Dubrovsky's story or novel and why. A.S. Pushkin and his novel "Dubrovsky". Real prototypes of the main character

In the 30s, a new stage began in. From romantic heroes and paintings, the writer moves on to realistic sketches, trying to show reality as it is. He begins to worry about the problems of Russian society, to which he devotes one of his most famous novels.

Documentary basis of the novel

One day, while talking with his friend P.V. Nashchokin, Pushkin heard the story of a poor Belarusian nobleman, Pavel Ostrovsky, who owned a small village in the Minsk province. During the War of 1812, the documents for ownership of the estate were burned. The rich neighbor of young Ostrovsky took advantage of this and took away his home from the young man. Ostrovsky's peasants rebelled, refusing to submit to the new owner, and chose to commit robbery. According to rumors, the young nobleman first became a teacher, and then joined his former subjects. He was arrested for robbery, but Pavel managed to escape from custody and hide. The further fate of this person, just like , is unknown.

Ostrovsky's situation struck Pushkin so much that he immediately decided to write about the novel, initially giving the main character the name of his desperate, daring prototype.

Creation of a work

Alexander Sergeevich began work on it in 1832. In the writer's drafts the place of events is marked - Kozlovsky district of the Tambov province. It was there that another real story took place, which is reflected in the novel: Colonel Kryukov won a court case regarding the ownership of the estate from his neighbor, Lieutenant Martynov. Litigations with similar outcomes have occurred repeatedly. Throughout Russia, wealthier nobles took away their estates from poor landowners. The blatant injustice of the court in such a situation outraged Pushkin, he decided to describe a similar situation with the most subtle details. Among the victims of eminent and unprincipled aristocratic neighbors was the landowner Dubrovsky. Alexander Sergeevich chose this sonorous surname for his noble hero.

Pushkin worked on the work for a year. The last entries of the drafts date back to 1833.

How the novel appeared in print

Pushkin never managed to complete the novel about the noble robber. The author did not even give the final title to the work (instead of the title in the drafts there is simply the date “October 21, 1821”). The work appeared in print after the death of the great poet, in 1841. This is the story of the creation of the novel “Dubrovsky”.

But researchers of Pushkin’s drafts discovered a continuation of the narrative in him. According to the writer’s plan, the elderly man was supposed to die, and Dubrovsky was supposed to return to Russia, hide his identity, be exposed and then run away again. If Alexander Sergeevich had not died, perhaps the novel would have had a happy ending.

"Dubrovsky"- the most famous robber novel in Russian, an unprocessed (and unfinished) work by A. S. Pushkin. It tells the story of the love of Vladimir Dubrovsky and Maria Troekurova - descendants of two warring landowner families.

History of creation

When creating the novel, Pushkin was based on the story of his friend P.V. Nashchokin about how he saw in the prison “one Belarusian poor nobleman, named Ostrovsky, who had a lawsuit with a neighbor for land, was forced out of the estate and, left with only peasants , began to rob, first the clerks, then others.” During the work on the novel, the main character's surname was changed to "Dubrovsky". The story takes place in the 1820s and spans approximately a year and a half. A similar plot (two landowner neighbors are friends, but then, because of a trifling reason, they become enemies, and one kills the other) was independently used by M. Yu. Lermontov in his youthful unfinished novel “Vadim”, created in the same years.

The title was given to the novel by publishers upon its first publication in 1841. In the Pushkin manuscript, instead of the title, there is the date when work on the work began: “October 21, 1832.” The last chapter is dated "February 6, 1833."

Images of the homeland of Vladimir Dubrovsky (“Ten minutes later he rode into the master’s courtyard ...” and the next four sentences in Chapter III of the novel) were planned by Pushkin for use in the preface to “Belkin’s Tales”, appeared in “The History of the Village of Goryukhin” (“Finally I saw the Goryukhin Grove ; and ten minutes later he drove into the master's courtyard..." and the next four sentences) and only then - in the novel "Dubrovsky".

