The image of Katerina in a thunderstorm. Features of social drama and high tragedy in play A

Material overview

Material overview

A number of lessons are presented, accompanied by presentations. Lesson No. 1, 2. Play by A.N. Ostrovsky "The Thunderstorm" (1859). Traditions and customs of the city of Kalinov. Lesson No. 3, 4. Katerina in the fight for her human rights.

Lesson No. 1, 2. Play by A.N. Ostrovsky "The Thunderstorm" (1859). Traditions and customs of the city of Kalinov.

Purpose of the lesson: trace the reflection of the era in the play, its way of life and morals; determine the moral issues of the play and its universal significance.

Tasks:

Acquaintance with the history of the creation of the play “The Thunderstorm”, the characters, determination of the theme, idea, and main conflict of the play.

Development of skills in analyzing a dramatic work, the ability to identify in a work author's position.

Equipment: multimedia projector, screen, textbooks, notebooks, play texts, presentation for the lesson.

Progress of the lesson

1. Organizational moment.

The history of writing the play (Presentation No. 1 “The history of the creation of the play”).

The play was begun by Alexander Ostrovsky in July and completed on October 9, 1859. On October 9, the playwright finished The Thunderstorm, and on October 14 he already sent the play to the censor in St. Petersburg. The manuscript is kept in the Russian State Library.

The writing of the play “The Thunderstorm” is also associated with the writer’s personal drama. In the manuscript of the play, next to Katerina’s famous monologue: “And what dreams I had, Varenka, what dreams! Or golden temples, or some extraordinary gardens, and everyone is singing invisible voices...”, there is Ostrovsky’s entry: “I heard from L.P. about the same dream...”. L.P. is the actress Lyubov Pavlovna Kositskaya, with whom the young playwright had a very difficult personal relationship: both had families. The actress's husband was the artist of the Maly Theater I. M. Nikulin. And Alexander Nikolaevich also had a family: he lived in a civil marriage with the commoner Agafya Ivanovna, with whom he had common children (all of them died as children). Ostrovsky lived with Agafya Ivanovna for almost twenty years.

It was Lyubov Pavlovna Kositskaya who served as the prototype for the image of the heroine of the play, Katerina, and she also became the first performer of the role.

In 1848, Alexander Ostrovsky went with his family to Kostroma, to the Shchelykovo estate. The natural beauty of the Volga region amazed the playwright, and then he thought about the play. For a long time it was believed that the plot of the drama “The Thunderstorm” was taken by Ostrovsky from the life of the Kostroma merchants. At the beginning of the 20th century, Kostroma residents could accurately indicate the place of Katerina’s suicide.

In his play, Ostrovsky raises the problem of the turning point in social life that occurred in the 1850s, the problem of changing social foundations.

2. Genre features of the play “The Thunderstorm”.

A thunderstorm is thundering in Moscow, notice how cleverly this is said, and be surprised.

The epigraph to the lesson presents the words of actress L.P. Kositskaya-Nikulina, who played the main character of the play, Katerina, who became the wife of the playwright.

Today we will begin our acquaintance with the play by A.N. Ostrovsky "The Thunderstorm". Here are different points of view on the appearance of this play and the definition of the genre. Analyze the choice of genre of the authors of these quotes and highlight the features that the author emphasizes.

The premiere took place on November 16, 1859.<...>The play did well because, in addition to fine connoisseurs and connoisseurs of fine art, the Moscow public, attracted by the name of the playwright and the controversy surrounding the play, kept flocking to the performances. There were many spectators in “wolf coats”, the simplest, most spontaneous, and therefore the most dear to the author’s heart.<...>As for people of old aesthetic concepts, whose tastes and morals were living out their days, they could no longer significantly damage the success of the drama. “The Thunderstorm” was a turning point for this audience. They still grumbled about it, but after success was determined, a new countdown of the author’s fame began precisely from this drama. And already to his next works “The Thunderstorm” was applied as a measure of “elegant”, and his new plays were reproached with the merits of the previous, grumpily received masterpiece. This is how literary history moves.

From the day of the first presentation of “The Thunderstorm” in literary and theatrical criticism right up to today There is debate about the genre of this play and the uniqueness of its main conflict. The author himself, paying tribute to traditions, as well as a number of critics and literary scholars, saw in “The Thunderstorm” a social and everyday drama, since it is characterized by special attention to everyday life. In addition, the entire history of dramaturgy preceding Ostrovsky did not know such a tragedy in which the heroes were private individuals, and not historical or legendary ones.

S.P. Shevyrev, who attended one of the first performances, considered “The Thunderstorm” a bourgeois comedy.

Ostrovsky enrolled the Russian Comedy in the merchant guild, started with the first, brought it to the third - and now, having gone bankrupt, it is being discharged with tears into the bourgeoisie. Here is the result of “The Thunderstorm”, which I saw last week... It seems to me that Kositskaya should hang herself, not drown herself. The last one is too old... Hanging myself would be more modern.S. P. Shevyrev - A. N. Verstovsky. October 25, 1859

You have never revealed your poetic powers as much as in this play... In “The Thunderstorm” you took a plot that is completely filled with poetry - a plot impossible for someone who does not have poetic creativity... Katerina’s love belongs to the same phenomena of moral nature, to which world cataclysms in physical nature belong... Simplicity, naturalness and some kind of meek horizon that envelops all this drama, along which heavy and ominous clouds pass from time to time, further enhances the impression of an imminent catastrophe.

The strong, deep and mainly positively general impression was made not by the second act of the drama, which, although with some difficulty, can still be drawn to the punitive and accusatory type of literature, but by the end of the third, in which (the end) there is absolutely nothing else , except for the poetry of folk life - boldly, widely and freely captured by the artist in one of its most significant moments, which does not allow not only denunciation, but even criticism and analysis, so this moment is captured and conveyed poetically directly... The name for this writer, for such a great writer, despite his shortcomings and shortcomings, is not a satirist, but folk poet. The word for clues to his activities is not “tyranny,” but “nationality.” Only this word can be the key to understanding his works.

"The Thunderstorm" is, without a doubt, Ostrovsky's most decisive work; the mutual relations of tyranny and voicelessness are brought to the most tragic consequences in it... There is even something refreshing and encouraging in “The Thunderstorm”. This “something” is, in our opinion, the background of the play, indicated by us and revealing the precariousness and the near end of tyranny. Then the very character of Katerina, drawn against this background, also breathes on us with new life, which is revealed to us in her very death... Russian life has finally reached the point where virtuous and respectable, but weak and impersonal creatures do not satisfy public consciousness and are recognized good for nothing. I felt an urgent need for people, even if less beautiful, but more active and energetic.

If we understand Katerina’s death as the result of a collision with her mother-in-law, and see her as a victim of family oppression, then the scale of the heroes will indeed be too small for the tragedy. But if you see that Katerina’s fate was determined by the collision of two historical eras, then the “heroic” interpretation of her character proposed by Dobrolyubov will turn out to be completely legitimate.

"The Thunderstorm" is a classic tragedy. Her characters appear from the very beginning as complete types - bearers of one character or another - and do not change until the end. The classicism of the play is emphasized not only by the traditional tragic conflict between duty and feeling, but most of all by the system of image-types.<...>It is no coincidence that the play’s sounding board, Kuligin, endlessly recites classic poetry. The lines of Lomonosov and Derzhavin are intended to play the role of a positive beginning in the hopeless atmosphere of “The Thunderstorm”.<...>

Kuligin reads poetry of high calm, appropriately and inappropriately, and Ostrovsky subtly puts into his mouth not the main, not decisive words of the great poets. But both the author and the educated connoisseur of the play knew which lines followed the hooligan declaration. Eternal doubts: “I am a king - I am a slave - I am a worm - I am God!”, the last questions: “But where, nature, is your law?” and “Tell me, what is bothering us so much?”

"Thunderstorm" solves these insoluble problems. That is why Ostrovsky so persistently appeals to classicism that he strives to give significance to the bourgeois drama. The level of approach is inflated, just as stage directions establish a point of view on the city of Kalinov - from top to bottom, from the “high bank of the Volga.”As a result, the bourgeois drama turns into a bourgeois tragedy.P. L. Weil, A. A. Genis. Native speech. 1991

♦ What is your impression after reading “The Thunderstorm” for yourself? Whose point of view about the genre of the play do you find more convincing?

3. Re-read the play

Exercise 1

Alexander Ostrovsky

Storm

Drama in five acts

Drama as a genre of literature is one of the main genres (types) of drama as a type of literature, along with tragedy and comedy. The drama mainly reproduces the private life of people, but its main goal is not to ridicule morals, but to depict the individual in his dramatic relationship with society.

At the same time, like tragedy, drama tends to recreate acute contradictions, but at the same time these contradictions are not so intense and allow the possibility of a successful resolution.

The concept of drama as a genre developed in the second half of the 18th century. from the enlighteners. Drama 19-20 centuries is predominantly psychological. Certain types of drama merge with adjacent genres, using their means of expression, for example, the techniques of tragicomedy, farce, and mask theater.

Task 2

List characters(the poster) of the play is a very significant part of its exposition and gives the first idea about the city of Kalinov and its inhabitants. What ideas can the viewer get by opening this poster? Pay attention to: a) the order of characters in the list (social and family plans); b) the nature of names and surnames; c) the situation in the city; d) place and time of action.

Note: Disclosing the meaning of names and surnames in the plays of A.N. Ostrovsky helps to comprehend both the plot and the main images. Although surnames and names are not allowed in in this case call them “speaking”, since this is a feature of the plays of classicism, but they are speaking in the broad - symbolic - sense of the word.

Faces:

Savel Prokofievich Dikoy, merchant, significant person in the city.

Boris Grigorievich, his nephew, is a young man, decently educated.

Marfa Ignatievna Kabanova (Kabanikha), wealthy merchant, widow.

Tikhon Ivanovich Kabanov, her son.

Katerina, his wife.

Varvara, Tikhon's sister.

Kuligin, a tradesman, a self-taught watchmaker, looking for a perpetuum mobile.

Vanya Kudryash, a young man, Dikov’s clerk.

Shapkin, tradesman.

Feklusha, wanderer.

Glasha, a girl in Kabanova's house.

A lady with two footmen, an old woman of 70 years old, half crazy.

City dwellers of both sexes.

The action takes place in the city of Kalinovo, on the banks of the Volga, in the summer.

10 days pass between actions 3 and 4.

Task 3

E. G. Kholodov speaks of A. N. Ostrovsky’s amazing ability to find names, patronymics and surnames for his heroes that are so organic and natural that they seem to be the only possible ones. He cites the opinions of various literary scholars that names indicate the author’s attitude towards his characters, that they reflect their essential moral aspirations or internal qualities, and that, using meaningful names and surnames to characterize the characters, Ostrovsky strictly followed the traditions of classicism.

♦ Do you think Ostrovsky followed the classicist tradition in choosing names and surnames for his characters? Explanations for the task. To prove the thesis that Ostrovsky follows the rules of classicism, researchers put forward the following assumptions: Katerina translated from Greek means “eternally pure”; her patronymic is Petrovna, which translates as “stone” - with her name and patronymic the playwright allegedly emphasizes high morality, strength, determination, the heroine's strength of character. Dikiy’s patronymic “Prokofich” translated from Greek means “successful”, Varvara means “rough”, Glasha means “smooth”, that is, sensible, reasonable.

Task 4

Please note that in the list of characters, some characters are represented in full - by first name, patronymic, last name, others - only by first name and patronymic, others - only by first name or only by patronymic. Is this a coincidence? Try to explain why.

4. Checking homework: Speech by students on the topic “Imaginative analysis of heroes” (individual messages).

1. Savel Prokofievich Dikoy, merchant, significant person in the city.

Dikoy in the northern Russian regions meant “stupid, crazy, crazy, half-witted, crazy,” and dikovat meant “fool, fool, go crazy.” Initially, Ostrovsky intended to give the hero the patronymic Petrovich (from Peter - “stone”), but there was no strength or firmness in this character, and the playwright gave Diky the patronymic Prokofievich (from Prokofy - “successful”). This was more suitable for a greedy, ignorant, cruel and rude man, who at the same time was one of the richest and most influential merchants of the city.

Principles for naming characters, i.e. the use of one-term, two-term and three-term anthroponyms are directly related to the social status of the character. The tripartite is found not only among heads of families (i.e., it emphasizes the family role), but also among nobles, rich merchants, i.e. people with high social status. It doesn’t matter what his place in the system of characters or role in the plot is. For example, in the play "The Thunderstorm" the three-term anthroponym has Savel Prokofievich Dikoy, an episodic character participating in three phenomena.

2. Boris Grigorievich, his nephew, a young man, decently educated.

Boris Grigorievich is Dikiy’s nephew. He is one of the weakest characters in the play. Boris himself says about himself: “I’m walking around completely dead... Driven, beaten...”

After all, Boris’s mother “couldn’t get along with her relatives,” “it seemed very wild to her.” This means that Boris is Dikoy on his father’s side. What follows from this? Yes, it follows that he was unable to defend his love and protect Katerina. After all, he is the flesh of his ancestors and knows that he is entirely in the power of the “dark kingdom.”

Boris is a kind, well-educated person. He stands out sharply against the background merchant environment. But he is by nature weak person. Boris is forced to humiliate himself before his uncle, Dikiy, for the sake of hope for the inheritance that he will leave him. Although the hero himself knows that this will never happen, he nevertheless curries favor with the tyrant, tolerating his antics. Boris is unable to protect either himself or his beloved Katerina. In misfortune, he only rushes about and cries: “Oh, if only these people knew how it feels for me to say goodbye to you! My God! God grant that someday they may feel as sweet as I do now... You villains! Monsters! Oh, if only there was strength! But Boris does not have this power, so he is unable to alleviate Katerina’s suffering and support her choice by taking her with him.

Katerina cannot love and respect such a husband, but her soul yearns for love. She falls in love with Dikiy's nephew, Boris. But Katerina fell in love with him, in Dobrolyubov’s apt expression, “in the wilderness,” because, in essence, Boris is not much different from Tikhon, except perhaps a little more educated than him. She chose Boris almost unconsciously, the only difference between him and Tikhon was his name (Boris is “fighter” in Bulgarian).

Boris's lack of will, his desire to receive his part of his grandmother's inheritance (and he will receive it only if he is respectful to his uncle) turned out to be stronger than love.

3. Marfa Ignatievna Kabanova (Kabanikha), rich merchant's wife, widow.

Kabanova is an overweight woman with a difficult character. It is no coincidence that Kabanova bears the name Marfa - “mistress, mistress of the house”: she really holds the house completely in her hands, all household members are forced to obey her. In the New Testament, Martha is the sister of Mary and Lazarus, in whose house Christ stayed. When Christ comes to them, both sisters tried to show respect to the distinguished Guest. Martha, who had a lively and active disposition, immediately began to take care of preparing the treat. Her sister Mary, a quiet and contemplative person, sat in deep humility at the feet of the Savior and listened to His words. The different character of the sisters - practical Martha and contemplative Mary - became a symbol of different attitudes in the life of Christians. These two attitudes can also be seen in Ostrovsky’s play: Kabanikha perceives mainly the formal side of the patriarchal world, a way of life that has developed over centuries, which is why she tries so hard to preserve long-outdated customs, the meaning of which she no longer understands. Katerina, like Maria, embodies a different approach to life: she sees the poetry of the patriarchal world; it is no coincidence that her monologue recreates ideal patriarchal relationships based on mutual love: “I used to get up early; If it’s summer, I’ll go to the spring, wash myself, bring some water with me and that’s it, I’ll water all the flowers in the house. I had many, many flowers. Then we’ll go to church with Mama, all of us, strangers - our house was full of strangers; yes praying mantis. And we’ll come from church, sit down to do some kind of work, more like gold velvet, and the wanderers will begin to tell us: where they were, what they saw, different lives, or sing poetry. So time will pass until lunch. Here the old women go to sleep, and I walk around the garden. Then to Vespers, and in the evening again stories and singing. It was so good!” The difference between Kabanikha and Katerina in their views on life is clearly manifested in the scene of Tikhon’s departure.

Kabanova. You boasted that you love your husband very much; I see your love now. Other good wife After seeing her husband off, she howls for an hour and a half and lies on the porch; but you, apparently, have nothing.

Katerina. There's no point! Yes, and I can’t. Why make people laugh!

Kabanova. The trick is not great. If I loved it, I would have learned it. If you don’t know how to do it properly, you should at least make this example; still more decent; and then, apparently, only in words.

In fact, Katerina is very worried when seeing off Tikhon: it is no coincidence that she throws herself on his neck, asks him to take her with him, wants him to take the terrible oath of allegiance from her. But Kabanikha misunderstands her actions: “Why are you hanging around your neck, shameless woman! You are not saying goodbye to your lover! He is your husband - the head! Don't you know the order? Bow down at your feet!” Kabanikha’s teachings echo the words of Martha, who is unhappy that Mary does not help her, but listens to Christ.

It is interesting that Ignatievna, that is, “ignorant” or “ignoring”. They do not notice what is happening to people close to them, they do not understand that their ideas about happiness are completely different. Both are absolutely confident that they are right and force those around them to live by their own rules. And thus they find themselves indirectly to blame for the tragedy of Larisa and Katerina; Kabanikha provokes Varvara to escape.

Her speech is a mixture of rudeness, a cold commanding tone with feigned humility and sanctimonious sighs. Her words show her attitude towards her family: she despises Tikhon, is cold towards Varvara and hates Katerina.

Widows in Ostrovsky's plays, as a rule, regardless of social status, have three-part anthroponyms: they are independent women who have to raise children and arrange their destinies. In the plays under analysis, both widows also have a high social position.

4. Tikhon Ivanovich Kabanov, her son.

The connection with the word “quiet” is obvious. Tikhon is afraid to contradict his mother, he cannot even stand up for Katerina, protect her from unfair accusations.

Kabanov Tikhon Ivanovich is one of the main characters, Kabanikha’s son, Katerina’s husband. In the list of characters, he follows directly after Kabanova, and is referred to as “her son.” This is Tikhon’s actual position in the city of Kalinov and in the family. Belonging, like a number of other characters in the play (Varvara, Kudryash, Shapkin), to the younger generation of Kalinovites, T, in his own way, marks the end of the patriarchal way of life. The youth of Kalinova no longer want to adhere to the old ways in everyday life. However, Tikhon, Varvara, and Kudryash are alien to Katerina’s maximalism, and unlike the central heroines of the play, Katerina and Kabanikha, all these characters stand on the position of everyday compromises. Of course, the oppression of their elders is hard for them, but they have learned to get around it, each in accordance with their character. Formally recognizing the power of their elders and the power of customs over themselves, they constantly go against them. But it is precisely against the background of their unconscious and compromising position that Katerina looks significant and morally high.

