Analysis of L. Andreev’s story “Grand Slam” - analyzing a literary work - analysis in literature lessons - catalog of articles - literature teacher

L. N. Andreev Grand slam

Grand slam

Four players play “vint” three times a week: Evpraksiya Vasilievna with her brother Prokopiy Vasilievich against Maslennikov and Yakov Ivanovich. Yakov Ivanovich and Maslennikov are completely unsuited to each other as partners: the dry old man Yakov Ivanovich is unusually careful and pedantic, never takes risks, unlike the hot and enthusiastic Maslennikov. Evenings during the game are extremely monotonous, the players are completely absorbed in the cards, the most lively conversation that occurs between them is the exchange of remarks about the good weather.

“Cards had long ago lost in their eyes the meaning of soulless matter, and each suit, and within a suit each card individually, was strictly individual and lived its own separate life.” However, one day the regular flow of the players’ lives is disrupted: Maslennikov disappears for two weeks. After returning, he reports that his son has been arrested and sent to St. Petersburg. The rest are surprised, since before no one was interested in whether Maslennikov had children.

On Thursday, November 26, the game takes an unusual turn: Maslennikov is unusually lucky. And in the end he announces the “grand slam”, which he passionately dreamed of playing. for a long time. Stretching out his hand for a purchase, Maslennikov suddenly falls to the floor and dies of cardiac paralysis. The other three are shocked by what happened, they don’t even know where to report the death of their friend. Yakov Ivanovich asks in confusion where to now look for a fourth partner for the game. The mistress of the house, busy with her thoughts, suddenly becomes interested in where Yakov Ivanovich himself lives.

METHODS OF WORLD MODELING IN L. ANDREEV’S STORY “GRAND SLM”: GENRE ASPECT

The high degree of semiotics of the genre of a literary work makes it possible to use genre analysis as a way to comprehend the integrity of the text. For theorists of the formal school, the features of the genre are dominant 1. This, in turn, suggests that the structure of a literary work can be understood through genre. In the works of M.M. Bakhtin talks about the close connection of the genre with the theme of the work and the worldview of the author 2. The concept of “genre content”, introduced by G.N. Pospelov, turns out to be important for genre analysis aimed at understanding aesthetic concept reality embodied in the text.

There is another understanding of the possibilities of genre analysis. Thus, analysis in terms of gender and genre by A.B. Esin in his monograph “Principles and Techniques of Analysis of a Literary Work” refers to auxiliary types of analysis. world modeling poetics character genre

It seems to us that the most productive genre analysis is based on the ontological aspect, which allows us to consider genre as “a certain type of world-creation in which certain relationships between man and reality are brought to the center of the artistic Universe and can be aesthetically comprehended and evaluated in the light of the universal law of life” 5.

The above focuses our attention not on a descriptive, but on a functional approach to the problem of the genre of a literary work, which, in turn, leads to the fact that the main task is not the genre identification of the work, but the study of how the genre structure relates to that embodied in the work a model of the world, how different genre strategies interact within one text.

This task, in our opinion, has been most consistently implemented

N.L. Leiderman 6, who proposes to correlate genre analysis of the text with the system of genre carriers. Developed by him theoretical model genre is the basis for the analysis of L. Andreev’s story “Grand Slam”.

The story “The Grand Slam” was first published in the Moscow newspaper “Courier” on December 14, 1899. There is a practice of considering of this text among others early stories writers focused primarily on the realistic tradition. However, when analyzing the texts of L. Andreev, one should take into account the point of view of the author of the monograph on the work of the writer L.A. Jesuitova: “The division of L. Andreev’s creativity into traditional realistic and philosophical or some other (non-realistic, semi-realistic, modernist, expressionist, symbolic, existentialist) is sometimes legitimate, but more often it is just a scheme convenient for presenting the material. Both unequal halves of Andreev’s work exist as a single organism, in interconnection and interpenetration they cannot be understood without each other, outside the general context created by them” 7. This remark, in our opinion, is directly related to the “Grand Slam” story. A genre that is characterized in certain ways modeling of reality reflects this duality of the text.