Plot of the novel

Because of the insolence of the slave Troekurov, a quarrel occurs between Dubrovsky and Troekurov, turning into enmity between neighbors. Troyekurov bribes the provincial court and, taking advantage of his impunity, seizes Dubrovsky's Kistenevka estate from him. The elder Dubrovsky goes crazy in the courtroom. The younger Dubrovsky, Vladimir, a guards cornet in St. Petersburg, is forced to leave the service and return to his seriously ill father, who soon dies. Dubrovsky sets fire to Kistenevka; The estate given to Troekurov burns down along with the court officials who came to formalize the transfer of property. Dubrovsky becomes a robber like Robin Hood, terrifying local landowners, but not touching Troekurov’s estate. Dubrovsky bribes a passing French teacher, Deforge, who proposes to enter the service of the Troekurov family, and under his guise he becomes a tutor in the Troekurov family. He is put to the test with a bear, which he kills with a shot in the ear. Love arises between Dubrovsky and Troekurov’s daughter, Masha.

Troekurov gives seventeen-year-old Masha in marriage to fifty-year-old Prince Vereisky against her will. Vladimir Dubrovsky tries in vain to prevent this unequal marriage. Having received the agreed sign from Masha, he arrives to save her, but is too late. During the wedding procession from the church to Vereisky's estate, Dubrovsky's armed men surround the prince's carriage. Dubrovsky tells Masha that she is free, but she refuses his help, explaining her refusal by saying that she has already taken an oath. Masha's groom, having wounded Dubrovsky, falls into the hands of robbers, but Dubrovsky asks them not to touch the groom. The robbers with Dubrovsky return to the forest, where a battle takes place with soldiers combing the area, victorious for the robbers. After this, the government sends a company of soldiers to capture Dubrovsky, but he disbands his accomplices and hides abroad from justice.

Possible sequel

Several drafts of the last, third volume of the novel have been preserved in Maykov's collection of Pushkin's drafts. Transcript of a later version:

Criticism

In literary criticism, the similarity of certain situations of “Dubrovsky” with Western European novels on a similar topic, including those authored by Walter Scott, is noted. A. Akhmatova ranked “Dubrovsky” lower than all other works of Pushkin, pointing out its compliance with the standard of the “tabloid” novel of that time:

In general, it is believed that P<ушкина>no failures. And yet “Dubrovsky” is Pushkin’s failure. And thank God he didn't finish it. It was a desire to earn a lot, a lot of money, so as not to think about it anymore. "Oak<ровский>", finished<енный>, at that time it would have been an excellent “reading book”.<…>...I leave three whole lines to list what is there that is tempting for the reader.
From Anna Akhmatova's notebook

Film adaptations

“Dubrovsky, Ataman of the Robbers” / Dubrowsky, der Räuber Ataman (Germany) (1921) Director Pyotr Chardynin
“The Eagle” (eng. The Eagle) - a Hollywood silent film with a greatly changed plot (1925); starring Rudolph Valentino.
“Dubrovsky” is a film by Soviet director Alexander Ivanovsky (1936).
“The Black Eagle” is a film by Italian director Riccardo Freda (1946). Starring Rossano Brazzi.
Theater for youth: Dubrovsky / Le Théâtre de la jeunesse: Doubrovsky (TV) (France) (1961). Director Alain Bode
What's good in life /Pa" qué me sirve la vida (Mexico) (1961). Director Jaime Salvador(musical based on the novel “Dubrovsky”)
“The Noble Robber Vladimir Dubrovsky” - a film directed by Vyacheslav Nikiforov and its 4-episode extended television version called “Dubrovsky” (1989). In the role of Vladimir Dubrovsky - Mikhail Efremov.
“Dubrovsky” - a full-length film and a 5-episode television version. The action of the novel is transferred to modern Russia. Directed by Alexander Vartanov (2014). In the role of Vladimir Dubrovsky - Danila Kozlovsky.

