Erdman suicide short. Suicide performance. Reviews of the play

History of creation

Erdman began working on Suicide immediately after the premiere of Mandate. The play was highly appreciated by M. Gorky, A. V. Lunacharsky and K. S. Stanislavsky (the latter compared Erdman with Gogol).

In 1932, Meyerhold again staged “The Suicide,” but after a closed viewing, the performance was banned by the party commission, headed by L. Kaganovich.

During Khrushchev's Thaw, attempts to stage or publish the play resumed. In 1982, V. Pluchek staged the play at the Satire Theater, but soon after the premiere the play was removed from the repertoire. Performances at the Vakhtangov Theater and the Taganka Theater were also prohibited.

In the early 70s, the play was translated into German. It was staged in theaters in Zurich, West Berlin, Vienna, Munich, Frankfurt am Main. Then productions appeared in France, Canada, the USA (New York, Washington, Chicago and other cities). In England, the play was performed by the Royal Shakespeare Company troupe.

Characters

• Podsekalnikov Semyon Semyonovich.
• Maria Lukyanovna is his wife.
• Serafima Ilyinichna is his mother-in-law.
• Alexander Petrovich Kalabushkin is their neighbor.
• Margarita Ivanovna Peresvetova.
• Stepan Vasilyevich Peresvetov.
• Aristarkh Dominikovich Grand-Skubik.
• Egorushka (Egor Timofeevich).
• Nikifor Arsentievich Pugachev - butcher.
• Victor Viktorovich - writer.
• Father Elpidius is a priest.
• Cleopatra Maksimovna.
• Raisa Filippovna.
• Old lady.
• Oleg Leonidovich.
• A young man is deaf, Zinka Padespan, Grunya, a gypsy choir, two waiters, a milliner, a dressmaker, two suspicious characters, two boys, three men, church singers - a choir, torchbearers, a deacon, two old women, men, women.

Plot

Podsekalnikov lives with his wife and mother-in-law in a communal apartment. He doesn't work, and the thought of being dependent really depresses him. Having quarreled with his wife over liverwurst, he decides to commit suicide. His wife and mother-in-law and neighbor Kalabushkin try to dissuade him, but many benefit from his suicide.

Aristarkh Dominicovich:

This is not possible, Citizen Podsekalnikov. Well, whoever needs this, please tell me, “don’t blame anyone.” You, on the contrary, must blame and blame, citizen Podsekalnikov. You shoot yourself. Wonderful. Wonderful. Shoot yourself for your health. But please shoot like a public figure.<...>You want to die for the truth, citizen Podsekalnikov.<...>Die quickly. Tear up this little note right now and write another one. Write in it sincerely everything you think. Blame it sincerely on everyone who should.

Cleopatra Maksimovna wants Podsekalnikov to shoot himself for her sake, Viktor Viktorovich - for the sake of art, and Father Elpidy - for the sake of religion.

The unforgettable dead man is still alive, but there are a large number of suicide notes.<...>“I am dying as a victim of nationality, persecuted by the Jews.” “I am unable to live due to the meanness of the financial inspector.” “I ask you not to blame anyone for the death except our beloved Soviet government.”

The enterprising Kalabushkin collects fifteen rubles from them, promising that Podsekalnikov will satisfy their desires.

But Podsekalnikov suddenly realizes that he doesn’t want to die at all. He thinks about life and death:

What is a second? Tick-tock... And there is a wall between tick and tick. Yes, a wall, that is, the barrel of a revolver... And here’s a tick, young man, that’s all, but like that, young man, that’s nothing.<...>Tick ​​- and here I am with myself, and with my wife, and with my mother-in-law, with the sun, with air and water, I understand this. So - and now I’m already without a wife... although I’m without a wife - I understand that too, I’m without my mother-in-law... well, I even understand that quite well, but here I am without myself - I don’t understand that at all. How can I live without myself? Do you understand me? I personally. Podsekalnikov. Human.

The next day, Podsekalnikov is given a luxurious farewell banquet, and he realizes the significance of his suicide:

No, do you know what I can? I don't have to be afraid of anyone, comrades. No one. I will do what I want. Still die.<...>Today I have dominion over all people. I am a dictator. I am the king, dear comrades.

