Cinema: the battlefield is the hearts and minds of people. Here God and the devil are fighting, and the battlefield is the heart
“And the battlefield is the hearts of people”
On Student's Day at the Academic Russian Drama Theater named after. Georgy Konstantinov premiered the play “Soldiers” based on the play by modern playwright Vladimir Zherebtsov. “Chmorik” (Subsidiary Farm) - this is the original title of the work - was once noticed and noted at the New Drama festival. “Chmorika” was staged by various theaters in Moscow (“Tabakerka”, the play “Soldiers”) and other cities, and a short film “Posobnoe Khozyastvo” was shot based on the play. Now “Soldiers” was seen in Yoshkar-Ola.
Toy soldiers, toy soldiers, green bugs,
Firecrackers, automatic devices, stars, badges...
In “The Gulag Archipelago” Alexander Isaevich Solzhenitsyn writes: “...The same person can be in different situations in life - a completely different person. That's close to the devil. The same goes for the saint. But the name does not change, and we attribute everything to him.” It is not always possible to know oneself, as Socrates bequeathed to us. Sometimes you need some kind of external push, a shake-up, something has to happen or someone has to come. For junior sergeant Khrustyashin, such an “alien” is Novikov. In a sense, he is an alien in this God-forsaken farmstead. Or rather, a schmuck. The play looks to the past stylistically. But not ideologically. Its theme - the army - will be boring for some, relevant for others, and hackneyed for others. But the point here is not in the harsh everyday life of the army and not at all in a thorough reproduction of the realities of the late 80s. Simply placing the action in an army setting works best. Probably, our Russian reality is more fully projected onto it. Behind in plain text, a simple plot - multi-layered and ambiguity; eternal questions are found in the most realistic situations. You just have to dig deeper and think.
The performance was presented to the audience on the big stage in a “small format”, this is the “trick”, a successful move by the director - honored. art. Russia Alexandra Suchkova (Nizhny Novgorod). The conversation with the viewer is conducted face to face, in close proximity, in a chamber setting. True, some production citations could not be avoided, but this did not harm the performance at all. Questions are not asked directly. The line of the director's intention does not go beyond boundaries, it moves delicately, unobtrusively and at the same time with precision and clarity. No didactics, no edification. Freedom of choice.
At first glance, the solution for the stage space looks simple. A barrel of water, pasted over with pictures of Gagarin and a rocket being launched - that’s all that suggests the proximity of Baikonur; boxes; two-story barracks bed. Lost in the steppes of Kazakhstan, the “soldiers” carry out their service. They are truly “cut off” from the whole world. A reminder of the connection with him is a telegraph pole, the lines from which stretch to the wings, forming a triangle, with its apex pointing towards the painted steppe. This telegraph “bird” and the circle inscribed in the triangle functionally limit and “sacralize” a piece of the stage snatched from the world: it becomes the arena of a serious struggle, which, according to Dostoevsky, is waged between the devil and God in the hearts of people.
The actors contributed a lot to the author. Here, too, there are our own finds and our own nuances. Although there are no “creepy” scenes in the play, tension is always present. Sergeant Khrustyashin (art. Igor Novoselov) finds himself in a difficult situation of choice. His tossing and turning “between an angel and a demon” cannot but be transmitted to the audience. Together with the “Decembrist” Katya (art. Ksenia Nemiro), a touching and homely beginning bursts onto the stage. Senior Lieutenant Altynov (art. Anton Tipikin) is vigilantly monitoring the “hazing chaos.” Scary in his calm self-confidence, the Demon (art. Sergei Vasin) appears, as expected, always unexpectedly - in clouds not of infernal sulfur, but of cigarette smoke. Novikov (art. Yaroslav Efremov) stands wonderfully on a stool, and Anya (art. Yulia Okhotnikova) listens to the playing of the “violinist”, who still lacks a little of the St. Petersburg-Gatchina “sourdough”. With a few strokes, the actress manages to convey the transition from feigned drunken gaiety to the sudden “longing for the ideal” that grips the suffering barmaid.
In the play, the director's intention is revealed through the details. A letter home with a brave lie about the launch of rockets is dictated by Khrustyashin to the prosaic grunting of pigs; a can of stew is solemnly opened by soldiers to the cheerful “Air March”. Here the sergeant, doomedly, but almost priestly, pulls out from under the bed his vestment - a butcher's apron stained with blood, a large knife sparkles in his hands, and the "chmorik" on his knees begs his colleague not to slaughter the pig. Here is Khrust, wrapped in a blanket, walking around the bed three times after talking with the Demon. And it’s not for nothing that the guys change into clean shirts. According to the plot, Novikov reads a poem. The author does not indicate which one. The director chooses the lines of Bulat Okudzhava, and it is clear why:
Involved in earthly passions,
I know that from darkness to light
One day a black angel will come out
And he will shout that there is no salvation.
But simple-minded and timid,
Beautiful as good news
white angel following
Whisper that there is hope.
Hope, of course, dies, but still the last... Yes, the glass breaks. Yes, the Bes is on the doorstep. Yes, everything is plunged into darkness. But in the finale the “March of the Aviators” sounds again.
So, a confidential heart-to-heart conversation took place, the dialogue with the viewer, one must think, was a success. And there was a “shot” in the hearts of the audience. The boys, who had played with soldiers, grew up and acted out the story about Cain and Abel. The game came out without a happy ending. Adult. "Real."
The blind and the seeing in ignorance are both equally “blind” and equally useless.
They argue which is better - capitalism or socialism. Essentially, it is discussed what is better in a person - selfishness or altruism, stinginess or generosity, evil or good. So, what is better - a good person or a bad one?
The answer is unanimously beyond doubt .
“He has chosen our hearts as a battlefield” …
Capitalism is a personality trait expressed in the physical world - selfishness. Just like socialism, it is the altruism of the individual reflected in the material world of objects. Slavery and feudalism are unlimited despotism.
Despotism, egoism, altruism (slavery, feudalism, capitalism, socialism, communism) are within us. All of them are simultaneously present in every person. They are present in everyone - in different proportions. If the traits are not clearly manifested, this does not mean that they do not exist - simply, they are in a suppressed embryonic state, not revealed.
Each of our character traits is objectively expressed in the world of matter and interpersonal relationships. Generosity, greed, courage, boasting, stupidity, callousness, etc. (A direct connection between character traits and diseases has been established). If you look at a person carefully, then everything manifestations of character can be see in the surrounding material world of objects created by him. Whichever qualities a person has more, the more he or she is represented in life. Remember, for example, the characters N.V. Gogol in "Dead Souls" : - Korobochka, Manilov, Plyushkin and others. (Another person only has to speak, and everything about him immediately becomes clear).
Thus. - Capitalism and socialism do not exist separately. They are a product of the human mind and “live” simultaneously together - in one person.
In absolutely all states (and even earlier in primitive tribe) - socialism is and was. In every society to varying degrees there is free help and care. Also in society, there is and was capitalism, the expression of which today is money. And, in the prehistoric world, the role of money was played by any item necessary for life (a chop, a scraper, a piece of meat, a handful of water, etc.).
The debate between politicians about the best system is "war of good and evil" in the human mind.
Each arguer adheres to values - according to the achieved level of individual development. Similarly, a donkey chooses a carrot for itself, and a man chooses something human (to each his own).
Having discovered that "root" capitalism (selfishness) and socialism (altruism) “grows” from a person, then among healthy and reasonable people, it is possible to put an end to political disputes and wars. Having put the forces of the “blind and the sighted ignorant” together, Can transfer the wasted energy of conflict to problems of personal development.
Ultimately, on change existing society and peace - for the better!
Every person, during the day, simultaneously countless times, can be a money-grubber and show concern for others (even if this action occurs in the family). Which indicates flexibility, mobility, changeability of the mind, the ability to change oneself and the surrounding material world with thoughts.
If you look more broadly, a person has everything. He contains all the character traits of his ancestors. All are identical in the structure of the genetic code and differ in the manifestation of gene activity. The total expression of all personality traits is called character.
…“He took seventy-two colors, He threw them into the vat. He took them out all white and said: “Like this, truly, the Son of man has come”... (From Philip, 54).
Consisting of “seventy-two colors,” man came to life. A self-realized Man, according to his knowledge and desire, can become “white” (pure).
The amount of socialism (the sum of social benefits) in the state is determined by the level of moral development of society. If the level is high, then there is more concern. The higher the consciousness, the more socialism there is. With democratic changes, the amount of socialism increases, and with dictatorship, autocracy, despotism, it decreases.
Morally low level society, is never able to build a more developed social state. Likewise, a monkey will not do anything human.
There is an Eastern proverb: “A new saddle and a golden bridle will not make an Arabian horse out of a donkey.” If you move the harness from one donkey to another donkey, then the stallion won’t work either.
Material changes alone in the country are useless.- Proactive moral development is required.
Everything serves as proof of truth, including the opposite. - To create a “beast”, it is necessary to erase the humanity from people, depriving them of the opportunity to think and free Gain knowledge. Then, the born beast (as a reward) will destroy its blind and mediocre parents.
Politicians, magicians, swindlers to take over : property, freedom, love, sympathy, trust, power or anything else - distract attention. Distracted by "false stand" people's minds are blinded and unable to see the essence of things correctly.
It's good to know that everything that is inside us is embodied in the outside.
Everyone can be their opposite - an egoist or an altruist. An English proverb confirms: - “our shortcomings are a continuation of our advantages.” People, under external dominant influence in an instant, easily capable of changing in any direction - good and bad.
With a low level of development of consciousness in society, freedom of speech and democratic institutions - from the individual, the head of state, It fully depends on whether such a society will develop or degrade.
How well a person knows himself depends on the opportunity external influence on his mind and manipulation of his consciousness.
“Our weaknesses no longer harm us when we know them.” (18th century, German scientist, publicist Georg Lichtenberg).
Those who know can understand both themselves and others. They are able to choose the best for themselves - the best president, government, they are able to limit the bad. … “And you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free” (John: 8 - 32).
Alyosha, having listened to his father’s order, which he shouted to him from the carriage as he was leaving the monastery, remained for some time in place in great bewilderment. It’s not that he stood there like a pillar, that didn’t happen to him. On the contrary, despite all his anxiety, he immediately managed to go to the abbot’s kitchen and find out what his dad had done upstairs. Then, however, he set off, hoping that on the way to the city he would somehow have time to solve the problem that was tormenting him. I will say in advance: he was not at all afraid of his father’s screams and orders to move home, “with pillows and a mattress.” He understood all too well that the order to move, out loud and with such an ostentatious cry, was given “in passion,” so to speak, even for beauty’s sake—sort of like a tradesman who had recently reveled in their own town, on his own name day, and in front of guests, getting angry because they didn’t give him any more vodka, he suddenly began breaking his own dishes, tearing his and his wife’s clothes, breaking his furniture and, finally, the glass in the house, and all again for show; and everything in the same vein, of course, now happened to dad. The next day, of course, the revelry tradesman, having sobered up, regretted the broken cups and plates. Alyosha knew that the old man would probably let him go back to the monastery the next day, and even today, perhaps, he would let him go. And he was quite sure that the father would not want to offend anyone else. Alyosha was sure that no one in the whole world would ever want to offend him, not only would they not want to, but they could not. This was an axiom for him, given once and for all, without reasoning, and in this sense he moved forward, without any hesitation. But at that moment some other fear was stirring in him, of a completely different kind, and all the more painful because he himself could not define it, namely the fear of a woman, and specifically of Katerina Ivanovna, who so urgently begged him the other day, conveyed to him by Mrs. Khokhlakova , a note to come to her for something. This demand and the need to definitely go immediately instilled some kind of painful feeling in his heart, and all morning, the further, the more, this feeling became more and more painful in him, despite all the subsequent scenes and adventures in the monastery, and now at the abbot's, and so on, and so on. What he was afraid of was not that he didn’t know what she would talk to him about and what he would answer her. And it wasn’t women in general that he was afraid of in her: he knew few women, of course, but still, all his life, from infancy until the monastery, he lived only with them. He was afraid of this woman, Katerina Ivanovna herself. He had been afraid of her since the first time he saw her. He saw her only once or twice, perhaps even three, and even once accidentally spoke a few words to her. He remembered her image as a beautiful, proud and powerful girl. But it was not her beauty that tormented him, but something else. It was precisely this inexplicability of his fear that now intensified this fear in him. This girl's goals were noble, he knew that; she strove to save his brother Dmitry, who was already guilty before her, and she strove out of sheer generosity. And so, despite his consciousness and the justice that he could not help but give to all these wonderful and generous feelings, a chill ran down his back, the closer he moved to her house. He realized that he would not find brother Ivan Fedorovich, who was so close to her, with her: brother Ivan was probably with his father now. Dmitry would not be caught even more accurately, and he had a presentiment why. So, their conversation will take place in private. I would really like to see his brother Dmitry before this fateful conversation and run to him. Without showing the letter, he could have said something to him. But brother Dmitry lived far away and is probably not at home now either. After standing still for a minute, he finally made up his mind. Having crossed himself with the usual and hasty cross and immediately smiling at something, he firmly headed towards his terrible lady. He knew her house. But if I had to go to Bolshaya Street, then through the square, etc., it would not be quite close. Our small town is extremely scattered, and the distances can be quite long. Moreover, his father was waiting for him, perhaps he had not yet forgotten his order, he could become capricious, and therefore he had to hurry to get there and there. As a result of all these considerations, he decided to shorten the path by going backwards, and he knew all these passages in the town like the back of his hand. Backwards meant almost no roads, along deserted fences, sometimes even climbing over other people's fences, passing other people's yards, where, however, everyone knew him and everyone greeted him. In this way he could get out to Bolshaya Street twice as close. Here in one place he even had to pass very close to his father’s house, namely past his neighbor’s garden, which belonged to one dilapidated little crooked house with four windows. The owner of this house was, as Alyosha knew, a city bourgeois, a legless old woman, who lived with her daughter, a former civilized maid in the capital, who until recently had been living in the general's places, and now for a year, due to the illness of the old woman, she arrived home and flaunting in chic dresses. This old woman and daughter, however, fell into terrible poverty and even went next door to Fyodor Pavlovich’s kitchen for soup and bread every day. Marfa Ignatievna performed for them willingly. But when my daughter came for soup, she didn’t sell a single one of her dresses, and one of them even had a very long tail. Alyosha learned about the latter circumstance, and of course quite by accident, from his friend Rakitin, who knew absolutely everything in their little town, and, having found out, forgot, of course, immediately. But, now drawing level with his neighbor’s garden, he suddenly remembered precisely this tail, quickly raised his drooping and thoughtful head and... suddenly stumbled upon the most unexpected encounter. Behind the fence in the neighbor's garden, perched on something, stood his brother Dmitry Fedorovich, leaning out up to his chest, and with all his might he made signs to him with his hands, called him and beckoned, apparently afraid not only to shout, but even to say a word out loud, so as not to heard. Alyosha immediately ran up to the fence. “It’s good that you looked back yourself, otherwise I almost shouted to you,” Dmitry Fedorovich joyfully and hastily whispered to him. - Get in here! Fast! Oh, how nice it is that you came. I was just thinking about you... Alyosha himself was glad and only wondered how to climb over the fence. But “Mitya” with a heroic hand grabbed his elbow and helped him jump. Having picked up his cassock, Alyosha jumped over with the agility of a barefoot city boy. - Well, go for a walk, let's go! - Mitya burst out in an enthusiastic whisper. “Where?” Alyosha whispered, looking around in all directions and seeing himself in a completely empty garden, in which there was no one but both of them. The garden was small, but the owner's house still stood no less than fifty paces from them. - There’s no one here, why are you whispering? - Why am I whispering? “Oh, damn it,” Dmitry Fedorovich suddenly shouted in his fullest voice, “why am I whispering? Well, you can see for yourself how the confusion of nature can suddenly emerge. I am here on a secret and guarding a secret. Explanation in the future, but, realizing that it was a secret, I suddenly began to speak secretly, and whisper like a fool, when I shouldn’t. Let's go! There you go! Until then, keep quiet. I want to kiss you!Glory to the Highest in the world,
Glory to the Supreme within me!..