Tikhon in no way corresponds to the role of a husband in a patriarchal family: to be a ruler, but also to support and protect his wife. A gentle and weak person, he rushes between the harsh demands of his mother and compassion for his wife. He loves Katerina, but not in the way that, according to the norms of patriarchal morality, a husband should love, and Katerina’s feeling for him is not the same as she should have for him according to her own ideas: “No, how can you not love! I feel sorry for him very much!” - she says to Varvara. “If you feel sorry, it’s not love. And no, you have to tell the truth,” Varvara replies. For Tikhon, breaking free from his mother’s care means going on a binge and drinking. “Yes, Mama, I don’t want to live by my own will. Where can I live by my own will!” - he responds to Kabanikha’s endless reproaches and instructions. Humiliated by his mother’s reproaches, he is ready to take out his frustration on Katerina, and only the intercession of his sister Varvara, who lets him go out for a drink in secret from his mother, stops the scene.

At the same time, Tikhon loves Katerina, tries to teach her to live in his own way (“Why listen to her! She needs to say something! Well, let her talk, and ignore her!” he consoles his wife, upset by her mother-in-law's attacks). And yet, he doesn’t want to sacrifice two weeks “without a thunderstorm” and take Katerina on the trip. He doesn't understand very clearly what's happening to her at all. When his mother forces him to pronounce a ritual order to his wife on how to live without him, how to behave in the absence of her husband, neither Kabanikh nor he, saying: “Don’t look at the guys,” have no idea how close all this is to the situation in their family. And yet Tikhon’s attitude towards his wife is humane, it has a personal connotation. After all, it is he who objects to his mother: “Why should she be afraid? It’s enough for me that she loves me.” Finally, when Katerina asks her to take terrible vows as a farewell, T. fearfully replies: “What are you talking about! What you! What a sin! I don’t even want to listen!” But, paradoxically, it is T.’s gentleness that in Katerina’s eyes is not so much an advantage as a disadvantage. He cannot help her either when she is struggling with sinful passion, or after her public repentance. And his reaction to betrayal is not at all what patriarchal morality dictates in similar situation: “Mama says that she needs to be buried alive in the ground so that she can be executed! But I love her, I would be sorry to lay a finger on her.” He cannot carry out Kuligin’s advice, cannot protect Katerina from her mother’s anger, from the ridicule of her household. He is “sometimes affectionate, sometimes angry, and drinks everything.” And only over the body of his dead wife does T. decide to rebel against his mother, publicly blaming her for the death of Katerina and it is with this publicity that he deals Kabanikha the most terrible blow.

Young Kabanov not only does not respect himself, but also allows his mother to treat his wife rudely. This is especially evident in the farewell scene before leaving for the fair. Tikhon repeats all his mother’s instructions and moral teachings word for word. Kabanov could not resist his mother in anything, he slowly became an alcoholic and thereby became even more weak-willed and quiet.

Tikhon is a kind, but weak person; he rushes between fear of his mother and compassion for his wife. The hero loves Katerina, but not in the way Kabanikha demands - sternly, “like a man.” He doesn’t want to prove his power to his wife, he needs warmth and affection: “Why should she be afraid? It’s enough for me that she loves me.” But Tikhon doesn’t get this in Kabanikha’s house. At home, he is forced to play the role of an obedient son: “Yes, Mama, I don’t want to live by my own will! Where can I live by my own will!” His only outlet is traveling on business, where he forgets all his humiliations, drowning them in wine. Despite the fact that Tikhon loves Katerina, he does not understand what is happening to his wife, what mental anguish she is experiencing. Tikhon's gentleness is one of his negative qualities. It is because of her that he cannot help his wife in her struggle with her passion for Boris, and he cannot ease Katerina’s fate even after her public repentance. Although he himself reacted kindly to his wife’s betrayal, without being angry with her: “Mama says that she must be buried alive in the ground so that she can be executed! But I love her, I would be sorry to lay a finger on her.” Only over the body of his dead wife does Tikhon decide to rebel against his mother, publicly blaming her for Katerina’s death. It is this riot in public that deals Kabanikha the most terrible blow.

It is significant that Tikhon, Kabanikha’s married son, is designated as her son: he was never able to free himself from his mother’s power and become truly independent.

5. Katerina, his wife.

Katerina is translated from Greek as “pure”. Despite the fact that she commits two terrible sins: adultery and suicide, she remains morally pure, and therefore is opposed to all other characters. The heroine realizes her guilt, cannot hide it, and therefore confesses to Tikhon that she committed a sin right on the street. She feels the need for punishment; he sincerely suffers that he cannot repent, cannot feel the sinfulness of his love. She silently endures Kabanikha’s reproaches, understanding their justice (previously the heroine did not want to listen to undeserved reproaches), and, according to Tikhon, “melts like wax.” An important role in Katerina’s fate was played by Varvara, who herself arranged her date with Boris. Ostrovsky uses not the canonical form (Ekaterina), but the folk one, emphasizing the folk-poetic side of the character of the heroine, her folk perception of the world, which is expressed in the desire to fly, the idea of ​​​​a “grave”: “There’s a grave under the tree... how good!.. Her sunshine.” it warms, the rain wets it... in the spring the grass will grow on it, so soft... birds will fly to the tree, they will sing, they will bring out children, flowers will bloom: yellow, red, blue... all kinds.” A large number of words with diminutive suffixes are also characteristic of folklore.

This image in its own way points to the end of the patriarchal way of life. T. no longer considers it necessary to adhere to the old ways in everyday life. But, due to his character, he cannot act as he sees fit and go against his mother. His choice is everyday compromises: “Why listen to her! She needs to say something! Well, let her talk, and you turn a deaf ear!”

All the characters call Katerina only by her first name; Boris calls her by her first name and patronymic once when she comes to see him. The appeal is also determined by the communication situation: Boris is surprised that Katerina herself made a date, he is afraid to approach her and start a conversation.

A. N. Ostrovsky “Thunderstorm”. Ostrovsky's drama "The Thunderstorm" was written in the 50-60s of the 19th century. This is the time when serfdom existed in Russia, but the arrival of new strength- commoners-intellectuals. A new topic has appeared in literature - the position of women in the family and society. The central place in the drama is occupied by the image of Katerina. The relationship with the other characters in the play determines its fate. Many events in the drama take place under the sound of thunder. On the one hand, this is a natural phenomenon, on the other, it is a symbol of the state of mind, therefore each of the heroes is characterized through their attitude to the thunderstorm. Katerina is incredibly afraid of thunderstorms, which shows her mental confusion. Internal, not for anyone visible thunderstorm rages in the soul of the heroine herself.

To understand Katerina’s tragic fate, let’s consider what this girl is like. Her childhood passed in the patriarchal-domostroevsky time, which left its mark on the character of the heroine and on her views on life. Katerina's childhood years were happy and cloudless. Her mother loved her very much, as Ostrovsky put it, “doted on her.” The girl looked after the flowers, of which there were many in the house, embroidered “on velvet with gold,” listened to the stories of the praying mantises, and went to church with her mother. Katerina is a dreamer, but her dream world does not always correspond to reality. The girl doesn't even try to understand real life, she can at any moment give up everything that does not suit her and again plunge into her world, where she sees angels. Her upbringing gave her dreams a religious coloring. This girl, so inconspicuous at first glance, has a strong will, pride and independence, which manifested itself already in childhood. While still a six-year-old girl, Katerina, offended by something, ran away to the Volga in the evening. It was a kind of child's protest. And later, in a conversation with Varya, she will point out another side of her character: “I was born so hot.” Her free and independent nature is revealed through her desire to fly. “Why don’t people fly like birds?” - these seemingly strange words emphasize the independence of Katerina’s character.

Katerina appears to us from two angles. On the one hand, she is a strong, proud, independent person, on the other hand, she is a quiet, religious girl, submissive to fate and her parents’ will. Katerina’s mother was convinced that her daughter “will love any husband,” and, flattered by an advantageous marriage, married her to Tikhon Kabanov. Katerina did not love her future husband, but resignedly submitted to her mother’s will. Moreover, due to her religiosity, she believes that her husband is given by God, and tries to love him: “I will love my husband. Silence, my darling, I won’t exchange you for anyone.” Having married Kabanov, Katerina found herself in a completely different world, alien to her. But she cannot leave him, she is a married woman, the concept of sinfulness binds her. Kalinov’s cruel, closed world is fenced off by an invisible wall from the outside “uncontrollably huge” world. We understand why Katerina so dreams of breaking out of the city and flying over the Volga, over the meadows: “I would fly out into the field and fly from cornflower to cornflower in the wind, like a butterfly.”

Imprisoned in the “dark kingdom” of ignorant wild and wild boars, faced with a rude and despotic mother-in-law, an inert husband in whom she does not see support and support, Katerina protests. Her protest results in love for Boris. Boris is not much different from her husband, except perhaps in education. He studied in Moscow, at a commercial academy, and has a broader outlook compared to other representatives of the city of Kalinov. It is difficult for him, like Katerina, to get along among Dikoy and the Kabanovs, but he is just as inert and weak-willed as Tikhon. Boris cannot do anything for Katerina, he understands her tragedy, but advises her to submit to fate and thereby betrays her. Desperate Katerina reproaches him for ruining her. But Boris is only an indirect reason. After all, Katerina is not afraid of human condemnation, she is afraid of the wrath of God. The main tragedy occurs in her soul. Being religious, she understands that cheating on her husband is a sin, but the strong side of her nature cannot come to terms with the Kabanovs’ environment. Katerina is tormented by terrible pangs of conscience. She is torn between her legal husband and Boris, between a righteous life and fall. She cannot forbid herself to love Boris, but she executes herself in her soul, believing that by her action she is rejecting God. These sufferings bring her to the point that, unable to withstand the pangs of conscience and fearing God’s punishment, she throws herself at her husband’s feet and confesses everything to him, putting her life in his hands. Katerina's mental anguish is intensified by a thunderstorm.

It’s not for nothing that Dikoy says that a thunderstorm sends punishment. “I didn’t know that you were so afraid of thunderstorms,” Varvara tells her. “How, girl, not to be afraid! - Katerina answers. - Everyone should be afraid. It’s not so scary that it will kill you, but that death will suddenly find you as you are, with all your sins...” There was a thunderclap the last straw, which filled the cup of Katerina’s suffering. Everyone around her reacts differently to her confession. Kabanova offers to bury her alive, but Tikhon, on the contrary, forgives Katerina. The husband forgave, Katerina, as it were, received absolution.

But her conscience remained uneasy, and she did not find the desired freedom and was again forced to live in the “dark kingdom.” Pangs of conscience and fear of remaining among the Kabanovs forever and turning into one of them lead Katerina to the idea of ​​suicide. How could a devout woman decide to commit suicide? To endure the torment and the evil that exists here on earth, or to leave all this of one’s own free will? Katerina is driven to despair by the callous attitude of people towards her and the pangs of conscience, so she rejects the opportunity to stay alive. Her death was inevitable.

In the image of his heroine, Ostrovsky painted a new type of original, integral, selfless Russian girl who challenged the kingdom of the wild and wild boars. Dobrolyubov rightly called Katerina “a ray of light in a dark kingdom.”

6. Varvara, Tikhon’s sister.

Wild, self-willed characters, except for the Wild One, are represented in the play by Varvara (she is a pagan, a “barbarian,” not a Christian and behaves accordingly).

Her name means “rough” when translated from Greek.

This heroine is really quite simple spiritually, rude. She knows how to lie when necessary. Her principle is “do what you want, as long as it’s safe and covered.” Varvara is kind in her own way, she loves Katerina, she helps her, as it seems to her, to find love, arranges a date, but does not think about what consequences all this may have. This heroine is in many ways opposed to Katerina - the scenes of the meeting between Kudryash and Varvara, on the one hand, and Katerina and Boris, on the other, are based on the principle of contrast.

Barbara from Greek as “coming from foreign lands”, i.e. ignorant wild ( neighboring peoples were backward compared to the Greeks). Indeed, Varvara easily oversteps morality: she meets with Kudryash, then, when her mother locks her up, she runs away with him. She does not obey the rules that forbid her to do what she wants without experiencing the slightest remorse. Her motto: “do what you want, as long as it’s sewn and covered.” Therefore, she does not understand Katerina’s torment; she does not feel guilty for pushing her to sin.

Varvara cannot be denied intelligence, cunning and lightness; Before marriage, she wants to be able to go everywhere, try everything, because she knows that “girls go out as they please, father and mother don’t care. Only women are locked up.” Lying is the norm for her. In a conversation with Katerina, she directly talks about this:

“Katerina. I don’t know how to deceive, I can’t hide anything.

Varvara. Well, you can’t do without this... Our whole house rests on this. And I was not a liar, but I learned when it became necessary.”

Varvara adapted to the “dark kingdom”, learned its laws and rules. There is a sense of authority, strength, and desire to deceive in her. She is, in fact, the future Kabanikha, because the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.

7. Kuligin, a tradesman, a self-taught watchmaker, looking for a perpetuum mobile.

“A self-taught mechanic,” as the hero introduces himself. Kuligin, in addition to the well-known associations with Kulibin, also evokes the impression of something small, defenseless: in this terrible swamp he is a sandpiper - a bird and nothing more. He praises Kalinov like a sandpiper praises his swamp.

P.I. Melnikov-Pechersky in his review of “The Thunderstorm” wrote: “... To this man Mr. Ostrovsky very skillfully gave famous name Kulibin, who in the last century and at the beginning of this century brilliantly proved what an uneducated Russian man can do with the power of his genius and unyielding will.”

But not everything is so gloomy; in the “dark kingdom” there are also living, sensitive souls. This is a self-taught mechanic Kuligin, looking for a perpetual motion machine. He is kind and active, obsessed with a constant desire to do something useful for people. However, all his good intentions run into a thick wall of misunderstanding, indifference, and ignorance. So, when he tries to install steel lightning rods on houses, he receives a furious rebuff from the Dikiy: “A thunderstorm is sent to us as punishment, so that we can feel it, but you want to defend yourself, God forgive me, with poles and some kind of rods.”

Kuligin is the reasoner in the play, condemnation of the “dark kingdom” is put into his mouth: “Cruel, sir, the morals in our city are cruel... Whoever has money, sir, tries to enslave the poor so that his labors will be free more money make money..."

But Kuligin, like Tikhon, Boris, Varvara, Kudryash, has adapted to the “dark kingdom”, has come to terms with such a life, he is just one of the inhabitants of the “dark kingdom”.

8. Vanya Kudryash, a young man, Dikov’s clerk.

The use of the diminutive form of the name is indicative: not Ivan, but Vanya, he is not yet independent in everything: he serves the Wild, although he can afford to be rude to him, knowing that he needs him.

It is unclear whether the anthroponym Kudryash is a surname or a nickname. This surname exists in the language along with the surname Kudryashov. Most likely, the anthroponym reflects the process of transition of a nickname into a surname, which corresponds to the anthroponymic situation in the second half of the 19th century. The use of an anthroponym in the play is close to the use of a surname: in the list of characters he is designated as Vanya Kudryash, and Tikhon says that Varvara “ran away with Kudryash and Vanka.”

The Wild clerk, but unlike other merchant employees, knows how to stand up for himself. He is smart and sharp-tongued, his characterizations of other characters and his judgments about life are accurate and imaginative. The image of Kudryash has analogies in Koltsov’s poetry. You can, for example, establish a connection with Likhach Kudryavich (“The First Song of Likhach Kudryavich”), about whom it is said:

With joy and joy

The curls curl like hops;

Without any care

They don't bother...

On time and on time

Rivers flow like honey;

And from morning to night

Songs are sung...

Varvara's friend, Ivan Kudryash, is a match for her. He is the only one in the city of Kalinov who can answer Dikiy. “I am considered a rude person; Why is he holding me? Therefore, he needs me. Well, that means I’m not afraid of him, but let him be afraid of me...” says Kudryash. In conversation, he behaves cheekily, smartly, boldly, boasts of his prowess, red tape, and knowledge of the “merchant establishment.” Kudryash is the second Wild, only he is still young.

In the end, Varvara and Kudryash leave the “dark kingdom,” but does this escape mean that they have completely freed themselves from old traditions and laws and will become the source of new laws of life and fair rules? Hardly. Once free, they will most likely try to become masters of life themselves.

9. Shapkin, tradesman.

Bourgeois people are often named by their last name: Kuligin, Shapkin.

10. Feklusha, wanderer.

Feklusha tells city residents about other countries. They listen to her and focus their attention only on this. At the same time, unnoticed by others, she tells the truth about people. But they don't hear it because they don't want to hear it. Feklusha praises the city of Kalinov and the quiet life in it. People are happy that their city is so magnificent; they don’t need anything else. They only support Feklusha with alms, which is what she achieves

Everyone calls the wanderer Feklusha by name, using the popular diminutive form, which reflects the real use of names in speech (remember, for example, the wanderer Fedosyushka in L.N. Tolstoy’s novel “War and Peace”).

In the “dark kingdom” the wanderer Feklusha enjoys great reverence and respect. Feklushi's stories about the lands where people with dog heads live are perceived as irrefutable information about the world.

11. Glasha, a girl in Kabanova’s house.

Servants and clerks in Ostrovsky's dramaturgy are named, as a rule, only by name: the diminutive form of the name is often used: Glasha.

Here, it was the satirical female images that were one of the expressions of the comedy principle. This includes the wanderer Feklusha and the “girl” Glasha. Both images can be safely called grotesque-comedy. Feklusha seems to be a storyteller of folk tales and legends, pleasing those around her with her stories about how “the Saltans rule the earth” and “no matter what they judge, everything is wrong,” and about the lands “where all the people have dog heads.” Glasha is a typical reflection of ordinary “Kalinovites” who listen with reverence to such Feklush, confident that “it’s still good that good people There is; no, no, and you’ll hear what’s going on in this world, otherwise you’d die like fools.” Both Feklusha and Glasha belong to the “dark kingdom”, dividing this world into “ours” and “theirs”, into patriarchal “virtue”, where everything is “cool and orderly”, and into external vanity, from which the old orders and time begin “to come into disparagement.” With these characters, Ostrovsky introduces the problem of the absurd ignorance and lack of enlightenment of the old conservative way of life, its inconsistency with modern trends.

12. A lady with two footmen, an old woman of 70 years old, half crazy.

13. City residents of both sexes.

The secondary characters are the background against which the tragedy of a desperate woman unfolds. Every face in the play, every image was a step on the ladder that led Katerina to the banks of the Volga, to tragic death.

Compose a story using the material you listened to on the topic “Traditions and customs of the city of Klinov.”

Traditions and customs of the city of Klinova.

Reading Ostrovsky's works, we involuntarily find ourselves in the atmosphere that reigns in a given society, and become direct participants in the events that take place on stage. We merge with the crowd and, as if from the outside, observe the lives of the heroes.

So, finding ourselves in the Volga city of Kalinov, we can observe the life and customs of its inhabitants. The bulk of the population consists of merchants, whose life was shown with such skill and knowledge by the playwright in his plays. It is precisely this “dark kingdom” that rules the roost in such quiet provincial Volga cities as Kalinov.

Let's get acquainted with representatives of this society. At the very beginning of the work we learn about the Wild, “ significant person"in the city, merchant. This is how Shapkin speaks about him: “We should look for another scolder like ours, Savel Prokofich. There’s no way he’ll cut someone off.” Immediately we hear about Kabanikha and understand that he and Dikiy are “birds of a feather.”