Opera

Dubrovsky - opera by E. F. Napravnik.
The first production of Eduard Napravnik's opera "Dubrovsky" took place in St. Petersburg, on January 15, 1895, at the Mariinsky Theater, under the direction of the author.

We will analyze the characteristics of the heroes and a brief summary especially carefully. We will also present a short overview of critical reviews of the work by the author’s contemporaries.

History of creation

It was based on a story that Pushkin was told by his friend P.V. Nashchokin. Thus, the novel “Dubrovsky” has realistic roots. The analysis of the work therefore needs to begin precisely with this.

So, Nashchokin met a Belarusian nobleman in the prison, who had been suing his neighbor for a long time over land, was kicked out of the estate and then, left with several peasants, began to engage in robbery. The surname of that criminal was Ostrovsky, Pushkin replaced it with Dubrovsky, and moved the action of the work to the 20s of the 19th century.

Initially, Pushkin titled the novel with the date “October 21, 1832,” which marked the beginning of work on the novel. And the well-known title was given to the work by the editor before publication in 1841.

Even at school, children study the novel “Dubrovsky”. Analysis of the work (grade 6 is the time when students become acquainted with it for the first time) is usually carried out according to a scheme. And if the first point is a description of the history of creation, then a summary of the novel should follow.

Landowner Kirill Petrovich Troekurov, a retired general-in-chief, is a classic wayward and rich gentleman, all his neighbors cater to his whims, and provincial officials tremble at the sight of him. He is friends with his neighbor and former comrade in the army service, Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky, a poor and independent nobleman, a former lieutenant.

Troekurov always had a bad and cruel character. More than once he mocked his guests. His favorite trick was to lock one of those who came to him in a room with a bear.

Development of action

One day Dubrovsky comes to see Troekurov, and the landowners quarrel over the insolence of the guest’s servant. Gradually the quarrel turns into a real war. Troekurov decides to take revenge, bribes the judge and, thanks to his impunity, sues Dubrovsky for Kistenevka, his estate. Upon learning the verdict, the landowner goes crazy right in the courtroom. His son, guards cornet Vladimir, is forced to leave his service and come from St. Petersburg to his sick father. Soon the elder Dubrovsky dies.

Court officials arrive to formalize the transfer of property, they get drunk and spend the night on the estate. At night, Vladimir sets fire to the house with them. Dubrovsky, together with his loyal peasants, becomes a robber. Gradually he terrifies all the surrounding landowners. Only Troekurov's possessions remain untouched.

A teacher comes to the Troekurov family to join the service. Dubrovsky intercepts him halfway and bribes him. Now he himself, under the guise of Deforge, goes to the enemy’s estate. Gradually, love arises between him and Masha Troekurova, the daughter of a landowner.

Denouement

It is best to consider the novel as a whole. But analyzing the work “Dubrovsky” chapter by chapter will be quite problematic, since they are an element of one whole and, without context, lose most of their meaning.

So, Troekurov decides to marry his daughter to Prince Vereisky. The girl is against it and does not want to marry the old man. Dubrovsky makes an unsuccessful attempt to prevent their marriage. Masha sends him a prearranged sign, he comes to save her, but it turns out to be too late.

When the wedding cortege follows from the church to the prince's estate, Dubrovsky's people surround him. Vladimir offers Masha freedom; she can leave her old husband and go with him. But the girl refuses - she has already made an oath and cannot break it.

Soon the provincial authorities almost manage to catch Dubrovsky's gang. After this, he dismisses his people, and he himself goes abroad.

Analysis of Pushkin’s work “Dubrovsky”: theme and idea

This work is one of the most significant in the writer’s work. In it, Pushkin reflected many of the problems of his time. For example, the tyranny of landowners, the arbitrariness of officials and judges, the lack of rights of serfs and robbery as a reaction to all this of rebellious and brave people.