In the story we can find three ways of world modeling - metaphorical (symbolic), metonymic and associative. In a story as in a genre short prose The dominant principle is the metonymic principle. Its essence lies in the fact that chance, an essential aspect of life, allows us to get an idea of ​​the universal meaning of existence, of the world as a whole. The functioning of this principle can be compared to a system of diverging circles. Four whist players are in a closed space in the “dead” 8th room. The boundaries of this circle seem impenetrable to “anxious and alien” 9 life. Connected with this image is the theme of the case-like existence of people who have deliberately fenced themselves off from reality. This topic brings A.P. closer together. Chekhov and L. Andreev, it is no coincidence that the story “The Grand Slam” is called one of the most “Chekhovian” in the writer’s work 10 . But outside the room, another life has always existed, exists and will exist. Inside, time flows smoothly in a circle (“So they played summer and winter, spring and autumn” 11), this time in its purest expression, it has lost its concreteness. This is evidenced by such temporary formulas as “at one time”, “at times”. Before us are the formal signs of an idyllic chronotope: isolation from the rest of the world, cyclical time, staticity due to the repetition of events. However, one can only talk about idyll in relation to L. Andreev’s text in an ironic way. It should be noted that the first publication of the story had the genre subtitle “idyll.” However, the idyllic passage of time is characteristic only of the first part of the story; the second part begins with the fixation exact date, the narrative becomes dynamic, the reader is filled with tense anticipation that something exceptional will happen.

Outside the room, time flows in biographical and historical dimensions. We find out that two players - Eupraxia Vasilievna and her brother Prokopiy Vasilyevich - had a past: “He lost his wife in the second year after the wedding and spent two whole months after that in a mental hospital; she herself was unmarried, although she once had an affair with a student.” Nikolai Dmitrievich has a present - “the eldest son was arrested for something and sent to St. Petersburg” 13. And only the life of Yakov Ivanovich is completely limited by the time circle with which the game of vint is associated. This, in particular, is indicated by the following portrait detail: “. a small, dry old man, who wore a welded frock coat winter and summer” 14 (our italics - L.S.). External world is present in the text largely thanks to Nikolai Ivanovich, who brought “faint echoes of this alarming and alien life” 15, he, with conversations about the weather, about the Dreyfus affair, least of all fits into the boundaries set by the card game. Note that this the only hero, endowed with the surname (Maslennikov). This is a sign of belonging to the world that is outside the card circle, and a sign of the hero’s unlost individuality. Finally, there is a third circle in the text of the story, correlated with the narrator’s speech zone; it amazes with its cosmic scale and timeless characteristics. The narration, conducted from a third person, is detached and enhances the effect of alienation. Only in the finale does this circle open for a moment for Yakov Ivanovich, when he realizes what death is, cries helplessly and understands that all attempts to “bypass” fate are pointless.

The associative principle of world modeling is associated with the motif of a card game. It is built in the reader's mind whole line literary associations, primarily those where the motifs of card games and death are associated: “The Queen of Spades” by A.S. Pushkin, “Masquerade” and “Shtoss” by M.Yu. Lermontov, “The Death of Ivan Ilyich” L.N. Tolstoy. The motive of animating, humanizing the cards makes us remember not only “ Queen of Spades» A.S. Pushkin, but also “Players” by N.V. Gogol, and the story

A.P. Chekhov's "Screw", where this theme is presented in a humorous, reduced key. The associative series associated with the theme of “case life” also draws us to the works of A.P. Chekhov.

The image, growing from the synthesis of associations, goes back to the metaphor “life is a game.” At the same time, we are not talking about comparing life with a game, as, for example, in the drama by M.Yu. Lermontov "Masquerade". L. Andreev’s metaphor realizes and brings to its logical conclusion the motive of humanizing cards. It is the metaphorical principle that allows us to identify the specifics of the model of the world that is created in L. Andreev’s story. The writer depicts the moment of substitution, the replacement of reality with a certain conventional, fantastic scheme. Grotesque deformation as a principle of world modeling is characteristic of expressionism. How more people Those who play cards are locked into the situation of the game, the more they fall under the power of the cards. Finally, it becomes obvious: it is not people who play cards, but people who play cards. This kind of metaphor turns out to be very characteristic of the poetics of the Expressionists. Suffice it to recall the micro-novel about the king who “played at people”, and now he himself has turned into playing card in the story by Sigismund Krzhizhanovsky “The Wandering “Strange””.