A few hours later, his lifeless body is brought to the apartment where Podsekalnikov lived: he is dead drunk. Having come to his senses, Podsekalnikov laments that he got drunk and missed the appointed time for suicide. Seeing Grand Skubik, Pugachev, Kalabushkin, Margarita Ivanovna, Father Elpidiy and others coming to the house, he hides in a coffin. He is mistaken for dead, solemn speeches are made over him, but at the cemetery Podsekalnikov cannot stand it and rises from the coffin:

Comrades, I'm hungry. But more than eating, I want to live.<...>Comrades, I don’t want to die: not for you, not for them, not for the class, not for humanity, not for Maria Lukyanovna.

The play ends with the words of Viktor Viktorovich that Fedya Pitunin shot himself, leaving a note “Podsekalnikov is right. Life really isn't worth living."

Reviews of the play

“According to the original plan of the play, a pitiful crowd of intellectuals dressed in disgusting masks presses on a man who is contemplating suicide. They are trying to use his death for personal gain...
Erdman, a true artist, unwittingly introduced real piercing and tragic notes into the polyphonic scenes with masks of ordinary people (as they liked to call the intelligentsia, and “philistine conversations” meant words expressing dissatisfaction with the existing order). But the theme of humanity broke through into the original plan (anti-intellectual, anti-philistine). The hero's refusal to commit suicide was also rethought: life is disgusting and unbearable, but one must live, because life is life. This is a play about why we stayed alive, although everything pushed us to commit suicide.”

Podsekalnikov, in spite of everything, is a man, a pitiful man, almost a non-human. Humble, pitiful, he decides to challenge humanity: to die. He is so insignificant, so driven that his solution is a feat worthy of a Japanese kamikaze. The hero of the Moscow philistinism miraculously transforms into a world hero and pronounces his monologue about the price of a second. He suddenly realizes that the appointed time has passed, but he is alive.

“But the whole point is that it is written like poetry, in such a rhythm and in such an order - it is impossible to play his plays as everyday ones: they turn out flat and even vulgar. If someday someone comes out with a successful “Suicide,” it will definitely sound not like everyday speech, but as if written in poetry. Correctly compared with “The Inspector General”. I think that in terms of the concentration of poetic energy, and also in terms of humor... it’s even higher than “The Inspector General”..."

Criticism about the play

A. Vasilevsky:

“Suicide” openly gravitates toward broad social generalizations. The plot point of the play arose from that scene of Dostoevsky’s “Demons”, when Petrusha Verkhovensky turns to Kirillov, who is ready to commit suicide: you, they say, don’t care what to die for, so just write a piece of paper that it was you who killed Shatov.
The tragic situation is repeated like a farce: petitioners flock to the newest suicide “because of the liver sausage” Podsekalnikov. He is seduced: you will become a hero, a slogan, a symbol; but it all ends in a scandal: Podsekalnikov no longer wanted to die; he never really wanted to die. He didn't want to be a hero.

L. Velekhov:

Erdman remained the only satirist in Soviet drama who ridiculed the system of power, and not individual human shortcomings. He did this surprisingly early, in the 20s, when the Soviet state was just taking shape, and the vast majority of very sharp-sighted people had no idea what kind of grandiose scaffold was being put together as its foundation.
The play “Suicide” contained an extremely serious and deep thought, expressed in a sharply eccentric, grotesque form. The idea that a person in our state is constrained by such extreme degree of lack of freedom that he is not only not free to choose how to live, but he cannot even die the way he wants.

E. Streltsova:

The play “Suicide” is, first of all, about the relationship between power and man, about personal freedom, no matter how unsightly we may find this personality. This is the rebellion of a “little” person against the colossal mechanism of suppression, leveling, and destruction of man’s life-giving capabilities.

Theater performances

First production

• - Moscow Academic Theater of Satire, director Valentin Pluchek

Notable productions

• - People's Theater "Sphere" Toropets (Tver region) Premiere - May 20, 2012 Director: I.M. Polyakova
• - Haifa City Theater, director Idar Rubenstein

Film adaptations

• - “Suicide”, director and screenwriter Valery Pendrakovsky

Literature

• Velekhov L. The most witty // Theater. 1990. No. 3
• Rassadin S. Suicides. The story of how we lived and what we read. M., 2007
• Streltsova E. Great humiliation // Paradox about drama. M., 1993

Notes

Links

Wikimedia Foundation.