The theme of robbery for good purposes is not new in world and Russian literature. The image of a noble and freedom-loving robber did not leave many romantic writers indifferent. However, this is not the only thing that declares Pushkin’s interest in this topic. For many years, robbery was widespread in Russia. The robbers were former soldiers, impoverished nobles, and escaped serfs. However, the people did not blame them for the robberies, but the authorities that brought them to this. And Pushkin decided in his work to show why honest people have to take the high road.

The uniqueness of the conflict

We continue to describe the analysis of Pushkin’s work “Dubrovsky”. 6th grade, which is where they study the novel, is already familiar with the concept of “conflict,” so it will definitely need to be considered.

So, in the novel there are only 2 conflicts, which are strikingly different both in nature and in social significance. The first has a strong social connotation and is associated with class inequality. In it, Andrei Dubrovsky and Kirila Troekurov collide. And as a result, it leads to the rebellion of Vladimir, who cannot come to terms with arbitrariness. This is the main conflict of the novel.

However, there is a second one, related to the theme of love and family relationships. It manifests itself in the formal marriage of Masha to the old prince. Pushkin raises the topic of women's lack of rights, talks about the impossibility of lovers to be happy because of the whims of their parents.

Both of these conflicts are united by the figure of Kirila Troekurov, who became the cause of troubles for both the Dubrovskys and their own daughter.

Image of Vladimir Dubrovsky

The main character of the novel is Vladimir Andreevich Dubrovsky. Analysis of the work allows us to give it a very flattering description. He is a poor nobleman, he is 23 years old, he has a majestic appearance and a loud voice. Despite his position, he did not lose his honor and pride. He, like his father, always treated serfs well and earned their love. That is why they entered into an agreement with him when he planned to burn the estate and then began to rob.

His mother died when he was only one year old. However, he knew that his parents married for love. He wanted such a future for himself. Masha Troekurova became for him that one and only love. However, her father intervened in the matter. Vladimir made a desperate attempt to save his beloved, but failed. His nobility was also manifested in the fact that he resignedly left when Masha refused to run away with him. We can say that this hero embodies the concept of noble honor.

Image of Troekurov

To expose people like Troekurov, the novel “Dubrovsky” was written. Analysis of the work makes us understand the baseness and unprincipledness of this person. Nothing is sacred to him. He brings his servants and friends into the world with equal ease. Even the death of a comrade and good friend did not stop his greed. He did not spare his daughter either. For the sake of profit, Troekurov doomed Masha to an unhappy married life and deprived her of true love. At the same time, he is confident that he is right and does not even allow the thought that he might be punished.

The novel as assessed by critics

What did critics think about the novel “Dubrovsky”? Analysis of the work helped us understand that Pushkin wrote a rather topical book. However, Belinsky, for example, called her melodramatic, and Dubrovsky a hero who does not evoke sympathy. On the other hand, the critic highly appreciated the authenticity with which Pushkin portrayed Troekurov and the landowner life of his time.

P. Annenkov noted that the novel has a romantic ending, incompatible with its content, but the characters described are particularly psychological and authentic. also emphasized the vitality of the situation described and the realism of the characters.

“Dubrovsky”: a brief analysis of the work

If necessary, make a brief analysis. Then you can write the following. The main theme of the work is robbery in Russia. The idea is to show how people take this path and who is to blame. Pushkin tried to expose the authorities and show the social injustice reigning around. There are two conflicts in the work - social and love. The first is associated with the unlimited power of those who have it, and the second with complete parental authority over their children. The main culprit is Troekurov, who embodies the classic type of Russian master.