I repeated this just in front of you, sitting here...
The garden was the size of a tithe or a little more, but it was surrounded by trees only all around, along all four fences - apple trees, maple, linden, birch. The middle of the garden was empty, under a lawn on which several pounds of hay were mown in the summer. The garden had been rented out by the owner since spring for a few rubles. There were also ridges with raspberries, gooseberries, currants, also all near the fences; beds with vegetables near the house, established, however, recently. Dmitry Fedorovich led the guest to one corner of the garden farthest from the house. There, suddenly, among densely standing linden trees and old bushes of currants and elderberries, viburnum and lilacs, something like the ruins of an ancient green gazebo, blackened and crooked, with lattice walls, but with a covered top and in which one could still shelter from the rain, appeared. The gazebo was built God knows when, according to legend, about fifty years ago, by some then owner of the house, Alexander Karlovich von Schmidt, a retired lieutenant colonel. But everything had already decayed, the floor was rotten, all the floorboards were wobbly, the wood smelled of dampness. In the gazebo there was a green wooden table dug into the ground, and all around there were benches, also green, on which one could still sit. Alyosha immediately noticed his brother’s enthusiastic state, but, entering the gazebo, he saw half a bottle of cognac and a glass on the table. - This is cognac! - Mitya laughed, - and you’re already looking: “he’s getting drunk again”? Don't trust the phantom.Don't trust the empty and deceitful crowd,
Forget your doubts...
I don’t get drunk, I just “treat myself,” as your pig Rakitin says, who will be a state councilor and will always say “I treat him.” Sit down. I would take you, Alyoshka, and press you to my chest, so much so as to crush you, because in the whole world... truly... truly... (get it! get it!) I love you only one of you!
He said the last line in a kind of almost frenzy. - Just you, and another “mean” one, with whom I fell in love, and with that, I disappeared. But falling in love does not mean loving. You can fall in love and hate. Remember! Now, while it's fun, I say! Sit down here at the table, and I’ll be on the side, and I’ll look at you and say everything. You will remain silent, and I will continue to speak, because the time has come. But, you know, I decided that I had to speak really quietly, because here... here... the most unexpected ears might open. I’ll explain everything, it’s said: to be continued from now on. Why was I eager for you, thirsting for you now, all these days, and now? (I've been anchored here for five days already). All these days? Because I’ll tell you everything, because it’s necessary, because you’re needed, because tomorrow I’m flying from the clouds, because tomorrow life will end and begin. Have you experienced, have you seen in a dream how people fall into a hole from a mountain? Well, now I’m not flying in a dream. And I’m not afraid, and don’t be afraid. That is, I’m afraid, but it’s sweet to me. That is, not sweet, but delight... Well, damn it, it doesn’t matter what it is. Strong spirit, weak spirit, woman's spirit - whatever it is! Let's praise nature: you see, how much sun there is, how clear the sky is, the leaves are all green, it's still summer, it's four o'clock in the afternoon, silence! Where were you going? — I went to see my father, but first I wanted to go to Katerina Ivanovna. - To her and to her father! Wow! Coincidence! But why did I call you, why did I want you, why did I hunger and thirst with all the bends of my soul and even with my ribs? To send you specifically to your father from me, and then to her, to Katerina Ivanovna, and thereby end both her and your father. Send an angel. I could have sent anyone, but I had to send an angel. And so you go to her and to your father. - Did you really want to send me? - Alyosha burst out with a painful expression on his face. - Wait, you knew it. And I see that you understood everything right away. But keep quiet, keep quiet for now. Don't be sorry and don't cry! Dmitry Fedorovich stood up, thought about it and put his finger to his forehead: “She called you herself, she wrote you a letter, or something, that’s why you went to her, otherwise would you have gone?” “Here is a note,” Alyosha took it out of his pocket. Mitya quickly ran through it. - And you went after them! Oh Gods! Thank you for pointing him in the right direction and he came to me like gold fish to the foolish old fisherman in the fairy tale. Listen, Alyosha, listen, brother. Now I intend to say everything. Because at least someone needs to be told. I have already told the angel in heaven, but I must also tell the angel on earth. You are an angel on earth. You will listen, you will judge, and you will forgive... And that’s what I need, for someone higher to forgive me. Listen: if two creatures suddenly break away from everything earthly and fly into the extraordinary, or at least one of them, and before that, flying away or dying, comes to the other and says: do me this and that, something that no one has ever asked they ask, but what can be asked only on one’s deathbed, then will he really not fulfill it... if it’s a friend, if it’s a brother? “I will do it, but tell me what it is, and tell me quickly,” said Alyosha. - Hurry up... Hm. Take your time, Alyosha: you are in a hurry and worried. There's no need to rush now. Now the world has entered a new street. Eh, Alyosha, it’s a pity that you didn’t think of delight! But what am I telling him? You didn't think of it! Well, I, the dunce, say:Be a noble man!
Whose verse is this?
Alyosha decided to wait. He realized that all his business, perhaps, was now only here. Mitya thought for a minute, leaning his elbow on the table and leaning his head on his palm. Both were silent. “Lesha,” said Mitya, “you won’t laugh alone!” I would like to begin... my confession... with a hymn to Schiller's joy. An die Freude! But I don’t know German, I only know that an die Freude. Don’t think either that I’m talking drunkenly. I won't sleep at all. Cognac is cognac, but I need two bottles to get drunk, -And the ruddy-faced Silenus
On a stumbling donkey,
But I haven’t even drunk a quarter of the bottle and I’m not strong. Not Strong, but strong, because he made the decision forever. Forgive me for the pun, you have to forgive me a lot today, not to mention a pun. Don't worry, I'm not smearing, I'm talking and I'll get to the point in no time. I won’t pull the Jew out of my soul. Wait, how is this...
He raised his head, thought and suddenly began enthusiastically:Timid, naked and wild was hiding
Troglodyte in the rock caves,
The nomad wandered through the fields
And he devastated the fields.
Trapper, with a spear, arrows,
Grozen ran through the forests...
Woe to those tossed by the waves
To the inhospitable shores!
From the Olympic peak
Mother Ceres comes after
The kidnapped Proserpina:
Dick lies before her light.
No corner, no treats
There is no goddess there anywhere;
And nowhere is there any reverence for God
The temple does not testify.
The fruit of the fields and the grapes are sweet
They do not shine at feasts;
Only the remains of bodies are smoking
On bloody altars.
And where with a sad eye
Ceres doesn't even look there -
In deep humiliation
He sees people everywhere!
So that from the baseness of the soul
A man could rise
With ancient mother earth
He entered into an alliance forever.
But here’s the thing: how can I enter into an alliance with the earth forever? I don’t kiss the ground, I don’t cut its chest; Why should I become a man or a shepherd? I walk and don’t know whether I’ve landed in stink and shame or in light and joy. That’s where the trouble lies, because everything in the world is a mystery! And when I happened to plunge into the deepest, deepest shame of depravity (and that was the only thing that happened to me), I always read this poem about Ceres and about man. Did it fix me? Never! Because I am Karamazov. Because if I’m going to fly into the abyss, I’ll do it straight, head down and heels up, and I’m even pleased that it’s in this humiliating position that I fall and consider it beauty for myself. And in this very shame I suddenly begin the anthem. Let me be cursed, let me be low and vile, but let me kiss the hem of the robe in which my God is clothed; let me follow the devil at the same time, but I am still your son, Lord, and I love you, and I feel joy, without which the world cannot stand and be.
The soul of God's creation
Eternal joy flows,
The secret power of fermentation
The cup of life is flaming;
Lured the grass to the light,
Chaos has developed into suns
And in the spaces, to the astrologer
Uncontrollable, spilled.
At the breast of good nature
Everything that breathes drinks joy;
All creatures, all peoples
It entails;
She gave us friends in misfortune,
Grape juice, wreaths hare,
Insects - voluptuousness...
Angel - God will.
But enough poetry! I have shed tears, and you let me cry. Let it be stupidity that everyone will laugh at, but you won’t. So your eyes are burning. Enough poetry. I want to tell you now about “insects,” about those whom God has endowed with voluptuousness:
Insects - voluptuousness!
I, brother, am this very insect, and this is specifically said about me. And we, Karamazovs, are all the same, and in you, angel, this insect lives and will give birth to a storm in your blood. These are storms, because voluptuousness is a storm, more than a storm! Beauty is a terrible and terrible thing! Terrible because it is indefinable, and it is impossible to determine because God asked only riddles. Here the shores meet, here all the contradictions live together. I, brother, am very uneducated, but I thought about it a lot. There are a lot of secrets! Too many mysteries depress people on earth. Solve it as best you can and get away with it. Beauty! Moreover, I cannot bear that another person, even higher in heart and with a lofty mind, begins with the ideal of the Madonna and ends with the ideal of Sodom. Even more terrible is someone who, already with the ideal of Sodom in his soul, does not deny the ideal of the Madonna, and his heart burns from it and truly, truly burns, as in his young, blameless years. No, the man is wide, too wide, I would narrow it down. The devil knows what it even is, that's what! What seems disgraceful to the mind is pure beauty to the heart. Is there beauty in sodom? Believe that it is in Sodom that she sits for the vast majority of people - did you know this secret or not? The terrible thing is that beauty is not only a terrible, but also a mysterious thing. Here the devil fights with God, and the battlefield is the hearts of people. But by the way, whatever hurts, that’s what he talks about. Listen, now to the actual point.
To joy! (German).
This work has entered the public domain. The work was written by an author who died more than seventy years ago, and was published during his lifetime or posthumously, but more than seventy years have also passed since publication. It may be freely used by anyone without anyone's consent or permission and without payment of royalties.
Nikolaeva Ekaterina, Tikhonova Lyudmila, Sysoeva Elvira, Kumakhova Adisa, Shikhalieva Yulia
The object of study of our work is the novel by F. M. Dostoevsky “The Brothers Karamazov”.
The subject of the study is the main characters of the novel, their monologues and dialogues, which help to reveal the religious and philosophical thoughts of the characters.
Goal: to identify the religious and philosophical views of F. M. Dostoevsky in the novel “The Brothers Karamazov”.
1. Study the biography of F. M Dostoevsky and the features of his work.
2. Try to characterize general direction spiritual searches of F. M. Dostoevsky before and during the writing of the novel “The Brothers Karamazov”, the writer’s attitude to faith and God, his religious views.
3. Analyze the main images of F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “The Brothers Karamazov” and observe how the religious and philosophical themes that concern F. M. Dostoevsky are presented in the novel.
4. Compare the heroes of the novel “The Brothers Karamazov” and, based on a comparison of their characters, find out for yourself which of the heroes of the novel is closer to the author.
5. Based on the analysis and comparison of the main characters of F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “The Brothers Karamazov”, identify for yourself the basic principles of the religious and philosophical views of the writer presented in the novel.