People lose their individuality, but cards begin to acquire more and more individuality, they become more significant than people, they acquire “their own will, their own tastes, sympathies and whims” 16. In this regard, the death of Nikolai Dmitrievich can be considered both as a result of his illness (angina pectoris, cardiac paralysis) and as an expression of the will of the cards with which the motives of fate and fate are associated. Why does Nikolai Dmitrievich become a victim of cards? He differs from his partners in that he has not lost his taste for life, has not learned to hide his feelings, even within the boundaries indicated by the card game, has not lost the ability to dream and experience strong passions. A significant place is devoted to the description of the relationship between the hero and the cards in the story. For all players, cards have long lost their “meaning of soulless matter” 17 . Nikolai Dmitrievich Maslennikov, to a greater extent than the other heroes, is aware of his dependence on the will of the cards, cannot come to terms with their whimsical disposition, and tries to outplay them. In relation to the cards to Nikolai Dmitrievich, “something fatal, something fatal” was felt 18.

The dissimilarity and foreignness of Nikolai Dmitrievich is emphasized in every possible way by the author. Alienity in the literature of expressionism shapes the nature and specificity of relationships in all spheres without exception, constituting the core of the concept of alienation. The fussiness of whist players' existence, their isolation from the world, is one of the aspects of alienation. The isolation of the characters, who know nothing and do not want to know about each other, is another level of alienation. The place of the stranger in the story, vacated due to the death of Nikolai Dmitrievich, will not be empty. Who will the cards pick next? Yakov Ivanovich? Eupraxia Vasilievna? Her brother, who was afraid of “too much happiness, followed by equally great sorrow” 19? At the end of the story, we clearly feel the breath of death as the breath of eternity, this is the dominant feeling of the expressionists. But even death is unable to break the usual circle of existence of heroes.

Thus, we see how expressionism acts as a kind of second layer, superimposed on a realistic basis.

The technique of shift and alogism characteristic of expressionism does not yet reveal itself as clearly as, for example, in more later story L. Andreev’s “Red Laughter”, however, in “Grand Slam” we also find a combination of specific naturalistic detail (“toffee paper” on the sole of a dead man’s boot) and mystical-sounding motifs of fate and death. Lack of motivation for transitions from the infinitely small to the infinitely large: “This is how they played summer and winter, spring and autumn. The decrepit world obediently bore the heavy yoke of endless existence and either blushed with blood or shed tears, announcing its path in space with the groans of the sick, hungry and offended,” 20 - this too distinguishing feature poetics of expressionism. Perhaps the most a shining example Eupraxia Vasilievna’s unexpected question at the end turns out to be unmotivated and strange:

“And you, Yakov Ivanovich, are still in the same apartment?” The question with which the story ends takes on special significance also because it does not require an answer.

L. Andreev's story, static at the beginning and dynamic in the second part, allows us to correlate it with two genre strategies - novelistic and ethological (moral descriptive). In this case, the first one turns out to be deprived of its essential characteristics and retains only some formal features. Thus, we can find an unexpected outcome in the text, an image of the mysterious game of fate with a person, we see how the writer brings life material into the focus of one event, which is typical for a short story. At the same time, we cannot call the unexpected denouement a novelistic pointe, a turn of the situation to the opposite, or the identification of properties in the characters’ characters that are new to the reader. Maslennikov's death does not change anything; the circle of life, indicated by the card game, is not broken. Even Yakov Ivanovich, who deviated from his rules, does this for the first and last time.

A measured, detailed description of the environment in its relatively stable state, the depiction of the static characters of the characters allows us to highlight this - the logical component in the story. In this case, the object of the image is not social roles heroes, but the psychology of players who see a person not as a person, but as a playing partner. This component forms the realistic basis into which elements of expressionist poetics are woven.