History of creation

Erdman began working on Suicide immediately after the premiere of Mandate. The play was highly appreciated by M. Gorky, A. V. Lunacharsky and K. S. Stanislavsky (the latter compared Erdman with Gogol).

In 1932, Meyerhold again staged “The Suicide,” but after a closed viewing, the performance was banned by the party commission, headed by L. Kaganovich.

During Khrushchev's Thaw, attempts to stage or publish the play resumed. In 1982, V. Pluchek staged the play at the Satire Theater, but soon after the premiere the play was removed from the repertoire. Performances at the Vakhtangov Theater and the Taganka Theater were also prohibited.

In the early 70s, the play was translated into German. It was staged in theaters in Zurich, West Berlin, Vienna, Munich, Frankfurt am Main. Then productions appeared in France, Canada, the USA (New York, Washington, Chicago and other cities). In England, the play was performed by the Royal Shakespeare Company troupe.

Characters

• Podsekalnikov Semyon Semyonovich.
• Maria Lukyanovna is his wife.
• Serafima Ilyinichna is his mother-in-law.
• Alexander Petrovich Kalabushkin is their neighbor.
• Margarita Ivanovna Peresvetova.
• Stepan Vasilyevich Peresvetov.
• Aristarkh Dominikovich Grand-Skubik.
• Egorushka (Egor Timofeevich).
• Nikifor Arsentievich Pugachev - butcher.
• Victor Viktorovich - writer.
• Father Elpidius is a priest.
• Cleopatra Maksimovna.
• Raisa Filippovna.
• Old lady.
• Oleg Leonidovich.
• A young man is deaf, Zinka Padespan, Grunya, a gypsy choir, two waiters, a milliner, a dressmaker, two suspicious characters, two boys, three men, church singers - a choir, torchbearers, a deacon, two old women, men, women.

Plot

Podsekalnikov lives with his wife and mother-in-law in a communal apartment. He doesn't work, and the thought of being dependent really depresses him. Having quarreled with his wife over liverwurst, he decides to commit suicide. His wife and mother-in-law and neighbor Kalabushkin try to dissuade him, but many benefit from his suicide.

Aristarkh Dominicovich:

This is not possible, Citizen Podsekalnikov. Well, whoever needs this, please tell me, “don’t blame anyone.” You, on the contrary, must blame and blame, citizen Podsekalnikov. You shoot yourself. Wonderful. Wonderful. Shoot yourself for your health. But please shoot like a public figure.<...>You want to die for the truth, citizen Podsekalnikov.<...>Die quickly. Tear up this little note right now and write another one. Write in it sincerely everything you think. Blame it sincerely on everyone who should.

Cleopatra Maksimovna wants Podsekalnikov to shoot himself for her sake, Viktor Viktorovich - for the sake of art, and Father Elpidy - for the sake of religion.

The unforgettable dead man is still alive, but there are a large number of suicide notes.<...>“I am dying as a victim of nationality, persecuted by the Jews.” “I am unable to live due to the meanness of the financial inspector.” “I ask you not to blame anyone for the death except our beloved Soviet government.”

The enterprising Kalabushkin collects fifteen rubles from them, promising that Podsekalnikov will satisfy their desires.

But Podsekalnikov suddenly realizes that he doesn’t want to die at all. He thinks about life and death:

What is a second? Tick-tock... And there is a wall between tick and tick. Yes, a wall, that is, the barrel of a revolver... And here’s a tick, young man, that’s all, but like that, young man, that’s nothing.<...>Tick ​​- and here I am with myself, and with my wife, and with my mother-in-law, with the sun, with air and water, I understand this. So - and now I’m already without a wife... although I’m without a wife - I understand that too, I’m without my mother-in-law... well, I even understand that quite well, but here I am without myself - I don’t understand that at all. How can I live without myself? Do you understand me? I personally. Podsekalnikov. Human.

The next day, Podsekalnikov is given a luxurious farewell banquet, and he realizes the significance of his suicide:

No, do you know what I can? I don't have to be afraid of anyone, comrades. No one. I will do what I want. Still die.<...>Today I have dominion over all people. I am a dictator. I am the king, dear comrades.