Download:
Preview:
To use presentation previews, create a Google account and log in to it: https://accounts.google.com
Slide captions:
“Here God and the devil are fighting, and the battlefield is the hearts of people...” (based on the novel by F. M. Dostoevsky “The Brothers Karamazov”) And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it... Om John. Chapter 1.5 Work performed by: Kumakhova Adisa Nikolaeva Ekaterina Sysoeva Elvira Tikhonova Lyudmila Shikhalieva Yulia Supervisor: Elena Gennadievna Strakhova GBOU Secondary School No. 1297, Moscow, 2013
Contents Chapter 1. Introduction …………………………………………………………….………………………………….3 Chapter 2. Biography of F.M. . Dostoevsky, the image of F. M. Dostoevsky through the eyes of his contemporaries…………………………………………………………………………………5 Chapter 3. Spiritual quest F M. Dostoevsky before and during the writing of the novel “The Brothers Karamazov. The writer’s attitude towards faith and God, his religious views. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………16 Chapter 4. The novel “The Brothers Karamazov”. History of creation …………………………….………..22 Chapter 5. Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov ……………………………………………………………… … 24 Chapter 6. Dmitry Karamazov ……………………………………………………………………………….37 Chapter 7. Ivan Karamazov ……………… ………………………………….………………………………….47 Chapter 8. Alyosha Karamazov ………………………………………… ………………………………………………………..58 Chapter 9. Pavel Smerdyakov ……………………………………………………………………… ……………64 Chapter 10. Conclusions…………………………………………………………………………………………………………70 List of references used ………………….…………………………………………………….72 Appendix …………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………….73 2
Chapter 1. Introduction The work of F. M. Dostoevsky has aroused the interest of researchers in various fields of activity since the publication of the author’s first work and remains relevant in our time. F. M. Dostoevsky, depicting complex, confusing situations in society and presenting his heroes with a choice, especially often resorts to turning points in fate individual person, thereby forcing us to make choices together with the characters, to empathize with them, living with them this or that situation. The object of study of our work is the novel by F. M. Dostoevsky “The Brothers Karamazov”. The subject of the study is the main characters of the novel, their monologues and dialogues, which help to reveal the religious and philosophical thoughts of the characters. Goal: to identify the religious and philosophical views of F. M. Dostoevsky in the novel “The Brothers Karamazov”. Objectives: 1. Study the biography of F. M. Dostoevsky and the features of his work. 2. Try to characterize the general direction of F. M. Dostoevsky’s spiritual search before and during the writing of the novel “The Brothers Karamazov”, the attitude of the writer 3
to faith and God, his religious views. 3. Analyze the main images of F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “The Brothers Karamazov” and observe how the religious and philosophical themes that concern F. M. Dostoevsky are presented in the novel. 4 . Compare the heroes of the novel “The Brothers Karamazov” and, based on a comparison of their characters, find out for yourself which of the heroes of the novel is closer to the author. 5 . Based on the analysis and comparison of the main characters of F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “The Brothers Karamazov”, identify for yourself the basic principles of the religious and philosophical views of the writer presented in the novel. To achieve the above objectives, the following Methods were used: - analysis of primary sources and additional literature that help to reveal the objectives; - synthesis, which allows you to combine the information obtained as a result of analysis; - induction – formulating a logical conclusion by summarizing data. 4
Chapter 2. Biography of F.M. Dostoevsky, the image of F. M. Dostoevsky through the eyes of his contemporaries. F. M. Dostoevsky was born on October 30 (November 11), 1821 in Moscow. Father - Mikhail Andreevich Dostoevsky - head doctor of the Mariinsky Hospital for the Poor, mother - Maria Fedorovna Nechaeva, daughter of the Moscow merchant Fyodor Timofeevich Nechaev. “... these were advanced people... and at this moment they would be advanced!.. And such family men, such fathers... you and I will not be, brother!” 1 The family loved to read and subscribed to the magazine “Library for Reading,” which made it possible to get acquainted with the latest foreign literature. Of the Russian authors, they loved N. Karamzin, V. Zhukovsky, A. Pushkin. The mother, a religious nature, introduced the children to the Gospel from a young age and took them on pilgrimages to the Trinity-Sergius Lavra. In 1834, Fyodor Mikhailovich and his brother entered the Moscow private boarding school of Leonty Ivanovich Chermak. “The selection of good teachers and strict monitoring [i]/e/ of their regular and timely arrival, and at the same time - the presence of a family character that reminds the children, at least partly, of their home and home life, - this, in my opinion, is the ideal of a closed educational institution. ‑ Boarding house 1 F. M. Dostoevsky about his parents, from “Memoirs” A. M. Dostoevsky. http://az.lib.ru/d/dostoewskij_f_m/text_0580.shtml 5
L.I. Chermaka was close to this ideal.” 1 After the death of his mother, which coincided with the news of the death of A. S. Pushkin (1837), F. M. Dostoevsky, by decision of his father, entered the St. Petersburg Military Engineering School (1838), which was one of the best educational institutions of that time . In 1839, his father unexpectedly died (killed, according to family legend, serfs). This news shocked F.M. Dostoevsky and provoked a severe nervous attack - a harbinger of future epilepsy, to which he had a hereditary predisposition. Left an orphan, without funds, in an atmosphere of drill, nit-picking of tyrants at the Main Engineering School, F. M. Dostoevsky devoted several years to a business that he did not like, to the sciences that bore him. At the school, as D.V. Grigorovich recalls, “over everyone’s head hung the sword of Damocles of severity, the most picky exactingness... For the most innocent offense - an undone collar or button - they were sent to a punishment cell or put on watch at the door with a satchel on their back.” . F. M. Dostoevsky already at this time keenly felt injustice; he was outraged by the embezzlement, bribery, and careerism that reigned in the army. “Fyodor Mikhailovich was outraged by many things in his service...” recalled A.I. Savelyev, who served as an officer on duty at the school. “He could not see the serf prisoners in shackles at his work 6
distances and reprisals that occurred in the troops holding guards in Kronstadt." 1 After graduating from college in 1843, F. M. Dostoevsky was enlisted in the drafting department of the engineering department, but a year later he retired, convinced that his vocation was literature In 1845, F. M. Dostoevsky’s first novel, “Poor People,” was written, published by N. Nekrasov in the “Petersburg Collection.” Later, “White Nights” (1848) and “Netochka Nezvanova” (1849) were published, in which features of realism were revealed. F. M. Dostoevsky: in-depth psychologism, exclusivity of characters and situations, but it started well. literary activity ends tragically. Being one of the members of the Petrashevsky circle, which united adherents of French utopian socialism, in 1849 the writer was arrested for participation in this circle and sentenced to death, which was later replaced by four years of hard labor and settlement in Siberia. “Dostoyevsky, in hard labor and in exile, retained his energy of character, strength of personality, and did not lose faith in himself. The most striking evidence remains "Notes from House of the Dead"- this terrible chronicle of the journey through the circles of hell of Russian penal servitude. The most painful 1 B. Rurikov. “Dostoevsky and his contemporaries.” http://az.lib.ru/d/dostoewskij_f_m/text_0580.shtml 7
the test was not backbreaking work, not terrible living conditions, but the cruel and merciless humiliation of a person, the violation of his dignity and honor, the outrage of his personality... The years of hard labor and exile were years of turning point for Dostoevsky, the full meaning of which was revealed only later. During this period, religious tendencies in the consciousness of Dostoevsky intensified, the idea of humility in the face of evil became stronger, and he stopped believing in revolution. He began to idealize obedience and humility, considering them as features of the Russian national character. In the end, Dostoevsky came, as he himself wrote, to betray his former convictions." 1 F. M. Dostoevsky spoke in 1874 Sun. Solovyov about the meaning of hard labor for him spiritual development: “Then fate helped me, hard labor saved me. I became a completely new person... Oh! This was great happiness for me: Siberia and hard labor... They say horror, bitterness, they talk about the legality of some kind of bitterness? Terrible nonsense! I only lived there healthy happy life, I understood myself there, my dear... I understood Christ... I lifted and felt the Russian man..." 2. From a revolutionary, an atheist, a believer is born. 1 B. Rurikov. "Dostoevsky and his contemporaries". http:// az .lib.ru/d/dostoewskij_f_m/text_0580.shtml 2 F.M. Dostoevsky in the memoirs of his contemporaries. In two volumes. M., 1964. p.
After the death of Nicholas I and the beginning of the liberal reign of Alexander II, the fate of F.M. Dostoevsky, like many political criminals, was softened. His noble rights were returned to him, and he retired in 1859 with the rank of second lieutenant. In the same year he received permission to live in Tver, and then in St. Petersburg. In his first post-convict letter to N.D. Fonvizina F. M. Dostoevsky tells her in what direction the rebirth of his beliefs was going: “...I formed a symbol of faith for myself, in which everything is clear and holy for me. This symbol is very simple; here it is: to believe that there is nothing more beautiful, deeper, more sympathetic, more intelligent, more courageous and more perfect than Christ, and not only is there not, but with jealous love I tell myself that it cannot be. Moreover, if someone proved to me that Christ is outside the truth, then I would rather remain with Christ than with the truth.” 1 At this time, the stories “Uncle’s Dream”, “The Village of Stepanchikovo and Its Inhabitants” (1859), and the novel “The Humiliated and Insulted” (1861) were published. In 1862, F. M. Dostoevsky travels abroad for the first time. In 2.5 months, he visited more than 20 cities in Western Europe (Berlin, Dresden, Wiesbaden, Cologne, Paris, London, Florence, Turin, Geneva, Vienna and others). The writer believes that the historical path that Europe took after the French Revolution of 1789 would have been disastrous 1 Belov S.V. Fedor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky. M., 1999. p. 95. 9
for Russia, as well as the introduction of new bourgeois relations. Russia's special, original path to " earthly paradise" - this is the socio-political program of F. M. Dostoevsky in the early 1860s. In 1864, “Notes from the Underground” was written, an important work for understanding the changed worldview of the writer. In 1865, while abroad in the resort of Wiesbaden to improve his health, he begins work on the novel “Crime and Punishment” (1866), which reflected the entire complex path of his inner quest. In 1867, F. M. Dostoevsky married Anna Grigorievna Snitkina, his stenographer, who became a close and devoted friend for him, and they live together. in Germany, Switzerland, Italy (1867 - 1871). During these years, the writer worked on the novels "The Idiot" (1868) and "Demons" (1870 - 1871), which he finished in Russia. In May 1872, the Dostoevskys left for the summer. Petersburg to Staraya Rusa, where they subsequently bought a modest dacha and lived here with their two children even in winter. In Staraya Rusa, almost the entire novels “The Teenager” (1874 – 1875) and “The Brothers Karamazov” (1878 – 1879) were written. executive editor of the magazine "Citizen", on the pages of which the "Diary of a Writer" begins to be published. At the end of May 1880, F. M. Dostoevsky goes to Moscow for the opening of the monument to A. Pushkin (June 6, on the birthday of the great poet), where all of Moscow gathered. There were 10 here
Turgenev, Maikov, Grigorovich and other Russian writers. Speech by F.M. Dostoevsky was called by I. Aksakov “a brilliant, historical event.” Unfortunately, the writer’s health soon deteriorated; on January 28 (February 9, 2010), 1881, F. M. Dostoevsky died in St. Petersburg. Contemporaries of F. M. Dostoevsky left many memories about his character, habits, appearance from his youth to the last years of his life, and from many recollections one can see that the first impression when meeting F. M. Dostoevsky was sometimes almost disappointing: his appearance was discreet, not aristocratic, there was something painful in her face - this feature is noted by almost all memoirists. However, they all note that the first impression of the writer immediately dissipated upon closer acquaintance with him both in his early years and in adulthood. Sometimes in the memoirs of the same people we meet “different” Dostoevsky. V.V. Timofeeva (O. Pochinkovskaya 1) describes her first impression of meeting F.M. Dostoevsky: “His hand was cold, dry and seemingly lifeless. And everything about him that day seemed lifeless to me: sluggish, as if through the force of movement, a soundless voice, dull eyes fixed on me 1 Varvara Vasilievna Timofeeva (O. Pochinkovskaya, 1850 - 1931) - writer and translator, author of novels, stories and essays-memoirs. In the early 70s she worked as a proofreader in the Transchel printing house, where the weekly book of the book was published. Meshchersky's "Citizen", published under the editorship of Dostoevsky in 1873 and the first months of 1874. eleven
two fixed points." 1 But at another moment and at another time, she describes it as follows: “As if illuminated by an imperious thought, animatedly pale and very young, with a soulful gaze of deep darkened eyes, with an expressively closed outline of thin lips - it breathed with the triumph of its mental strength, a proud consciousness of his power... It was neither a good nor an evil face. It somehow at the same time attracted and repelled, intimidated and captivated... And I unconsciously, without looking away, looked at this face, as if a “living picture” with mysterious content suddenly opened in front of me, when you greedily rush to catch its meaning, knowing that one more moment, and all this rare beauty will disappear like a flash of lightning. I have never seen such a face from Dostoevsky again. But in those moments his face told me more about him than all his articles and novels. It was the face of a great man, a historical face." 2. We see the writer as touchy, suspicious, often unrestrained, unable to control his feelings. Sometimes he left the impression of being unkind to people 1 V. V. Timofeeva (O. Pochinkovskaya). Year of work with famous writer. (Dedicated to the memory of Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky). http://chulan.narod.ru/hudlit/dost/timofeeva.htm 2 Ibid., http://chulan.narod.ru/hudlit/dost/timofeeva.htm 12
person. Even in a circle of people close to him, he often appeared dissatisfied, bowing dryly, “as if they were people unpleasant to him.” But memoirists also write about another Dostoevsky. As his relative Ivanova says, among young people F. M. Dostoevsky felt alive, cheerful, set the tone in the games and entertainment of the youth, participated in their revels, and composed humorous poems. Dostoevsky took part in an amateur production of The Inspector General and played the role of postmaster Shpekin. He turned out to be a comedian, "and a subtle comedian, who knew how to evoke a purely Gogol's laughter"How many times, responding to requests from students, did Dostoevsky speak at literary evenings. He could give his last money to a random person, did not know how to refuse when they asked him, and at the same time complained that he was being robbed and was treated poorly. Credibility Dostoevsky combined with painful suspiciousness, unsociability and isolation with a disposition towards people, simplicity and cordiality with cold distrust. All these are not just contradictions of the writer’s personality, manifestations of the complexity and variability of his nature. These are contradictions of character, which was distorted by society, contradictions of his ideology. and creativity. “Dostoevsky as an artist-psychologist was a rare, exceptional phenomenon. He was characterized by an amazing sensitivity to 13.