Notes

• 1 See: Tomashevsky B.V. Theory of literature. Poetics / B.V. Tomashevsky. - M., 2 1996.
• 2 See: Bakhtin M.M. Aesthetics verbal creativity/ MM. Bakhtin. - M., 1979; Medvedev, P.N. (Bakhtin M.M.) Formal method in literary criticism / P.N. Medvedev (M.M. Bakhtin). - L., 1927.
• 3 See: Pospelov G.N. On the issue of poetic genres / G.N. Pospelov // Reports and communications of the Faculty of Philology of Moscow State University. - 1948. - Issue. 5. - pp. 59-60.
• 4 See: Esin A.B. Principles and techniques of analyzing a literary work: textbook. allowance / A.B. Yesin. - M., 1999. In some cases, according to the author, genre can help in analysis, indicate which aspects of the work should be paid attention to. The possibilities of genre analysis are limited by the fact that not all works have a clear genre nature, and in the case when the genre is defined unambiguously, this “does not always help the analysis, since genre structures are often recognized by a secondary feature that does not create a special originality of content and form” (p. 221). However, the author relates this remark to a greater extent to the analysis of lyrical genres. When it comes to analysis epic works, first of all, a story, genre aspect seems significant (p. 222).
• 5 Workshop on genre analysis of a literary work / N.L. Leiderman, M.N. Lipovetsky, N.V. Barkovskaya and others - Ekaterinburg: Ural. state ped. univ., 2003. -S. 24.
• 6 Ibid. pp. 15-24.
• 7 Jesuitova L.A. Creativity of Leonid Andreev. 1892-1906 / L.A. Jesuitova. - L., 1975. - P. 65.
• 8 Andreev L.N. Grand Slam / L.N. Andreev // Favorites. - M., 1982. - P. 59.
• 9 Ibid. P. 59.
• 10 Bezzubov V.I. Leonid Andreev and the traditions of Russian realism / V.I. Without teeth. - Tallinn, 1984.
• 11 Andreev, L. N. Decree. Op. P. 59.
• 12 Ibid. P. 58.
• 13 Ibid. P. 62.
• 14 Ibid. P. 58.
• 15 Ibid. P. 59.

Left a reply Guest

L.N. Andreev is one of the few writers who subtly felt the movement of life, its rapid impulses and the slightest changes. The writer felt the tragedy especially acutely human existence, which is controlled by mysterious, fatal forces unknown to people. His work is the result of philosophical reflection, an attempt to answer the eternal questions of existence. In Andreev’s works, artistic details acquire special value. At first glance, they seem completely motionless and silent. Behind the smallest details, like light strokes, subtle halftones and hints are hidden. Thus, the writer encourages his reader to independently answer critical issues human life Therefore, in order to understand Andreev’s works, you need to feel the semantic shades of each word, be able to determine its sound in context. This is what we will now try to do when analyzing the story “Grand Slam”. II Conversation on the story “Grand Slam” - What is the peculiarity of the plot and character system?(The plot of the story, at first glance, seems quite simple. However, upon closer examination, you will notice philosophical meaning, which is hidden behind the real everyday basis. Characters of the story - ordinary people. For many years they spend their leisure time playing vint. The author sparingly outlines the features of his heroes and says nothing about inner world characters. The reader himself has to guess that behind the simple plot basis and laconic depiction of the characters there is meant a symbol of the monotony of the flow of life, in the rhythm of which ordinary people live aimlessly).- What is the intonation of the piece? What is her role? ( The intonation of the story is simple, devoid of emotionality, acute drama, and calm. The author impartially describes the leisure time of the players. It's about about ordinary and inconspicuous events. But behind the measured intonation of the narrative, tension is hidden, drama is felt in the subtext. In this calm flow of life, behind the monotony of a card game, people lose their spiritual appearance and individuality).- What can you say about the heroes of the story “Grand Slam”? How are their actions described? ( Appearance The characters are briefly outlined. Yakov Ivanovich “was a small, dry old man, winter and summer, who wore a welded frock coat and trousers, silent and stern.” The complete opposite of him is Nikolai Dmitrievich - “fat and hot”, “red-cheeked, smelling fresh air" Evpraksiya Vasilievna and Prokopiy Vasilievich are described in less detail. When describing his brother and sister, Andreev limits himself to only mentioning the facts of their biography. All heroes have one thing in common - card game replaced them with the diversity of life. They are afraid that the established order and artificially created conditions of existence may collapse. The world of these heroes will be hidden within the confines of a deck of cards. Therefore, their actions are very stereotyped. The author succinctly describes the manner of their playing).- Compare the two heroes Nikolai Dmitrievich and Yakov Ivanovich by their behavior at the card table. How do their characters reveal themselves through details?(Yakov Ivanovich never played more than four tricks, his actions are precisely weighed, do not allow the slightest deviation from the order he established. Nikolai Dmitrievich, on the contrary, is presented in the story as a passionate player. Playing cards completely absorbs him. In addition, he dreams of a grand slam , so he constantly displays outbursts of emotion).- How does Andreev describe the cards in the story “Grand Slam”? What is the meaning behind the detailed images of the cards? (It seems that cards and people have switched places: people look like inanimate objects, and cards behave like living beings. The author describes the card suits in detail. As the description becomes more detailed, the cards develop a character, specific model behavior, they become prone to displaying emotions. We can say that the author performs an artistic ritual of bringing the cards to life. The personification of cards can be contrasted with the process of spiritual death of the heroes).- What symbolic subtext is hidden behind the death of Nikolai Dmitrievich? (The death of this hero is natural and inevitable. The entire course of the narrative foreshadows tragic ending. The absurdity of the dream of a grand slam testifies to the spiritual death of the hero. After which physical death occurs. The absurdity of the situation is enhanced by the fact that his dream has come true. The death of Nikolai Dmitrievich symbolizes the emptiness of many human aspirations and desires, the destructive influence of everyday life, which, like acid, corrodes the personality and makes it colorless).- What is the philosophical meaning of the story?(Many people live in an atmosphere of spiritual vacuum. They forget about compassion, kindness, mercy, intellectual development. There is no keen interest in the world around them in their hearts. By depicting the limited personal space of his heroes, the author covertly expresses his disagreement with this form of existence).