“The view is unusual! Beauty! The soul rejoices,” exclaims Kuligin, but against the background of this beautiful landscape a bleak picture of life is drawn, which appears before us in “The Thunderstorm”. It is Kuligin who gives an accurate and clear description of the life, morals and customs that reign in the city of Kalinov. He is one of the few who is aware of the atmosphere that has developed in the city. He speaks directly about the lack of education and ignorance of the masses, about the impossibility of earning money through honest work, of becoming a people from under the bondage of noble and important persons in the city. They live far from civilization and do not really strive for it. Preservation of old foundations, fear of everything new, the absence of any law and the rule of force - this is the law and norm of their life, this is what these people live and are content with. They subjugate everyone who surrounds them, suppress any protest, any manifestation of personality.

Ostrovsky shows us typical representatives of this society - Kabanikha and Wild. These individuals occupy a special position in society, they are feared and therefore respected, they have capital, and therefore power. There are no general laws for them; they created their own and force others to live in accordance with them. They strive to subjugate those who are weaker and “butter up” those who are stronger. They are despots both in life and in the family. We see this unquestioning submission of Tikhon to his mother, and Boris to his uncle. But if Kabanikha scolds “under the guise of piety,” then Dikoy scolds “as if he had broken free from his chain.” Neither one nor the other wants to recognize anything new, but wants to live according to house-building orders. Their ignorance, combined with stinginess, makes us not only laugh, but also smile bitterly. Let us remember Dikiy’s reasoning: “What kind of electricity is there!.. A thunderstorm is sent to us as punishment, so that we can feel it, but you want to defend yourself, God forgive me, with poles and some kind of rods.”

We are amazed by their callousness towards people dependent on them, their reluctance to part with money, and to deceive in settlements with workers. Let us remember what Dikoy says: “Once I was fasting about fasting, about a great fast, and then it’s not easy and you slip a little man in; I came for money, carried firewood... I did sin: I scolded him, I scolded him like that... I almost killed him.”

These rulers also have those who unwittingly help them exercise their dominance. This is Tikhon, who with his silence and weakness of will only helps to strengthen his mother’s power. This includes Feklusha, an uneducated, stupid writer of all sorts of fables about the civilized world, and these are the townspeople who live in this city and have come to terms with such orders. All of them together are the “dark kingdom” that is presented in the play.

Ostrovsky, using various artistic media, showed us a typical provincial city with its customs and morals, a city where arbitrariness, violence, complete ignorance reigns, where any manifestation of freedom, freedom of spirit is suppressed.”

This cruel morals city ​​of Kalinov. Residents can be divided into representatives of the “dark kingdom” and representatives of the new life. How do they live together?

Which of the heroes managed to challenge the cruel world of the “dark kingdom”? Yes, this is Katerina. Why does the author choose her?

5. Working with the textbook on the page

The main character of the play is the young merchant's wife Katerina Kabanova. But in order to understand her character, the reasons for her actions, you need to know what kind of people she lives among, who surrounds her. The characters are introduced in the first act of the play. Events 1-4 of the first act are exposition, and in acts 5-9 the actual plot of the drama takes place.

So Katerina rushes about in this dark forest among animal-like creatures. Women's names in Ostrovsky's plays are very bizarre, but the name of the main character almost always extremely accurately characterizes her role in the plot and fate. Katerina is “pure”. Katerina is a victim of her purity, her religiosity, she could not bear the splitting of her soul, because she loved not her husband, and cruelly punished herself for it. It is interesting that Marfa Ignatievna, that is, “ignorant” or, in scientific terms, “ignoring”, stands as if on the sidelines from Katerina’s tragedy, but is certainly to blame (not directly, but indirectly) for the death of her daughter-in-law.

6. Let’s summarize the drama “The Thunderstorm”

Theme of the play "Thunderstorm"	A clash between new trends and old traditions, between those who oppress and those who are oppressed, between the desire for the free expression of one’s feelings, human rights, spiritual needs and the social, family and everyday order that prevailed in pre-reform Russia.
Idea of ​​the play	Exposing social orders. The nature in which people live is beautiful, but the social order is ugly. Under these orders, the majority of the population is materially and spiritually dependent on the wealthy minority.
Conflicts	The main one is between old, outdated, authoritarian social and everyday principles, which are based on feudal-serf relations, and new, progressive aspirations for equality and freedom of the human person. The main conflict combines a node of conflicts: identify these conflicts and fill out the table in the following lessons.

6. Homework: by action. Tasks No. 6, 8, 9, 12, 13, 16, 20, 21, 22, 25, 26.

Individual task: prepare a presentation on the topic

1) “Symbolism of the play “The Thunderstorm”;

2) “The image of Katerina as assessed by critics” (based on articles by Dobrolyubov and Pisarev).

Lesson No. 3, 4. Play by A.N. Ostrovsky "The Thunderstorm" (1859). Katerina in the fight for her human rights.

Purpose of the lesson: trace the reflection of the era in the play; identify the meaning of the title of the drama; determine the moral issues of the play and its universal significance.

Tasks:

Determining the compositional structure of the play and artistic analysis stage hosts; acquaintance with critical articles on the drama by A.N. Ostrovsky's "The Thunderstorm", analysis of the symbolism of the play;

Development of skills in analyzing a dramatic work and the ability to determine the author’s position in the work;

Cultivating the moral reading position of students, interest in Russian classical literature, history and culture.

Equipment: multimedia projector, screen, textbooks, notebooks, play texts, lesson presentation.

1. Organizational moment.

2. Composition of the play(Presentation “To the play”).

In The Thunderstorm, as a dramatic work, the basis of the plot is the development of the conflict. The drama consists of five acts, each of which depicts a different stage of the struggle.

Action 1 – the social and everyday background of the conflict, the inevitability (premonition) of the conflict;

Act 2 – the irreconcilability of contradictions and the severity of Katerina’s conflict with the “dark kingdom”

Act 3 – freedom gained by Katerina is a step towards the tragic death of the heroine;

Act 4 – Katerina’s mental turmoil is a consequence of the freedom she has acquired;

Act 5 – Katerina’s suicide as a challenge to tyranny.

Each action is divided into separate scenes, i.e. such sections of text that depict the development of the conflict from any one perspective, seen through the eyes of any one character. The conflict in “The Thunderstorm” develops quickly and intensely, which is achieved by a special arrangement of scenes: with each new scene, starting from the outbreak of the conflict, the tension (dramatic intensity) of the struggle increases.

3. Turning the pages of the play.

FIRST ACTION

Act one. Public garden on the high bank of the Volga; beyond the Volga there is a rural view. There are two benches and several bushes on the stage.

The social and everyday background of the conflict, the inevitability (premonition) of the conflict - exposition.

Task 5

Some researchers (A. I. Revyakin, A. A. Anastasyev, A. I. Zhuravleva, etc.) noted the presence in the play of a “leisurely,” detailed exposition that takes on a “deeply effective character,” that is, combining preliminary information about the background of the action depicting the main characters in the action itself, dialogues, etc. Some consider the entire first act as exposition, others limit it to the first three phenomena.

Find the boundaries of the exposition in the first act of “Thunderstorm” and justify your opinion. What is the effectiveness of the exposition of “The Thunderstorm”, what is its significance for understanding the conflict of the play? At what point does the action begin? Justify your point of view.

Task 6

Checking homework: a detailed description on the topic “Landscape of the city of Kalinov”, using stage directions, Kuligin’s monologues, remarks from the characters (act I - stage direction, scene 1; action III - scene 3; action IV - scene stage).

What do you think is the role of landscape in the play?

– What picture appears before the viewer when the curtain opens? Why does the author draw this before us? a picturesque picture? (The beauty of nature emphasizes the ugliness and tragedy of what is happening in the human world). For another reason, Ostrovsky chose a public garden as the setting for the play, and the time of action - after the service in the church - so it was easier and more natural to introduce the characters, whose path lies through the boulevard.

Task 7

Please note that immediately after Kuligin’s accusatory monologue “Cruel morals, sir, in our city, they are cruel,” is followed by Feklusha’s remark addressed to her interlocutor: “Blaalepie, dear, blaalepie!.. You live in the promised land! And the merchants are all pious people, adorned with many virtues!..” (act I - scene 3).

Why, in your opinion, did Ostrovsky put the evaluative statements of Kuligin and Feklushi next to each other? What role do they play in the first act, being placed side by side?

Task 8

Homework check: What do they talk about with their young relatives Dikaya and Kabanikha?

Compare the features of their language. What vocabulary predominates in their speech? Give examples (action I - phenomena 2, 5).

Task 9

Homework check: Katerina’s story about her life before marriage in home(action I - phenomenon 7).

Think about why the world in which she spent her childhood and early youth, seems to her so joyful, free and happy, and in the Kabanovs’ house “everything seems to be from under captivity,” although, according to Varvara, “it’s the same with us.”

What does the word “order” mean in Kabanikha’s mouth?

How is the frank conversation between Katerina and Varvara motivated?

Analyze Katerina's speech. How does the heroine’s speech reveal her inner world?

♦ Is it possible to find an explanation for this in the following excerpts from the 16th century book “Domostroy” (Monument of Old Russian Literature of the 1st half of the 16th century), which is often referred to by critics and literary scholars when considering the “Thunderstorm” conflict? Is Domostroy to blame for Katerina’s tragic fate in the Kabanovs’ house?

I bless, sinner named, and teach, and instruct, and admonish my son named, and his wife, and their children, and household members: to follow all Christian laws and live with a clear conscience and in truth, with faith doing the will of God and keeping the commandments him, and affirming himself in the fear of God, in righteous living, and teaching his wife, in the same way instructing his household, not with violence, not with beatings, not with hard slavery, but as children, so that they are always calm, well-fed and clothed, and in warm home and always in order.<...>

<...>Yes, for yourself, your master, and your wife, and your children, and your household members - do not steal, do not fornicate, do not lie, do not slander, do not envy, do not offend, do not slander, do not encroach on someone else’s property, do not judge, do not indulge in excess, do not ridicule, do not remember evil, do not be angry with anyone, be obedient and submissive to the elders, friendly to the middle ones, friendly and merciful to the young and poor, manage every matter without red tape and especially not to offend the employee in terms of payment, and endure any insult with gratitude for the sake of God: both reproach and reproach, if rightly they are reproached and reproached, accept with love and avoid such recklessness, and do not take revenge in return.<...>

Husbands should teach their wives with love and exemplary instruction; their husbands' wives ask about strict order, about how to save their souls, please God and their husbands, arrange their home well, and submit to their husband in everything; and whatever the husband punishes, one willingly agrees with and carries out according to his instructions: and first of all, have the fear of God and remain in bodily purity... Whether the husband comes, or a simple guest, she would always sit at her needlework: for that she is honored and glory, and praise to the husband, the servants would never wake up the mistress, but the mistress herself would wake up the servants and, going to bed after work, would always pray.<...>

<...>Invite the clergy, and the beggars, and the weak, and the needy, and the suffering, and strangers into your home and, as best you can, feed, drink, and warm, and give alms from your righteous labors, for in the house, and in the market, and On the way, all sins are cleansed: after all, they are intercessors before God for our sins.

Domostroy. Monument of ancient Russian literature of the first half of the 16th century

♦ Which Domostroevsky norms do the characters of “The Thunderstorm” observe and which ones violate in their Everyday life? How is this reflected in the development of the main conflict of the play?

Task 10

Get to know the point of view modern literary critic to Katerina’s monologue in question. Do you agree with her? If yes, then develop this idea by drawing on the text of the entire play.

It is very important that Katerina... did not appear from somewhere in the expanses of another life, another historical time (after all, patriarchal Kalinov and contemporary Moscow, where bustle is in full swing, or Railway, which Feklusha talks about, is different historical time), but was born and formed in the same “Kalinovka” conditions. Ostrovsky talks about this in detail already in the exposition of the play, when Katerina tells Varvara about her life as a girl. This is one of Katerina's most poetic monologues. Here is an ideal version of patriarchal relations and the patriarchal world in general. The main motive of this story is the motive of all-permeating mutual love... But it was “will”, which did not at all conflict with the centuries-old way of a closed life, the entire circle of which is limited to housework and religious dreams. This is a world in which it does not occur to a person to oppose himself to the general, since he has not yet separated himself from this community. And therefore there is no violence or coercion here. The idyllic harmony of patriarchal family life is a thing of the very distant past.<...>

Katerina lives in an era when the very spirit of this morality - harmony between an individual and the moral ideas of the environment - has disappeared and the ossified form of relationships rests on violence and coercion. Sensitive Katerina caught this...

A. I. Zhuravleva. Thousand-year monument to Russia. 1995

SECOND ACT

Act two. A room in the Kabanovs' house.

The irreconcilability of contradictions and the severity of Katerina’s conflict with the “dark kingdom” are the beginning.

Task 11

Some critics, Ostrovsky's contemporaries, reproached him for deviating from the laws of stage art, in particular for the abundance of characters and scenes that were completely unnecessary and not related to the basis of the play. Such persons include Feklusha and Glasha, Kuligin and Dikoy, Kudryash and Shapkin, a lady with two footmen. These reproaches addressed to the playwright were refuted by N. A. Dobrolyubov:

In “The Thunderstorm” the need for so-called “unnecessary faces” is especially visible: without them we cannot understand the heroine’s face and can easily distort the meaning of the entire play, which is what happened with most critics.N. A. Dobrolyubov. A ray of light in a dark kingdom. 1860

Try to figure out what significance the phenomenon of the second act, the dialogue between Feklushi and Glasha, has in the play, which seems very far from the events depicted in “The Thunderstorm”. (If this task turns out to be difficult for you, find one of the possible answers in the article by N. A. Dobrolyubov “A Ray of Light in the Dark Kingdom” (Part 2)).

Task 12

Homework check: It is believed that the scene of Tikhon’s departure is one of the most important in the play both for revealing the characters’ characters and for its function in the development of intrigue (phenomenon 3).

Determine the role of this scene in the development of the action of “The Thunderstorm”. Does Katerina’s attitude towards her husband change at the moment of farewell?

What feelings do Katerina and Kabanikha experience? Write stage directions for their remarks that help you understand their emotional state.

Why does Kabanikha limit herself to only remarking, dissatisfaction, that Katerina does not howl on the porch after her husband’s departure, but does not insist, does not dare force her daughter-in-law to fulfill this custom?

Task 13

Let's return to the conversation between Katerina and Tikhon before his departure:

“Kabanov. After all, you are not alone, you will stay with your mother.

Katerina. Don't tell me about her, don't tyrant my heart! Oh, my misfortune, my misfortune! (Cries.) Where can I, poor thing, go? Who should I grab hold of? My fathers, I am perishing!”

Before this, Katerina says about Kabanikha: “She offended me!”, and Tikhon replies: “Take everything to heart, and you’ll soon end up in consumption. Why listen to her? She needs to say something! Well, let her talk, and you turn a deaf ear.”

What is Katerina’s offense? Why doesn’t Tikhon’s words calm her down, his advice not to pay attention to her mother-in-law? Can Katerina, as we know her from the first two actions, not take it to heart, pretend that she obeys Kabanikha’s absurd demands and thereby ensure herself a relatively calm existence in the house?

What is the meaning of the word “heart” in this dialogue?

Is this fragment of the dialogue between Katerina and Tikhon connected with her final decision to meet with Boris, and if so, to what extent?

Task 14

Re-read Katerina’s final monologue about the key in the second act and watch how, in her reflections, she gradually approaches the decision to meet Boris (from the words “Throw him away, throw him far away, throw him into the river so that they will never be found” to the words “Oh, if only it were night hurry up!..”) Which phrases of this monologue do you consider defining and why?

Task 15

An interesting testimony from a contemporary about how one of the famous actresses played Kabanova: in the first act, she came on stage strong, imperious, a “flint-woman”, menacingly pronounced her instructions to her son and daughter-in-law, then, left on stage alone, suddenly everything changed and became good-natured. It was clear that the formidable appearance was only a mask that she wore in order to “maintain order in the house.” Kabanova herself knows that the future is not hers: “Well, at least it’s good that I won’t see anything.” (According to the book: M. P. Lobanov. Ostrovsky. 1979.)

Is such a stage interpretation of the image of Kabanikha possible? What is the reason for Kabanikha’s very lenient attitude towards Varvara’s behavior and uncompromising severity towards Katerina?

Do you agree with the statement that Marfa Ignatievna is far from insensitive as a mother?

ACT THIRD

Act three. Scene 1. Street. The gate of the Kabanovs' house, there is a bench in front of the gate.

The freedom gained by Katerina is a step towards the tragic death of the heroine - development.

Task 16

Homework check: Expressively read the dialogue between Kabanikha and Feklushi from phenomenon I.

What is its main subtext? Determine the mood of your interlocutors. What intonation means can you express it?

What is more comic or dramatic in the scene? Can we say that it is still topical today?

Task 17

Homework check: Why do you think the Wild One needed to “confess” to Kabanikha (phenomenon II)?

Why does he, a tyrant, the sovereign ruler of his household, not want to return home (“I have a war going on there”)? Why is Dikoy so worried?

Task 18

In a conversation with Kabanikha, Dika constantly uses the word “heart”: “...What do you tell me to do with myself when my heart is like this!”, “Here it is, what kind of heart I have!”, “That’s it.” what does my heart bring me..."; The words “to make angry”, “angry”, “get angry” sound at the same time. Kabanikha asks: “Why are you deliberately bringing yourself into your heart?”

What meaning does Ostrovsky and his heroes put into the word “heart”?

Task 19

Read the critic's enthusiastic assessment of the scene in the ravine.

You know this moment, magnificent in its poetry - this hitherto unprecedented night of meeting in a ravine, all breathing with the closeness of the Volga, all fragrant with the smell of the herbs of its wide meadows, all sounding with free songs, “funny”, secret speeches, all full of the charm of deep and tragic passion - fatal. It was created as if it was not an artist, but an entire people who created it here.A. A. Grigoriev - I. S. Turgenev. 1860

Is this really a key scene for determining the direction of the play?

What do you think attracts Katerina to Boris?

Task 20

Constructing the scene in the ravine according to the laws of music, Ostrovsky introduces two contrasting themes in it, but by the end they merge in a common chord: the anxious, difficult love of Katerina and Boris and the free, reckless love of Varvara and Kudryash. It is these two faces - Varvara and Kudryash - with greatest strength They personify the will that even Kabanikha and Dikoya cannot suppress.

A. N. Anastasyev. "Thunderstorm" by Ostrovsky. 1975

Do you agree with this point of view of the literary critic? Are other assessments of the characters in “The Thunderstorm” possible in this scene and in its composition itself?

Homework check: What role do the songs of Kudryash and Varvara play in these scenes?

ACT FOUR

Act four. In the foreground is a narrow gallery with the vaults of an ancient building that is beginning to collapse; here and there there is grass and bushes; behind the arches there is a bank and a view of the Volga.

Katerina’s mental turmoil is a consequence of the freedom she has gained—the climax.

Task 21

Homework check: What new things do we learn about the morals of the “dark kingdom” from the dialogue between Kuligin and Boris? How does the topic of this dialogue relate to the conversation between Kudryash and Boris before the date? How are these dialogues related to the main event of the third act?