the most intimate and hidden movements of the soul, the ability to penetrate into the most remote corners of consciousness and feelings, to observe and analyze the subtlest fluctuations of the psyche, the emergence of almost elusive ideas and their development, the collision of various aspirations in the depths of the spiritual world. These properties made an all the more powerful impression because they appeared in combination with another trait - with the talent of bold thought, the desire for generalization, for one’s own, clearly expressed concept. Dostoevsky's novels were called ideological novels. The writer was not afraid of the invasion of philosophy, journalism, he was not afraid of disputes, the clash of different points of view. His works are imbued with the spirit ideological quest. Analysis of mental movements is inseparable from synthesis, generalizations, defense moral ideas, dear to the writer." 1 Thus, having examined the biography of F. M. Dostoevsky and the memories of his contemporaries about him, we came to the following conclusions: 1) F. M. Dostoevsky lived a life full of moral and psychological difficulties, creative ups and downs, suffered many personal and family tragedies. 2) According to the memoirs of his contemporaries, F. M. Dostoevsky gave the impression of a shy person, especially in his youth. 1 B. Rurikov. “Dostoevsky and his contemporaries. http:// az.lib.ru/d/dostoewskij_f_m/text_0580.shtml 14
3) The features of F. M. Dostoevsky’s creativity are realism, in-depth psychologism, centralization, all attention is directed to the individual. 15
Chapter 3. Spiritual quests of F. M. Dostoevsky before and during the writing of the novel “The Brothers Karamazov. The writer’s attitude towards faith and God, his religious views. Many researchers of the work of F. M. Dostoevsky of this period note that the time preceding and coinciding with the moment of writing the novel “The Brothers Karamazov” represents the result of the writer’s intense thoughts about God. After hard labor, F. M. Dostoevsky in a letter to N. Fonvizina writes the following: “I will tell you about myself that I am a child of the century, a child of disbelief and doubt to this day and even (I know this) to the grave. What terrible torment this thirst to believe has cost me and is now costing me, which is the stronger in my soul, the more contrary arguments I have. And yet, God sometimes sends me moments in which I am completely calm; in these moments I love and find that I am loved by others, and in such moments I formed within myself a symbol of faith in which everything is clear and sacred to me. This symbol is very simple, here it is: to believe that there is nothing more beautiful, deeper, more sympathetic, more intelligent, more courageous and more perfect than Christ, and not only is there not, but with jealous love I tell myself that it cannot be. Moreover, if someone proved to me that Christ is outside the truth, and it really were that the truth is outside Christ, then I would rather remain with Christ than with the truth.” 1 . 1 RVB: F.M. Dostoevsky. Collected works in 15 volumes. N. D. Fonvizina. End of January - 20th of February 1854. Omsk, http://www.rvb.ru/dostoevski/01text/vol15/01text/383.htm 16
From F. M. Dostoevsky’s letter we see how great his “thirst” for faith is and how painful his religious doubts are, among which Christ acts as salvation. Christ for F. M. Dostoevsky is the embodiment of morality, goodness and beauty, as well as the highest truth. But F. M. Dostoevsky comes to this conviction only after hard labor, and this path is painful and long. In 1846, the writer was influenced by the socialist ideas of V. G. Belinsky and, as some researchers note, during this period he approached the ideas of atheism. But even at this time he is concerned with the question of how to reconcile the existence of God and world evil. F. M. Dostoevsky does not accept “victims of living conditions and history” and demands an account of all those accidentally lost in the course of historical progress. But from whom should we demand an account? In traditional religious perception, the judge is God, which means the solution is rebellion against God and Divine Revelation. The writer faces the problem of independently creating new religious and ethical values. So F. M. Dostoevsky begins the painful path of spiritual knowledge, the decisive point of which is hard labor, where, as many researchers rightly note, the “degeneration of the writer’s beliefs” occurs. It was in conditions of hard labor that F. M. Dostoevsky turned to the Bible. This was a book given to him by the wives of the Decembrists in Tobolsk on the way to the prison and became the only one allowed for him to read. 17
“Fyodor Mikhailovich,” writes his wife, “did not part with this holy book during all four years of his stay in hard labor. Subsequently, she always lay in plain sight, in his desk, and he often, having conceived or doubted something, opened the Gospel at random and read what was on the first page...” 1. Reading the Bible, F. M. Dostoevsky comes to the conviction that it is possible to discover the meaning of life only by taking life itself as a basis, by loving “ living life» – God – before logic and yourself. The Creator Himself is Love, and Love and Good cannot but be free, which means they cannot make a person unfree. Man, according to F. M. Dostoevsky, is equally capable of both Good and the birth of Evil in self-will. Self-will, as the writer believes, turns personal freedom into an end in itself and from absolute Freedom creates despotism, which tries to provide happiness to a person by force, which leads to the denial of God, the world, and, consequently, man. F. M. Dostoevsky sees Scripture not so much as a sermon or morality, but rather as a guarantee of new life. The dignity of a person, his right to well-being and respect are not based on the fact that he is intelligent, kind or possesses " beautiful soul”, but on the significance of every person. In "A Writer's Diary" last years life F. M. Dostoevsky wrote: “Without 1 A. G. Dostoevskaya. Memories. Part eleven. Death. Funeral., http://www.azlib.ru/d/dostoewskij_f_m/text_0610.shtml 18
no higher idea can exist, neither man nor nation. And there is only one highest idea on earth, and that is the idea of the immortality of the human soul, for all other “higher” ideas of life by which a person can live flow only from it alone.” 1 . By “higher idea” the writer understands God’s word as set out in the Bible. Deep faith in God, according to F. M. Dostoevsky, provides solid support in all the vicissitudes of fate. It is thanks to faith that peace arises in a person’s soul for the fate of the world and his own personal life. Whoever denies the existence of God introduces an irreparable loss into his worldview. God in the Christian canon is an absolute and comprehensive value, and by denying God, absolute values are also denied: beauty, goodness, moral behavior. The proclamation of Christ as the highest truth, goodness and beauty, the appeal to the Holy Scriptures as the “book of humanity” - these ideas were embodied by F. M. Dostoevsky in his last novel “The Brothers Karamazov”. Turning to the style of the novel “The Brothers Karamazov” and the type of depiction of reality, many researchers note its closeness to the Bible. V. Rozanov, in his article dedicated to F. M. Dostoevsky, wrote: “Among the chaos of chaotic scenes, amusingly absurd conversations (perhaps deliberately piled up by the author) - wonderful dialogues 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Writer's Diary. 1876, December. Chapter One III. Unsubstantiated allegations., http://az.lib.ru/d/dostoewskij_f_m/text_0480.shtml 19
and monologues containing the highest contemplation of the destinies of man on earth: here there is delirium, and murmur, and high tenderness of his suffering soul. Everything in general forms a picture that is both amazingly true to reality and removed from it into some kind of endless abstraction, where the features of high art are mixed with the features of morality, politics, philosophy, and finally religion, everywhere with a thirst, rather a need not so much to convey as create or at least alter. It’s amazing: in an era that is completely non-religious, in an era that is essentially decomposing, chaotically mixing, a number of works are created that, as a whole, form something reminiscent of a religious epic, but with all the features of blasphemy and chaos of their time.” Vyach. Ivanov in his work “Dostoevsky and the Tragedy Novel” writes that “In modern history, tragedy is almost torn away from its religious foundations, and therefore falls.” 1 . F. M. Dostoevsky, according to the author, although he did not write a tragedy, but only a “tragedy novel,” revived the mythological and religious feeling that was originally inherent in tragedy as a genre. Modern researchers of the work of F. M. Dostoevsky, following Vyach. Ivanov and V. Rozanov develop their ideas related to the style of author's novels. So G. Pomerantz in his work “Openness to the Abyss. Meetings with Dostoevsky he wrote: “However, 1 Vyach. Ivanov. Dostoevsky and the tragedy novel. II. The principle of worldview, p. 427., http://www.rvb.ru/ivanov/vol4/01text/02papers/4_172.htm 20
If we strictly pose the question of which root of European culture Dostoevsky is closer to, the biblical or the Hellenic, then, of course, to the biblical.” 1 . In fact, the story told in the Bible is the story of the meeting of God and man; it is this meeting that is discussed in F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “The Brothers Karamazov”. The Bible played a huge role in the creation of the novel “The Brothers Karamazov”, influencing not only the characters and plot of the novel, but also harmoniously intertwining itself with the system of relationships between the characters, which can be projected onto world-famous biblical types, onto the speech organization and symbolism of the work. Based on the above, we can draw the following conclusions: 1. The time of writing the novel “The Brothers Karamazov” was preceded by a long and painful period spiritual formation writer. 2. As a result of the search, the “highest idea” for F. M. Dostoevsky becomes God’s word as set out in the Bible. 3. The Bible, according to F. M. Dostoevsky, is a conversation between a person and God - an absolute value, the denial of which leads to the denial of beauty, goodness, and morality. Only in absolute Love for Christ and God can a person achieve harmony with the world and himself. 1 G. Pomerantz, Openness to the Abyss. Meetings with Dostoevsky., M., Soviet writer, 1990, p. 167. 21
Chapter 4. The novel “The Brothers Karamazov”. History of creation. The top philosophical creativity F. M. Dostoevsky published the novel “The Brothers Karamazov” (1879 - 1880) - his last and largest work, which included philosophical poem(a legend, as V.V. Rozanov called it) about the Grand Inquisitor. The concept of the novel “The Brothers Karamazov” by F. M. Dostoevsky consists of two romantic cycles conceived by the writer, “Atheism” and “The Life of a Great Sinner,” which he turned to the experience of the Bible, a book that represents the basis of the Christian worldview. The novel was conceived as a social and philosophical epic about the present, past and future of Russia, depicted through the prism of “the history of one family” and the fate of several of its representatives. F. M. Dostoevsky worked on his last novel for three years. The final stage of work - artistic embodiment - lasted for three years. But spiritually he worked on it all his life. At the beginning of 1878, F. M. Dostoevsky compiled a detailed outline of the novel. On May 16, the writer’s little son Alyosha died, whose death had a hard impact on him. In June, F. M. Dostoevsky visits Optina Pustyn together with Vladimir Solovyov, so the first 22
books were written under the direct impression of the monastic life the writer saw. At the end of October, the first two books of the novel were rewritten by Anna Grigorievna Dostoevskaya and presented to the publisher of the Russian Messenger. The publication of the novel began with the first issue of the Russian Messenger in 1879, and ended in the eleventh issue of the same magazine in 1880. All these years were years of intense labor, which even F. M. Dostoevsky, who worked so hard and passionately, called convict labor. The last novel According to the author’s plan, F. M. Dostoevsky’s “The Brothers Karamazov” was supposed to consist of two parts. The writer managed to complete work only on the first part, which outlined only the background of the main characters. But what was written is a completely independent work. The novel "The Brothers Karamazov" was the result creative development writer, a unique synthesis of his general philosophical, ethical, social ideas. 23
Chapter 5. Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov Fyodor Pavlovich 24
Each character in F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “The Brothers Karamazov” is inexhaustible material for studying the depths of human psychology, and the head of the Karamazov family, Fyodor Pavlovich, is not only a riotous voluptuary, an extravagant and depraved person, but also a cunning man who managed to save a lot for himself state. “...he was a strange type, which is quite often encountered, namely, the type of person who is not only trashy and depraved, but at the same time stupid - but one of those stupid people who know how to manage their property affairs very well, and it seems that these are the only ones. Fyodor Pavlovich, for example, started out with almost nothing, he was the smallest landowner, he ran to dine at other people’s tables, strived to become a hanger-on, and yet at the time of his death he had up to a hundred thousand rubles in pure money. And at the same time, all his life he continued to be one of the most stupid madcaps throughout our district. I’ll repeat again: this is not stupidity; Most of these madmen are quite smart and cunning - namely, stupidity, and also some kind of special, national one.” 1 His “stupidity” is “national”, but he learned how to handle things and be a shameless money-grubber from the Jews. He is a landowner, but the smallest one, did not live on his estate and in his youth behaved like a hanger-on, and then went into business, first of all 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Book one. The story of one family. http://www.modernlib.ru/books/dostoevskiy_fedor_mihaylovich/bratya_karamazovi/read/ 25
usury, opened taverns, i.e., chose the dirtiest option of “bourgeoisification.” But his fundamental trait is depravity and voluptuousness, which dominate his attitude towards Grushenka, which leads to a love rivalry with his son Dmitry. Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov - the father of Dmitry, Alexei and Ivan Karamazov, as well as Pavel Smerdyakov, his illegitimate son - is a man who is completely absorbed in his desires and passions, greedy for any pleasures and entertainment. Turning to the name of the main character, it can be noted that it is derived from the Latin “Theodore”, which means “God’s gift”. And this is where the author’s position is manifested, because, according to F. M. Dostoevsky, every person is God’s gift, but this is what a person himself can do with himself and what he can turn God’s gift into without faith, without Christ in the soul. It is obvious that in the novel F. M. Dostoevsky, in the person of Fyodor Pavlovich, creates precisely a kind of anti-image of the name, since it is quite difficult to call it “God’s gift”. The hero’s appearance is completely devoid of attractiveness, there is not even a feeling of a pleasant-looking person, and his behavior is defiant: he is overly emotional, often starts shouting, but this is more “playing for the audience” than character traits. The first half of the novel is built on Fyodor Pavlovich’s relationship with his children, and here we immediately notice how different his sons have grown up. F. M. Dostoevsky 26
directly tells us that the hero did little to raise them, and even now, recognizing them as his children, he cares little about their future fate. Fyodor Pavlovich's attitude to life is manifested in his words and actions. So, in a conversation with his youngest son Alyosha, he says: “... I need every penny, and the longer I live, the more necessary it will be... Now I’m still a man, fifty-five in total, but I want another twenty years on the line of a man If I'm going to be wealthy, then when I get old, I'll become a lousy person, they won't come to me in good faith then, well, that's when I'll need the money. So now I’m saving up more and more for myself, sir...” 1. We see that Fyodor Pavlovich openly recognizes fornication and debauchery, “filth” as the essence of his life, and his stinginess and greed for money, old man’s frugality as the only way and means to get to this essence. F. Kafka writes about Fyodor Pavlovich in his diaries that “... the father of the Karamazov brothers is by no means a fool - he is very smart, almost equal in intelligence to Ivan, but an evil person, and, in any case, he is smarter, for example, than his not exposed by the narrator's cousin or nephew, the landowner who considers himself so much superior to him." 2. 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part two. Book Four Tears. II. At my father's. http://www.modernlib.ru/books/dostoevskiy_fedor_mihaylovich/bratya_karamazovi/read / 2 Franz Kafka. Diaries. 1914, December 20 http://www.vehi.net/kafka/dnevnik.html 27
This is confirmed precisely by the fact that, despite his frivolity, Fyodor Pavlovich is still with the estate and with money. F. M. Dostoevsky himself speaks of Fyodor Pavlovich as “an old buffoon”, “a strange fellow”, “a stupid madman”, “a cunning and stubborn buffoon”, “an evil buffoon” (as he is often called), “a mean comedian”, “ ran around like a jester around other people’s tables.” He loves to “introduce himself”, “to make others look like jesters” and appears at a “family fight” for “some kind of buffoonery and acting scene”, and says about himself: “You see a jester before you, a jester indeed!”, “... I am a native jester, from birth, just like a holy fool,” “... a jester and I introduce myself as a jester.” The appearance of Fyodor Pavlovich is the appearance of a holy fool, but the essence of a clown is a bastard. Foolishness in the original sense is holiness through shame, while behind the external ugliness there is a Bright Face, but Fyodor Pavlovich does not have this light. Ivan, reciting the poem “The Grand Inquisitor,” speaks of a category of sinners who “... plunge into this lake so that they can no longer swim out, then “God already forgets them” ...” 1. In the same way, Fyodor Pavlovich plunges into sins, like into this lake from which he cannot swim. Violation of sacred human, moral and spiritual norms is 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Book five. Pro and contra. V. Grand Inquisitor. http:// ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.37/index.html 28