Chapter I

Several years ago, an old Russian gentleman, Kirila Petrovich Troekurov, lived on one of his estates. His wealth, noble family and connections gave him great weight in the provinces where his estate was located. The neighbors were happy to cater to his slightest whims; provincial officials trembled at his name; Kirila Petrovich accepted signs of servility as a proper tribute; his house was always full of guests, ready to entertain his lordly idleness, sharing his noisy and sometimes violent amusements. No one dared to refuse his invitation or on certain days not to appear with due respect in the village of Pokrovskoye. In his home life, Kirila Petrovich showed all the vices of an uneducated person. Spoiled by everything that surrounded him, he was accustomed to giving full rein to all the impulses of his ardent disposition and all the ideas of his rather limited mind. Despite the extraordinary strength of his physical abilities, he suffered from gluttony twice a week and was tipsy every evening. In one of the wings of his house lived sixteen maids, engaged in handicrafts peculiar to their sex. The windows in the outbuilding were blocked by wooden bars; the doors were locked with locks, the keys to which were kept by Kiril Petrovich. The young hermits went to the garden at the appointed hours and walked under the supervision of two old women. From time to time, Kirila Petrovich married off some of them, and new ones took their place. He treated peasants and servants strictly and capriciously; despite this, they were devoted to him: they were vain of the wealth and glory of their master and, in turn, allowed themselves a lot in relation to their neighbors, hoping for his strong patronage. Troekurov's usual occupations consisted of traveling around his extensive domains, long feasts and pranks, which were invented every day and the victim of which was usually some new acquaintance; although old friends did not always avoid them, with the exception of one Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky. This Dubrovsky, a retired lieutenant of the guard, was his closest neighbor and owned seventy souls. Troekurov, arrogant in relations with people of the highest rank, respected Dubrovsky despite his humble state. They had once been comrades in the service, and Troekurov knew from experience the impatience and determination of his character. Circumstances separated them for a long time. Dubrovsky, upset, was forced to resign and settle in the rest of his village. Kirila Petrovich, having learned about this, offered him his patronage, but Dubrovsky thanked him and remained poor and independent. A few years later, Troekurov, a retired general-in-chief, came to his estate, they met and were delighted with each other. Since then, they were together every day, and Kirila Petrovich, who had never deigned to visit anyone with his visits, would easily drop by the house of his old friend. Being the same age, born in the same class, raised the same, they were somewhat similar in character and inclinations. In some respects, their fate was the same: both married for love, both were soon widowed, both had a child. Dubrovsky’s son was brought up in St. Petersburg, Kiril Petrovich’s daughter grew up in the eyes of her parent, and Troekurov often said to Dubrovsky: “Listen, brother, Andrei Gavrilovich: if there is a way in your Volodka, then I will give Masha for it; It’s okay that he’s naked as a falcon.” Andrei Gavrilovich shook his head and answered as usual: “No, Kirila Petrovich: my Volodka is not Maria Kirilovna’s fiancé. It is better for a poor nobleman, such as he is, to marry a poor noblewoman and be the head of the house, than to become the clerk of a spoiled woman.” Everyone envied the harmony that reigned between the arrogant Troekurov and his poor neighbor, and were surprised at the courage of this latter when, at Kiril Petrovich’s table, he directly expressed his opinion, not