Task 22

Read the second scene of the fourth act, analyze the author’s remarks and, based on this, write director’s remarks for the dialogue between Dikiy and Kuligin that reveal the inner state of the speakers. They will help you determine your interpretations of these characters in the play.

Sample assignment

Director's remarks

Kuligin. Yes, at least for you, your lordship, Savel Prokofich. If only I could put it on the boulevard, in a clean place, sir. What's the cost? The consumption is empty: a stone column (shows with gestures the size of each thing), a copper plate, so round, and a straight hairpin (shows with a gesture), very simple. I’ll put it all together and cut out the numbers myself. Now you, your lordship, when you deign to take a walk, or others who are walking, will now come up and see what time it is. And this place is beautiful, and the view, and everything, but it’s as if it’s empty. We, too, Your Excellency, have travelers who come there to see our views, after all, it’s a decoration - it’s more pleasing to the eye.

option: persistently, with dignity, with bitterness, with restraint, quietly, etc. option: loudly, worriedly, hastily, respectfully, etc. (Options of your choice.)

♦ Homework check: Why does Ostrovsky accompany Dikiy’s speech with author’s remarks much more often than Kuligin’s?

Why did Derzhavin’s poems quoted by Kuligin anger Dikiy? Why did he promise to send Kuligin to the mayor? What did he see in the poems? (“Hey, honorable ones, listen to what he says!”)

Task 23

In criticism and literary criticism, Kuligin was usually assessed either as an advanced person, an intellectual from the people, his name was associated with the name of the inventor Kulibin, or as a person who understood everything, but was downtrodden, a kind of victim of the “dark kingdom.”

Get acquainted with another point of view belonging to a modern literary critic:

Not only Kalinov’s dark inhabitants, but also Kuligin, who performs some of the functions of a reasoning hero in the play, are, after all, also flesh and blood of Kalinov’s world. His image is consistently painted in archaic tones... Kuligin's technical ideas are a clear anachronism. The sundial he dreams of came from antiquity, the lightning rod is a technical discovery of the 18th century. Kuligin is a dreamer and poet, but he writes “in the old-fashioned way,” like Lomonosov and Derzhavin. And his stories about the customs of the Kalinovsky inhabitants are kept in even more ancient stylistic traditions, reminiscent of ancient moralizing tales and apocrypha. Kind and gentle, dreaming of changing the lives of his fellow countrymen by receiving an award for the discovery of a perpetual motion machine, he seems to them to be something of a city holy fool.

A. I. Zhuravleva. Thousand-year monument to Russia. 1995

Task 24

Check out the interpretations below of Katerina's repentance scene.

Reviewing the production of “The Thunderstorm” at the Maly Theater (1962), E. G. Kholodov notes that in the scene of repentance, Rufina Nifontova, who played Katerina, rises to a truly tragic force.

No, it was not a thunderstorm, not the prophecies of a crazy old woman, not the fear of hell that prompted this Katerina to confess. For her honest and integral nature, the false position in which she found herself is unbearable. How humanly, with what deep pity Katerina says, looking into Tikhon’s eyes: “My darling!” At that moment, it seems, she forgot not only Boris, but also herself. And it is in this state of self-forgetfulness that she shouts out words of recognition, without thinking about the consequences. And when Kabanikha asks: “With whom... Well, with whom?”, she firmly and proudly, without challenge, but with dignity, answers: “With Boris Grigorievich.”

E. G. Kholodov. "Storm". Maly Theater. A. N. Ostrovsky on the Soviet stage. 1974

If Katerina was driven to Boris by the passion that gripped her, then why did she publicly and publicly repent of her sin in the fourth act? After all, she knew, she could not help but know, that this would entail shame, abuse, not to mention the collapse of love. However, even in this most difficult and risky scene, Ostrovsky created a psychologically undeniable situation in which Katerina could not act differently if she remained herself. It was not “a coincidence of empty circumstances”, but the greatest, cruel, insurmountable test for a pure and believing soul that Katerina met in the destroyed church gallery. Consistently - in full agreement with the truth of life, with the reality of the situation and at the same time with great dramatic art - the writer rains down blow after blow on his heroine.

In the series of these blows - like in music - one can feel the contrast, the increase in action, the harbinger of a thunderstorm and the thunderstorm itself. First, a woman’s casual remark: “If someone is destined for it, you won’t go anywhere.” Then Tikhon’s joke, seemingly inappropriate in this tense atmosphere: “Katya, repent, brother, if you have sinned in anything.” Then - the unexpected appearance of Boris - a living reminder of ill-fated love. In the discordant conversation, one can hear that the thunderstorm will kill someone today - “because look, what an unusual color!” The Lady brings a sharp note of increasing tension with her prophecies. But this is not enough! Hiding against the wall, Katerina sees an image of “fiery Gehenna” and can’t stand it anymore - she tells everything...

In the drama “The Thunderstorm” there is absolutely no concept of “fate”, the tragic guilt of the hero and retribution for it as a constructive element. Moreover, the author’s efforts are aimed at criticizing the idea of ​​the hero’s tragic guilt. Ostrovsky convincingly shows that modern society is destroying the best, most gifted and pure natures, but such observations force him to conclude that the relations prevailing in modern society are subject to change.L. M. Lotman. A. N. Ostrovsky and Russian drama of his time. 1961

Compare the proposed interpretations. Which of them, in your opinion, helps to better understand the motives of Katerina’s behavior?

Task 25

A. N. Anastasyev. "Thunderstorm" by Ostrovsky. 1975

It is important that it is here, in Kalinov, in the soul of the extraordinary, poetic Kalinov woman that a new attitude to the world is born, a new feeling, still unclear to the heroine herself... This vague feeling, which Katerina cannot, of course, explain rationally, is an awakening sense of personality . In the heroine’s soul, it naturally takes not the form of civil, public protest - this would be incompatible with the mentality and entire sphere of life of a merchant’s wife - but the form of individual, personal love.A. I. Zhuravleva. Thousand-year monument to Russia. 1995

Why did it turn out to be suicide for Katerina? the only way out from the current situation?

4. The main characters of the play.

Task 29

The world of patriarchal relations is dying, and the soul of this world leaves life in torment and suffering, crushed by the ossified, meaningless form of everyday connections and itself passing a moral verdict, because in it the patriarchal ideal lives in its primordial content. That is why in the center of "The Thunderstorm" next to Katerina stands not any of the heroes of the "love triangle", not Boris or Tikhon, heroes of a completely different, everyday, everyday scale, but Kabanikha... Both of them are maximalists, both will never come to terms with human weaknesses and do not compromise. Both of them, finally, believe the same, their religion is harsh and merciless, there is no forgiveness for sin, and they both do not remember mercy. Only Kabanikha is completely chained to the earth, all her forces are aimed at holding, gathering, defending the way of life, she is the guardian of form. And Katerina embodies the spirit of this world, its dream, its impulse. Ostrovsky showed that even in the ossified world of the city of Kalinov, a folk character of amazing beauty and strength can arise, whose faith - truly Kalinov's - is nevertheless based on love, on a free dream of justice, beauty, some kind of higher truth.

A. I. Zhuravleva. Thousand-year monument to Russia. 1995

Who do you think, along with Katerina, can be called the main characters of the play and why?

Is it possible to agree with Zhuravleva and accept Katerina and Kabanikha as two poles of Kalinov’s world? If yes, then justify with examples from the text of the play.

Task 30

The fact is that the character of Katerina, as he is performed in “The Thunderstorm,” constitutes a step forward not only in Ostrovsky’s dramatic work, but also in all of our literature. It corresponds to the new phase of our national life, it has long demanded its implementation in literature, our best writers revolved around it; but they only knew how to understand its necessity and could not comprehend and feel its essence; Ostrovsky managed to do this...

In Katerina we see a protest against Kabanov’s concepts of morality, a protest brought to the end, proclaimed both under domestic torture and over the abyss into which the poor woman threw herself.N. A. Dobrolyubov. A ray of light in a dark kingdom. 1860

Katerina's whole life consists of constant internal contradictions; every minute she rushes from one extreme to another; Today she repents of what she did yesterday, and yet she herself does not know what she will do tomorrow; she confuses her every step of the way own life and the lives of other people; finally, having mixed up everything she had at hand, she cuts through the lingering knots with the most stupid means, suicide, and even a suicide that is completely unexpected for herself.D. I. Pisarev. Motives of Russian drama. 1864

As paradoxical as this may seem at first glance, it seems to us that both critics were right in this case. Each from his own position, although within the same ideological and socio-political tradition. The very character of Katerina, objectively, apparently, contained elements that opened up the possibility of a certain duality in his assessment: under certain conditions, “Katerina” could “overthrow the Dark Kingdom” and become an element of a renewed society - such a possibility was objectively laid down by history in their character; under other historical circumstances, the “Katerinas” submitted to the social routine of this kingdom and themselves appeared as an element of this kingdom of the Foolovites. Dobrolyubov, assessing Katerina only on one side, concentrated all his critic’s attention only on the spontaneously rebellious side of her nature; Pisarev was struck by Katerina’s exceptional darkness, the antediluvian nature of her social consciousness, her peculiar social “Oblomovism,” and political bad manners.

A. A. Lebedev. The playwright in the face of criticism. 1974

♦ Can this point of view of a modern literary critic serve as an explanation of the reasons for the disagreements between Dobrolyubov and Pisarev in their assessment of Katerina?

5. Symbolism of “Thunderstorm” (Presentation “Symbolism of the play”).

1. Names of heroes (see above). The use of proper names is determined by two main trends. Really existing (or existing) names and toponyms are used, albeit unusual ones (Ostrovsky does not give widely used surnames to his heroes; he often chooses rare names); surnames can be invented, but always taking into account the anthroponymic norms of the second half of the 19th century. At the same time, Ostrovsky sought to make first and last names “speaking”; he often “revitalized” the semantics of even the most ordinary name.

The semantics of a surname in many cases turns out to be veiled; first names and patronymics can be neutral.

The semantics of the anthroponym may not be at all connected with the character of the character: Ostrovsky, most likely, sought to ensure that the viewer did not have the desire to always correlate the name and character.

At the same time, the playwright took into account the use of the name in a particular social environment. And here the principles of naming are especially important (monomial, two-term, three-term). The functioning of anthroponyms in a work is determined primarily by social and family roles.

2. Place names in Ostrovsky’s plays are expressive.

In "The Thunderstorm" the action takes place in the city of Kalinov. There are two cities of Kalinov, perhaps in Ostrovsky’s time these were villages. Kalina is often mentioned in proverbs and sayings, and in folk songs it is a strong parallel to the girl.

All the settlements mentioned by the heroes actually exist: Moscow, Paris, Tyakhta, the place where Dikoy sends Boris is a village in the Altai Territory.

It is unlikely that Ostrovsky hoped that the audience would know this village, so he specifies that Boris is going to the “Chinese”, which is not far from the truth, taking into account the phonosemantics of the toponym: only a very remote place can be called that.

3. One of the important symbols is the Volga River and the rural view on the other bank.

The river as the border between dependent, unbearable for many life on the bank on which the patriarchal Kalinov stands, and free, have a fun life there, on the other side. Katerina, the main character of the play, associates the opposite bank of the Volga with childhood, with life before marriage: “How playful I was! I’ve completely withered away from you.” Katerina wants to be free from her weak-willed husband and despotic mother-in-law, to “fly away” from the family with Domostroev principles. “I say: why don’t people fly like birds? You know, sometimes I feel like I'm a bird. When you stand on the torus, you feel the urge to fly,” says Katerina Varvara. Katerina remembers birds as a symbol of freedom before throwing herself off a cliff into the Volga: “It’s better in a grave... There’s a grave under a tree... how nice!... The sun warms it, wets it with rain... in the spring the grass grows on it, it’s so soft... the birds will come on a tree, they will sing, they will bring children out..."

The river also symbolizes an escape towards freedom, but it turns out that this is an escape towards death.

And in the words of the lady, a half-crazy old woman, the Volga is a whirlpool that draws beauty into itself: “This is where beauty leads. Here, here, in the deep end!”

4. The symbol of birds and flight in Katerina’s dreams. No less symbolic are the images from Katerina’s childhood dreams and the fantastic images in the wanderer’s story. Unearthly gardens and palaces, the singing of angelic voices, flying in a dream - all these are symbols of a pure soul, not yet aware of contradictions and doubts. But the uncontrollable movement of time also finds expression in Katerina’s dreams: “I no longer dream, Varya, of paradise trees and mountains as before; and it’s as if someone is hugging me so warmly and warmly and leading me somewhere, and I follow him, I go...” This is how Katerina’s experiences are reflected in dreams. What she tries to suppress in herself rises from the depths of the unconscious.

5. Some motives in the monologues of the heroes also have a symbolic meaning.

In Act 3, Kuligin says that the home life of rich people in the city is very different from the public life. Locks and closed gates, behind which “households eat and tyrannize the family,” are a symbol of secrecy and hypocrisy.

In this monologue, Kuligin denounces the “dark kingdom” of tyrants and tyrants, whose symbol is a lock on a closed gate so that no one can see and condemn them for bullying family members.

In the monologues of Kuligin and Feklushi, the motive of the trial sounds. Feklusha talks about a trial that is unfair, even though it is Orthodox. Kuligin speaks of a trial between merchants in Kalinov, but this trial cannot be considered fair, since main reason the emergence of court cases is envy, and because of the bureaucracy in the judiciary, cases are delayed, and every merchant is only happy that “it will cost him a penny.” The motive of the trial in the play symbolizes the injustice reigning in the “dark kingdom.”

Certain meaning There are also paintings on the walls of the gallery, where everyone runs during a thunderstorm. The paintings symbolize obedience in society, and “fiery Gehenna” is hell, which Katerina, who was looking for happiness and independence, is afraid of, and Kabanikha is not afraid, since outside the home she is a respectable Christian and she is not afraid of God’s judgment.

Tikhon’s last words also carry another meaning: “Good for you, Katya! Why did I stay in the world and suffer!” The point is that through death Katerina gained freedom in a world unknown to us, and Tikhon will never have enough fortitude and strength of character to either fight his mother or commit suicide, since he is weak-willed and weak-willed.

6. Symbolism of a thunderstorm. The meaning of the title of the play "The Thunderstorm".

The thunderstorm in the play has many faces. The characters perceive the thunderstorm differently.

A thunderstorm in society is a feeling among people who stand up for the immutability of the world of something incomprehensible, astonished because someone went against it.

For example, Dikoy believes that a thunderstorm is sent by God as punishment so that people remember about God, that is, he perceives a thunderstorm in a pagan way. Kuligin says that a thunderstorm is electricity, but this is a very simplified understanding of the symbol. But then, calling the thunderstorm grace, Kuligin thereby reveals the highest pathos of Christianity.

- To reveal the meaning of the name “Thunderstorms”, the symbolic meaning of this image, you should remember (or write in a notebook) fragments of the text, remarks that mention the thunderstorm and the perception of it by the residents of the city of Kalinov. Name possible interpretations of this symbol in the play. An excerpt from V. Ya. Lakshin’s book “Ostrovsky” will help you prepare an answer to this question. Select from it the materials necessary for your analysis:

This is an image of fear: punishment, sin, parental authority, human judgment. “There won’t be any thunderstorms over me for two weeks,” Tikhon rejoices as he leaves for Moscow. The tales of Feklushi - this Kalinovskaya oral newspaper, which readily condemns foreign things and praises the native theme, with its mentions of “Makhnut-saltan” and “unjust judges” reveal another literary source images of a thunderstorm in the play. This is “The Tale of Makhmet-Saltan” by Ivan Peresvetov. The image of a thunderstorm as fear is pervasive in the work of this ancient writer, who wants to support and instruct his sovereign, Ivan the Terrible. The Turkish king Makhmet-saltan, according to Peresvetov’s story, brought order to his kingdom with the help of a “great thunderstorm.” He ordered the unrighteous judges to be “skinned,” and to write on their skin: “Without such a thunderstorm of righteousness, it is impossible to bring into the kingdom... Like a horse under a king without a bridle, so is a kingdom without a thunderstorm.”

Of course, this is only one facet of the image, and the thunderstorm in the play lives with all the naturalness of a natural wonder: it moves in heavy clouds, thickens with motionless stuffiness, bursts into thunder and lightning and refreshing rain - and with all this goes in harmony with the state of depression, moments of horror of popular repentance and then tragic liberation, relief in Katerina’s soul.V. Ya. Lakshin. Ostrovsky. 1976

Thunderstorm as a natural (? physical) phenomenon.

There is another interpretation of the main symbol of the play:

The image of a thunderstorm, which closes the general meaning of the play, is also endowed with special symbolism: it is a reminder of the presence in the world of a higher power, and therefore of the highest super-personal meaning of existence, in front of which such sublime aspirations for freedom, for the affirmation of one’s will, are truly comical in appearance. Before God's thunderstorm, all the Katerina and Marfa Kabanovs, the Boris and Savela Wilds, the Kuligins and Kudryashis are united. And nothing can convey better than a thunderstorm this ancient and eternal presence of God’s will, which man must comprehend and with which it is pointless to compete.

A. A. Anikin. Reading the play “The Thunderstorm” by A. N. Ostrovsky. 1988

For the first time, the lady appears before the first thunderstorm and frightens Katerina with her words about disastrous beauty. These words and thunder in Katerina’s consciousness become prophetic. Katerina wants to run away into the house from the thunderstorm, because she sees God’s punishment in it, but at the same time she is not afraid of death, but is afraid to appear before God after talking with Varvara about Boris, considering these thoughts to be sinful. Katerina is very religious, but this perception of the thunderstorm is more pagan than Christian.

A thunderstorm is an image of a spiritual upheaval.

- How do you feel about the above point of view of a modern literary critic? Does it, in your opinion, reflect the playwright's intention?

- To sum up what has been said, we can say that the role of symbolism is very important in the play. Giving phenomena, objects, landscape, words of heroes one more, more deep meaning, Ostrovsky wanted to show how serious a conflict existed at that time not only between, but also within each of them.

6. Criticism of the play “The Thunderstorm”(Presentation “Criticism of the drama “The Thunderstorm”).

"The Thunderstorm" became the subject of fierce debate among critics in both the 19th and 20th centuries. In the 19th century, Dobrolyubov (article “A Ray of Light in the Dark Kingdom”) and Apollon Grigoriev wrote about it from opposite positions. In the 20th century - Mikhail Lobanov (in the book “Ostrovsky”, published in the “ZhZL” series) and Lakshin.

In the drama “The Thunderstorm,” Ostrovsky’s most advanced, progressive aspirations were especially clearly manifested. Katerina's encounter with scary world The wild ones, the Kabanovs, with their bestial laws based on cruelty, lies, deception, mockery and humiliation of man, are shown in it with stunning force.

“The Thunderstorm” was written by Ostrovsky in the years when the theme of “freedom of feeling,” “the liberation of women,” and “family foundations” was very popular and topical. In literature and dramaturgy was dedicated to her whole line works. What all these works had in common, however, was that they skimmed the surface of phenomena and did not penetrate into the depths of contradictions modern life. Their authors did not see hopeless conflicts in the surrounding reality. They thought that with the era of change, Russia would open new era that a turning point is close and inevitable in all spheres and areas of life.