A few hours later, his lifeless body is brought to the apartment where Podsekalnikov lived: he is dead drunk. Having come to his senses, Podsekalnikov laments that he got drunk and missed the appointed time for suicide. Seeing Grand Skubik, Pugachev, Kalabushkin, Margarita Ivanovna, Father Elpidiy and others coming to the house, he hides in a coffin. He is mistaken for dead, solemn speeches are made over him, but at the cemetery Podsekalnikov cannot stand it and rises from the coffin:

Comrades, I'm hungry. But more than eating, I want to live.<...>Comrades, I don’t want to die: not for you, not for them, not for the class, not for humanity, not for Maria Lukyanovna.

The play ends with the words of Viktor Viktorovich that Fedya Pitunin shot himself, leaving a note “Podsekalnikov is right. Life really isn't worth living."

Reviews of the play

“According to the original plan of the play, a pitiful crowd of intellectuals dressed in disgusting masks presses on a man who is contemplating suicide. They are trying to use his death for personal gain...
Erdman, a true artist, unwittingly introduced real piercing and tragic notes into the polyphonic scenes with masks of ordinary people (as they liked to call the intelligentsia, and “philistine conversations” meant words expressing dissatisfaction with the existing order). But the theme of humanity broke through into the original plan (anti-intellectual, anti-philistine). The hero's refusal to commit suicide was also rethought: life is disgusting and unbearable, but one must live, because life is life. This is a play about why we stayed alive, although everything pushed us to commit suicide.”

Podsekalnikov, in spite of everything, is a man, a pitiful man, almost a non-human. Humble, pitiful, he decides to challenge humanity: to die. He is so insignificant, so driven that his solution is a feat worthy of a Japanese kamikaze. The hero of the Moscow philistinism miraculously transforms into a world hero and pronounces his monologue about the price of a second. He suddenly realizes that the appointed time has passed, but he is alive.

“But the whole point is that it is written like poetry, in such a rhythm and in such an order - it is impossible to play his plays as everyday ones: they turn out flat and even vulgar. If someday someone comes out with a successful “Suicide,” it will definitely sound not like everyday speech, but as if written in poetry. Correctly compared with “The Inspector General”. I think that in terms of the concentration of poetic energy, and also in terms of humor... it’s even higher than “The Inspector General”..."

Criticism about the play

A. Vasilevsky:

“Suicide” openly gravitates toward broad social generalizations. The plot point of the play arose from that scene of Dostoevsky’s “Demons”, when Petrusha Verkhovensky turns to Kirillov, who is ready to commit suicide: you, they say, don’t care what to die for, so just write a piece of paper that it was you who killed Shatov.
The tragic situation is repeated like a farce: petitioners flock to the newest suicide “because of the liver sausage” Podsekalnikov. He is seduced: you will become a hero, a slogan, a symbol; but it all ends in a scandal: Podsekalnikov no longer wanted to die; he never really wanted to die. He didn't want to be a hero.

L. Velekhov:

Erdman remained the only satirist in Soviet drama who ridiculed the system of power, and not individual human shortcomings. He did this surprisingly early, in the 20s, when the Soviet state was just taking shape, and the vast majority of very sharp-sighted people had no idea what kind of grandiose scaffold was being put together as its foundation.
The play “Suicide” contained an extremely serious and deep thought, expressed in a sharply eccentric, grotesque form. The idea that a person in our state is constrained by such extreme degree of lack of freedom that he is not only not free to choose how to live, but he cannot even die the way he wants.

E. Streltsova:

The play “Suicide” is, first of all, about the relationship between power and man, about personal freedom, no matter how unsightly we may find this personality. This is the rebellion of a “little” person against the colossal mechanism of suppression, leveling, and destruction of man’s life-giving capabilities.

Theater performances

First production

• - Moscow Academic Theater of Satire, director Valentin Pluchek

Notable productions

• - People's Theater "Sphere" Toropets (Tver region) Premiere - May 20, 2012 Director: I.M. Polyakova
• - Haifa City Theater, director Idar Rubenstein

Film adaptations

• - “Suicide”, director and screenwriter Valery Pendrakovsky

Literature

• Velekhov L. The most witty // Theater. 1990. No. 3
• Rassadin S. Suicides. The story of how we lived and what we read. M., 2007
• Streltsova E. Great humiliation // Paradox about drama. M., 1993

Notes

Links

Wikimedia Foundation.

2010.

Moscow 1920s. Semyon Semyonovich Podsekalnikov, unemployed, wakes up his wife Marya Lukyanovna at night and complains to her that he is hungry. Marya Lukyanovna, indignant that her husband does not let her sleep, although she works all day “like some kind of horse or ant,” nevertheless offers Semyon Semyonovich liverwurst left over from dinner, but Semyon Semyonovich, offended by his wife’s words, refuses sausage refuses and leaves the room.

