840 rub.

Content
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 1. PLACE AND ROLE OF N. V. GOGOL’S POEM “DEAD SOULS” IN RUSSIAN LITERATURE.
1. 1 HISTORY OF THE CREATION OF THE POEM
1. 2 GENRE FEATURES OF THE POEM
1. 3 COMPOSITIONAL FEATURES OF THE POEM
CHAPTER 2. DESCRIPTIONS OF NATURE AS A MEANS OF CHARACTERISTICS OF CHARACTERS OF GOGOL’S POEM “DEAD SOULS”
2. 1 MANILOV
2. 2 BOX
2. 3 NOZDROV
2. 4 SOBAKEVICH
2. 5 PLYUSHKIN
2. 6 CHICHIKS
CONCLUSION
LITERATURE
APPLICATION. DOMINANT MOTIVES IN THE DESCRIPTION OF LANDSCAPES ACCORDING TO THE CHARACTERISTICS OF EACH LANDLORD

Fragment of work for review

<…>In a word, everything was somehow deserted and good, as neither nature nor art could invent, but as only happens when they are united together...” (P. 127)
These motives of life, movement, development are present only in the description of Plyushkin’s character, who, it would seem, has descended so that further degradation is impossible. But perhaps it is precisely this circumstance - the impossibility of a further fall - that leaves some hope that he will now move in the opposite direction, since nothing can be worse. And the description of the garden is a symbol of the fact that something alive and human remains in the hero’s soul. That is, in this case, the description of the hero’s house and garden is, to some extent, a description of the hero’s character. Everything is in desolation, complete decline - both Plyushkin’s farm and his own life, but before the garden was beautiful, and the hero’s life was filled with meaning, which leaves the slightest hope for revival.
The abundance and splendor of Plyushkin’s neglected garden contrast with the descriptions of Manilov’s stunted and meager garden. Let's compare these two descriptions:
Manilov's Garden Plyushkin's Garden - two or three flower beds
- a vast garden, overgrown and dead - five or six birches - a colossal white birch trunk - thin tops
- tremulous domes
overgrown trees - a gazebo with a flat green dome - collapsed railings, a shaky gazebo - the dull bluish color of a pine forest - green thickets illuminated by the sun - the day was either clear or gloomy... - The sun, climbing under a leaf, illuminates it. Many details of the landscape coincide, which in both cases Gogol draws attention to, however, if the dominant motif in the description of Manilov’s garden is incompleteness, incompleteness, unfinishedness, then in the description of Plyushkin’s garden these are the motifs of obsolescence, but at the same time abundance, luxury, gradually transitioning and already in decline.
2. 6 Chichikov
Speaking about the images of landowners in the poem, one cannot ignore the image of its central character, Pavel Ivanovich Chichikov: although this image stands somewhat apart in the poem, it is he who is the central, connecting link. His journey is the engine of the plot. The very fact that Chichikov is constantly in motion distinguishes him from many other heroes of the poem: he moves, and to some extent, develops. And the motifs of nature that accompany it are, first of all, road landscapes: “As soon as the city left, they began to paint, according to our custom, nonsense and game on both sides of the road: hummocks, a spruce forest, low thin bushes of young pines, charred trunks of old trees, wild heather and such nonsense. There were villages stretched out along the cord, the structure similar to old stacked firewood...<…>In a word, the species are known.” (p. 12)
Gogol, even in this short passage, twice emphasizes the ordinariness, the commonness of this Russian landscape, its boredom - “nonsense and game.” This characteristic does not relate to the image of Chichikov, but to the image of Russia through which the hero travels, to the state of affairs in it. The landscapes are boring, the roads are bad - and all this is projected onto the events that take place in the poem: this “nonsense and game” extends not only to nature, but also to the morals that reign in the country, where you can trade living or dead people, souls.
And, despite the fact that the first volume of “Dead Souls,” according to Gogol’s plan, is a description of hell, yet the author, already in this first volume, gives readers and heroes some hope for revival, creating an image of Rus', like a three-bird:
“It seems that an unknown force has taken you on its wing, and you are flying, and everything is flying: miles are flying, merchants are flying towards you on the beams of their wagons, a forest is flying on both sides with dark formations of spruces and pines, with a clumsy knock and the cry of a crow, The whole road flies to God knows where into the disappearing distance, and something terrible is contained in this quick flickering, where the disappearing object does not have time to appear, only the sky above, and the light clouds, and the rushing month alone seem motionless. Eh, three! bird three, who invented you?..”