Liberal illusions and hopes were alien to Ostrovsky. Therefore, “The Thunderstorm” turned out to be a completely unusual phenomenon against the background of similar literature. It sounded with obvious dissonance among works about the “liberation of women.”

Thanks to Ostrovsky's insight into the very essence of the contradictions of contemporary life, Katerina's suffering and death acquire the significance of a genuine social tragedy. Ostrovsky’s theme of “woman’s liberation” is organically connected with criticism of the entire social system; The tragic death of Katerina is shown by the playwright as a direct consequence of her hopeless situation in the “dark kingdom.” Kabanikha’s despotism grows not only from the waywardness of her character. Her views and actions are determined by the primordial laws of Domostroy. Kabanikha is an active and merciless guardian and guardian of all the “foundations” of her world. Kabanikha, as Dobrolyubov pointed out, “has created for herself a whole world of special rules and superstitious customs, for which she stands with all the stupidity of tyranny.”

In accordance with ideological plan drama, Ostrovsky highlights in the image of Katerina those features that do not allow her to come to terms with the “laws” of the environment, based on lies and deception. The main thing in Katerina’s character is his integrity, love of freedom and sincerity. Katerina is a heroic, sublime image, raised above the little things and everyday life. Her feelings are full-blooded, spontaneous and deeply human.

Ostrovsky simultaneously shows Katerina’s inner constraint by the norms of Christian morality. The consequence of this is a peculiar interweaving in the image of Katerina of elements of “religious exaltation” with the desire for will, with the desire to defend one’s personality, to break the deadening narrowness of the family order protected by Kabanikha.

7. Reflection.

- Imagine that you have to stage “The Thunderstorm” by A. N. Ostrovsky on the stage of a modern theater.

- In what genre would you stage this play, what would you highlight as the main conflict?

Questions about the play. What are the similarities and differences between the characters of Tikhon and Boris? How do they feel about Katerina? Presentation

Download material

Didn't like the essay?
We have 10 more similar essays.

Ostrovsky's play "The Thunderstorm" raises the problem of a turning point in social life, a change in social foundations. The author cannot be absolutely impartial; his position is revealed in remarks, of which there are not very many, and they are not expressive enough. There is only one option left: the author’s position is presented through a certain character, through composition, symbolism.

The names in the play are very symbolic. " Talking names", used in The Thunderstorm, is an echo of the classic theater, the features of which were preserved in the late sixties of the 19th century.

The name Kabanova vividly portrays to us an overweight woman with a difficult character, and the nickname “Kabanikha” complements this unpleasant picture. The author characterizes the wild as a wild, unrestrained person. The name Kuligin has many meanings. On the one hand, it is consonant with the name of Kulibin, a self-taught mechanic. On the other hand, “kuliga” is a swamp. There is a saying: “Every sandpiper praises his swamp.” This saying can explain Kuligin’s sublime praise of the Volga. His name refers him to the "swamp" of the city of Kalinov, he is a natural inhabitant of the city. Female Greek names are also important. Katerina means “pure”, and indeed, throughout the play she is tormented by the problem of purification. Opposite to her, Varvara (“Varvarka”) does not delve into her soul, lives naturally and does not think about her sinfulness. She believes that every sin can be redeemed.

Dobrolyubov called Katerina “a ray of light in a dark kingdom,” and later, a few years later, Ostrovsky himself gave people like her the name “warm hearts.” The play shows the conflict of a “hot heart” with the surrounding icy environment. And the thunderstorm is trying to melt this ice. Another meaning put by the author into the word “thunderstorm” symbolizes the wrath of God. Anyone who is afraid of a thunderstorm is not ready to accept death and face the judgment of God. The author puts his words into Kuligin’s mouth. “The judge is more merciful than you,” he says. In this way he characterizes his attitude towards this society.

The motif of ascent runs through the entire play, based on Katerina’s words about the field and the landscape. The author managed to convey the landscape with limited means: the view of the vast Trans-Volga region, opening from the cliff, creates the feeling that Kalinov is not the only place suitable for humans, as the Kalinovites think. For Katerina, this is a city of thunderstorms, a city of retribution. Once you leave it, you find yourself in a new world, one with God and nature - on the Volga, the greatest river in Russia. 11o you can only come to the Volga at night, when you can’t see your own or other people’s sins. Another path to freedom is through a cliff, through death. Ostrovsky is aware that the swamp, the “kulig” - the city of Kalinov - draws in and does not let go.

In the stage directions, that is, at the beginning of the play, Boris is named the only person who wears a European suit. And his name is Boris - “fighter”. But he first stoops to a relationship with married woman, and then, unable to fight, he leaves, sent away by the Wild. If at first he said that he lives in Kaliion only because of the inheritance left by his grandmother, now, even when he perfectly understands that they will not give him money, he remains here because this environment has absorbed him.

When Katerina talks about her home, she describes the ideal of a patriarchal Christian family. But this ideal is already undergoing changes. And it is the initial discrepancy with the canons that will lead to spiritual and social conflict. All her life Katerina dreamed of flying. It is the desire to fly that will push Katerina into the abyss.

A feature of the composition, which also expresses the author’s position, are two possible options for climax and denouement. If we consider that the climax occurs when Katerina goes for a walk on the Volga, then the denouement will be repentance, that is, the drama of a free woman comes to the fore. But repentance does not happen at the very end. Then what is the death of Katerina? There is another option - Katerina’s spiritual struggle, the culmination of which is repentance, and the denouement is death.

In connection with this question, the problem of determining the genre of the play arises. Ostrovsky himself called it a drama, because after the greatest tragedies of Antigone or Phaedra, it would be unthinkable to call the story of a simple merchant’s wife a tragedy. By definition, tragedy is an internal conflict of the hero, in which the hero pushes himself to death. This definition applies to the second version of the composition. If we consider a social conflict, then this is a drama.

The question of the meaning of the name is equally ambiguous. A thunderstorm breaks out on two levels - external and internal. The entire action takes place to the sound of thunder, and each of the characters is characterized through their attitude to the thunderstorm. Kabanikha says that one must be prepared for death, Dika, that it is impossible and sinful to resist lightning, Kuligin talks about the process of mechanization and offers to escape from the thunderstorm, and Katerina is insanely afraid of it, which shows her spiritual confusion. An internal, invisible thunderstorm occurs in Katerina’s soul. While an external thunderstorm brings relief and purification, a thunderstorm in Katerina leads her into a terrible sin - suicide.

4.2 Features of classicism in Ostrovsky’s play “The Thunderstorm” (article by P. Weil and A. Genis)

Researchers begin their article about Ostrovsky’s play “The Thunderstorm” in a peculiar way. In Russian folk drama, they write, the hero, appearing in a booth, immediately announced to the audience: “I am a mangy dog, Tsar Maximilian!” The characters in Ostrovsky’s play “The Thunderstorm” declare themselves with the same certainty. Already from the first remarks, critics say, a lot can be said about the characters in the play. For example, Kabanikha introduces herself like this: “If you want to listen to your mother, ...do as I ordered” 1 . And with his first remark Tikhon answers her: “How can I, Mama, disobey you!” 2.Kuligin is immediately recommended by a self-taught mechanic and poetry lover.

Researchers evaluate “The Thunderstorm” as a “classicist tragedy.” Her characters appear from the very beginning as complete types - bearers of one character or another - and do not change until the end. The classicism of the play is emphasized not only

a traditional tragic conflict between duty and feeling, but most of all - a system of image-types.

"The Thunderstorm" stands out noticeably from Ostrovsky's other plays, full of humor and

everyday, specifically Russian, details. Weil and Genis believe that the heroes of the play could fit not only into the environment of the Volga merchants, but also into the equally conventional Spanish passions of Corneille or the ancient conflicts of Racine.

The researchers write that the reader sees the exalted Katerina, the pious Kabanikha, the pious Feklusha, and the holy fool Barynya. Faith, religion is perhaps the main theme of “The Thunderstorm”, and more specifically, it is the theme of sin and punishment. Researchers note the fact that Katerina is not at all rebelling against the swampy bourgeois environment, but she is challenging at the highest level, trampling not human laws, but God’s: “If I was not afraid of sin for you, will I be afraid of human judgment?” 3

IN adultery Katerina confesses, driven to the limit by the consciousness of her sinfulness, and public repentance occurs when she sees the image of fiery hell on the wall under the arches of the city promenade. Talking about Katerina’s religious ecstasies, researchers turn to the motif of the Annunciation. Katerina's hysterical holiness determines her fate. Researchers emphasize that there is no place for her - neither in the city of Kalinov, nor in the Kabanikha family - she has no place on earth at all. Beyond the pool into which she threw herself is paradise. Where is hell? In the impenetrable provincial merchant class? No, this is a neutral place. In extreme cases, this is purgatory. Hell in the play gives an unexpected twist to the plot. First of all - abroad.

Researchers are drawing attention to the fact that an ominous specter of distant hostile overseas countries hovers over the deep Russian province. And not just hostile, but in the context of general religious ecstasy - precisely devilish, underworld, hellish.

There is no special preference for any foreign country or nation: they are all equally disgusting, because they are all strangers. Lithuania, for example, the researchers note, is not by chance depicted on the wall of the gallery right next to the fiery hell, and local residents They don’t see anything strange in this neighborhood, they don’t even know what it is. Feklusha talks about overseas sultans, and Dikoy, protesting against Kuligin’s intentions, calls him “Tatar”.

Ostrovsky himself, the researchers conclude, was apparently critical of foreign countries. From his travel impressions it is clear how he was fascinated by the nature of Europe, architecture,

museums, order, but in most cases he was decidedly dissatisfied with people (at the same time often repeating Fonvizin from a hundred years ago almost verbatim).

The theme of a hostile foreign country could be considered incidental in “The Thunderstorm,” according to Weil and Genis, but it is truly important in the play. The fact is that “The Thunderstorm” is polemical, critics have put forward a hypothesis.

In 1857, Flaubert's novel Madame Bovary was published in France, and in 1858 it was translated and published in Russia, making a huge impression on the Russian reading public. Even before this, Russian newspapers, researchers writing about the history of the French novel, discussed the trial in Paris on charges of “insulting public morality, religion and good morals." In the summer of 1859, Ostrovsky began and finished “The Thunderstorm” in the fall.

By comparing these two works, critics reveal their extraordinary

similarity. Just the coincidence of the general theme is not so significant: an attempt by an emotional nature to escape from the bourgeois environment through love passion - and collapse, ending in suicide. But

private parallels in “Madame Bovary” and “The Storm” are very eloquent.

1) Emma is as exaltedly religious as Katerina, researchers note, and is just as susceptible to the influence of ritual. The image of fiery hell on the wall appears before the shocked Norman woman in the same way as before the Volzhan woman.

2) Both are overwhelmed by the same girlish, unfulfillable dreams. Both girls, as critics point out and compare themselves to a pizza, dream of flying.

3) Both Emma and Katerina remember their childhood and youth with joy, painting this time as the “Golden Age of their lives.” Both have only the serenity of pure faith and innocent pursuits in their thoughts. The activities, the authors point out, are similar: embroidering pillows for Emma and embroidering for

velvet from Katerina.

4) Similar family situation, researchers note: the hostility of mothers-in-law and the softness of husbands. Both Charles and Tikhon are uncomplaining sons and submissive cuckolded spouses. Languishing in the “moldy existence of woodlice,” (Flaubert’s expression), both heroines beg their lovers to take them away. But no luck with lovers; they both refuse girls.

4) Even the identification of love with a thunderstorm - so vivid in Ostrovsky -

revealed by Flaubert, Weil and Genis come to the conclusion

Researchers write that the place that Russian classicists occupy in Ostrovsky’s play is given to their own French classicists in Flaubert’s novel. The Norman Kuligin is the pharmacist Homais, who is also passionate about science, preaches the benefits of electricity and constantly mentions Voltaire and Racine. This is not accidental, the authors note this fact: in “Madame Bovary” the images (except for Emma herself) are the essence of types. Fat,

ambitious provincial, bungling husband, reasoner, despotic mother,

an eccentric inventor, a provincial heartthrob, and a cuckolded husband. AND

Katerina (as opposed to Emma) is static, like Antigone.

But for all the similarities between the works of Flaubert and Ostrovsky, there are significant

different and even antagonistic, critics say. They express their guess that “The Thunderstorm” is polemical in relation to “Madame Bovary.” The main difference can be defined in a simple word - money.

Boris, Katerina's lover, is dependent because he is poor, but the author shows Boris not poor, but weak. Not money, but fortitude he lacks

enough, the researchers conclude, to protect their love. As for Katerina, she is not placed in a material context at all.

It is completely different with the European Flaubert. There's hardly any money in Madame Bovary

not the main character. Money is a conflict between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law; money -

the flawed development of Charles, who was forced to marry with a dowry in his first marriage, money is the torment of Emma, ​​who sees wealth as a way to escape from the bourgeois world, money is finally the reason for the suicide of the heroine entangled in debt: a real, genuine reason, without allegories, critics say. Before the theme of money, both the theme of religion, presented very strongly in Madame Bovary, and the theme of social conventions recede. It seems to Emma that money is freedom, but Katerina doesn’t need money, she doesn’t know it and doesn’t connect it with freedom in any way.

Therefore, researchers come to the conclusion that this difference is fundamental, decisive between the heroines. Critics note the antithesis of rationalism and spirituality, that is, Emma’s tragedy can be calculated, expressed in specific quantities, counted to the nearest franc, but Katerina’s tragedy is irrational, inarticulate, inexpressible.

Thus, it is impossible, as critics believe, to believe without factual grounds that Ostrovsky created “The Thunderstorm” under the impression of “Madame Bovary” - although the dates are storylines folded in a suitable manner. But for readers and viewers, the occasion is not important, but the result is important, because it turned out that Ostrovsky wrote the Volga “Madame Bovary”, therefore, according to Weil and Genis, the play became a new argument in a long-standing dispute

Westerners and Slavophiles.

Katerina has been puzzling the reader and viewer for more than a century with the dramatic inadequacy of feelings and actions, since the stage embodiment inevitably turns into either stilted banality or unjustified modernization. Researchers believe that Katerina arose at a time that was inappropriate for her: the time of Emma was coming - the era of psychological heroines who would reach their peak in Anna Karenina.

So, critics come to the conclusion that Katerina Kabanova appeared at the wrong time and was not convincing enough. The Volga Madame Bovary turned out to be not as reliable and understandable as the Norman one, but much more poetic and sublime. Although inferior to the foreigner in intelligence and education, Katerina stood on a par with her in terms of intensity of passions and

surpassed in supermundaneity and purity of dreams. Researchers note the similarities of the heroines, as in marital status, as well as habits and character traits. There is only one thing that critics see as differences between the heroines - this financial situation and dependence on money.

5. A. N. Ostrovsky’s play “The Thunderstorm” in modern school literary criticism

Perception of the image of the heroine in the textbook “In the World of Literature,” ed. A.G. Kutuzova

Ostrovsky universally implements the metaphor of a thunderstorm in his drama. “The Thunderstorm” is a play from modern life, the author believes, but it is written in prose based on everyday material. The name is an image that symbolizes not only the elemental power of nature, but also the stormy state of society, the storm in the souls of people. Nature, according to the authors, is the personification of harmony, which is opposed to a world full of contradictions. The first remark creates a special mood in the perception of the play, the critic notes: the beauty of the Volga landscape is imagined, and the free and high-water river is a metaphor for the power of the Russian spirit. Kuligin's remark complements and comments on this picture. He sings the song “In the midst of a flat valley at a smooth height...”: “Miracles, truly it must be said that miracles! Curly! Here, my brother, for fifty years I’ve been looking at the Volga every day and I can’t get enough of it” 1 . The authors note the fact that these words of the hero and songs based on Merzlyakov’s poems precede the appearance of the main character - Katerina - and the conflict associated with her personal tragedy.

What appears before the eyes of the audience is not the private life of one family, but the “cruel morals” of the city of Kalinov. Ostrovsky shows how the inhabitants of the city have different attitudes towards the elemental force of nature. The authors emphasize that for such “hot” hearts as Kuligin, the thunderstorm is God’s grace, and for Kabanikha and Dikiy it is heavenly punishment, for Feklushi it is Ilya the Prophet rolling across the sky, for Katerina it is retribution for sins.

All important plot points are connected with the image of a thunderstorm. In Katerina's soul, under the influence of a feeling of love for Boris, confusion begins. The authors believe that she feels as if some kind of disaster is approaching, terrible and inevitable. After the townspeople say that the outcome of this storm will be disastrous, Katerina confesses her sin to everyone in the climactic scene of the play.

A thunderstorm is a threat to the outgoing, internally wrong, but still outwardly strong world of the “dark kingdom,” critics say. At the same time, the thunderstorm is also good news about new forces designed to clear the stale air of oppressive despotism for Katerina.

The creator of the Russian national theater, A. N. Ostrovsky, significantly developed and enriched the art of dramaturgy itself, the techniques of creating character in drama. This applies to the detailed exposition, as the authors of the textbook believe, and to the director’s character of the stage directions, and to the fact that even before the hero appears on stage, other characters give him an assessment, that the hero’s features are revealed immediately by the first remark with which he enters into action. To understand the creator’s intention, it is also important how this or that character is called in the list of characters: by first name, patronymic and last name, or by an abbreviated name.

So in “The Thunderstorm” only three characters are named in full: Sovel Prokopyevich Dikoy, Marfa Ignatievna Kabanova and Tikhon Ivanovich Kabanov - they are the main persons in the city. Katerina is also not a random name. In Greek, it means “pure,” which again characterizes the heroine, critics write.

The thunderstorm for the Kalinovites, and for Katerina among them, is not a stupid fear, the critic claims, but is a reminder to a person of responsibility to the higher forces of good and truth. This is why the thunderstorm frightens Katerina so much, the author concludes: for her, since the heavenly thunderstorm only harmonizes with the moral thunderstorm, which is even more terrible. And the mother-in-law is a thunderstorm and the consciousness of a crime is a thunderstorm

So, the authors of the textbook “In the World of Literature,” when analyzing the images of the play, pay attention first of all to the image of a thunderstorm, an element, which they consider symbolic in the play. A thunderstorm, in their opinion, means the departure, collapse of the old world and the emergence of a new one - the world of personal freedom

Perception of the image of the heroine in the textbook “Russian Literature”XIXcentury" ed. A.N. Arkhangelsky

It is no coincidence that a woman is placed at the center of events in “The Thunderstorm,” the authors believe. It's not just that main topic Ostrovsky - the life of a family, a merchant's house - assumed a special role for female characters, their elevated plot status. The authors note that the men around Katerina are weak and submissive, they accept the circumstances of life.

Katerina, whom her mother-in-law “tortures... locks up,” on the contrary, strives for freedom. And it’s not her fault that she, as if between a rock and a hard place, is squeezed between the old morality and the freedom she dreams of, the researchers justify the heroine. Katerina is not at all emancipated, does not strive beyond the boundaries of the patriarchal world, does not want to free herself from its ideals; Moreover, in her childhood memories the ancient harmony of Russian life seems to come to life. She speaks with tenderness about her mother’s house, the authors believe, about the quiet provincial summer, about the pages, about the flickering light of the lamp. And, most importantly, about the affection that surrounded her in childhood.