Semyon Semyonovich is found in the kitchen at the moment when he puts something in his mouth, and when he sees them entering, he hides it in his pocket. Marya Lukyanovna faints, and Kalabushkin invites Podsekalnikov to give him the revolver, and then Semyon Semyonovich is surprised to learn that he is going to shoot himself. “Where could I get a revolver?” - Podsekalnikov is perplexed and receives an answer: a certain Panfilich is exchanging his revolver for a razor. Completely infuriated, Podsekalnikov kicks Kalabushkin out, takes out a liverwurst from his pocket, which everyone took for a revolver, takes his father’s razor from the table and writes a suicide note: “I ask you not to blame anyone for my death.”

Aristarkh Dominikovich Grand-Skubik comes to Podsekalnikov, sees a suicide note lying on the table and invites him, if he shoots himself anyway, to leave another note - on behalf of the Russian intelligentsia, which is silent because it is forced to remain silent, and you cannot force the dead to be silent. And then Podsekalnikov’s shot will wake up all of Russia, his portrait will be published in the newspapers and a grand funeral will be held for him.

Following Grand Skubik comes Cleopatra Maksimovna, who invites Podsekalnikov to shoot himself because of her, because then Oleg Leonidovich will abandon Raisa Filippovna. Cleopatra Maksimovna takes Podsekalnikov to her place to write a new note, and Alexander Petrovich, butcher Nikifor Arsentievich, writer Viktor Viktorovich, priest Father Elpidiy, Aristarkh Dominicovich and Raisa Filippovna appear in the room. They reproach Alexander Petrovich for taking money from each of them so that Podsekalnikov would leave a suicide note with a certain content.

Kalabushkin demonstrates a wide variety of notes that will be offered to the unforgettable deceased, and it is unknown which one he will choose. It turns out that one dead person is not enough for everyone. Viktor Viktorovich recalls Fedya Pitunin - “a wonderful guy, but with some kind of sadness - you’ll have to plant a worm in him.” When Podsekalnikov appears, they announce that he must shoot himself tomorrow at twelve o'clock and they will give him a grand farewell - they will throw a banquet.

There is a banquet in the summer garden restaurant: the gypsies sing, the guests drink, Aristarkh Dominikovich gives a speech glorifying Podsekalnikov, who constantly asks what time it is - the time is steadily approaching twelve. Podsekalnikov writes a suicide note, the text of which was prepared by Aristarkh Dominikovich.

Serafima Ilyinichna reads a letter addressed to her from her son-in-law, in which he asks her to carefully warn his wife that he is no longer alive. Marya Lukyanovna is sobbing, at this time the banquet participants enter the room and begin to console her. The dressmaker who came with them immediately takes her measurements to sew a funeral dress, and the milliner offers to choose a hat to go with this dress. The guests leave, and poor Marya Lukyanovna exclaims: “Senya was there - there was no hat, the hat became - Senya was gone! God! Why don’t you give everything at once?”

At this time, two unknown people bring in the lifeless body of a dead drunk Podsekalnikov, who, having come to his senses, imagines that he is in the next world. After a while, a boy from the funeral procession office appears with huge wreaths, and then the coffin is brought. Podsekalnikov tries to shoot himself, but cannot - he doesn’t have enough courage; Hearing voices approaching, he jumps into the coffin. A crowd of people enters, Father Elpidy performs the funeral service.

In the cemetery, eulogies are heard near a freshly dug grave. Each of those present claims that Podsekalnikov shot himself for the cause that he defends: because churches (Father Elpidy) or shops (butcher Nikifor Arsentievich) are closed, for the ideals of the intelligentsia (Grand Skubik) or art (writer Viktor Viktorovich ), and each of the ladies present - Raisa Filippovna and Cleopatra Maksimovna - claims that the dead man shot himself because of her.

Moved by their speeches, Podsekalnikov unexpectedly rises from the coffin and announces that he really wants to live. Those present are unhappy with Podsekalnikov’s decision, but he, taking out his revolver, invites anyone to take his place. There are no takers. At that moment, Viktor Viktorovich runs in and reports that Fedya Pitunin shot himself, leaving a note: “Podsekalnikov is right. Life really isn't worth living."