2.4 Problems of psychology and the meaning of life in the stories “Grand Slam”, “Once upon a time”, “The Story of Sergei Petrovich”, “Thought”

The writer's attention has always been attracted by the moral, ethical and philosophical essence of human existence. He was especially concerned about the increasing alienation and loneliness of modern man. “Andreev associated the disunity of people, their spiritual inferiority, indifference to the fate of their native country not only with social inequality and material need, but for him this is the result of the abnormal structure of bourgeois society as a whole. Disunity and lack of spirituality are also inherent in “prosperous” ordinary people.” “The Grand Slam” is one of the most successful stories of a philosophical mood and one of Andreev’s most powerful anti-bourgeois and anti-philistine stories. The law, the norm, the circle of human destiny (“fate”) acquire symbolic and phantasmagonic features in it.

Andreev shows that “everyday life so devalues ​​the spiritual content of human life that it becomes like a meaningless spinning, like fantastic game. (In this story, the symbolic image of the game is based on an empirical one - the card game of screw. In his future work, Andreev will widely use the image of a masquerade, a spectacle, a playground, where a person is a mask, a puppet).”

And the worst thing here is that from this creepy game no exit. All the actions of the heroes: conversations, thoughts come down to only one thing - winning a game of screw. Even the death of one of the heroes does not find a response in their hearts. Their only regret is that they lost their partner, and he did not know that he had won.

“In the Grand Slam final, sarcasm and a cry of pain, irony and a cry of despair merged together. A person, deadened, destroyed by the subjugation of mechanical everyday life, deserves mercy (a man is missing!) and contempt (those who have become reified cannot be people, they are not capable of solidarity, they are strangers even to themselves).” The characters are indifferent to each other, united only by a long-term game of screw, they are so faceless that the author begins to call them the equally faceless “they” - this is another idea of ​​the writer. When one of the players dies during the game, the remaining players are disturbed not by the death itself, but by the fact that the dead one did not know about his winnings, and they lost a fourth partner.

