in a very pompous ornate style. Milton literally piles comparison upon comparison. For example, Satan is at the same time a comet, a menacing cloud, a wolf, and a winged giant. There are a lot of drawn out descriptions in the poem. At the same time, the author resorts to individualizing the speech of the characters. You can be convinced of this by comparing the furious, menacing appeal of Satan, the slow, majestic speech of God, the monologues of Adam full of virtues, and the gentle melodious speech of Eve.

15.European Baroque lyrics

The seventeenth century is the highest stage in the development of European Baroque poetry. Baroque flourished especially brightly in the 17th century in the literature and art of those countries where feudal circles, as a result of tense socio-political conflicts, temporarily triumphed, slowing down for a long time the development of capitalist relations, that is, in Italy, Spain, Germany. Baroque literature reflects the desire of the court environment, crowding around the throne of absolute monarchs, to surround themselves with splendor and glory, to glorify their greatness and power. The contribution made to the Baroque by the Jesuits, figures of the Counter-Reformation, on the one hand, and representatives of the Protestant Church, on the other (along with the Catholic, Protestant Baroque was also richly represented in Western European literature of the 17th century). The stages of the flourishing of the Baroque in the literature of the West, as a rule, coincide with periods of time when church forces become more active and a wave of religious sentiments grows (religious wars in France, the crisis of humanism caused by the aggravation of social contradictions in Spain and England in the first quarter of the 17th century, the spread of mystical tendencies in Germany during the Thirty Years' War), or with periods of growth experienced by noble circles.

Taking all this into account, it is necessary to take into account the fact that the emergence of the Baroque was due to objective reasons rooted in the patterns of social life in Europe in the second half of the 16th and 17th centuries.

The Baroque was, first of all, the product of those deep socio-political crises that shook Europe at that time and which acquired particular proportions in the 17th century. The Church and the aristocracy tried to take advantage of the sentiments that arose as a result of these SDs.