the cause of Karamazov's death. According to Ivan, Fyodor Pavlovich embodies the denial of everything that Ivan considers (or would like to consider) sacred, therefore both he and his brothers indirectly administer final and ancient Justice, being bearers of pre-Christian biblical truth, which Fyodor himself speaks of Pavlovich: “It is measured with the same measure, it will be measured with the same measure, or whatever it is... In a word, it will be measured.” 1 . True, the hero himself does not apply these words to himself. One of the chapters of the second book is called “The Old Jester.” Here we get to know Fyodor Pavlovich directly for the first time and can personally form our own idea of the hero. Fyodor Pavlovich explains his behavior to Elder Zosima this way: “Do you think that I always lie like that and play buffoons? Know that I did this all the time on purpose to test you...” 2. This “on purpose to test you” manifests itself in Fyodor Pavlovich constantly. He also “deliberately” pisses off Miusov, as if for some time becoming his “double” and pretending that it was because of him that he lost his faith, while exposing him, revealing the true character of the hero. The buffoonery of Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov is essentially a characteristic feature of the Russian 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Book five. Pro and contra. V. Grand Inquisitor. http:// ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.37/index.html 2 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Book two. Inappropriate meeting. II Old Jester. http://www.loveread.ec/contents.php?id=1728 29
Russian people - distrust of unfounded statements. However, this only results in him teasing the monks and ranting about faith: “he tells offensive... jokes, deliberately reinterprets the concept of Christian love; at some point, playing along with the “sacred elder”, Father Zosima, he pretends that he is “playing the jester” only out of “suspiciousness”, and then, continuing to grimace, he reproaches the monks for trying to “buy God with minnows” 1 . “In his seemingly stupid and buffoonish speech addressed to the elder in this episode, numerous quotes that seem to come to his mind completely arbitrarily actually develop the hero’s subconscious thoughts. Fyodor Pavlovich’s gospel quotes express, on a deeper level than the buffoonish chatter that serves as his shield, the secret doubts and fears of a man so frightened by the degradation of his life that he is afraid to be alone even at night.” 2. It should be noted. That Fyodor Pavlovich’s speech is replete with gospel quotations, but God’s word in his mouth is vulgarized, takes on a different, base meaning, thereby emphasizing the baseness of the hero himself. So Karamazov quotes the Gospel of Luke: “...blessed is the womb that bore You, and the breasts that nourished You!” 3. In Scripture these words are 1 E. M. Meletinsky. Notes on the work of Dostoevsky. M., RSUH 2001 – p. 158. 2 Simonetta Salverstoi. Biblical and patristic sources of Dostoevsky's novels. Academic project, St. Petersburg, 2001 – p. 124. 3 Gospel of Luke, chapter 11, 27., http://apologetica.ru/biblie/luk11.html 30
addressed to Christ, who is glorified by one of the women, and Fyodor Pavlovich addresses them to Elder Zosima. This creates a symbolic parallel between Christ and Zosima, which, according to F. M. Dostoevsky, is unacceptable. Another time, when talking about Grushenka, he says that “...she “loved much,” and Christ forgave her who loved much...” 1, referring to the Gospel of Luke. Here are just the words in the Gospel: “... her many sins are forgiven because she loved much, but those who are forgiven little love little.” 2 refer to a sinner who loved Christ and came to him, but Fyodor Pavlovich, referring them to Grushenka, puts a completely different meaning into them, vulgarizing him. In general, conversations about faith occupy Karamazov most of all. So during lunch, he happily enters into an argument with Smerdyakov, taking Grigory’s side: “Don’t cry, Grigory, we’ll smash him into smoke and dust in a minute. Tell me this, donkey: you may be right before your tormentors, but you yourself still renounced your faith and you yourself say that at that very hour you were cursed with anathema, and if you are anathema, then you for this anathema 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Book two. Inappropriate meeting. VI. Why does such a person live? http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.12/index.html 2 Gospel of Luke. Chapter 7. 47. http://apologetica.ru/biblie/luk7.html 31
You won't get a pat on the head in hell. What do you think about this, my beautiful Jesuit?” 1 . We see how he squeals “in the apotheosis of delight”, listening to Smerdyakov’s position, and all his arguments are perceived by us not as a desire to convince his opponent, but as a kind of question to which the hero wants to hear the answer. He speaks with delight about Smerdyakov’s faith: “Alyoshka, isn’t it true? Isn’t that what the Russian faith is like?” 2. It seems that the hero deliberately does not express his point of view. Confronting faith and unbelief, he seems to try on these two positions. We see that the hero is scared without faith in God, but he is not able to fully believe, and he is afraid. Living according to God's canons is not for him, he has fallen too low, there are too many temptations, he is too sinful, but even without faith it is difficult for him. That is why he pits the sincere believer Alexei against the unbelieving Ivan, asking them: “But still say: is there a God or not? Only seriously! Now I seriously need to... Hm. It is more likely that Ivan is right. Lord, just think about how much faith a person gave, how much strength he gave for this dream, and this is so many thousands of years! Who is it that laughs at a person like that? Ivan? For the last time and decisively: is there a God or not? This is my last time!” 3. 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Book three. Voluptuaries. VII. Controversy. http://www.loveread.ec/contents.php?id=1728 2 Ibid., http:// www.loveread.ec/read_book.php?id=1728&p=40 3 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Book three. Voluptuaries. VIII For some cognac. http://www.loveread.ec/read_book.php?id=1728&p=40#glIII_8 32
Fyodor Pavlovich accepts Ivan’s position because he himself does not believe in God, but at the same time he sincerely wants to be convinced of his unbelief, which is why he asks several times about the same thing, which is why he becomes gloomy and gloomy after a conversation with Smerdyakov. Without any theory, Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov also refuses “paradise”: “... I want to live in my filth to the end, if only you knew this. It’s sweeter in filth: everyone scolds it, but everyone lives in it, only all in secret , and I openly... But I don’t want to go to your heaven, Alexey Fedorovich, if only you knew that, yes decent person It’s indecent even to go to your paradise, even if he is there...” 1 - he says to Alyosha. Fyodor Pavlovich's godlessness gives rise to his ugliness and depravity. And yet Alyosha is closer to his father, it is he who is Fyodor Pavlovich’s beloved son, and not Ivan, with whom the hero seems to agree: “Alyosha, dear, my only son, I’m afraid of Ivan; I'm more afraid of Ivan than he is. I’m the only one who’s not afraid of you...” 2. It is Fyodor Pavlovich’s love for his son Alexei that makes the hero even more paradoxical. He is an atheist, a sensualist, a madman and a libertine, sincere in his love. Although this love is selfish. Fyodor Pavlovich does not notice how he hurts Alyosha in 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part two. Book four. Tears. II. At my father's. http://www.loveread.ec/read_book.php?id=1728&p=52 2 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Book three. Voluptuaries. IX. Voluptuaries. http:// www.loveread.ec/read_book.php?id=1728&p=42 33
in Zosima’s cell, his son is ashamed and does not immediately understand that he has unpleasant memories of his mother. Fyodor Pavlovich's love for Alyosha can be called love for sincerity, for simplicity, for purity. Alyosha, unlike Dmitry, does not pretend to anything, is not competition, and, unlike Ivan, is understandable, so there is no reason to be afraid of him. This is precisely what is dear to Fyodor Pavlovich. Thus, we see what is really happening in the hero’s soul eternal struggle between God and the devil, although he himself does not want to believe in either one or the other until he is convinced of their existence, he is frightened by the thought of paying for his sins. Of course, Fyodor Pavlovich is that fallen soul whom I would like to save, even though he is a buffoon, a stubborn man, and a libertine. “Fyodor Karamazov is a landowner, albeit a declassed one, who has gone through the stage of a hanger-on, prone to evil buffoonery and dirty business. Faith in God and connection with the Russian God-bearing people are the condition and source of salvation for the fallen, no matter how mired in sin.” 1 . In connection with the image of Fyodor Pavlovich, the color symbolism of the novel is also indicative. So when describing the image of Karamazov (“Fyodor Pavlovich had on his head the same red bandage that Alyosha saw on him.” 2), his room (“It was a small room, the whole 1 E. M. Meletinsky. Notes on the work of Dostoevsky. M., Russian State University for Humanities, 2001. 2. F. M. The Karamazov Brothers. Book IV. 115 34
divided across by red screens..." 1) most often there are dark and red tones, which in F. M. Dostoevsky's novel is associated with hell, and due to which the situation is escalated before the murder. G. Pomerantz notes that in F. M. Dostoevsky “... the approach to hell is marked by cramped space and darkness, the approach to heaven is marked by space and light.” 2. In connection with the above, we can also mention the chapter in which the murdered man is described: “A light robe and White shirt their chests were covered in blood. The candle on the table brightly illuminated the blood and the motionless dead face of Fyodor Pavlovich.” 3, where the color is red and the candle, brightly illuminating the blood, is like tongues of flame from hell itself. The image of Alyosha’s mother is constructed in a completely different way, which he remembers in the illumination of the “slanting rays of the setting sun” “... (the slanting rays are what he remembers most), in the room in the corner there is an image, in front of it there is a lit lamp, and in front of the image she is sobbing on her knees as if in hysterics, with squeals and cries, her mother, who grabbed him in both hands, hugged him tightly to the point of pain and prayed for him to the Mother of God, stretching him out of her arms 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Book eight. Mitya. IV. In the dark. http://www.loveread.ec/read_book.php?id=1728&p=115 2 G. Pomerantz. Openness to the abyss. Meetings with Dostoevsky. M., Soviet writer, 1990, p. 361. 3 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Book nine. Preliminary investigation. II. Anxiety. http://www.loveread.ec/read_book.php?id=1728&p=135 35
with both hands to the image, as if under the cover of the Mother of God..." 1. We see how the image of the holy fool praying for her son from the Mother of God in F. M. Dostoevsky becomes a symbol of motherhood, reminding us Sistine Madonna- mother with baby in her arms. Conclusions: 1) The main negative traits of Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov are voluptuousness and buffoonery, lack family values. 2) Refusing God and paradise, denying their existence, the hero comes to the destruction of the soul, which leads him to physical death, as retribution for what he has done, as the hero himself says: “It is measured with the same measure, it will be measured with the same, or how is it there." 3) Any person. According to F. M. Dostoevsky, it is God’s gift and is worthy of forgiveness if you are sincerely ready to repent and come to God. 4) When analyzing the image of Fyodor Pavlovich, we can clearly see how the “biblical” is organically included in the novel, not only in terms of creating the character and speech of the hero, but also at the level of symbolism (the name of the hero, color painting). 5) The very life of the father of the family shows that a life in which there are no moral values, respect for the individual and there is a place for unbelief leads to moral self-destruction and, as a result, to physical death. 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part one. The story of one family. IV. Third son Alyosha. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.5/index.html 36
Chapter 6. Dmitry Karamazov 37
One of the main characters of F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “The Brothers Karamazov” is Dmitry Karamazov, a man of uncontrollable passions and spontaneous impulses. Dmitry is infinitely far from any rationalism and represents an extremely spontaneous nature. The hero is “frivolous, violent, passionate, impatient.” His youth, as we know, was chaotic; he was a terrible “reveler.” Dmitry himself admits: “...I am Karamazov. Because if I’m going to fly into the abyss, I’ll do it straight, head down and heels up, and I’m even pleased that it’s in this humiliating position that I fall and consider it beauty for myself.” 1 . “I loved debauchery, I loved the shame of debauchery. I loved cruelty: am I not a bug, an evil insect? It’s said - Karamazov!” 2, “in the meantime, revelry and mayhem.” Dmitry, more than other sons, inherited voluptuousness from his father: “Let him fair man <...>but he is a voluptuous man.” For all his spiritual brokenness, sinfulness and depravity, the hero is endowed with nobility and generosity. F. M. Dostoevsky is attracted by many things in Dmitry. He sees in 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Book three. Voluptuaries. Chapter III. Confession of a warm heart. In verse. http://www.loveread.ec/read_book.php?id=1728&p=32 2 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Book three. Voluptuaries. Chapter IV. Confession of a warm heart. In jokes. http://www.loveread.ec/read_book.php?id=1728&p=32 38
It is the expression of a passionate Russian soul, ready to purify itself through suffering. “As we have seen, Dmitry is constantly aware of his “baseness” (“I am the most vile bastard of all”) and at the same time expresses a desire to correct himself, to renew himself, to suffer... Dmitry quotes Schiller’s words about the deep humiliation of a person and the need to get rid of humiliation enter into an alliance with the "earth" (soil). All time is running talking about his "thirst for resurrection and renewal." 1 . When depicting Dmitry Karamazov, F. M. Dostoevsky is obviously “biased” in the sense that, characterizing him from the words of other heroes as a man of extremes, often low, voluptuous and unbridled in anger, the author at the same time sympathizes with him and tries to justify in the eyes of readers. And although in the course of the action Dmitry Karamazov equally commits both dishonest and noble deeds, F. M. Dostoevsky “enlightens” his image, showing the hero mainly in a state of painful struggle and victory over himself. As a result, Dmitry appears in the novel as a passionate, but warm-hearted, repentant person. His saving trait should be recognized as his constant generosity. He is ready to forgive his father, who defrauded him of his inheritance and is constantly plotting against him, 1 E. M. Meletinsky. Notes on the work of Dostoevsky. M., RSUH 2001 – p. 167. 39
forgives Grushenka, who secretly ran away from him to the Pole, forgives Katya, who spoke out against him at the trial and thereby destroyed him: “I swear by God and the Last Judgment, I am not guilty of my father’s blood! Katya, I forgive you! 1 . With no less fervor, Dmitry Karamazov himself asks for forgiveness, since he, even at the moment of committing another “baseness,” is unusually acutely aware of his sinfulness. His thirst for forgiveness results in his “confession of a warm heart” to Alyosha, is reflected in the noble impulse to “step back and give way” to Grushenka’s happiness upon the return of her first fiancé, and in repentance before the judges in Mokroye. At the trial, he declares: “I accept the torment of accusation and my national shame, I want to suffer and through suffering I will be cleansed!” Unlike Ivan, he fervently believes in God, is ready to admit that he is the most guilty and to suffer for others, even instead of others. He appears in precisely the image of a repentant sinner who is so loved by God and Elder Zosima. It is Dmitry who is assigned in the novel to follow the “path of grain” to the end, thanks to which his “punishment” rises to a spiritual feat. This image of grain falling into the ground appears more than once in the novel. Quoting 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Book twelve. Judgement mistake. Chapter XIV. The men stood up for themselves. http://www.loveread.ec/read_book.php?id=1728&p=225 40
Gospel of John “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it remains alone; and if it dies, it will bear much fruit.” (Chapter XII, 24), F. M. Dostoevsky attaches special significance to these words, making them an epigraph to the entire novel. And since the novel is dedicated to the history of “one family,” then, accordingly, these words are primarily addressed to the members of this “family.” Many researchers of the work of F. M. Dostoevsky noted that the writer deliberately chooses words from the Gospel of John as an epigraph, because the context in this text is the coming of the Hellenes to Jesus, and therefore the rest of the world, all of humanity. Jesus says: “Whoever serves Me, let him follow Me; and where I am, there will my servant also be. And whoever serves Me, My Father will honor him.” 1 . And a little earlier: “...the hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified.” 2, where the hour of glory is the Kingdom of Heaven. Thus, the one who forgets about himself and follows Christ is worthy of the Kingdom of Heaven: “ Loving soul he will destroy his own; But he who hates his life in this world will keep it to eternal life.” 3. 1 Gospel of John. Chapter 12, 26. http://biblia.org.ua/bibliya/in.html#ch12 2 Gospel of John. Chapter 12, 23. http://biblia.org.ua/bibliya/in.html#ch12 3 Gospel of John. Chapter 12, 25. http://biblia.org.ua/bibliya/in.html#ch12 41