Retold

Under no circumstances, under any circumstances, attend this production, either for big money or for little.
Yesterday I had a chance to see this monstrous bad taste at the MDT, whose artistic director is Lev Dodin. Previously, I had heard extremely positive reviews about Dodin, and in general, I could not even think that he would allow something like this to be shown on the stage of his theater.
Let's start with the plot. The plot leaves much to be desired. Yes, perhaps, in the time of the respected Nikolai Erdman, this was indeed very relevant and, as they say, on the topic of the day, and I would like to believe that Stanislavsky’s production was much better in its time. But a spoon is dear to dinner, and what Zhenovach put on is now so hackneyed and banal that even if such a Podsekalniov now lives somewhere on the outskirts, then hearing about him now is absolutely uninteresting and terribly boring. The production feels empty and predictable. The endings of phrases could often be thought of by ourselves while the actors held an inappropriate pause.
Unfortunately, it occurred to Mr. Zhenovach to modernize the play, but he chose a completely unsuccessful method. With his light hand, the actors constantly used words like “bitch”, “skin”, “bastard”, does he seriously think that young people can be lured by swearing from the stage? And even one that was completely out of place and looked as ridiculous as possible. In general, a lot of things there looked ridiculous and absolutely stupid.
Worse, this action lasted more than 3 hours, after 2 you already lose track of time and simply wait in humility for the end. Everything is too drawn out, the dialogues are often completely meaningless, they say the same thing 1000 times. What makes it all worse are the absolutely flat jokes. They are so primitive that they evoke pity rather than laughter.
Cast. “The tragicomic image is the unconditional success of yesterday’s student Vyacheslav Evlantiev. His Podsekalnikov is funny, scary, and touching,” they write in the reviews. You have to try very hard to see this in V. Evlantiev’s acting. When he, in the image of Podsekalnikov, slammed doors several times and decided to shoot or not shoot, the only feeling was not sympathy or even pity, but a great desire to help him finally decide (or do it for him). The monologues of the main characters and their wrung-out experiences seemed especially unsuccessful. Everything was too pretentious, and most importantly, boring.
Scenery. If in the first act the doors, which are the only decorations in the production, seem to be an unusual and original move, then in the second act they begin to be incredibly annoying. The actors are constantly slamming them, people are constantly slamming doors for 3 hours, this is for very patient listeners.
It is worth noting that the first act is somewhat better, at first it’s even interesting, but the second is so drawn out and boring that you don’t even feel sorry for the money, but simply for lost time. Continuously chewing on the same thing is absolutely not funny anymore, but a shame for what is happening. The play could easily have been cut in half. But judging by the fact that after the first act the hall thinned by half, then perhaps they are equally absurd.
I do not recommend this production to anyone. This is the level of the village House of Culture in a village near Samara.

One of the most powerful plays of the last century in Russia - “The Suicide” by Nikolai Erdman - still, in our opinion, has not found an adequate stage embodiment. A month later, a performance based on this play will premiere at the Pushkin Theater. "New" in it...

One of the most powerful plays of the last century in Russia - “Suicide” by Nikolai Erdman - still, in our opinion, has not found an adequate stage embodiment.

A month later at the Pushkin Theater there will be a premiere of a performance based on this play. “Novaya” participates in it not only as a fan and information sponsor, but also as a partner.

At the end of the sixties, Alexander Galich and I were sitting near a pond, near Ruza, in the writers' House of Creativity, and I saw: from afar, from the highway, a stranger was walking towards us - a sharp-nosed, lean, gray-haired man, surprisingly similar to the artist Erast Garin. (Later I find out: rather, on the contrary, it was Garin, enchanted by him in their common youth, who involuntarily began to imitate him, even adopting a manner of speech that we consider uniquely Garin’s. He adopted the stuttering too.)

In general, my friend Sasha gets up - also as if enchanted - and, without saying a word to me, leaves to meet the alien.

Who is this? - I ask, waiting for his return.

“Nikolai Robertovich Erdman,” Galich answers with unsuccessfully concealed pride. And he adds revealingly modestly: “He came to visit me.”<…>

That was the only time I saw Erdman, and without saying a single word to him, I remember it as a significant moment in my life. What if you caught a glimpse of a living Gogol, would you forget about it?