The story “Once upon a time” is one of the peaks early creativity Andreeva. In it the motives of life, death, alienation, happiness sound in full force, the worldviews of two antipodean heroes are sharply contrasted: a stranger to the land and people, the predatory and unfortunate merchant Kosheverov and the happy deacon Speransky, who is close to life. Both heroes find themselves in the same hospital room, both of them will soon die, but there is a significant difference between them: their attitude towards their future. “And if for Kosheverov a chamber, a cell, a room is a deplorable end, a joyless and hopeless outcome, death, followed by emptiness, if for him death only revealed the futility and purposelessness of his existence, then for Speransky death once again revealed the great meaning and price of life.

Speransky is completely open to life. He is not focused on his illness, he is turned to other patients, to doctors and students, nurses and caregivers, to living life outside the ward. He hears the cry of sparrows, rejoices in the shine of the sun, and watches the road with interest. His fate is closely connected with the fate of his wife, children, home and garden - they all live in him, and he continues to live in them.”

With this story Andreev wanted to show that different people They approach life differently. For some people it is happiness, an opportunity to express themselves (Speransky), while for others life is a meaningless, empty vegetation.

“The last phrase of the story “Once upon a time”: “The sun rose” is unusually capacious and polysemantic. It is related to the fate of Kosheverov (he died, defeated by both life and death, and invincible life continues to flow). It applies no less to the fate of Deacon Speransky: the deacon will soon die, but his death itself is the triumph of life, it is a confirmation of what he loved, for which he lived. This last phrase also applies to the fate of the third actor- student Torbetsky, whose life, although he lies on hospital bed, is still ahead, like the lives of thousands of generations of people ahead.”

At the center of “The Story of Sergei Petrovich” is the leading problem of Andreev’s early work: “man and fate.” The hero of the stories of a philosophical mood experienced the influence of “fate” and reacted to it with his behavior. Sergei Petrovich finds himself in a position that gives him the opportunity to see, feel, and realize his dependence on “fate.” The narration in the story is not from the person of Sergei Petrovich, but from a third person, but this unknown and “objective” third person is at the level of Sergei Petrovich’s consciousness, as close as possible to the range of his ideas.

“The assessment that Andreev gave to the story is curious. In several cases (letters to M. Gorky, A. Izmailov, etc.) Andreev admitted that the story was not entirely successful for him artistically. At the same time, he stubbornly insisted that ideologically “Sergei Petrovich” is very important for him, that he puts it above many, if not all, early stories of this time, including above the story “Once upon a time” “in terms of the significance and seriousness of the content” . Here, for example, is what Andreev wrote about the story in his own diary: “...death is not scary to me now and is not scary precisely because “Sergei Petrovich” is over...”. In his diary, Andreev briefly writes down the main theme of the story, as he understands it: “... this is a story about a man, typical of our time, who recognized that he has the right to everything that others have, and rebelled against nature and against people who depriving him of his last opportunity for happiness. He commits suicide - a “free death”, according to Nietzsche, under whose influence the spirit of indignation is born in my hero.”

In choosing the theme and plot, Andreev largely followed Mikhailovsky, his interpretation of the strengths of Nietzsche’s philosophy and his dispute with Nietzsche about the free man. According to Mikhailovsky, Nietzsche is strong in his criticism of the modern personality, erased to nothing by modern bourgeois society, and his acute longing for a new, free, bright person. A little person, Mikhailovsky believed, “can conceal within himself, and on occasion even reveal, such moral power and beauty, before which we must inevitably respectfully take off our hats. But it can be removed just as respectfully in front of an ordinary ordinary worker in a matter that we consider important, necessary, sacred.”

Andreev chooses as the hero of the story just such an ordinary ordinary worker, whom he once attracted to himself and was amazed by “Thus Spoke Zarathustra.” Under the influence of Nietzsche’s idea of ​​the “superman”, the ordinary man Sergei Petrovich saw the light: the ideal of a person “strong, free and courageous in spirit” lit up before him, and he realized how far he was from this ideal.

Nietzsche awakened in him a feeling of his inequality in the natural world due to his ordinariness, ordinariness (in comparison with some comrades he is “ugly”, “stupid”, “less talented”, etc.). Sergei Petrovich was deeply hurt by Nietzsche's thought about the inferiority of ordinary people, to whose category he belonged.