Another time, Zosima pronounces these same words about grain in a conversation with Alyosha, and here they are directly connected with Dmitry: “I sent you to him, Alexey, because I thought that your brotherly face would help him. But everything is from the Lord and all our destinies. “Unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it remains alone; and if it dies, it will bear much fruit.” Remember this." 1 . Thus, the idea of sacrifice, expressed figuratively in the Gospel, states the following: in order to preserve one’s soul for “eternal life,” one must not only neglect the personal, overcome selfishness, but also, sacrificing oneself, suffer, one must joyfully accept the guilt of everyone upon oneself, be able to sacrifice oneself for the benefit of everyone. Dmitry Karamazov comes to such sacrifice, which constitutes a symbol of faith, the moral credo of F. M. Dostoevsky. The “strange” dream about the “child” ends the most stormy day and the most stormy night in the life of Dmitry Karamazov, when he successively experiences complete despair, the depth of hatred and anger (in his father’s garden), then - with the news of Grushenka’s flight to her former fiancé - self-denial up to the intention of committing suicide, then - upon her return - the joy of renewal and love, but then the height of shame and humiliation during arrest and first interrogation, and, finally, the slow realization of the hopelessness of one’s situation given the gravity of existing 1 F. M. Dostoevsky . Brothers Karamazov. Book six. Russian monk. I. Elder Zosima and his guests. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.40/index.html 42
evidence against him. As a result, all these experiences and shocks are embodied in a dream. In the center of the dream is the image of a crying child and a feeling of immense pity for him. And it is at this moment that the whole essence of Mitya Karamazov is revealed: he is filled with the desire to do something so that “the child does not cry anymore,” “... so that no one has tears at all from this moment. And to do this now, without delay and in spite of everything, with all the unrestraint of Karamazov...” 1. The heroes of F. M. Dostoevsky are especially close and understandable to those whose soul does not know peace, who is in a state of constant doubt and search for truth. Such is Dmitry Karamazov; it is not for nothing that he is the bearer of the book’s most intimate secret. It is Dmitry who says the famous phrase, which can serve as the key to the novel and to the entire work of F. M. Dostoevsky as a whole: “Here the devil is fighting with God, and the battlefield is the hearts of people.” 2. Dmitry - a “morally broad nature” - also represents a “battlefield” of the divine and the devil. Tracing the development of this conflict higher powers in the soul of Mitya Karamazov, we cannot help but notice that in his own judgments at the trial, in 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part three. Book nine. Preliminary investigation. VIII. Testimony of witnesses. Child. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.62/index.htmlF. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Book three. 2 Voluptuaries. Chapter III. Confession of a warm heart. In verse. http://www.loveread.ec/read_book.php?id=1728&p=32 43
In relation to him, other characters who speak “for” or “against” him necessarily include God (“refuge and salvation”) and the devil (clever and insidious, questioning the truth). “God,” as Mitya himself said later, “was watching over me then: just at that very time Grigory Vasilyevich woke up...” 1 - we read in the novel. And another time: “In my opinion, gentlemen, in my opinion, this is how it was,” he spoke quietly, “whether it was whose tears, whether my mother begged God, whether the bright spirit kissed me at that moment - I don’t know, but damn was defeated..." 2. We see that Dmitry Karamazov himself is aware of this struggle within himself. He is not irretrievably lost, like his father, since he is capable of repenting and suffering, capable of accepting the “torment of the cross.” Good and evil, moral beauty and depraved ugliness, the battle of which takes place in the hearts of people, the dramatic tension of overcoming “hell” is repeated each time in its own way, and not only in the story of Mitya, but at the same time the truth of Zosima’s words is confirmed every time: “before all people for all and for everything, for all the sins of man, the world and 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part three. Book eight. Mitya. IV. In the dark. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.50/index.html 2 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part three. Book nine. Preliminary investigation. V. Third ordeal. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.59/index.html 44
individual, then only the goal of our unity will be achieved. For know, dear ones, that each one of us is undoubtedly guilty for everyone and for everything on earth, not only for the common world guilt, but individually each for all people and for every person on this earth. This consciousness is the crown of the monastic path, and of every person on earth. For monks are not other people, but only such as all people on earth should be. Only then would our heart be touched by endless, universal love that knows no saturation. Then each of you will be able to win the whole world with love and wash away the world’s sins with your tears...” 1. “Hell of spiritual torment” is different for each hero. Mitya considers his dishonor – Katerina Ivanovna’s lost money – “hell”, and therefore pins his hope for the deliverance of his soul on the return of the money he asks from his father. Conclusions: 1) Dmitry is a “sacrificial” person, consciously sacrificing himself, consciously following the path of atonement for his own sin of his brothers. 2) It is Dmitry Karamazov who manages to complete the “path of grain” and come in his spiritual quest to the Kingdom of Heaven. 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part two. Book four. Tears. I. Father Ferapont. http:// ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.26/index.html 45
3) Deep faith in God, according to Dostoevsky, provides firm support in all the vicissitudes of fate; peace arises in a person’s soul for the fate of the world and his personal life. 4) Dmitry Karamazov is proof of Dostoevsky’s religious theory, because it is he who manages to take the path of atonement. No matter what happens, the hero does not lose faith in God, which is why he manages to pass all the tests, thereby redeeming not only his own sins, but also the sins of his brothers. 46
Chapter 7. Ivan Karamazov 47
Ivan Fedorovich Karamazov is the twenty-three-year-old son of Fedor Pavlovich Karamazov. He grew up “... as some kind of gloomy and closed-off youth, far from timid, but as if from the age of ten, he understood that they were still growing up in someone else’s family and at the mercy of others, and what kind of father they had something that is embarrassing to even talk about, and so on. and so on." 1 . From an early age, Ivan showed extraordinary abilities for learning. Having graduated from the educational institution and, out of pride, not turning to his father for financial help, he achieved work in the field of literature, after graduating from university he wrote an article about the church court, which both clergy and atheists liked equally and which the most astute readers recognized as “an impudent farce and mockery.” » 2. Young Karamazov stands out in the society of the small provincial town where the action of the novel develops with his intelligence, clarity of thinking, and education. He leads an outwardly impeccable life: he owes nothing to anyone and does not need anything. 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part one. Book one. The story of one family. III. Second marriage and second children. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.4/index.html 2 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part one. Book one. The story of one family. III. Second marriage and second children. http:// ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.4/index.html 48
Alyosha confesses to Ivan in the tavern: “Brother Dmitry says about you: Ivan is a grave. I'm talking about you: Ivan is a mystery. You are still a mystery to me..." 1. Alyosha feels that his brother is doing something internal and important, striving for some goal, perhaps a very difficult one. Zosima immediately guesses the young philosopher’s secret, saying that God is torturing him.” “This idea has not yet been resolved in your heart and torments it... This is your great grief, for it urgently requires a solution... But thank the creator for giving you a higher heart capable of tormenting with such torment,” 2 Zosima addresses Ivan. Thus, Ivan is not a smug atheist, but a “higher heart,” a martyr of the idea, experiencing unbelief as a personal problem. He denies with his mind what he loves with his heart. Ivan is exhausted and overwhelmed by the problem of God and his relationship to the world. The hero’s facts and reasoning are always connected with Holy Scripture, but if you look closely at how he interprets it, defending his point of view, you can immediately see that the hero stops only at those places where the logic of God’s opponent dominates, taking them out of context, in which has a reverse side, the Divine word. 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part two. Book five. Pro and contra. III. The brothers meet. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.35/index.html 2 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part one. Book two. Inappropriate meeting. VI. Why does such a person live? http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.12/index.html 49
Ivan admits the existence of God: “I don’t accept God, understand this, I don’t accept the world he created, the world of God, and I can’t agree to accept.” 1 . He is ready to accept God, but only in order to hold him responsible for the “damned chaos” He created. He denies God out of love for humanity, acts as a lawyer for all those who suffer against the Creator, addressing Alyosha, a true believer: “Imagine that you yourself are erecting the building of human destiny with the goal of ultimately making people happy, finally giving them peace and quiet, but for this it would be necessary and inevitable to torture just one tiny creature, that same child who beat himself in the chest with his fist and founded this building on his unavenged tears. Would you agree to be an architect on these conditions, tell me and don’t lie! ..." 2. Many researchers note that of the entire Bible, F. M. Dostoevsky most loved the Book of Job, in which he sought the answer to the question about the mystery of the suffering of the innocent, about faith in God. The rebellious motives of the “Book of Job,” refracted in the novel “The Brothers Karamazov” in the chapter “Revolt,” are associated primarily with the issue of the suffering of the innocent. F. M. Dostoevsky was well aware of the point of view according to which a person is cleansed of sins through 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part two. Book five. Pro and contra, III. The brothers meet. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.35/index.html 2 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part two. Book five. Pro and contra. IV. Riot. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.36/index.html 50
suffering, which has only increased since the time of Job, but Ivan Karamazov sees only suffering without purification, and therefore cannot accept God’s peace. God is silent and does not respond to the cries of the innocent victims, in the words of Job: “In the city people groan, and the soul of those who are being killed screams, and God does not forbid it.” 1 . This remark is very similar to Ivan’s confession to Alyosha: “I accept God... I accept his wisdom... I don’t accept God,... I don’t accept the world created by him, God’s world, and I cannot agree to accept... I am convinced like a baby, that suffering will heal and smooth out, that... in the moment eternal harmony, something so precious will happen and appear that it will be enough for all hearts, to satisfy all indignations, to atone for all the atrocities of people, for all the blood they have shed... but I don’t accept it and don’t want to accept it!” 2. Ivan rejects the hero's justification for evil at the end of the Book of Job. For the hero, the main difficulty lies in the time factor: his desire for “everything” is immediately opposed to the slow flow of time in the Holy Scriptures. Ideological struggle, a clash of two positions of the rebel Ivan, who does not accept the world and its injustice, and Elder Zosima, the preacher of all-forgiving love, suffering and self-sacrifice as the only way to self-improvement, 1 Book of Job, chapter 24, 12. http://biblia.org.ua/bibliya/iov.html#ch24 2 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part two. Book five. Pro and contra. III. The brothers meet. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.35/index.html 51
reaches its climax in the chapter "The Grand Inquisitor". The action of the poem takes place in Spain in the 15th century. The Savior comes to earth again during the period of the rampant Inquisition, and people recognize him. The Grand Inquisitor, “...an almost ninety-year-old old man, tall and straight, with a withered face, with sunken eyes, but from which the shine still glows like a fiery spark...” 1, orders Jesus to be put in prison, and at night he comes to his captive and begins talk to him. The old man’s speech is directed against the teachings of the God-man, and Christ responds to this speech only with a kiss. According to the inquisitor, the great power that allows one to rule over all of humanity is contained in the formula “miracle, mystery and authority,” but remembering how Jesus appears, we see that these three conditions are met. “He appeared quietly, unnoticed, and now everyone - this is strange - recognizes him. This could be one of the best places poem, that is, why exactly they recognize him.” 2 - what else is presented to us here if not a mystery? “The people cry and kiss the ground on which he walks. Children throw flowers in front of him, sing and cry out to him: “Hosanna!” 3, - this is how the authority of 1 F. M. Dostoevsky is presented. Brothers Karamazov. Part two. Book five. Pro and contra. V. Grand Inquisitor. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.37/index.html 2 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part two. Book five. Pro and contra. V. Grand Inquisitor. http:// ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.37/index.html 3 Ibid., http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.37/index.html 52
Christ. And finally, with one word, he resurrects the dead girl - a miracle. Miracle, mystery and authority - all this is inherent in the prisoner and is not given to the inquisitor. But not only this torments the inquisitor and makes him talk so much and passionately, but the power that Christ possesses, because he does not at all resort to the power of mystery, miracle and authority, and without this the people love him, believe him and follow him. The power of Christ is truly not based on miracle, mystery and authority, as the inquisitor thinks, but lies in His Love and Compassion. He loves everyone and everyone, he even loves the great inquisitor, knowing in advance that he will tell him: “Tomorrow I will burn you.” His love is the true Miracle, Mystery and Authority. The situation changes dramatically after the kiss of Christ. The doors of the prison dissolve, and Christ goes out into the “dark stacks of hail,” and the inquisitor remains inside the prison. The doors of the prison are open, but he does not dare to take a step, because this means following Christ, following His path. Ivan doesn’t know whether he will take this step, but Dostoevsky knows, because there is no other way out of prison. Ivan is not only the author of this poem, he is also the great inquisitor who stands in front of the open door and does not know whether to follow Christ or not. And Alyosha understands this, who, following Christ kissing the inquisitor, gets up and kisses Ivan. Alyosha bows to his “great grief” associated with doubts and the search for truth, which Zosima unraveled in him at the beginning of the novel. It is the final kiss of the Prisoner that makes 53
this poem is brilliant. It contradicts the entire worldview of Ivan the ideologist, but is immensely dear to Ivan the artist. Thus, the poem is the heart of the novel, the very battlefield where the devil fights with God. The monologue of the Grand Inquisitor is, of course, the monologue of Ivan himself, addressed to an invisible enemy. Christ never appeared to Ivan in any vision, just as, on the contrary, the devil would appear to him later. He creates a poem, composes “The Grand Inquisitor” only in order to finally see his opponent. “The Silence of Christ” in the poem is the muteness of Ivan himself, his heart and soul. But Ivan himself does not intend to admit this and he turns his spiritual weakness into a weapon, saying that silence is consent, recognition of the truth of the inquisitor’s words, their indisputability. And he tells his poem to Alyosha as a counter-argument to his brother’s exclamation that there is a Being in the world who “... can forgive everything, everyone and everything and for everything, because He Himself gave His innocent blood for everyone and for everything...” 1. The poem, prepared as evidence against Christ, becomes indisputable proof of his power, completely destroying Ivan’s theory. So, the main problem Ivana is a clash of mind and heart, with neither force inferior to the other. As a result of this struggle, contradictions are born: 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part two. Book five. Pro and contra. V. Grand Inquisitor. http:// ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.37/index.html 54
1 . There is no God and immortality, but I want to believe that they exist. 2. There is no eternal harmony, and I don’t want it (out of love for humanity), but as an ideal it is beautiful. 3. Everything is permitted, but I cannot accept the idea that the people for whom the highest harmony was built would agree to accept it “on the unjustified blood of a little tortured one,” and therefore not everything is permitted for me. 4 . “To satisfy my moral feeling” I need retribution, but I want to forgive. According to Dostoevsky, all of Fyodor Pavlovich’s children are to blame for his death, and therefore everyone is responsible for the crime. Dmitry is guilty of killing his father in his soul and mentally committing murder several times, Alexey is guilty of going to Grushenka instead of being with Dmitry and preventing the catastrophe, Ivan is guilty of killing his father in his desires and by this denies himself. Ivan is the mental leader of the murder. According to Ivan’s theory, “everything is allowed,” but, despite the theory, Ivan himself does not go to kill. The attraction to God is what stops him, the force that prevents him from falling completely. His theory was just a mask, which he did not fully believe in. And yet he blames himself for the murder of his father. “I only know one thing... It wasn’t you who killed your father... I said this word to you for the rest of my life: “Not you!” This is what Alyosha says to Ivan. But for him these words sound like “you killed too.” 55