I'm exaggerating, but not excessively. “Gogol! Gogol! - Stanislavsky shouted, listening to the text of the comedy “Suicide”, written in 1928.<…>

Nikolai Erdman has become - has become! - a genius in "Suicide".

Here is a unique case when, within the framework of one work, there is not just a degeneration of the original idea, that is, a common thing, as a rule, captured at the level of drafts or manifested in the confessions of the author himself. In “The Suicide,” as the action progresses, Erdman himself begins to see the light and grows. He gradually and obviously unexpectedly ascends to a fundamentally different level of relationship with reality.

Where, from what lowlands does this ascent begin?

Semyon Semyonovich Podsekalnikov, an unemployed man in the street, at the beginning of the comedy is just a hysterical bore, draining the soul out of his wife over a piece of liverwurst. He is a nonentity, almost insisting on his insignificance. And when the idea of ​​suicide first appears in the play, it is precisely as if; she seemed farcical to her frightened wife.

Yes, and a farce - fi! - rude.

Podsekalnikov secretly goes to the kitchen for the coveted sausage, and they mistakenly guard him at the locked door of the communal restroom, fearing that he will shoot himself there, and anxiously listening to the sounds - fi, fi and again fi! - of a completely different nature.<…>

Even when everything turns much more dramatic, when the downtrodden tradesman admits the real possibility of leaving for another world, the farce will not end. Unless the farcical laughter will be redirected. There will be indiscriminate ridicule of those who decided to make money from Podsekalnikov’s death - the so-called “formers”.<…>

That is, you can also find something like this:

“You are shooting yourself. Wonderful. Great, shoot yourself to your health. But please shoot like a public figure. Don’t forget that you are not alone, citizen Podsekalnikov. Look around. Look at our intelligentsia. What do you see? A lot of things. What do you hear? Nothing. Why don't you hear anything? Because she is silent. Why is she silent? Because she is forced to remain silent. But you can’t keep a dead man silent, citizen Podsekalnikov. If a dead man speaks. At present, Citizen Podsekalnikov, what a living person can think can only be said by a dead person. I came to you as if I were dead, Citizen Podsekalnikov. I came to you on behalf of the Russian intelligentsia."

The intonation is mocking - I’m talking, of course, about the intonation that the mocking author’s will imposed on the character. But what a terrifying reality behind all this!

Didn’t the Bolsheviks really muzzle the intelligentsia? Didn’t the so-called philosophical steamer, by Lenin’s order, take away the best Russian thinkers into irrevocable emigration? Finally, isn’t the most terrible of all protest gestures, public self-immolation, really something that “only a dead person can say”?<…>

Podsekalnikov himself, the most insignificant of insignificants, suddenly begins to grow. At first only in his own eyes: surrounded by unusual attention, he rapidly evolves from self-abasement, characteristic of most nonentities, to self-affirmation, characteristic of them.

His triumph was a telephone call to the Kremlin: “...I read Marx, and I didn’t like Marx.” But little by little, from such idiocy, he grows into a monologue, which - in a cathedral choir! - the entire Russian literature could say, preoccupied with sympathy for the “little man.” From Gogol with Dostoevsky to Zoshchenko:

“Are we doing anything against the revolution? From the first day of the revolution we have done nothing. We just go to visit each other and say that it’s difficult for us to live. Because it is easier for us to live if we say that it is difficult for us to live. For God's sake, do not take away our last means of livelihood, allow us to say that it is difficult for us to live. Well, at least like this, in a whisper: “It’s difficult for us to live.” Comrades, I ask you on behalf of a million people: give us the right to whisper. You won’t even hear him behind the construction site. Trust me".

"The right to whisper."<…>

“The hero’s refusal to commit suicide... has been rethought,” Nadezhda Yakovlevna Mandelstam said about the play “Suicide,” calling it brilliant, “life is disgusting and unbearable, but we must live, because life is life... Did Erdman consciously give such a sound, or his goal was it easier? Don't know. I think that the theme of humanity broke through into the original - anti-intellectual or anti-philistine - plan. This play is about why we stayed alive, although everything pushed us to commit suicide.”<…>

This incredible play managed to travel this way: first - vaudeville with the sweaty smell of a farce, then - tragic farce, and in the finale - tragedy. Quite consonant with, say, Yesenin’s suicide with his farewell:

...Dying is not new in this life,

But life, of course, is not newer.<…>

Naturally, the authorities reacted as they should have reacted. She banned comedy from being staged (not to mention printed) - first by Meyerhold, then by the Art Theater, which was increasingly gaining official status. It was in vain that Stanislavsky counted on the latter, explaining the motives for his appeal to the “deeply respected Joseph Vissarionovich”:

“Knowing your constant attention to the Art Theater...” - etc.