caring whether it contradicted the opinions of the owner. Some tried to imitate him and go beyond the limits of proper obedience, but Kirila Petrovich frightened them so much that he forever discouraged them from making such attempts, and Dubrovsky alone remained outside the general law. An unexpected incident upset and changed everything. Once at the beginning of autumn, Kirila Petrovich was getting ready to go to a field that was leaving. The day before, the order was given to the hounds and hunters to be ready at five o'clock in the morning. The tent and kitchen were sent forward to the place where Kirila Petrovich was supposed to have lunch. The owner and guests went to the kennel yard, where more than five hundred hounds and greyhounds lived in contentment and warmth, glorifying the generosity of Kiril Petrovich in their canine language. There was also an infirmary for sick dogs, under the supervision of the staff doctor Timoshka, and a department where noble bitches gave birth and fed their puppies. Kirila Petrovich was proud of this wonderful establishment and never missed an opportunity to boast about it to his guests, each of whom examined it at least for the twentieth time. He walked around the kennel, surrounded by his guests and accompanied by Timoshka and the main hounds; stopped in front of some kennels, now asking about the health of the sick, now making comments more or less strict and fair, now calling familiar dogs to him and talking affectionately to them. Guests considered it their duty to admire Kiril Petrovich’s kennel. Only Dubrovsky was silent and frowned. He was an ardent hunter. His condition enabled him to keep only two hounds and one pack of greyhounds; he could not help but feel a little envy at the sight of this magnificent establishment. “Why are you frowning, brother,” Kirila Petrovich asked him, “or don’t you like my kennel?” “No,” he answered sternly, “it’s a wonderful kennel, it’s unlikely that your people will live the same life as your dogs.” One of the hounds was offended. “We don’t complain about our life,” he said, “thanks to God and the master, and what’s true is true; it wouldn’t be a bad thing for another nobleman to exchange his estate for any local kennel. He would have been more nourished and warmer.” Kirila Petrovich laughed loudly at his servant’s impudent remark, and the guests followed him with laughter, although they felt that the huntsman’s joke could apply to them as well. Dubrovsky turned pale and did not say a word. At this time, they brought newborn puppies to Kiril Petrovich in a basket; he took care of them, chose two for himself, and ordered the others to be drowned. Meanwhile, Andrei Gavrilovich disappeared, and no one noticed. Returning with the guests from the kennel yard, Kirila Petrovich sat down to dinner and only then, not seeing Dubrovsky, did he miss him. People answered that Andrei Gavrilovich had gone home. Troekurov ordered to immediately catch up with him and turn him back without fail. From his childhood he never went hunting without Dubrovsky, an experienced and subtle connoisseur of canine virtues and an infallible resolver of all kinds of hunting disputes. The servant, who galloped after him, returned as they were still sitting at the table, and reported to his master that, they say, Andrei Gavrilovich did not listen and did not want to return. Kirila Petrovich, as usual, inflamed by the liqueurs, became angry and sent the same servant a second time to tell Andrei Gavrilovich that if he did not immediately come to spend the night in Pokrovskoye, then he, Troekurov, would quarrel with him forever. The servant galloped off again, Kirila Petrovich got up from the table, dismissed the guests and went to bed. The next day his first question was: is Andrei Gavrilovich here? Instead of an answer, he was given a letter folded into a triangle; Kirila Petrovich ordered his clerk to read it aloud and heard the following:

“My gracious sir, I don’t intend to go to Pokrovskoye until you send me the huntsman Paramoshka to confess; but it will be my will to punish him or have mercy, but I do not intend to tolerate jokes from your servants, and I will not tolerate them from you either, because I am not a jester, but an old nobleman. For this reason I remain obedient to your services

Andrey Dubrovsky."

According to modern concepts of etiquette, this letter would be very indecent, but it angered Kiril Petrovich not with the strange style and location, but only with its essence: “How,” Troekurov thundered, jumping out of bed barefoot, “to send my people to him to confess, he free to pardon and punish them! what was he really up to; does he know who he is contacting? Here I am... He’ll cry with me, he’ll find out what it’s like to go against Troekurov!” Kirila Petrovich got dressed and went hunting with his usual pomp, but the hunt was unsuccessful. All day they saw only one hare and it was poisoned. Lunch in the field under the tent also failed, or at least was not to the taste of Kiril Petrovich, who killed the cook, scolded the guests, and on the way back, with all his desire, deliberately drove through the fields of Dubrovsky. Several days passed, and the hostility between the two neighbors did not subside. Andrei Gavrilovich did not return to Pokrovskoe Kirila Petrovich was bored without him, and his annoyance poured out loudly in the most insulting expressions, which, thanks to the zeal of the local nobles, reached Dubrovsky, corrected and supplemented. The new circumstance destroyed the last hope for reconciliation. Dubrovsky was once touring his small estate; approaching the birch grove, he heard the blows of an ax and a minute later the crack of a fallen tree. He hurried into the grove and ran into the Pokrovsky men, who were calmly stealing the forest from him. Seeing him, they started to run. Dubrovsky and his coachman caught two of them and brought them bound to his yard. Three enemy horses were immediately taken as spoils to the winner. Dubrovsky was extremely angry; before this, Troekurov’s people, famous robbers, had never dared to play pranks within his domain, knowing his friendly relationship with their master. Dubrovsky saw that they were now taking advantage of the gap that had occurred, and decided, contrary to all concepts of the law of war, to teach his captives a lesson with twigs, which they had stocked up in his own grove, and to give the horses to work, assigning them to the master’s cattle. The rumor about this incident reached Kiril Petrovich on the same day. He lost his temper and in the first minute of anger wanted to launch an attack on Kistenevka (that was the name of his neighbor’s village) with all his servants, ruin it to the ground and besiege the landowner himself on his estate. Such feats were not unusual for him. But his thoughts soon took a different direction. Walking with heavy steps back and forth across the hall, he accidentally looked out the window and saw a troika stopped at the gate; a small man in a leather cap and frieze overcoat got out of the cart and went to the outbuilding to the clerk; Troekurov recognized assessor Shabashkin and ordered to call him. A minute later, Shabashkin was already standing in front of Kiril Petrovich, bowing after bow and reverently awaiting his orders. “Great, what’s your name?” Troekurov told him, “Why did you come here?” “I was going to the city, Your Excellency,” answered Shabashkin, “and I went to Ivan Demyanov to find out if there would be any order from Your Excellency. It’s very opportune that I stopped by, what’s your name; I need you. Drink some vodka and listen. Such an affectionate reception pleasantly surprised the assessor. He gave up vodka and began to listen to Kiril Petrovich with all possible attention. “I have a neighbor,” said Troekurov, “a small-time rude man; I want to take his estate, what do you think about that? Your Excellency, if there are any documents or... You're lying, brother, what kind of documents do you need? There are decrees for that. This is the power to take away property without any right. Wait, though. This estate once belonged to us, was bought from some Spitsyn and then sold to Dubrovsky’s father. Is it possible to find fault with this? Wise, Your Excellency; This sale was probably completed legally. Think, brother, look carefully. If, for example, your Excellency could somehow obtain from your neighbor a record or deed of sale by virtue of which he owns his estate, then of course... I understand, but the problem is all his papers were burned in a fire. How, Your Excellency, did his papers burn! what's better for you? in this case, please act according to the laws, and without any doubt you will receive your complete pleasure. Do you think? Well, look. I rely on your diligence, and you can be sure of my gratitude. Shabashkin bowed almost to the ground, went out, from that very day he began to work on the planned business, and, thanks to his agility, exactly two weeks later Dubrovsky received an invitation from the city to immediately deliver proper explanations about his ownership of the village of Kistenevka. Andrei Gavrilovich, astonished by the unexpected request, wrote back on the same day in a rather rude manner, in which he announced that the village of Kistenevka came to him after the death of his late parent, that he owned it by right of inheritance, that Troekurov had nothing to do with him and that any outside claim to this property of his is a sneak and a fraud. This letter made a very pleasant impression in the soul of assessor Shabashkin. He saw, firstly, that Dubrovsky knew little about business, and secondly, that it would not be difficult to put a person so ardent and imprudent in the most disadvantageous position. Andrei Gavrilovich, having calmly examined the assessor’s requests, saw the need to answer in more detail. He wrote a fairly efficient paper, but later it turned out to be insufficient. The matter began to drag on. Confident in his rightness, Andrei Gavrilovich cared little about him, had neither the desire nor the opportunity to sprinkle money around him, and although he was always the first to mock the corrupt conscience of the ink tribe, the thought of becoming a victim of a sneak did not occur to him. For his part, Troekurov cared just as little about winning the case he had started; Shabashkin worked for him, acting on his behalf, intimidating and bribing judges and crookedly interpreting all kinds of decrees. Be that as it may, on the 18th... year, February 9th, Dubrovsky received an invitation through the city police to appear before the ** zemstvo judge to hear his decision in the case of a disputed estate between him, Lieutenant Dubrovsky, and Chief General Troekurov, and for subscriptions of your pleasure or displeasure. On the same day, Dubrovsky went to the city; Troekurov overtook him on the road. They looked at each other proudly, and Dubrovsky noticed an evil smile on his opponent’s face.