Starting with Nietzsche, starting from him, Sergei Petrovich comes to the understanding that he is not free, not strong, not brave in spirit, not only because he is devoid of bright talents. He is unhappy because the social system does not give him any opportunity to develop his own natural needs and capabilities (he deeply loved nature, was fond of music and art, dreamed of the joyful work of a simple plowman and the sensitive female love). In an unfairly constructed society, he is assigned the role of a member useful to the market (as a buyer), to statistics and history (as an object of study of the laws of population), to progress. All his “usefulness,” as it became clear to Sergei Petrovich, “is beyond his will.”

“The most insignificant”, “the most ordinary” Sergei Petrovich is a rebel like Pushkin’s Eugene (“The Bronze Horseman”). Eugene rose up against state and historical necessity, which deprived him of personal will. Sergei Petrovich rebelled against “fate”. In the concept of “rock” he first of all includes the social injustice of the bourgeois world. It also includes “natural inequality” (talents and ordinary people). But if for Nietzsche this division forever elevates some and “rejects” others, then for Sergei Petrovich it is clear that this inequality should become imperceptible in a society where every person can find himself, be in his place and receive satisfaction from his own efforts and recognition according to the results of their work.

Sergei Petrovich, like most of Andreev’s heroes, is an individualist, an altruistic individualist, suffering and weak, and as an individualist he does not know the ways to achieve social equality in which he could become a free person. Moreover, Sergei Petrovich was fully convinced that in this world he could not be equal to any other person and, therefore, could not be happy. Nietzsche’s treatise (“If life fails you, know that death will succeed”) was the impetus for self-awakening and the reason for the suicide of Sergei Petrovich, the real reason suicide was an awareness of one’s own helplessness in a world where all kinds of inequality are cultivated. His suicide is a step of despair, and indignation, and rebellion, and the triumph of the winner at the same time.

In the story “Thought” the theme of “the powerlessness and impersonality of human thought, the meanness of the human mind” is most clearly expressed. Main character story - Doctor Kerzhentsev. This person refuses moral standards and ethical principles, and recognizes only the power of thought. "All human history“,” he writes in his notes, “seemed to me like a procession of one triumphant thought. ...I idolized her,” he said about the thought, “and wasn’t she worth it? Didn’t she, like a giant, fight against the whole world and its errors? She carried me to the top of a high mountain, and I saw how deep below people were swarming with their petty animal passions, with their eternal fear of life and death, with their churches, masses and prayer services.”

Having abandoned the morality of society, Kerzhentsev relies on his own thought. To prove his superiority over all people, he decides to kill. Moreover, he kills his friend Alexei Savelov. Kerzhentsev imitates his madness and is glad that he cleverly deceived the investigation. “But the thought killed its creator and master with the same indifference with which he killed others with it.”

So the writer leads us to the conclusion that Kerzhentsev’s self-centered and non-social thought is dangerous both for himself and for the people around him. The hero's tragedy is not the only one of its kind; Andreev shows that this will happen to anyone who wants to elevate himself above others.

CONCLUSION

The artistic thought of Leonid Andreev very often, for a long time and persistently lingered on “eternal” questions and problems - about life and death, about the mysteries of human existence, about the purpose of man and his place in the endless cycle of life.

The spiritual crisis of Father Vasily, depicted by Andreev, a man who naively thought of saving humanity from the evils of life by the will of heaven, was perceived by contemporaries as a call to achieve truth on earth on their own.

From the story of the same name, Sergei Petrovich understands that in a socially unjust society a person cannot be happy, and, realizing that he is insignificant, he decides to commit suicide.

In the story “Once upon a time,” Andreev drew a piece of eternal, indestructible life, captured its brief moment and showed that for some it can be joyless, meaningless, aimless, for others it can be immortal, an introduction to the eternal and good.

The story “Thought” shows the tragedy of a man who destroyed his “moral instincts” and who then destroyed himself.

The writer in the story “Bargamot and Garaska” argued that even the “last” person is also a person and is called your brother.

The writer acted as an ardent opponent of the war in the story “Red Laughter.”

The story was a cry about the need to save man, people, nations, humanity from the “world infection” that spreads war as a way of its own existence and spread.