Then, in the conversation, the image of a certain third person pops up - the devil. Some researchers associate the image of the devil with Smerdyakov, but we are closer to the opinion of those who bring him closer to Ivan’s father, Fyodor Pavlovich. “The devil is a dead father who comes to his son to amuse him. As before, Ivan hates his father, now in the shoes of a “small caliber” devil, with the only difference, however, that Fyodor Pavlovich’s life stopped and found a new place for himself in the world of ghosts of his own son.” 1 . Thus, the devil is a combination of the smallest and lowest qualities of father and son. The devil tells Ivan’s poem “Geological Revolution,” which the hero now listens to with great shame, and it is in the devil’s retelling that it is revealed to us that Ivan once thought about the possibility of harmony on earth without God. “And although Ivan has not yet completely renounced his theory, the appearance of the devil proves that it survives last days, for the devil in his own way is Ivan’s lynching.” 2. It is the devil who forces Ivan to admit the inconsistency of his theory, and, consequently, his guilt. Archpriest Vyacheslav Perevezentsev in his work “The Revolt of Ivan Karamazov” wrote: “... people don’t just forget God, it’s not so easy to forget about Him, because 1 F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “The Brothers Karamazov”. Current state of study. Russian Academy Sci. Institute of World Literature named after. A. M. Gorky. Commission for the Study of the Works of F. M. Dostoevsky. - under. Ed. T. A. Kasatkina, M., “Science”, 2007, p. 152. 2 Novel by F. M. Dostoevsky “The Brothers Karamazov”. Current state of study. The Russian Academy of Sciences. Institute of World Literature named after. A. M. Gorky. Commission for the Study of the Works of F. M. Dostoevsky. - under. Ed. T. A. Kasatkina, M., “Science”, 2007, p. 153. 56
“The soul is Christian by nature” (Tertullian). They rebel against Him, they kill Him, and, having killed Him within themselves, they long for everyone to commit murder.” 1 . The same thing happens to Ivan in the novel by F. M. Dostoevsky: having killed God in himself, he provokes Smerdyakov and blames his brother Dmitry for the murder. Conclusions: 1) Ivan’s tragedy in rebellion against Christ, arising from the clash of mind and heart, from the hero’s pride. 2) F. M. Dostoevsky directly makes it clear that denial of Christ, rebellion against him leads to the death of the soul, this is, first of all, rebellion against oneself. 3) The resurrection of man, and in in this case Ivan, is possible only through acceptance of God. 4) Once again we are convinced of Dostoevsky’s theory that happiness lies in accepting God without requiring logical conclusions, but accepting Him sincerely, without requiring evidence. 1 Novel by F. M. Dostoevsky “The Brothers Karamazov”. Current state of study. The Russian Academy of Sciences. Institute of World Literature named after. A. M. Gorky. Commission for the Study of the Works of F. M. Dostoevsky. - under. Ed. T. A. Kasatkina, M., “Science”, 2007, p. 163. 57
Chapter 8. Alyosha Karamazov 58
Alexey Karamazov is the most younger son Fyodor Pavlovich, who was twenty years old at the time the events began. Alyosha is depicted paler than others, and yet “The Brothers Karamazov” was conceived as a biography of Alyosha, and in the preface the author directly calls him the hero of the novel. “The main novel of the second is the activity of my hero already in our time,” writes F. M. Dostoevsky, “precisely in our current current moment. The first novel took place thirteen years ago, and there is almost not even a novel, but only one moment from the first youth of my hero. It is impossible for me to do without this first novel, because much in the second novel would become incomprehensible.” 1 . One gets the impression that what lies ahead is really his biography or even a “life”, but in reality Alyosha appears only as one of the characters, but an obviously positive one, uniting and reconciling everyone. He was “... a stately, red-cheeked, bright-eyed, radiant health... teenager. At that time he was even very handsome, slender, of medium-tall height, dark blond, with a regular, although somewhat elongated oval face, with brilliant dark gray wide-set eyes, very thoughtful and, apparently, very calm » 2. He studied easily, smoothly, but, without graduating from the gymnasium, suddenly, under the influence of some internal impulse, he came to his father, found his mother’s grave and soon after that decided to enter a monastery. At this time, Alyosha completely submits to the influence of Elder Zosima and is so imbued with his worldview that he considers himself to be “mentally united with him.” 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. From the author. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.1/index.html 2 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part one. Book one. The story of one family. V. Elders. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.6/index.html 59
Almost all the characters in the novel treat Alyosha with love. By his nature, from an early age he had the ability to arouse the special love of those around him. He always had a special, even, bright mood that filled his soul and did not give room to feelings of resentment, anger and irritation. This trait of his is reflected in the hero’s name, which means “protector”, “protector”, from Greek word“Alex” - “to protect”, “reflect”, “prevent”, it is not without reason that often in the novel almost everyone who knows him closely calls Alyosha “angel”, “cherub”. So Dmitry, asking Alyosha to go to Katerina Ivanovna, tells him: “I could send anyone, but I had to send an angel...”. Or another time: “I have already told the angel in heaven, but I must also tell the angel on earth. You are an angel on earth. You will listen, you will judge and you will forgive...” Ivan also calls him Cherub: “He was afraid of you, you, the dove. You are a “pure cherub”… Cherub…”. Another one arises here biblical image- the image of a dove as a harbinger of God, the Kingdom of God, the Holy Spirit. F. M. Dostoevsky sought to show in Alyosha that humane humanity, that genuine love for one’s neighbor, which the rest of the Karamazovs lack. At first glance, Alyosha is a completely positive hero; among the most important traits of his character, the most prominent are his love of humanity and “non-judgment of his neighbor.” And no matter what misdeeds his brothers and his father commit, he is always ready to forgive and understand them, and always treats them with love. But at the same time, Alyosha Karamazov is at some point able to say about himself: “... and I myself am Karamazov... Am I a monk, a monk? ... maybe I don’t believe in God...” 1 . And this paradoxical statement corresponds to the unrealized plan of F. M. Dostoevsky to turn him in the second volume of The Brothers Karamazov into a revolutionary or a criminal, who later, of course, repents. 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. From the author. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.1/index.html 60
Although Alyosha recognizes Karamazov in himself, he believes that in this sense he is on the “lowest rung” and admits to religious doubts. And yet he is a deeply religious person, without “fantasies” and “mysticism”, without psychological “morbidity”. The narrator calls Alyosha Karamazov a realist and asserts that “... in a realist, faith is not born from a miracle, but a miracle from faith. If a realist once believes, then precisely because of his realism he must certainly admit a miracle.” 1 . He did not need miracles, but only the highest justice. Alyosha loves people, and especially children, whom he tries to influence. “His character of love was always active,” he believes that “everyone should love life,” and “before logic.” He acts as a kind of reconciliator not only between his father and brothers, but also other heroes of the novel, having a good understanding of people, he “does not want to be a judge of people” and treats everyone with sympathy. Alyosha is deprived of the shortcomings of his father and brothers and combines their advantages. He is not voluptuous, like Fyodor Pavlovich and brother Dmitry, not an atheist, like his father and Ivan, not indifferent to people and not a rationalist, like Ivan, not dry, like Smerdyakov. It should be noted that throughout the entire novel “The Brothers Karamazov” Alyosha more than once has to fight the temptation of faith. Such a temptation of faith is the death of Zosima, when we see that Alyosha is disappointed and partly outraged by the rapid decay of the deceased Zosima. No less of a test for him is a conversation with Ivan, during which his brother tells Alyosha about the essence of his “rebellion against God,” trying to involve Alyosha himself in it. This is a rebellion against religion, against a world where “a child cries, where tears flow…”. Ivan considers the torture of “innocent children” the most cruel and recognizes the desirability of destroying their tormentors, persuading his brother Alyosha to do this. It comes from 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part one. Book one. The story of one family. V. Elders. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.6/index.html 61
the belief that the injustice of human suffering cannot be justified at any cost, speaks of the tears of an innocent child, which cannot be repaid by future harmony, and talks about a certain landowner who hunted an eight-year-old boy with greyhounds and, having finished, asks cruelly: “Well... what about him? Shoot?". And Alyosha, without hesitation, answers: “Shoot! - quietly... with a pale, distorted smile..., but immediately correcting himself: “I said something absurd, but...”. Even the meek and religious Alyosha, who grew up on the idea of forgiving his enemies, is not able to drown out in himself the immediate sense of justice that demands revenge on the beast landowner. Without a doubt, such a movement of Alyosha’s soul was nothing more than a game of the devil in his heart: “there is a devil in his heart...”. It is precisely because the world is unfair towards those who suffer that Ivan Karamazov denies it: “I don’t accept God, understand this, I don’t accept the world He created, the world of God, and I can’t agree to accept...” 1 . This phrase was deeply ingrained in Alyosha’s mind, which he later used as his own in a conversation with Rakitin: “I don’t rebel against my God, I just don’t accept the world,” Alyosha suddenly grinned wryly.” 2. Here Alyosha specifically quotes the words of Ivan Karamazov, as if emphasizing the similarities between himself and his brother, but fundamental difference nevertheless, there is, because he, in contrast to Ivan, is guided by love, some recklessness, spontaneity of thought and feeling. Ivan comes to this thoughtfully, with a cold heart. 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part two. Book five. Pro and contra. III. The brothers meet. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.35/index.html F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part three. Book seven. Alyosha. II. Such a moment. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.44/index.html 62
That same evening, Alyosha overcomes his “rebellion” and embraces the earth in tenderness: “something solid and unshakable, like this vault of heaven, descended in his soul... He fell to the ground as a weak youth, and stood up as a steadfast fighter for the rest of his life...” 1 . The Gospel story about the marriage in Cana of Galilee, read by Father Paisius, becomes such a “resurrection” for Alyosha. Through his drowsiness, praying at the tomb of Elder Zosima, Alyosha hears Father Paisius reading - and then the walls move apart, the coffin is no longer there. He sees the guests, the bridal chamber. Elder Zosima, “joyful and quietly laughing,” says to him, “We are having fun, drinking new wine, the wine of new, great joy... But do you see our Sun, do you see Him? Don't be afraid of Him. He is terrible in his greatness before us, terrible in his height, but his mercy is endless...” 2. Alyosha’s vision is a symbol of resurrection, the joy of the Kingdom of God. Ivan does not understand how he can forgive the mother of a tortured child. Alyosha understood: in the new world they forgive “for everyone, for everything and for everything,” he manages to survive “temptations.” Conclusions: 1) Alyosha is devoid of the shortcomings of his father and brothers and combines their advantages. 2) Alyosha, like all Karamazovs, is subject to temptations and doubts, but unconditional faith and love help him withstand all trials. 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part three. Book seven. Alyosha. IV. Cana of Galilee. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.46/index.html 2 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part three. Book seven. Alyosha. IV. Cana of Galilee. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.46/index.html 63
Chapter 9. Pavel Smerdyakov 64
Pavel Smerdyakov – illegitimate son Fyodor Pavlovich Kamarazov, not recognized by him, and Lizaveta Smerdyashchaya, practically the adopted son of Grigory’s servant. Smerdyakov's character is largely determined by his illegal origin. He himself says: “Without a father, from the Stinking One came... it was my lot from my very childhood... they poked me in Moscow.” 1 . This partly explains why he is “terribly unsociable and silent”, “arrogant”, “without any gratitude”, has “immense pride, and, moreover, insulted pride”, why he is characterized by “illogicality and disorder of other desires”. Having learned about Smerdyakov’s disgust and cleanliness, Fyodor Pavlovich sent him to Moscow to study as a cook, where “... he stayed for several years and returned with a greatly changed face. He suddenly aged somehow unusually, completely disproportionately with age, he shriveled, turned yellow, and began to look like an eunuch.” 2. At the same time, it was difficult to understand what was on his mind when he stopped and seemed to think, engaging in self-contemplation. F. M. Dostoevsky compares him with the hero of I. N. Kramskoy’s painting “The Contemplator” 3. If “...they asked him what he was standing and thinking about, he probably would not have remembered anything, but he would probably have harbored within himself the impression under which he was during his contemplation. These impressions are dear to him, and he is probably hoarding them... maybe, suddenly, having accumulated impressions for many years, he will leave everything and go to Jerusalem, to wander and escape, or maybe he will suddenly burn down his native village, or maybe something else will happen... and more together. There are quite a few people who are contemplative. 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part two. Book five. Pro and contra. II. Smerdyakov with a guitar. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.34/index.html 2 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part one. Book three. Voluptuaries. VI. Smerdyakov. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.20/index.html 3. See Appendix 1. 65
Smerdyakov was probably one of these contemplators...” 1 . Thus, F. M. Dostoevsky makes us understand that Smerdyakov contains that destructive force, that ability to reach the end in his denial, which the writer spoke about in his “Diaries”: “... to destroy oneself forever and ever for just one minute triumph with denial and pride - the Russian Mephistopheles could not have invented anything more impudent!” 2. Many researchers attribute the wanderer from Kramskoy’s painting to the schismatic sectarians, Old Believers, whose views are opposed to the official church, and after this, to Smerdyakov himself, noting F. M. Dostoevsky’s enormous interest in the religious and cultural schism in Russian society and its consequences. According to F. M. Dostoevsky, the contemplator in Kramskoy’s painting of the same name accumulates impressions that can later provoke his actions. Smerdyakov, similar to him in his self-absorption, is accumulating impressions for his further actions, which may result in something unexpected. The fact that Smerdyakov is a sectarian is evidenced by many details found in the novel. This is a direct indication of his thin voice, dislike of women, preference for fish dishes over meat, conscientious attitude to his work, apparent honesty, and efficiency. Fyodor Pavlovich calls him a “Jesuit,” which for Dostoevsky is tantamount to a sectarian. For Smerdyakov, it costs nothing to renounce both Christ and his own baptism, because he accepted another - “baptism of fire.” 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part one. Book three. Voluptuaries. VI. Smerdyakov. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.20/index.html 2 F. M. Dostoevsky, Diary of a Writer. 1873, M., Institute of Russian Civilization, 2010, p. 84. 66
Smerdyakov is deprived of Karamazov’s love of life, driven to debauchery; he is terribly disgusted and loves external cleanliness and neatness. He is a contemplator, not a doer, but just like Ivan Karamazov, only on a parodic level, he is prone to logical, rationalistic reasoning. So he casuistically talks about the innocence of his nephew, who agreed to convert to Islam, and about the impossibility of moving mountains by the power of faith. It is these arguments that bring him closer to Fyodor Pavlovich and Ivan Karamazov, betraying the hero’s lack of faith. Ivan’s theory that “everything is permitted”, which he has adopted, inspires Smerdyakov to commit parricide. Defender Mitya Fetyukovich says about Smerdyakov that “... in character... in heart... he was not such a weak person... I did not find timidity in him. There was no simplicity in him at all; on the contrary, I found a terrible mistrust hiding under naivety, and a mind capable of contemplating a lot..." 1. The defender calls Smerdyakov a creature “evil, ambitious, vengeful and sultry-envious.” A number of circumstances contributed to Smerdyakov’s commission of the crime: Ivan’s departure, Alyosha’s absence that night and Dmitry’s appearance. Hating him with the “hatred of Cain,” Smerdyakov commits a crime, knowing that the accusation will fall on Mitya, but he does not want to use the stolen money because of disappointment in the validity of Ivan’s theory of permissiveness and because of his indecision. He could have saved Mitya by leaving a confession in his suicide note, but he did not do this, because confession is the voice of conscience. It is noteworthy in this regard that the name of the hero is Pavel Fedorovich - a kind of inversion of the name of his father, Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov. F. M. Dostoevsky in a unique way creates a vicious circle from Fyodor Pavlovich to Pavel Fedorovich - illegitimate 1 F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. Part four. Book Twelve. Judgement mistake. XII. And there was no murder. http://ilibrary.ru/text/1199/p.92/index.html 67