In fact, according to researchers, even in Katerina’s childhood everything was not so simple. Katerina seems to accidentally let slip in the 2nd scene of the 2nd act: once, when she was six years old, they offended her in her parents’ house, she ran out to the Volga, got into a boat, and went off, only the next morning they found her . But in her mind lives a completely different image of the Russia of her childhood. According to researchers, this is a heavenly image.

The authors note the fact that it is very important to understand that Katerina does not protest against ancient rules and morals, against patriarchy, but on the contrary, she fights for them in her own way, dreams of restoring the “former” with its beauty, love, silence and peace. It is interesting that Katerina professes the same ideas that Ostrovsky himself adhered to in the early period of his work. If you carefully read the work, the authors say, you will notice that Katerina cheats on her husband not “as a sign of protest” against Kalinovsky’s morals, and not for the sake of “emancipation.” Before Tikhon leaves, she almost begs her husband not to leave, or asks him to take her with him, or take an oath from her. But the husband does not do this, he destroys Katerina’s hopes for domestic affection, crushes dreams of “real” patriarchy, and almost himself “pushes” Katerina into the arms of Boris, researchers say. And no one expects or demands love, real feeling, true loyalty from Katerina.

The conflict between Katerina and Kabanikha, according to the authors, is a conflict between the new consciousness of a young woman and the old consciousness of a supporter of the old order. Katerina faces a choice: to submit to lifeless patriarchy, to die with it, or to go against all traditions, challenge the morals of her beloved antiquity, and perish. Katerina’s choice is known to everyone, the researchers conclude.

So, the authors of the textbook, edited by Arkhangelsky, deny the opinion, formed under the influence of Dobrolyubov, that Katerina is protesting against patriarchal morals. In their opinion, Katerina, on the contrary, wants to restore them, and she protests against the deadness of Kalinov’s world.

If we summarize the analysis of modern studies of the image of Katerina, it can be noted that despite all the differences in the opinions of the authors, they also have something in common - this is the perception of the image as associated with folk song, mythology, with popular consciousness.

6.Changing the image of Katerina in the perception of researchers. Conclusion

Summing up the results of our work, we can conclude that the image of Katerina is one of the most ambiguous and contradictory images of Russian literature. Until now, many literary scholars and researchers are arguing about the island heroine. Some consider A.N. Ostrovsky a great artist, others accuse him of having a contradictory attitude towards his heroes. Katerina Kabanova is the most successful image created by A.N. Ostrovsky, one cannot but agree with this.

The difference in the opinions of critics about Katerina is due to both the peculiarities of their worldview and the change in the general situation in society. For example, democrat critic N.A. Dobrolyubov believed that Katerina showed a protest against Kabanov’s concepts of morality, a protest carried to the end, to the point of suicide. D. Pisarev disputes Dobrolyubov’s opinion. He believes that Katerina’s suicide was a coincidence of the most empty circumstances that she could not cope with, and not a protest at all. But both critics perceived the heroine as a social type, saw a social conflict in the play and had a negative attitude towards the heroine’s religiosity.

The Soviet literary critic Revyakin expressed views close to those of Dobrolyubov. And in modern research First of all, Katerina is perceived as the embodiment of the people's soul, people's religiosity, in many ways a symbolic image, testifying to the collapse of the world of unfreedom, hypocrisy and fear.

Bibliography:

1. Article by N.A. Dobrolyubov “A Ray of Light in the Dark Kingdom” (N.A. Dobrolyubov Selected: School library. Publishing house "Children's Literature", Moscow, 1970).

2. Article by D. Pisarev “Motives of Russian drama” (D. I. Pisarev. Literary criticism in three volumes. Volume one Articles 1859-1864 L., “Fiction”, 1981)

3. Book by Revyakin A.I. The Art of Drama by A.N. Ostrovsky Ed. 2nd, rev. and additional M., “Enlightenment”, 1974.

4. A textbook for students of the 10th grade of secondary school Lebedev Yu.V. (M., “Enlightenment”, 1991).

Plan:

1. Innovation in the image of Katerina, the heroine of A.N. Ostrovsky’s play “The Thunderstorm”. Formulation of the problem

2. The image of Katerina as assessed by critics “ natural school»

1. Article by N.A. Dobrolyubov “A Ray of Light in the Dark Kingdom”

1. Article by D. Pisarev “Motives of Russian drama”

3.The image of Katerina in Soviet literary criticism

1. The image of Katerina in the perception of A.I. Revyakin

4.Modern interpretations of the image of Katerina

1. The conflict between life-loving religiosity and harsh Domostroevsky morality (interpretation by Yu. Lebedev)

2. Features of classicism in Ostrovsky’s play “The Thunderstorm” (article by P. Weil and A. Genis)

5. A. N. Ostrovsky’s play “The Thunderstorm” in modern school literary criticism

1. Perception of the image of the heroine in the textbook “In the World of Literature,” ed. A.G. Kutuzova

2. Perception of the image of the heroine in the textbook “Russian Literature of the 19th Century,” ed. A.N. Arkhangelsky

6.Changing the image of Katerina in the perception of researchers. Conclusion

1.Innovation of the image of Katerina, the heroine of A.N. Ostrovsky’s play “The Thunderstorm”. Formulation of the problem.

The play “The Thunderstorm” by the famous Russian playwright A.N. Ostrovsky, written in 1859, entered the history of Russian literature thanks to the image of the main character - Katerina Kabanova. The unusual female character and tragic fate attracted the attention of both readers and literary critics. It is not for nothing that the first articles about the play “The Thunderstorm” were actually about the image of Katerina. Ostrovsky, as it were, continued the tradition of A.S. Pushkin in creating an extraordinary Russian female character. Of course, Tatyana Larina and Katerina are completely different heroines, both in terms of social status, and in terms of the environment in which they were formed, and in terms of worldview. But what they have in common is incredible sincerity and strength of feelings. As one of the researchers of Russian literature wrote, “A woman in Russian society of the second half of the 19th century is both a dependent creature (from family, from everyday life, from tradition) and strong, capable of decisive actions that have the most decisive impact on the world of men. Such is Katerina from “The Thunderstorm”. ..”

Turning to the research of literary critics of the 19th and 20th centuries, one can see that the image of the main character of the play “The Thunderstorm” is perceived differently. This is how the purpose of the essay was formulated: To identify how the perception of the image of Katerina from A.N. Ostrovsky’s play “The Thunderstorm” changes in the studies of critics of different eras.

To achieve the goal, the following tasks were set:

1. Study critical articles and literary research, dedicated to the image of Katerina.

2. Draw conclusions about changes in the interpretation of the image of the main character.

The following sources were used when working on the abstract:

1. Article by N.A. Dobrolyubov “A Ray of Light in the Dark Kingdom” (N.A. Dobrolyubov Selected: School Library. Children's Literature Publishing House, Moscow, 1970). This article by the famous critic of the “natural school” - one of the very first studies of the play - became the basis for the perception of the image of the main character in Soviet literary criticism.

2. Article by D. Pisarev “Motives of Russian drama” (D. I. Pisarev. Literary criticism in three volumes. Volume one Articles 1859-1864 L., “Fiction”, 1981) The author of the article polemicizes with N. Dobrolyubov, while remaining in the position of criticism of the “natural school” 3. Book by Revyakin A.I. The Art of Drama by A.N. Ostrovsky Ed. 2nd, rev. and additional M., “Enlightenment”, 1974. The book is devoted to the characteristics of the playwright’s creative path, analysis of the ideological and aesthetic originality of his plays, their innovative role in the development of domestic drama and performing arts. 4. A textbook for students of the 10th grade of secondary school Lebedev Yu.V. (M., “Enlightenment”, 1991). The manual overcomes the limited views inherent in Soviet literary criticism and uses the latest material from researchers of Russian literature 5. The book by P. Weil, A. Genis “Native Speech. Lessons in Fine Literature" (Nezavisimaya Gazeta, 1991, Moscow) The book is an original ironic study of the works included in school curriculum. The authors’ goal is to get rid of the cliches in the perception of Russian classics imposed by Soviet literary criticism. 6. Textbook “In the World of Literature” under. ed. A.G. Kutuzova. 7. Textbook “Russian Literature of the 19th Century”, ed. A.N. Arkhangelsky. These textbooks present modern look school literary studies at classical works Russian literature.

2.The image of Katerina as assessed by critics of the “natural school”

A number of democratic critics who worked in famous literary magazines 60s XIX century. The main feature of their work was the rejection of literary analysis of works and their interpretation as examples of social, accusatory, critical art

2.1 Article by N.A. Dobrolyubov “A Ray of Light in the Dark Kingdom”

Dobrolyubov’s article “A Ray of Light in the Dark Kingdom” was first published in Sovremennik in 1860. In it, the author writes that Ostrovsky has a deep understanding of Russian life and a great ability to depict sharply and vividly its most significant aspects. "The Thunderstorm" served as good proof of this. "The Thunderstorm" is, without a doubt, Ostrovsky's most decisive work. The mutual relations of tyranny and voicelessness are brought to the most tragic consequences in it. The author considers the subject of the drama to be the struggle between passion and duty - with the unhappy consequences of the victory of passion or with the happy ones when duty wins. And, indeed, the author writes that the subject of the drama represents the struggle in Katerina between the sense of duty of marital fidelity and passion for the young Boris Grigorievich. Katerina, this immoral, shameless (in the apt expression of N.F. Pavlov) woman who ran out at night to her lover as soon as her husband left home, this criminal appears to us in the drama not only not in a sufficiently gloomy light, but even with some the radiance of martyrdom around the brow. “She speaks so well, suffers so pitifully, everything around her is so bad that there is no indignation against her, but only regret and justification for her vice.” The character of Katerina, the author believes, constitutes a step forward not only in Ostrovsky’s dramatic activity, but also in all of Russian literature. Many authors have long wanted to show their heroine exactly like this, but Ostrovsky was the first to do it. The character of the Ostrovskaya heroine, first of all, according to Dobrolyubov, is striking in its opposition to all tyrant principles. This image, according to the author, is concentrated and decisive, unswervingly faithful to the instinct of natural truth, full of faith in new ideals and selfless, in the sense that it is better for him to die than to live under those principles that are disgusting to him. He is guided not by abstract principles, not by practical considerations, not by instant pathos, but simply by nature, by his whole being. In this integrity and harmony of character lies his strength and his essential necessity at a time when old, wild relationship Having lost all internal strength, they continue to hold on by external, mechanical connection.

Further, the author writes that the decisive, integral Russian character acting among the Wild and Kabanovs appears in Ostrovsky in the female type, and this is not without its serious significance. It is known that extremes are reflected by extremes and that the strongest protest is the one that finally rises from the chests of the weakest and most patient. The field in which Ostrovsky observes and shows us Russian life does not concern purely social and state relations, but is limited to the family; In the family, it is the woman who withstands the oppression of tyranny most of all.

Thus, the emergence of a feminine energetic character fully corresponds to the situation to which tyranny has been brought in Ostrovsky’s drama. But the image of Katerina, despite all this, strives for a new life at the cost of death. “What does death matter to her? All the same, she does not consider life to be the vegetation that befell her in the Kabanov family.” First of all, according to the author, what is striking is the extraordinary originality of this character. There is nothing foreign in him, everything somehow comes out from within him. She tries to reconcile any external dissonance with the harmony of her soul, covering any shortcoming from the fullness of her inner strength. Rough, superstitious stories and senseless ravings of wanderers turn into golden, poetic dreams of the imagination, not frightening, but clear, kind. Defining the main feature of the character of Ostrovsky’s heroine, Dobrolyubov notes that she is a spontaneous, living person, everything is done according to the desire of nature, without a clear consciousness, logic and analysis do not play the main role in her life. “In the dry, monotonous life of her youth, she constantly knew how to take what agreed with her natural aspirations for beauty, harmony, contentment, happiness.” In the conversations of the pages, in the prostrations and lamentations, she saw not a dead form, but something else, to which her heart was constantly striving. While she lives with her mother, in complete freedom, without any everyday freedom, while the needs and passions of an adult have not yet become apparent in her, she does not even know how to distinguish her own dreams, her inner world from external impressions.

The last path fell to the lot of Katerina, as it falls to the lot of most of the people in the “dark kingdom” of the Wild and Kabanovs. In the gloomy atmosphere of the new family, Katerina began to feel the insufficiency of her appearance, which she had thought to be content with before. The author very sharply depicts the patriarchal world into which Katerina finds herself after marriage: “Under the heavy hand of the soulless Kabanikha there is no scope for her bright visions, just as there is no freedom for her feelings. In a fit of tenderness for her husband, she wants to hug him, - the old woman shouts: “Why are you hanging around your neck, shameless one? Bow at your feet!” She wants to be left alone and be sad quietly, but her mother-in-law shouts: “Why aren’t you howling?” . She is looking for light and air, wants to dream and frolic, water her flowers, look at the sun, at the Volga, send her greetings to all living things - but she is kept in captivity, she is constantly suspected of unclean, depraved intentions. Everything around her is gloomy, scary, everything emanates coldness and some kind of irresistible threat: the faces of the saints are so stern, and the church readings are so menacing, and the stories of the wanderers are so monstrous... They are still the same in essence, they have changed at all, but she has changed herself: she no longer has the desire to construct aerial visions, and the vague imagination of bliss that she enjoyed before does not satisfy her. She matured, other desires awoke in her, more real ones; not knowing any other career than the family, any other world than the one that has developed for her in the society of her town, she, of course, begins to recognize of all human aspirations the one that is most inevitable and closest to her - the desire for love and devotion .

In the past, her heart was too full of dreams, she did not pay attention to the young people who looked at her, but only laughed. When she married Tikhon Kabanov, she did not love him either, she still did not understand this feeling; They told her that every girl should get married, showed Tikhon as her future husband, and she married him, remaining completely indifferent to this step. And here, too, a peculiarity of character is manifested: according to our usual concepts, she should be resisted if she has decisive character; but she does not even think about resistance, because she does not have enough reasons for this. “She has no particular desire to get married, but there is no aversion to marriage either; there is no love for Tikhon, but there is no love for anyone else.”

The author notes the strength of Katerina’s character, believing that when she understands what she needs and wants to achieve something, she will achieve her goal no matter what. He explains her desire to initially come to terms with the order of the Kabanov house by the fact that at first, out of the innate kindness and nobility of her soul, she made every possible effort so as not to violate the peace and rights of others, in order to get what she wanted with the greatest possible compliance with all the demands placed on her imposed by people; and if they are able to take advantage of this initial mood and decide to give her complete satisfaction, then it will be good for both her and them. But if not, she will stop at nothing. This is exactly the way out that seems to Katerina, and nothing else could be expected given the situation in which she finds herself.

Dobrolyubov explains the motives for Katerina’s actions: “The feeling of love for a person, the desire to find a kindred response in another heart, the need for tender pleasures naturally opened up in the young girl and changed her previous, vague and ethereal dreams.” Immediately after the wedding, the critic writes, she decided to turn them on the one who was closest to her - her husband. In the play, which finds Katerina already at the beginning of her love for Boris Grigorievich, Katerina’s last, desperate efforts are still visible - to make her husband sweet.

Defining the character of Katerina, Dobrolyubov identifies the following qualities:

1) already mature, from the depths of the whole organism, the demand for the right and spaciousness of life arises. “She is not capricious, does not flirt with her discontent and anger - this is not in her nature; she does not want to impress others, to show off and boast. On the contrary, she lives very peacefully and is ready to submit to everything that is not contrary to her nature; recognizing and respecting the aspirations of others, she demands the same respect for herself, and any violence, any constraint outrages her deeply, deeply.”

2) Irritability, inability to tolerate injustice. “Katerina tells Varya about her character one trait from childhood: “I was born so hot! I was only six years old, no more, so I did it! They offended me with something at home, and it was late in the evening, it was already dark - I ran out to the Volga, got into the boat, and pushed it away from the shore. The next morning they found it, about ten miles away...”

This is true strength of character, which, in any case, you can rely on!

3) Her actions are in harmony with her nature, they are natural for her, necessary, she cannot refuse them, even if it has the most disastrous consequences. The author believes that all the “ideas” instilled in Katerina from childhood rebel against her natural aspirations and actions. In his opinion, Katerina was brought up in concepts identical to the concepts of the environment in which she lives, and cannot renounce them, not having any theoretical education. “Everyone is against Katerina, even her own concepts of good and evil; everything should force her - to drown out her impulses and wither in the cold and gloomy formalism of family muteness and humility, without any living aspirations, without will, without love - or teach her to deceive people and conscience.”

Describing Katerina’s love for Boris, Dobrolyubov claims that her whole life lies in this passion; all the strength of nature, all its living aspirations merge here. One can agree with the opinion of the author, who believes that what attracts her to Boris is not just the fact that she likes him, that in appearance and speech he is not like the others around her; She is drawn to him by the need for love, which has not found a response in her husband, and the offended feeling of a wife and woman, and the mortal melancholy of her monotonous life, and the desire for freedom, space, hot, unfettered freedom.” At the same time, the following statement of the critic is not entirely accurate: “Fear of doubt, the thought of sin and human judgment - all this comes to her mind, but no longer has power over her; this is just a formality, to clear one’s conscience.” In fact, fear of sin largely determined Katerina’s fate.

The author sympathizes with the strength of Katerina’s feelings. He writes that such love, such a feeling will not live within the walls of Kabanov’s house, with pretense and deception. The critic notes that she is not afraid of anything except being deprived of the opportunity to see her chosen one, talk to him, and enjoy these new feelings for her. Explaining why Katerina publicly admits her sin, Dobrolyubov writes: “My husband arrived and she had to be afraid, cunning, hide, and life became impossible for her. This situation was unbearable for Katerina, she could not stand it - in front of all the people crowded in the gallery of the ancient church, she repented of everything to her husband. They took action with the “criminal”: her husband beat her a little, and her mother-in-law locked her up and began to eat her... Katerina’s will and peace are over.” The critic defines the reasons for Katerina’s suicide this way: she cannot submit to these rules of her new life and is unable to return to her former life. If she cannot enjoy her feelings, her will, then she doesn’t want anything in life, she doesn’t even want life. In Katerina’s monologues, according to the critic, it is clear that she completely submits to her nature, and not to given decisions, because all the principles that are given to her for theoretical reasoning are decisively contrary to her natural inclinations. She decided to die, but she is afraid of the thought that this is a sin, and she seems to be trying to prove to everyone that she can be forgiven, since it is very difficult for her. The critic correctly notes that there is no malice or contempt in it, which is what heroes flaunt when they leave the world without permission. But she can’t live anymore, and that’s all. The thought of suicide torments Katerina, which plunges her into a semi-hot state. And the matter is over: she will no longer be a victim of a soulless mother-in-law, she will no longer languish locked up, with a spineless and disgusting husband. She's freed!..