The writer expresses the idea that everyday life “discolors” a person, devalues ​​his soul; such a person deserves contempt, but at the same time, pity (“Grand Slam”).

Andreev presents the theme of betrayal (“Judas Iscariot”) in a completely new way. Judas cannot defeat him, but he cannot help but love Jesus. And the whole psychology of betrayal then lies in the struggle of the individual with predestination in the struggle of Judas with the mission destined for him.

Stories about children make us think about the stolen childhood and irretrievably lost happiness that every person needs.

Stories by L. Andreev, written in late XIX- early 20th century remain relevant today. The ideas expressed by the writer still concern modern people: senseless wars continue in the world; people are still struggling with their fate, some know exactly what they are living for, others are simply living it. This is why the work of Leonid Andreev remains relevant a century later.

Andreev discovered his own in literature, new world, a world covered in the revolutionary breath of rebellious elements, anxious thoughts, and philosophical moods. Reacting sharply to the transition and crisis of all spheres of life in a turning point era, Andreev acted as an artist-seeker, an experimenter, who infected everyone who came into contact with him with the very process of intense, painful searches. Blok and Gorky, Vorovsky and Veresaev, Benois and Kirov, Lunacharsky and Voloshin, Korolenko and R. Luxemburg - these and many other contemporaries of Andreev repeated, for example, that he made it vital for each of them the need now, immediately and accurately, to answer themselves and everyone around to the eternal, “damned” questions discovered by humanity in ancient times and relevant to this day: about the purpose of human existence, about the tragedies of life and death, about the paths of reason, faith and feeling, about the fight against “world evil” for victory man, for the victory of good. A. Blok considered this very ineradicable need of Andreev to ask questions and demand answers to them to be a characteristically Russian trait, which became sharply visible in the revolutionary era. Andreev asked his questions to the old world “from his very depths, relentlessly and unconsciously,” asked them on behalf of the “great child - Russia,” which entered the arena of world history as the leading actor and needed effective answers.

“Andreev stood at the origins of a number of phenomena that were developed in Russian and foreign art. As studies about specific writers show, individual artists experienced his influence, entire literary movements followed the paths marked by his work: Andreev’s experience was of great importance for V. Mayakovsky and B. Brecht, without it it is impossible to establish the pedigree of F. Kafka, L. .Pirandello and O'Neill; an appeal to Andreev’s work reveals the roots of such literary phenomena as existentialism (A. Camus), intellectual theater and theater of the absurd, “philosophical realism” in Japan; Andreev’s searches in the field of “neorealism” and “universal psychologism” are in line with various trends in Russian and world theater and cinema.”

LIST OF REFERENCES USED

Andreev L.N. Favorites. – M: Soviet Russia, 1988. – 323 p.

Bogdanov V.A. Creativity of L. Andreev // Andreev L.N. Favorites. – M: Soviet Russia, 1988. – pp. 3-15.

Kuleshov F.I. About the prose of Leonid Andreev // Andreev, L.N. Red Laugh: Selected stories and stories. – Mn: Publishing house of BSU named after. IN AND. Lenin, 1981. – pp. 5-22.

Jesuitova L.A. Creativity of Leonid Andreev. – L: Leningrad University Publishing House, 1976. – 239s.

Russian writers: bibliographic dictionary: In 2 volumes / ed. P.A. Nikolaev.

– M: Education, 1990. – T. 1. – pp. 32-36. Russian literature of the twentieth century 1897-1917: tutorial

for students of Belarusian departments of philological faculties of pedagogical institutes of Belarus / ed. T.B. Liokumovich.

– Brest: Commercial publishing enterprise “Pirce”, 1993. – 138 p. Sokolov A.G. History of Russian literature of the late nineteenth – early twentieth centuries.

Textbook – 4th ed., add. and processed.. – M: Higher. shk; Ed. Center Academy, 2000 – 432 p. Leonida Essay >> Literature and Russian language April 5 10. Moscow. Leonid Egorovich! I'm not at all... in London*, popularization ideas about an obvious contradiction, ... asked Obolensky, art story*. Together with... Tolstoy. 284 in. IN.