The idea for the novel "Dubrovsky" arose at the end of September 1832. In September 1832, Pushkin met in Moscow with P.V. Nashchokin and heard from him a story about Dubrovsky’s prototype - the Belarusian nobleman Ostrovsky. At this time, Pushkin was working on the story of a Pugachevo nobleman, whom the vicissitudes of his personal fate make him an accomplice in the peasant rebellion, and therefore Ostrovsky’s story made a great impression on Pushkin; it lay on the ground prepared by his previous thoughts and artistic work.

A true incident that happened in the early 1830s with a poor nobleman, “who had a lawsuit with a neighbor for land, was forced out of the estate and, left with only peasants, began to rob, first clerks, then others,” becomes the basis of the novel “Dubrovsky ".

The title was given to the novel by publishers upon its first publication in 1842. In the Pushkin manuscript, instead of the title, there is the date when work on the work began: “October 21, 1832.” The last chapter is dated February 6, 1833.

The basis of the novel "Dubrovsky" is the tragic idea of the socio-moral stratification of people from the nobility and the social enmity of the nobility and the people. It gives rise to internal drama, which is expressed in contrasts of the novel's composition:
friendship confronts the court scene,
Vladimir Dubrovsky’s meeting with his home is accompanied by the death of his father, struck down by misfortunes and a fatal illness,
the silence of the funeral is broken by the menacing glow of the fire,
the holiday in Pokrovsky ends with a robbery,
love is an escape
wedding is a battle.
These are the dissimilar events that coexist in the novel. The action of the novel develops first sequentially, then the author uses a retrospective, i.e. method of returning to the past. Conflict plays an important role in the novel.

" The plot of Pushkin's novel is extremely simple. After carefully crafted exposition, the action centers around one character and his fate. And yet, the main line of the narrative in Dubrovsky is formed, as it were, from several ready-made narrative blocks, each of which is associated with a special literary tradition. The story about the feud between the fathers is followed by another - about the transformation of a guards officer into a robber. Next comes the story of Dubrovsky’s love for Marya Kirilovna, followed by the story of the forced marriage of Troekurov’s daughter...”

Vladimir Dubrovsky, like his father, is endowed with courage, nobility, a sense of human dignity, and kindness. But he does not achieve success, he inexorably loses everything: in the first volume we learn that his patrimony has been taken away from him, he is deprived of his parental home and familiar society, the socio-cultural environment in which he lived before. In the second volume we see how Vereisky takes away his love, and the state takes away his robber will. In the novel, human feelings enter into a tragic duel with prevailing laws and morals.

Pushkin's heroes strive to arrange their destiny in their own way, but they fail. Vladimir Dubrovsky experiences three options for his lot in life: a wasteful and ambitious guards officer, a modest and courageous Desforge, a formidable and honest robber. But he fails to change his fate, since the hero’s place in society is fixed forever. He is the son of an old nobleman with the same qualities that his father had - poverty and honesty, dignity and pride, nobility and independence. Maintaining honesty in poverty is too great a luxury; poverty obliges you to be flexible, moderate your pride and forget about honor. Therefore, all attempts by Vladimir Dubrovsky to defend his right to be poor and honest end in disaster: the hero’s spiritual qualities are incompatible with his social and property status.