son. Born in sin, he dies committing sin - suicide. A son who killed his father, but not mentally, as Ivan does, and not in his soul, like Dmitry, kills himself. Often researchers of the work of F. M. Dostoevsky consider Smerdyakov only as Ivan’s double, his dark side. However, it is no coincidence that Alyosha claims that his father’s killer is not Mitya or Ivan, but Smerdyakov, thereby emphasizing the difference between Ivan and Smerdyakov. Smerdyakov, who returned the stolen money to Ivan and declared to his “teacher” that he was only his, the “main murderer”, henchman who carried out the “deed” according to his word, and then committed suicide “by his own will”, like Judas, who betrayed Christ for thirty pieces of silver, and then returned them to the Jewish high priests and elders, cannot understand Ivan’s horror and torment; it seems to him that he is pretending, “playing a comedy.” And it is not for nothing that in Ivan’s sick imagination it is Smerdyakov who merges with the image of the devil and replaces it. He, like Raskolnikov from Crime and Punishment, only needed to make sure that he could “transgress.” The theme raised by F. M. Dostoevsky in the novel Crime and Punishment finds its development here, in The Brothers Karamazov, but here it is resolved on a different, more evangelical level than in Crime and Punishment. The brothers, each in their own way, experience the same tragedy, they have a common guilt and a common redemption. Not only Ivan with his idea of “everything is allowed,” not only Dmitry in his uncontrollable passions, but also the “quiet boy” Alyosha are responsible for the murder of his father. All of them consciously or semi-consciously wished for his death, and their desire pushed Smerdyakov to commit a crime: he was their obedient instrument. Ivan's murderous thought turned into Dmitry's destructive passion and Smerdyakov's criminal action. 68
Conclusions: 1) Pavel Smerdyakov, despite the fact that we do not recognize him as our father, is still by nature a true Karamazov. 2) Pavel Smerdyakov, unlike other heroes, has already made his choice between God and the devil, and his entire further path is the path of the devil. 3) Denial of God and faith leads to loss life values and the Fall, even to parricide. 4) Smerdyakov’s suicide is nothing more than retribution for lack of faith. 69
Chapter 10. Conclusions “The Brothers Karamazov” is a novel that sums up the philosophical quests of F. M. Dostoevsky, this is a kind of summary of his life’s journey. It is here that the writer’s main thoughts about man, faith, and the fate of Russia as a whole are concentrated. Using the example of one family - the Karamazov family - F. M. Dostoevsky shows what can happen to a person and a family without faith, without Christ. The theme of faith and unbelief runs like a red line through the images of the characters in the novel, their life path and attitude towards loved ones. So Smerdyakov’s suicide is nothing more than retribution for lack of faith. F. M. Dostoevsky directly makes it clear that denial of Christ, rebellion against him, leads to the death of the soul. This is, first of all, a rebellion against oneself, as happened not only with Pavel Smerdyakov, but also with Ivan. The resurrection of a person can only happen through acceptance of God, through faith. Dmitry's redemption, the purification of his soul through suffering, his unshakable faith in God create the image of a repentant sinner. Deep faith in God, according to Dostoevsky, provides firm support in all the vicissitudes of fate; peace arises in a person’s soul for the fate of the world and his personal life. The theme of family is no less important in the novel. Family is the most important part of the life of not only every person, but also society as a whole. Its collapse is even equal to the collapse of the state. The heroes of the novel talk about Russia, they are one way or another concerned about the fate of the country. The state cannot exist if its small unit - the family - is not united. F. M. Dostoevsky showed that the loss of values, roots and moral qualities leads to this decay, and this loss, in turn, manifests itself when people leave God, when unbelief takes root in their consciousness. 70
Special mention should be made about the influence of the Bible on F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel. The writer does not just quote Holy Scripture, the entire novel is permeated biblical motifs and reflections. The Bible penetrates into the text of the novel in the form of borrowing symbolic images (color painting, names of characters, analogies with biblical images, such as “dove”, “angel” - Alyosha Karamazov, “Valam’s donkey” - Pavel Smerdyakov, the image of a repentant sinner - Dmitry Karamazov , the rebellion of Ivan Karamazov - with the rebellion of Lucifer. One of the questions that concerns the author of the novel is the question of the Russian soul. F. M. Dostoevsky identifies his own, original path for Russia, and this is connected primarily with man. different time all the heroes of the novel notice something national, Russian. Having analyzed the work, we came to the conclusion that the Russian soul for Dostoevsky is a soul that truly believes in God, not completely succumbing to vices, which, even in the most difficult moment, will not lose its faith, for faith from birth has been inextricably linked with this soul. The Russian soul is ready to follow the path of renewal and purification through suffering, as shown in the example of Dmitry Karamazov. At the same time, the Russian soul is characterized by a search for truth, the highest truth. This character is presented in the novel by Alyosha Karamazov. He never completely loses his faith in God, but he is interested in the question of Supreme Justice: “Who judged? Who could judge that?” (Book 7, Chapter 2). 71
Used Books Fiction 1. F. M. Dostoevsky. Brothers Karamazov. M., Soviet writer, 1974 2. F. M. Dostoevsky. Writer's Diary. 1876, December. 3. Bible Critical literature 1. F.M. Dostoevsky in the memoirs of his contemporaries. In two volumes. , M., 1964. 2. Belov S.V. Fedor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky. M., 1999. 3. G. Pomerantz, Openness to the abyss. Meetings with Dostoevsky., M., Soviet writer, 1990. 4. E. M. Meletinsky. Notes on the work of Dostoevsky. M., Russian State University for the Humanities 2001 5. Simonetta Salverstoi. Biblical and patristic sources of Dostoevsky's novels. Academic project, St. Petersburg, 2001 6. F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “The Brothers Karamazov”. Current state of study. The Russian Academy of Sciences. Institute of World Literature named after. A. M. Gorky. Commission for the Study of the Works of F. M. Dostoevsky. - under. Ed. T. A. Kasatkina, M., “Science”, 2007 Internet sources 1. F. M. Dostoevsky about his parents, from “Memoirs” A. M. Dostoevsky. 2. B. Rurikov. "Dostoevsky and his contemporaries". 3. V.V. Timofeeva (O. Pochinkovskaya). A year of work with the famous writer. (Dedicated to the memory of Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky). 4. A. G. Dostoevskaya. Memories. 5. Vyach. Ivanov. Dostoevsky and the tragedy novel. II. Principle of worldview 6. Franz Kafka. Diaries. 72
Appendix 1 73 I. N. Kramskoy. Contemplator.
The Karamazov family. Relation degree. 74 Appendix 2
75 Appendix 3 All illustrations for the work were made by E. Nikolaeva.
1. Preacher of a merciful and humble heart
As you know, the work of F.M. Dostoevsky was aimed at understanding the secrets of human personality. He wrote about this to his brother Mikhail: “Man is a mystery. It must be solved, and if you spend your whole life solving it, then don’t say that you wasted your time, I’m working on this mystery, because I want to be human.”
In his quest to comprehend the mystery of man, Dostoevsky did not turn to the European philosophy of rationalism, going from Aristotle to Descartes. Since the Enlightenment of the 18th century, rationalism has understood man as a being produced from nature, the social environment, the state, the nation, or one ideology or another.
“Man is a political animal,” declared Aristotle. It was obvious that European philosophy was not capable of comprehending the mystery of man’s personality, his spiritual nature. Therefore, in his research and in his creativity, F.M. Dostoevsky relied on the biblical tradition, for which the secret of a person is concentrated in his heart - the “hidden heart” of a person. The heart in the Holy Scriptures is the focus of the entire physical and spiritual life of a person. Everything that comes to a person’s mind or memory comes to the heart.
The heart is that mysterious depth at which a person meets God - the divine Logos. “The pure in heart will see God.” In the New Testament, the heart is a network of organs of communication with God. “Christ dwells in our hearts through faith,” according to the words of St. Paul.
The secret of the heart in particular is that it can be the source of good or evil will. The Holy Scripture says that there is an evil heart, a vain heart, an undivided heart, even a bestial heart. According to the Gospel, from the depths of the human heart come evil thoughts, adultery, fornication, and murder (Mark 7:21).
Therefore, we pray, turning to God, “O God, instill within me a pure heart, and renew a right spirit in my womb.” That is why the Bible says in the Proverbs of Solomon: “Guard your heart above all else, for from it comes life” (Proverbs 4:23). At the same time, the Holy Scripture also says that the secret of the heart is revealed only to God. Dostoevsky developed this biblical philosophy of the heart in his work. He reveals the secrets of the heart through the fates of his heroes. IN final novel“The Brothers Karamazov” Dmitry, in the confession of his warm heart, expresses the biblical idea that the heart is a spiritual battlefield, where the devil and God fight (“here the Devil and God fight, and the battlefield is the hearts of people”).
It turns out that the heart, as the spiritual center of the personality, was split in man by the Fall and, as a result, both the ideal of the Madonna and the ideal of Sodom began to coexist in him. The metaphysical nature of the human heart, according to Dostoevsky, became antinomic. Dostoevsky expresses this discovery through the lips of the hero. “I cannot bear it,” says Dmitry, that another person, even higher in heart and with a lofty mind, begins with the ideal of the Madonna, and ends with the ideal of Sodom. Even more terrible is someone who already has the ideal of Sodom, in his soul does not deny the ideal of the Madonna, and his heart burns from it and truly burns, as in other blameless years. No, the man is wide, too wide, I would narrow it down.” The fate of Dostoevsky's heroes depends on who wins in their hearts. Heroes proud at heart: Svidrigailov, Stavrogin, Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov come to the denial of God and immortality. Self-will, rebellion and voluptuousness conquer the ideal of the Madonna in their hearts and lead them to death. There are other heroes in Dostoevsky who are ready to accept redemptive suffering on earth, just to save their soul from death, to lead them out of hell. Dostoevsky shows us such heroes in the person of Raskolnikov and Dmitry Karamazov. “Accept suffering and redeem yourself with it, that’s what you need,” Sonya advises Raskolnikov (Sofia - wisdom). The suffering that God sends to Dmitry Karamazov saves him from the self-will and voluptuousness that dominate his heart. They reveal to him the Christian meaning of life, he accepts the redemptive suffering sent to him. “I would never, never have risen on my own! But the thunder struck, I accept the torment of accusation and my national shame, I want to suffer and through suffering I will be cleansed!” Dostoevsky argued and preached that only in Christ and the immortality of the soul is the true meaning and purpose of human life, and indeed of all humanity. “Destroy the belief in immortality in humanity, not only love will immediately dry up in it, but all living force to continue world life", says Ivan Karamazov.
“In my opinion, Christ’s love for people is in its own way a miracle impossible on earth,” Ivan says to his brother Alyosha, seducing him. Believing with your mind and proud heart that there is no God and everything is permitted. It is no coincidence that the devil tells him: “You and I have the same philosophy” - and this is the philosophy of a proud heart. Dostoevsky contrasts the rebellious Ivan with the humble-hearted, philanthropic Alyosha. He believes that the path to the Kingdom of God is kept in the heart of Elder Zosima. “It doesn’t matter, he is holy, in his heart is the secret of renewal for everyone, that power that will finally establish truth on earth, and everyone will be holy and will love each other, and there will be no rich, no poor, no exalted, no humiliated, but “Everyone will be like children of God and the real kingdom of Christ will come,” this is what Alyosha’s heart dreamed about, writes Dostoevsky. Dostoevsky's heroes, from Sonya Marmeladova and Prince Myshkin to Alyosha Karamazov and Elder Zosima, carry in their hearts the image of Christ through humble love for their neighbor. Unlike the willful, proud carnal love, which is a tormenting passion and leads to crime, as happens between Rogozhin and Nastasya Filippovna. On the contrary, moderate, meek and sacrificial love, by its nature, love saves (Sonya saves Raskolnikov). Elder Zosima preaches this humble love: “Should we take it by force or by humble love?” Always decide: “I will take it with humble love” - decide this way once and for all and you will be able to conquer the whole world. Love humility is a terrible force, the strongest of all, like which there is nothing.”
In the sermon of the humble saving love of Elder Zosima, Dostoevsky embodies the idea of the “merciful heart” of St. Isaac the Syrian, which loves and has mercy on everyone and all of God’s creation and cries for its salvation.
In the person of Elder Zosima, Dostoevsky becomes a preacher of the philosophy of a merciful and humble heart, capable of saving the world. This is an image of the love that Christ commanded us in the Gospel: “Learn from me, if you are meek and humble in heart, you will find rest for your souls.”
2. Philosophy of the singing heart
Russian religious philosophy is often called “philosophy of the heart.” Unlike the European philosophy of Cartesian rationalism (“I think, therefore I am”), Nietzsche’s philosophy of life (“Man is the will to power”) and the philosophy of existentialism (Sartre “Man is doomed to freedom”), Russian philosophy is not anthropocentric, but Christocentric or theocentric. She was a guide to faith in Christ as the measure of all things. “The direction of philosophy depends at first on the concept that we have of the Holy Trinity,” wrote I. Kireevsky. Based on biblical and patristic ideas about man as the image and likeness of God, Russian thinkers of the 19th and 20th centuries turned to the soul and heart, seeing in them the spiritual and religious foundations of human life. One of the famous Russian religious thinkers of the 20th century was I.A. Ilyin. The philosophy of Ivan Ilyin is often called the philosophy of the “singing heart.” In his book of the same name, “The Singing Heart,” Ilyin wrote: “And everything great and brilliant that was created by man was created from a contemplating and singing heart.” Humanity, in his opinion, over the past two centuries, having broken with faith in Christ, has tried to create a culture without faith, without heart, without contemplation, without conscience. And therefore, in the 20th century there were disasters, wars, revolutions, the collapse of spiritual culture and the creation of a materialistic civilization. And today we live in an era of heartless culture, the heart and the love associated with it have been banished from modern life. “The great misfortune of modern man is that he has lost the sincerity of his heart.” I.A. Ilyin became a preacher of the Russian Orthodox Renaissance. As a thinker, he believed and argued that the Russian revival must begin from a loving and singing heart. “The Russian idea is the idea of the heart. The idea of the contemplative heart. A heart that contemplates freely and objectively: and transmits its vision to the will for action and thought for awareness and speech. This is the main source of Russian faith and Russian culture. Here main strength Russia and Russian identity. This is the path of our revival and renewal.” The Russian idea, according to Ilyin, asserts that the main thing in life is love and that it is love that is built living together on earth, for out of love will be born faith and the entire culture of the spirit. Since ancient times, the Russian-Slavic soul, organically predisposed to feeling, sympathy and kindness, received this idea historically from Christianity: it responded with its heart to God’s gospel, to the main commandment of God and believed that God is love.” In his book “The Singing Heart,” Ilyin argued that the kingdom of God appears within us when we have a singing heart. “There is only one true happiness on earth - the singing of the human heart. The heart sings when it loves, it sings from love, which flows as a living stream from some mysterious depth and does not dry up even when suffering and torment come. Then everything else in life is not so significant: then the sun does not set, then God’s ray does not leave the soul, then the Kingdom of God enters earthly life, and earthly life appears illuminated and transformed. And this means that a new life has begun, and that a person has joined a new existence.” At the end of his probably main book, I.A. Ilyin, summing it up, wrote: “A man with a singing heart is the island of God, his lighthouse, his mediator. So, on Earth there is only one true happiness, and this happiness is the bliss of a loving and singing heart: for it already grows during life into the spiritual substance of the world and participates in the kingdom of God.”