The main idea of ​​Dobrolyubov’s article “A Ray of Light in a Dark Kingdom” is that in Katerina one can see a protest against Kabanov’s concepts of morality, a protest brought to the end. Katerina, as perceived by Dobrolyubov, is a woman who does not want to put up, does not want to take advantage of the miserable vegetation that is given to her in exchange for her living soul. “Her destruction is the realized song of the Babylonian captivity...” - this is how the critic poetically formulates.

Thus, Dobrolyubov evaluates the image of Katerina, firstly, as a concentrated and decisive image, for which death is better than life under those principles that are disgusting and alien to him. Secondly, Katerina is a spontaneous, living person, everything is done according to the desire of nature, without a clear consciousness, logic and analysis do not play the main role in her life. Thirdly, the critic notes the great strength of Katerina’s character; if she wants to achieve her goal, then she will achieve it no matter what. He truly admires Katerina, considering this image the strongest, smartest and bravest in the play.

2.2 D. I. Pisarev “Motives of Russian drama” Article by D.I. Pisareva was written in 1864. In it, the author sharply condemns the position of his opponent, N.A. Dobrolyubov, and points to the article “A Ray of Light in the Dark Kingdom” as his “mistake.” That is why this article expanded and deepened the polemic between Russkoe Slovo and Sovremennik, which began earlier. Pisarev sharply disputes the interpretation of Katerina from Ostrovsky’s “The Thunderstorm,” given in this article by Dobrolyubov, believing that Katerina cannot be considered as a “decisive, integral Russian character,” but is only one of the creations, a passive product of the “dark kingdom.” Thus, Dobrolyubov is credited with idealizing this image, and debunking it seems to be the true task of “real criticism.” “It’s sad to part with a bright illusion,” notes Pisarev, “but there’s nothing to do, we’d have to be satisfied with the dark reality this time.” Unlike Dobrolyubov, Pisarev showed the reader a bare list of facts that may seem too harsh, incoherent and, in the aggregate, even implausible. “What kind of love is this that arises from the exchange of a few glances? What is this stern virtue that gives in at the first opportunity? Finally, what kind of suicide is this, caused by such minor troubles that are tolerated completely safely by all members of all Russian families?” the critic asks. And, of course, he answers it himself: “I conveyed the facts absolutely correctly, but, of course “, I could not convey in a few lines those shades in the development of the action that, softening the external sharpness of the outlines, force the reader or viewer to see in Katerina not the author’s invention, but a living person, truly capable of doing all the above-mentioned eccentricities.” Reading “The Thunderstorm” or watching it on stage, Pisarev believes, no one ever doubted that Katerina should have acted in reality exactly as she did in the drama, because every reader or viewer looks at Katerina from his own point of view , evaluates it as he perceives and sees it. “You can find an attractive side in each of Katerina’s actions; Dobrolyubov found these sides, put them together, composed an ideal image from them, saw as a result “a ray of light in the dark kingdom” and, like a man full of love, rejoiced at this ray with the pure and holy joy of a poet,” writes the critic. To create the correct image of Katerina, Pisarev believes, it is necessary to trace Katerina’s life from childhood. The first thing Pisarev claims is that upbringing and life could not give Katerina either a strong character or a developed mind. Pisarev believes that in all Katerina’s actions and feelings, first of all, a sharp disproportion between causes and effects is noticeable. “Every external impression shocks her entire organism; the most insignificant event, the most empty conversation produces whole revolutions in her thoughts, feelings and actions.” The critic considers Katerina a frivolous girl who takes everything that happens to heart: Kabanikha grumbles, and Katerina languishes from it; Boris Grigorievich casts tender glances, and Katerina falls in love; Varvara says a few words in passing about Boris, and Katerina considers herself a lost woman in advance, although until then she had not even spoken to her future lover; Tikhon leaves home for several days, and Katerina falls on her knees in front of him and wants him to take a terrible oath of marital fidelity from her. Pisarev gives another example: Varvara gives Katerina the key to the gate, Katerina, after holding onto this key for five minutes, decides that she will certainly see Boris, and ends her monologue with the words: “Oh, if only the night would come soon!” , and yet even the key was given to her primarily for the love interests of Varvara herself, and at the beginning of her monologue Katerina even found that the key was burning her hands and that she should definitely throw it away. According to the critic, by resorting to little tricks and precautions, it would be possible to see each other once in a while and enjoy life, but Katerina walks around as if lost, and Varvara is very seriously afraid that she will “thump at her husband’s feet and tell him everything in order.” . Pisarev believes that this catastrophe is caused by a confluence of the most empty circumstances. The way he describes Katerina’s feelings is intended to confirm his perception of the image: “Thunder struck - Katerina lost the last remnant of her mind, and then a crazy lady walked across the stage with two lackeys and delivered a nationwide sermon about eternal torment, moreover, on the wall, in the covered gallery, hellish flames are drawn - and all this is one to one - well, judge for yourself, how can Katerina really not tell her husband right there, in front of Kabanikha and in front of the entire city public, how she spent all ten during Tikhon’s absence nights?" The final catastrophe, suicide, happens impromptu in the same way, the critic claims. He believes that when Katerina runs away from home with the vague hope of seeing her Boris, she is not yet thinking about suicide. She finds it inconvenient that death does not appear, “you, she says, call for it, but it does not come.” It is clear, therefore, that there is no decision on suicide yet, the critic believes, because otherwise there would be nothing to talk about. Further analyzing last monologue Katerina, the critic looks for evidence of her inconsistency in him. “But while Katerina is reasoning in this way, Boris appears, and a tender meeting takes place. As it turns out, Boris is leaving for Siberia and cannot take Katerina with him, despite the fact that she asks him. After this, the conversation becomes less interesting and turns into an exchange of mutual tenderness. Then, when Katerina is left alone, she asks herself: “Where to now? should I go home? and answers: “No, it doesn’t matter to me whether I go home or go to the grave.” Then the word “grave” leads her to a new series of thoughts, and she begins to consider the grave from a purely aesthetic point of view, from which, however, people have so far only been able to look at other people’s graves. “In a grave, he says, it’s better... There’s a grave under a tree... how nice!.. The sun warms it, wets it with rain... in the spring the grass grows on it, it’s so soft... birds will fly to the tree and sing, the children will be brought out, the flowers will bloom: yellow, red, blue... all kinds, all kinds.” This poetic description of the grave completely fascinates Katerina, and she says that she does not want to live in the world. At the same time, carried away by an aesthetic feeling, she even completely loses sight of fiery Gehenna, and yet she is not at all indifferent to this last thought, because otherwise there would not have been a scene of public repentance for sins, there would have been no departure of Boris to Siberia, and the whole story about night walks would remain sewn and covered up.” But in her last minutes, Pisarev argues, Katerina forgets about the afterlife to such an extent that she even folds her hands crosswise, as they fold them in a coffin, and, making this movement with her hands, she does not even bring the idea of ​​suicide closer to the idea of fiery hell. Thus, a jump is made into the Volga, and the drama ends. Katerina’s whole life consists of constant internal contradictions, the critic believes, every minute she rushes from one extreme to another; Today she repents of what she did yesterday, and yet she herself does not know what she will do tomorrow, at every step she confuses her own life and the lives of other people; finally, having mixed up everything she had at hand, she cuts through the lingering knots with the most stupid means, suicide, and even a suicide that is completely unexpected for herself. Discussing further about Dobrolyubov's article, Pisarev claims that he called the contradictions and absurdities of her character a beautiful name, saying that they express a passionate, tender and sincere nature. And because of beautiful words, there is no reason to declare Katerina a bright phenomenon and be delighted with her, as Dobrolyubov does. So, we can claim that Pisarev analyzes this drama in order to prove that the critic Dobrolyubov was mistaken in his assessment of one female image. The critic wants to contribute to the assessment of Katerina’s character, to reveal her image from his point of view. Pisarev believes that the viewer should not sympathize with either Katerina or Kabanikha, because otherwise a lyrical element will burst into the analysis and confuse all reasoning. In the play “The Thunderstorm,” the author ends his article, Katerina, having committed many stupid things, throws herself into the water and thus commits the last and greatest absurdity. Summarizing the study of D. Pisarev’s article “Motives of Russian Drama,” we can highlight the following features of the critic’s perception of the image of the main character: 1. Katerina is only one of the creations, a passive product of the “dark kingdom”2. Upbringing and life could not give Katerina either a strong character or a developed mind3. In all of Katerina’s actions and feelings, one can notice, first of all, a sharp disproportion between causes and effects4. The catastrophe - Katerina's suicide - is produced by a confluence of the most empty circumstances5. Katerina’s suicide is completely unexpected for herself. So, we see that the critic’s goal was to prove the fallacy of the view of the heroine in Dobrolyubov’s articles, with which he completely disagrees. To prove that Ostrovsky’s heroine is not at all a “decisive, integral Russian character,” he interprets her image too straightforwardly, completely ignoring the depth and poetry that the author gave it.

3.The image of Katerina in Soviet literary criticism

Critics of this period are trying to analyze the ideological and aesthetic originality of the plays, as well as the role of writers in Russian drama. In Soviet literature, the image of Katerina is interpreted quite typically and equally.

3.1 The image of Katerina in the perception of A.I. Revyakin (from the book “The Art of Drama by A.N. Ostrovsky”)

The originality of Ostrovsky's dramaturgy, its innovation, the critic believes, is especially clearly manifested in typification. If ideas, themes and plots reveal the originality and innovation of the content of Ostrovsky’s dramaturgy, then the principles of character typification also concern its artistic depiction and its form. Ostrovsky, Revyakin believes, was attracted, as a rule, not by exceptional personalities, but by ordinary, ordinary people. social characters more or less typical. The uniqueness of the typicality of Ostrovsky’s images lies in their socio-historical specificity. The playwright painted highly complete and expressive types of a certain social status, time and place. The uniqueness of the typicality of Ostrovsky’s images lies in their socio-historical specificity. The playwright, as the critic asserts, painted highly complete and expressive types of a certain social situation, time and place. He also depicts with the greatest skill the tragic experiences of Katerina Kabanova. “She is overwhelmed by the feeling of love for Boris that has awakened in her for the first time,” writes Revyakin, thereby contrasting her feelings for Tikhon. Her husband is away. All this time, Katerina meets with her beloved. Upon her husband’s return from Moscow, she develops a feeling of guilt towards him and intensifies her thoughts about the sinfulness of her act. “And this is how convincingly, complexly and subtly the playwright motivates this climactic episode of the play,” the critic admires. Crystal clear, truthful, conscientious Katerina has a hard time hiding her actions in front of her husband. According to Varvara, she “is trembling all over, as if she were suffering from a fever; so pale, rushing around the house, as if looking for something. Eyes like those of a madwoman! Just this morning I started crying, and I’m still crying.” Knowing Katerina’s character, Varvara is afraid that she will “thump at her husband’s feet and tell everything.” Katerina’s confusion is aggravated by the approach of a thunderstorm, which she is completely afraid of, the critic says. It seems to her that this thunderstorm carries punishment for her sins. And here Kabanikha pesters her with his suspicions and teachings. Revyakin says quite compassionately tragic story Katerina, he sympathizes with her. Tikhon, although jokingly, calls on her to repent, and then Boris comes out of the crowd and bows to her husband. At this time, there is a frightening conversation among the people about the thunderstorm: “Remember my word that this thunderstorm will not pass in vain... Either it will kill someone, or the house will burn down... so look what an extraordinary color it is.” Even more alarmed by these words, Katerina says to her husband: “Tisha, I know who he will kill... He will kill me. Then pray for me!” By doing this, she sentences herself to death, to suicide. At the same moment, as if by chance, a half-crazed lady appears. Turning to the frightened Katerina, who is hiding, she shouts out cliché and also fateful words about beauty - temptation and destruction: “It’s better to go into the pool with beauty - that’s it!” Yes, hurry, hurry! Where are you hiding, stupid! You can’t escape God! You will all burn in unquenchable fire!” The nerves of the exhausted Katerina are strained to the limit, writes the critic. In complete exhaustion, Katerina talks about her death. Trying to calm her down, Varvara advises her to step aside and pray. Katerina obediently moves to the wall of the gallery, kneels down to pray, and instantly jumps up. It turns out that she ended up in front of the wall painted doomsday. This painting depicting hell, the critic explains, and sinners being punished for their crimes was the last straw for the tormented Katerina. All restraining forces left her, and she utters words of repentance: “My whole heart was torn!” I can't stand it anymore! Mother! Tikhon! I am a sinner before God and before you!..” A thunderclap interrupts her confession, and she falls unconscious into her husband’s arms. The motivation for Katerina’s repentance may seem, at first glance, to be overly detailed and drawn out, the researcher believes. But Ostrovsky shows in the heroine’s soul the painful struggle of two principles: spontaneous protest bursting from the depths of the heart and her perishing prejudices of the “dark kingdom.” The prejudices of the bourgeois-merchant environment are winning. But, as can be seen from the subsequent development of the play, Katerina finds the strength within herself not to resign herself, not to submit to the demands of the kingdom, even at the cost of her life.

So, shackled by the chains of religion, Katerina publicly repents of what was in her life a manifestation of the most joyful, bright, truly human, this is the conclusion the critic Revyakin draws about the image of Katerina. From his article we can conclude that he perceives the image of Katerina rather as positive, compassionate and sympathizes with him. According to the critic, the conflict of the play is a conflict human feelings and prejudices of the bourgeois-merchant environment, and the play itself - realistic image typical merchant morals. A fatal role in Katerina’s fate, according to the researcher, is played by her religiosity, which drives her to suicide. This perception of the image of the main character of the play “The Thunderstorm” is characteristic of Soviet literary criticism.

4.Modern interpretations of the image of Katerina

4.1 The conflict between life-loving religiosity and harsh Domostroevsky morality (interpretation by Yu. Lebedev)

The unusualness of the researcher’s perception of the play is reflected in the fact that he immediately notes its main artistic feature - the song opens “The Thunderstorm” and immediately brings the content into the national song space. The researcher believes that Katerina’s fate is the fate of the heroine of a folk song. The main idea of ​​the researcher is that in the merchant Kalinov, Ostrovsky sees a world breaking with the moral traditions of folk life. Only Katerina is given the ability to retain the fullness of viable principles in folk culture, the critic believes, and also to maintain a sense of moral responsibility in the face of the trials to which this culture is subjected in Kalinov.

It is not difficult to notice in “The Thunderstorm” the tragic confrontation between Katerina’s religious culture and Kabanikha’s Domostroy culture - this is how the critic defines the conflict of the play (“Domostroy” is a medieval Russian book about a strict patriarchal family structure).

In Katerina’s worldview, Slavic pagan antiquity harmoniously merges with democratic trends Christian culture. “Katerina’s religiosity embodies sunrises and sunsets, dewy grass in flowering meadows, the flight of birds, the fluttering of butterflies from flower to flower. Together with her is the beauty of the rural church, and the expanse of the Volga, and the Trans-Volga meadow space,” this is how the critic poetically and admiringly describes the heroine.

Ostrovsky’s earthly heroine, emitting spiritual light, is far from the harsh asceticism of Domostroevsky morality. Katerina’s life-loving religiosity is far from the harsh precepts of Domostroevskaya morality, the critic concludes.

In a difficult moment of her life, Katerina will complain: “If I had died as a little girl, it would have been better. I would look from heaven to earth and rejoice at everything. Otherwise she would fly invisibly wherever she wanted. I would fly out into the field and fly from cornflower to cornflower in the wind, like a butterfly.” “Why don’t people fly!.. I say: why don’t people fly like birds? You know, sometimes I feel like I'm a bird. When you stand on a mountain, you feel the urge to fly. That’s how I would run away, raise my hands and fly..." How to understand these fantastic desires of Katerina? What is this, a figment of a morbid imagination, a whim of a refined nature? No, the critic believes, ancient pagan myths come to life in Katerina’s mind, the deep layers of Slavic culture are stirring.

Katerina’s freedom-loving impulses, even in her childhood memories, are not spontaneous: “I was born so hot! I was still six years old, no more, so I did it! They offended me with something at home, and it was late in the evening, it was already dark, I ran out to the Volga, got into the boat, and pushed it away from the shore.” After all, this act is completely consistent with her people's soul. In Russian fairy tales, a girl turns to a river with a request to save her from evil pursuers, writes Lebedev. The feeling of divine powers is inseparable from Katerina from the forces of nature. So she prays therefore to the dawn of the morning, to the red sun, seeing in them the eyes of God. And in a moment of despair, she turns to the “violent winds” so that they convey to her beloved her “sadness, melancholy - sadness.” Indeed, Katerina’s character has folk origins, without which her character withers like cut grass.

In Katerina’s soul, two equal and equal impulses collide with each other. In the Kabanovsky kingdom, where all living things wither and dry up, Katerina is overcome by a longing for lost harmony, the author of the article believes. Love for Boris, of course, will not satisfy her longing. Is this why Ostrovsky enhances the contrast between Katerina’s high flight of love and Boris’s wingless passion? Fate brings together people who are incommensurable in depth and moral sensitivity, writes Lebedev.

The hero’s mental flabbiness and the heroine’s moral generosity are most obvious, according to the author, in the scene of their last date. Katerina’s hopes are in vain: “If only I could live with him, maybe I would see some kind of joy.” “If only”, “maybe”, “some kind”... Little consolation! But even here she finds herself thinking about something other than herself. It is Katerina who asks her husband for forgiveness for the troubles she has caused him, but Boris cannot even comprehend this.

Katerina is equally heroic both in her passionate and reckless love affair and in her deeply conscientious public repentance. Katerina dies just as surprisingly, says the critic. Her death is the last flash of spiritualized love for God's world, for trees, birds, flowers and herbs.

When leaving, Katerina retains all the signs that, according to popular belief, distinguished the saint: she is dead as if she were alive. “And exactly, guys, it’s as if it’s alive! There’s only a small wound on the temple, and there’s only one drop of blood.”

Thus, we see that in Lebedev’s study great attention is devoted to the folk, folklore origins of the image of Katerina. Its connection with folk mythology, song, and peculiar folk religiosity can be traced. The critic perceives the heroine as a woman with a lively and poetic soul capable of strong feeling. In his opinion, she inherits the moral traditions of folk life, which were abandoned by the residents of Kalinov, carried away by the cruel ideal of Domostroy. So, Katerina, in Lebedev’s interpretation, is the embodiment of people’s life, the people’s ideal. This indicates that in literary criticism in the last third of the twentieth century, the views of democratic critics (Dobrolyubov, Pisarev) are rethought and rejected.