Did not help. Neither the trick of Konstantin Sergeevich, who interpreted “The Suicide” from the point of view of the original plan, “anti-intellectual or anti-philistine” (“In our opinion, N. Erdman managed to reveal the various manifestations and internal roots of the philistinism, which opposes the construction of the country”), nor the request saved matters to Comrade Stalin to personally view the performance “before graduation, performed by our actors.”

Is this like what happened with Nicholas I and Pushkin? “I myself will be your censor”? Look what the old man wanted! Such creative unions arise exclusively on the initiative from above. And as a result:

“Dear Konstantin Sergeevich!

I don’t have a very high opinion of the play “Suicide” (sic! - St. R.). My closest comrades believe that it is empty and even harmful”...<…>

The plebeian Dzhugashvili understood the plebeian Podsekalnikov, his breed, his nature. And the more he understood, the more he despised the plebeianism in him, which he felt with displeasure in himself (watching “The Turbins”, he felt it in contrast). Just as Nicholas I could not forgive Eugene from “The Bronze Horseman” for his “Uzho!” addressed to the idol of Peter (which, as we know, became one of the reasons for the ban imposed on the poem), so Semyon Semenovich’s plea for the “right to whisper” should was to irritate Stalin...<…>

Having received the opportunity to whisper in their corner (God knows what) or having had their fill, they are independent. At least they are freed from the constant feeling of fear or gratitude.<…>

Stalin decided to punish Erdman. And he punished him - accordingly, in a plebeian way, choosing as the reason the drunken mistake of the artist Kachalov.

What exactly did he read? How did he frame Erdman (and at the same time Vladimir Mass and another co-author, Mikhail Volpin)?

There are different opinions on this matter. It is clear that there was no way that, say, this could be read: “The GPU appeared to Aesop - and grabbed him by the ass... The meaning of this fable is clear: quite a fable!” Moreover, probably, with this sad mockery the co-authors noted the already accomplished turn of their fate. And all other fables - or rather, parodies of the fable genre - are relatively harmless. Yes, to tell the truth, they are not particularly brilliant.<…>

In general, one way or another, Kachalov was interrupted by the owner’s shout, and this reason (because only a reason was needed, the reason was ripe) was enough for Erdman and his co-authors to be arrested. He and Mass were taken in 1933 in Gagra, right on the set of “Jolly Fellows,” whose script they wrote.

The film was released without the names of the screenwriters in the credits, just like Volga-Volga, to which Nikolai Robertovich also had a hand. Director Alexandrov came to him, an exile, to explain himself. “And he says: “You see, Kolya, our film is becoming the leader’s favorite comedy. And you yourself understand that it will be much better for you if your name is not there. Understand?". And I said that I understand...”

Erdman told the artist Veniamin Smekhov about this.

What's next? The exile, at first - a classic one, Siberian, to Yeniseisk, which gave Erdman a sad and cheerful reason to sign letters to his mother: “Your Mother is a Siberian.” War, mobilization. The retreat, and Nikolai Robertovich walked with difficulty: his leg was seriously threatened by gangrene (from these days his friend Volpin, who at that time shared his fate, also endured several Erdman jokes, not so imperishable as to reproduce them, but testifying to the amazing presence of spirit) . Then - an unexpected meeting in Saratov with the evacuated Moscow Art Theater students, who saved Erdman’s leg and, apparently, his life. And a completely sudden call to Moscow, and, moreover, to the song and dance ensemble of the NKVD, under the direct patronage of Beria. There is a story about how Erdman, seeing himself in the mirror dressed in a security officer’s overcoat, joked:

It seems to me that they c-come for me again...

Finally, even the Stalin Prize for the film “Brave People,” a patriotic Western made according to Stalin’s order. And - day labor, day labor, day labor. Countless cartoons, librettos for government concerts and operettas, “Circus on Ice” and, shortly before his death in 1970, as an outlet, friendship with Lyubimov, with the young Taganka.

Actually, Erdman did not at all disdain to write for variety shows and music hall before, but it was one thing before, and another after “The Suicide.”<…>