4.2 Features of classicism in Ostrovsky’s play “The Thunderstorm” (article by P. Weil and A. Genis)

Researchers begin their article about Ostrovsky’s play “The Thunderstorm” in a peculiar way. In Russian folk drama, they write, the hero, appearing in a booth, immediately announced to the audience: “I am a mangy dog, Tsar Maximilian!” The characters in Ostrovsky’s play “The Thunderstorm” declare themselves with the same certainty. Already from the first remarks, critics say, a lot can be said about the characters in the play. For example, Kabanikha introduces herself like this: “If you want to listen to your mother, ... do as I ordered.” And with his first remark Tikhon answers her: “How can I, Mama, disobey you!” .Kuligin is immediately recommended by a self-taught mechanic and a lover of poetry. Researchers evaluate “The Thunderstorm” as a “classicist tragedy.” Her characters appear from the very beginning as complete types - bearers of one character or another - and do not change until the end. The classicism of the play is emphasized not only by the traditional tragic conflict between duty and feeling, but most of all by the system of image-types. “The Thunderstorm” noticeably stands out from other plays by Ostrovsky, full of humor and everyday, specifically Russian, details. Weil and Genis believe that the heroes of the play could fit not only into the environment of the Volga merchants, but also into the equally conventional Spanish passions of Corneille or the ancient conflicts of Racine. The researchers write that the reader sees the exalted Katerina, the pious Kabanikha, the pious Feklusha, and the holy fool Barynya. Faith, religion is perhaps the main theme of “The Thunderstorm”, and more specifically, it is the theme of sin and punishment. Researchers note the fact that Katerina is not at all rebelling against the swampy bourgeois environment, but she is challenging at the highest level, trampling not human laws, but God’s: “If I was not afraid of sin for you, will I be afraid of human judgment?” Katerina confesses to adultery, driven to the limit by the consciousness of her sinfulness, and public repentance occurs when she sees the image of fiery hell on the wall under the arches of the city promenade. Talking about Katerina’s religious ecstasies, researchers turn to the motif of the Annunciation. Katerina's hysterical holiness determines her fate. Researchers emphasize that there is no place for her - neither in the city of Kalinov, nor in the Kabanikha family - she has no place on earth at all. Beyond the pool into which she threw herself is paradise. Where is hell? In the impenetrable provincial merchant class? No, this is a neutral place. In extreme cases, this is purgatory. Hell in the play gives an unexpected twist to the plot. First of all, foreign countries. Researchers are paying attention to the fact that an ominous specter of distant hostile overseas countries hovers over the deep Russian provinces. And not just hostile, but in the context of general religious ecstasy - precisely devilish, underworld, hellish. There is no special preference for any foreign country or nation: they are all equally disgusting, because they are all strangers. Lithuania, for example, the researchers note, is not by chance depicted on the wall of the gallery right next to fiery hell, and local residents do not see anything strange in this neighborhood, they don’t even know what it is. Feklusha talks about overseas sultans, and Dikoy, protesting against Kuligin’s intentions, calls him “Tatar”. Ostrovsky himself, the researchers conclude, was apparently critical of foreign countries. From his travel impressions it is clear how he was fascinated by the nature of Europe, architecture, museums, order, but in most cases he was decidedly dissatisfied with people (and often repeating Fonvizin of a hundred years ago almost word for word). The theme of a hostile foreign country could be considered incidental in “The Thunderstorm,” according to Weil and Genis, but it is truly important in the play. The fact is that “The Thunderstorm” is polemical, critics have put forward a hypothesis. In 1857, Flaubert's novel Madame Bovary was published in France, and in 1858 it was translated and published in Russia, making a huge impression on the Russian reading public. Even before this, Russian newspapers, researchers write about the history of the French novel, discussed the trial in Paris on charges of “insulting public morality, religion and good morals.” In the summer of 1859, Ostrovsky began and finished “The Thunderstorm” in the fall. Comparing these two works, critics reveal their extraordinary similarity. Just the coincidence of the general theme is not so significant: an attempt by an emotional nature to escape from the bourgeois environment through love passion - and collapse, ending in suicide. The partial parallels in “Madame Bovary” and “The Thunderstorm” are very eloquent.1) Emma is just as exaltedly religious as Katerina, researchers note, and is just as susceptible to the influence of ritual. The image of fiery hell on the wall appears before the shocked Norman woman in exactly the same way as before the Volzhan woman. 2) Both are overwhelmed, girlishly unfulfilled, by the same dreams. Both girls, as critics note and compare themselves to a plitz, dream of flying. 3) Both Emma and Katerina recall their childhood and youth with joy, depicting this time as the “Golden Age of their lives.” Both have only the serenity of pure faith and innocent pursuits in their thoughts. The classes, the authors point out, are similar: embroidering pillows for Emma and embroidering on velvet for Katerina. 4) The family situation is similar, the researchers note: the hostility of mothers-in-law and the softness of husbands. Both Charles and Tikhon are uncomplaining sons and submissive cuckolded spouses. Languishing in the “moldy existence of woodlice,” (Flaubert’s expression), both heroines beg their lovers to take them away. But they have no luck with lovers, they both refuse the girls.4) Even the identification of love with a thunderstorm - so vivid in Ostrovsky - is also revealed by Flaubert, Weil and Genis come to the conclusion. Researchers write that the place that Russian classicists occupy in Ostrovsky's play is in Flaubert's novel reserved for their own classicists, the French. The Norman Kuligin is the pharmacist Homais, who is also passionate about science, preaches the benefits of electricity and constantly mentions Voltaire and Racine. This is not accidental, the authors note this fact: in “Madame Bovary” the images (except for Emma herself) are the essence of types. Fat, ambitious provincial, bungler husband, reasoner, despotic mother, eccentric inventor, provincial heartthrob, same cuckolded husband. And Katerina (as opposed to Emma) is static, like Antigone. But despite all the similarities, the works of Flaubert and Ostrovsky are significantly different and even antagonistic, critics say. They express their guess that “The Thunderstorm” is polemical in relation to “Madame Bovary.” The main difference can be defined in a simple word - money. Boris, Katerina's lover, is dependent because he is poor, but the author shows Boris not poor, but weak. It is not money, but fortitude that he lacks, the researchers conclude, in order to protect his love. As for Katerina, she does not fit into a material context at all. It is completely different with the European Flaubert. In Madame Bovary, money is hardly the main character. Money is a conflict between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law; money is the flawed development of Charles, who was forced to marry for a dowry in his first marriage, money is the torment of Emma, ​​who sees wealth as a way to escape from the bourgeois world, money is finally the reason for the suicide of the heroine entangled in debt: a real, genuine reason, without allegories, critics say . Before the theme of money, both the theme of religion, presented very strongly in Madame Bovary, and the theme of social conventions recede. It seems to Emma that money is freedom, but Katerina doesn’t need money, she doesn’t know it and doesn’t connect it with freedom in any way. Therefore, researchers come to the conclusion that this difference is fundamental, decisive between the heroines. Critics note the antithesis of rationalism and spirituality, that is, Emma’s tragedy can be calculated, expressed in specific quantities, counted to the nearest franc, but Katerina’s tragedy is irrational, inarticulate, inexpressible. Thus, it is impossible, as critics say, without factual grounds to believe that Ostrovsky created “The Thunderstorm” under the impression of “Madame Bovary” - although the dates and plot lines develop in a suitable way. But for readers and viewers, the occasion is not important, but the result is important, because it turned out that Ostrovsky wrote the Volga “Madame Bovary”, therefore, according to Weil and Genis, the play became a new argument in the long-standing dispute between Westerners and Slavophiles. Katerina has been puzzling the reader and viewer for more than a century dramatic inadequacy of feelings and actions, since the stage embodiment inevitably turns into either stilted banality or unjustified modernization. Researchers believe that Katerina arose at a time that was inappropriate for her: the time of Emma was coming - the era of psychological heroines who would reach their peak in Anna Karenina. So, critics come to the conclusion that Katerina Kabanova appeared at the wrong time and was not convincing enough. The Volga Madame Bovary turned out to be not as reliable and understandable as the Norman one, but much more poetic and sublime. Although inferior to the foreigner in intelligence and education, Katerina stood on a par with her in terms of intensity of passions and

surpassed in supermundaneity and purity of dreams. Researchers note the similarities of the heroines, both in marital status and habits and character traits. There is only one thing that critics see as different between the heroines - their financial situation and dependence on money.

5. A. N. Ostrovsky’s play “The Thunderstorm” in modern school literary criticism

5.1 Perception of the image of the heroine in the textbook “In the World of Literature,” ed. A.G. Kutuzova

Ostrovsky universally implements the metaphor of a thunderstorm in his drama. “The Thunderstorm” is a play from modern life, the author believes, but it is written in prose based on everyday material. The name is an image that symbolizes not only the elemental power of nature, but also the stormy state of society, the storm in the souls of people. Nature, according to the authors, is the personification of harmony, which is opposed to a world full of contradictions. The first remark creates a special mood in the perception of the play, the critic notes: the beauty of the Volga landscape is imagined, and the free and high-water river is a metaphor for the power of the Russian spirit. Kuligin's remark complements and comments on this picture. He sings the song “In the midst of a flat valley at a smooth height...”: “Miracles, truly it must be said that miracles! Curly! Here, my brother, for fifty years I have been looking at the Volga every day and I still can’t get enough of it.” The authors note the fact that these words of the hero and songs based on Merzlyakov’s poems precede the appearance of the main character - Katerina - and the conflict associated with her personal tragedy.

What appears before the eyes of the audience is not private life one family, and the “cruel morals” of the city of Kalinov. Ostrovsky shows how the inhabitants of the city have different attitudes towards the elemental force of nature. The authors emphasize that for such “hot” hearts as Kuligin, the thunderstorm is God’s grace, and for Kabanikha and Dikiy it is heavenly punishment, for Feklushi it is Ilya the Prophet rolling across the sky, for Katerina it is retribution for sins.

All important plot points are connected with the image of a thunderstorm. In Katerina's soul, under the influence of a feeling of love for Boris, confusion begins. The authors believe that she feels as if some kind of disaster is approaching, terrible and inevitable. After the townspeople say that the outcome of this storm will be disastrous, Katerina confesses her sin to everyone in the climactic scene of the play.

A thunderstorm is a threat to the outgoing, internally wrong, but still outwardly strong world of the “dark kingdom,” critics say. At the same time, the thunderstorm is also good news about new forces designed to clear the stale air of oppressive despotism for Katerina.

The creator of the Russian national theater, A. N. Ostrovsky, significantly developed and enriched the art of dramaturgy itself, the techniques of creating character in drama. This applies to the detailed exposition, as the authors of the textbook believe, and to the director’s character of the stage directions, and to the fact that even before the hero appears on stage, other characters give him an assessment, that the hero’s features are revealed immediately by the first remark with which he enters into action. To understand the creator’s intention, it is also important how this or that character is called in the list of characters: by first name, patronymic and last name, or by an abbreviated name.

So in “The Thunderstorm” only three characters are named in full: Sovel Prokopyevich Dikoy, Marfa Ignatievna Kabanova and Tikhon Ivanovich Kabanov - they are the main persons in the city. Katerina is also not a random name. In Greek, it means “pure,” which again characterizes the heroine, critics write.

The thunderstorm for the Kalinovites, and for Katerina among them, is not a stupid fear, the critic claims, but is a reminder to a person of responsibility to the higher forces of good and truth. This is why the thunderstorm frightens Katerina so much, the author concludes: for her, since the heavenly thunderstorm only harmonizes with the moral thunderstorm, which is even more terrible. And the mother-in-law is a thunderstorm and the consciousness of a crime is a thunderstorm

So, the authors of the textbook “In the World of Literature,” when analyzing the images of the play, pay attention first of all to the image of a thunderstorm, an element, which they consider symbolic in the play. A thunderstorm, in their opinion, means the departure, collapse of the old world and the emergence of a new one - the world of personal freedom

5.1 Perception of the image of the heroine in the textbook “Russian Literature” XIX century" ed. A.N. Arkhangelsky

It is no coincidence that a woman is placed at the center of events in “The Thunderstorm,” the authors believe. The point is not only that Ostrovsky’s main theme - the life of a family, a merchant’s house - assumed a special role for female characters, their elevated status in the plot. The authors note that the men around Katerina are weak and submissive, they accept the circumstances of life.

Katerina, whom her mother-in-law “tortures... locks up,” on the contrary, strives for freedom. And it’s not her fault that she, as if between a rock and a hard place, is squeezed between the old morality and the freedom she dreams of, the researchers justify the heroine. Katerina is not at all emancipated, does not strive beyond the boundaries of the patriarchal world, does not want to free herself from its ideals; Moreover, in her childhood memories the ancient harmony of Russian life seems to come to life. She speaks with tenderness about her mother’s house, the authors believe, about the quiet provincial summer, about the pages, about the flickering light of the lamp. And, most importantly, about the affection that surrounded her in childhood.

In fact, according to researchers, even in Katerina’s childhood everything was not so simple. Katerina seems to accidentally let slip in the 2nd scene of the 2nd act: once, when she was six years old, they offended her in her parents’ house, she ran out to the Volga, got into a boat, and went off, only the next morning they found her . But in her mind lives a completely different image of the Russia of her childhood. According to researchers, this is a heavenly image.

The authors note the fact that it is very important to understand that Katerina does not protest against ancient rules and morals, against patriarchy, but on the contrary, she fights for them in her own way, dreams of restoring the “former” with its beauty, love, silence and peace. It is interesting that Katerina professes the same ideas that Ostrovsky himself adhered to in early period of your creativity. If you carefully read the work, the authors say, you will notice that Katerina cheats on her husband not “as a sign of protest” against Kalinovsky’s morals, and not for the sake of “emancipation.” Before Tikhon leaves, she almost begs her husband not to leave, or asks him to take her with him, or take an oath from her. But the husband does not do this, he destroys Katerina’s hopes for domestic affection, crushes dreams of “real” patriarchy, and almost himself “pushes” Katerina into the arms of Boris, researchers say. And no one expects or demands love, real feeling, true loyalty from Katerina.

The conflict between Katerina and Kabanikha, according to the authors, is a conflict between the new consciousness of a young woman and the old consciousness of a supporter of the old order. Katerina faces a choice: to submit to lifeless patriarchy, to die with it, or to go against all traditions, challenge the morals of her beloved antiquity, and perish. Katerina’s choice is known to everyone, the researchers conclude.

So, the authors of the textbook, edited by Arkhangelsky, deny the opinion, formed under the influence of Dobrolyubov, that Katerina is protesting against patriarchal morals. In their opinion, Katerina, on the contrary, wants to restore them, and she protests against the deadness of Kalinov’s world.

If we summarize the analysis of modern studies of the image of Katerina, it can be noted that despite all the differences in the opinions of the authors, they also have something in common - this is the perception of the image as associated with folk songs, mythology, and popular consciousness.

6.Changing the image of Katerina in the perception of researchers. Conclusion

Summing up the results of our work, we can conclude that the image of Katerina is one of the most ambiguous and contradictory images of Russian literature. Until now, many literary scholars and researchers are arguing about the island heroine. Some consider A.N. Ostrovsky a great artist, others accuse him of having a contradictory attitude towards his heroes. Katerina Kabanova is the most successful image created by A.N. Ostrovsky, one cannot but agree with this.

The difference in the opinions of critics about Katerina is due to both the peculiarities of their worldview and the change in the general situation in society. For example, democrat critic N.A. Dobrolyubov believed that Katerina showed a protest against Kabanov’s concepts of morality, a protest carried to the end, to the point of suicide. D. Pisarev disputes Dobrolyubov’s opinion. He believes that Katerina’s suicide was a coincidence of the most empty circumstances that she could not cope with, and not a protest at all. But both critics perceived the heroine as a social type, saw a social conflict in the play and had a negative attitude towards the heroine’s religiosity.

The Soviet literary critic Revyakin expressed views close to those of Dobrolyubov. And in modern studies, first of all, Katerina is perceived as the embodiment of the people’s soul, people’s religiosity, in many ways a symbolic image, testifying to the collapse of the world of unfreedom, hypocrisy and fear.

Bibliography:

1. Article by N.A. Dobrolyubov “A Ray of Light in the Dark Kingdom” (N.A. Dobrolyubov Selected: School Library. Children's Literature Publishing House, Moscow, 1970).

2. Article by D. Pisarev “Motives of Russian drama” (D. I. Pisarev. Literary criticism in three volumes. Volume one Articles 1859-1864 L., “Fiction”, 1981)

3. Book by Revyakin A.I. The Art of Drama by A.N. Ostrovsky Ed. 2nd, rev. and additional M., “Enlightenment”, 1974.

4. A textbook for students of the 10th grade of secondary school Lebedev Yu.V. (M., “Enlightenment”, 1991).

5. Book by P. Weil, A. Genis “Native Speech. Lessons in Fine Literature" (Nezavisimaya Gazeta, 1991, Moscow).

Ostrovsky A.N. Decree. Op. P. 87

Ostrovsky A.N. Decree. Op. C 38

Ostrovsky A.N Decree. Op. P.31

A. N. Ostrovsky's play “The Thunderstorm” was written in 1859. In the same year, it was staged in theaters in Moscow and St. Petersburg and for many years now has not left the stages of all theaters around the world. Such popularity and relevance of the play is explained by the fact that “The Thunderstorm” combines the features of social drama and high tragedy.

The plot of the play centers on the conflict of feelings and duty in the soul of the main character, Katerina Kabanova. This conflict is a sign of a classic tragedy.

Katerina is a very pious and religious person. She dreamed of a strong family, loving husband and children, but ended up in the Kabanikha family. Marfa Ignatievna placed Domostroevsky order and way of life above all else. Naturally, Kabanikha forced everyone in her family to follow her Charter. But Katerina, a bright and free person, could not come to terms with the cramped and stuffy world of Domostroy. She yearned for a completely different life. This desire led the woman to sin - betrayal of her husband. Going on a date with Boris, Katerina already knew that after this she would not be able to live. The sin of betrayal weighed heavily on the heroine’s soul, with which she simply could not exist. A thunderstorm in the city accelerated Katerina’s national recognition - she repented of her betrayal.

Kabanikha also found out about her daughter-in-law’s sin. She ordered to keep Katerina locked up. What awaited the heroine? In any case, death: sooner or later Kabanikha would have brought the woman to the grave with her reproaches and instructions.

But this was not the worst thing for Katerina. The worst thing for the heroine is her internal punishment, her internal judgment. She herself could not forgive herself for her betrayal, her terrible sin. Therefore, the conflict in the play is resolved in the traditions of classic tragedy: the heroine dies.

But Dobrolyubov also pointed out that throughout the entire play, readers think “not about a love affair, but about their whole life.” This means that the accusatory notes of the work touched on a variety of aspects of Russian life. The play takes place in the provincial merchant town of Kalinov, located on the banks of the Volga River. In this place, everything is so monotonous and stable that even news from other cities and from the capital does not reach here. Residents in the city are closed, distrustful, hate everything new and blindly follow the Domostroevsky way of life, which has long since become obsolete.

Dikoy and Kabanikha personify the “city fathers” who enjoy power and authority. Dikoy is depicted as a complete tyrant. He swaggers in front of his nephew, in front of his family, but retreats in front of those who are able to fight back. Kuligin notices that all the atrocities in the city occur behind the high walls of merchant houses. Here they deceive, tyrannize, suppress, cripple lives and destinies. In general, Kuligin’s remarks often expose the “dark kingdom”, condemn it, and even, to some extent, reflect the position of the author.

Other minor characters also play a large role in the play. So, for example, the wanderer Feklusha reveals all the ignorance and backwardness of the “dark kingdom”, as well as its imminent death, because a society oriented towards such views cannot exist. An important role in the play is played by the image of the half-crazy Lady, who voices the idea of ​​sinfulness and inevitable punishment of both Katerina and the entire “dark kingdom”.