And this image, this symbolic landscape is correlated with the image of Chichikov, the most ambiguous and contradictory in the poem. Gogol brings to the fore not just a negative hero, but a man who turned all ideas about the real values ​​of this world upside down and placed the “penny” at the center of the universe. On the other hand, it is the image of Chichikov that is the only one that moved from the first volume to the second. And it is with the image of Chichikov, according to most researchers, that the idea of ​​resurrection is connected.
But in the description of this symbolic landscape there are indications of the devilish side of the hero’s nature (darkness, crow’s cry, clouds, terrible flickering), and of other possibilities of his personality, of the possibility of his rebirth (light of the moon, continuity of movement).
Conclusion
When analyzing descriptions of nature and landscapes in Gogol’s poem “Dead Souls”, the following features can be identified.
1. Descriptions of nature and landscapes do not occupy much space in Gogol’s poem (the only exception is the description of Plyushkin’s garden). However, whenever Gogol turns to pictures of nature, they are symbolic in nature.
2. The main function that landscapes and pictures of nature perform in Gogol’s poem is the function of revealing the characters’ characters. Any picture of nature illuminates the figure of each of the landowners in a new way, once again emphasizing those features that already become obvious when describing the appearance, lifestyle, and behavior of the heroes.
3. It is possible to identify the main “dominants” in the characters’ characters, reflected in the descriptions of the nature surrounding them:
Manilov - disorder, laziness, unsuccessful attempts to start some kind of activity; chaos and disorder, lack of will are projected onto the garden, which he strives, but cannot create around his home;
Korobochka - vanity, troublesome economic activity, the desire to obtain maximum benefit are reflected in the landscape surrounding it - a poultry house, a vegetable garden in which only vegetables grow;
Nozdryov - passion, imbalance, rudeness, a tendency to scandals are metaphorically expressed by Gogol with the help of images of hummocks, swamps, unkempt hunting grounds of his estate;
Sobakevich - pragmatism and greed are manifested in the fact that there is no longer nature as such on his estate, he views the forest exclusively as a building material;
Plyushkin is the lowest level of fall, degradation, the loss of almost all human traits, but nevertheless - the presence of a past, prehistory, and as a symbol of this - a huge, neglected, overgrown, but still beautiful garden.
Chichikov - uncertainty, changeability of character (he knows how to adapt to any of his interlocutors); Motifs of road landscapes, flickering, variability, and movement are associated with his image. On the one hand, in the descriptions of nature surrounding his image, Gogol emphasizes the boredom, the ordinariness of the places through which the hero passes, but at the same time the landscape becomes symbolic, prophetic: the flight of a trio of birds over the earth, the stars and the moon, clouds and the sky. All this gives a certain way out into the comic space, takes us away from the earth and opens up new perspectives. In general, both the image of Chichikov and the images of nature accompanying him are dual images, not fully understood, perhaps even by the author himself.
4. It should also be noted that Gogol often uses comparisons in his descriptions, detailed comparisons likening his heroes or natural phenomena to other processes and phenomena. So, Sobakevich looks like a medium-sized bear, and his and his wife’s faces are compared to a pumpkin and a cucumber, respectively; even the description of the light of a cloudy day is likened to the color of a soldier's uniform. Very often these comparisons point to the fact that Gogol’s heroes themselves lose human traits, become like objects or animals, fall down, degrade.
In general, the images of nature in Gogol’s poem shade and deepen the images of the characters and emphasize the dominant features in their characters.
Literature
Gogol N.V. Dead souls. T. 1. M., 1980. Ed. S. I. Mashinsky and M. B. Khrapchenko
Vinogradov I. A. Gogol - artist and thinker. Christian foundations of worldview. M., 2000
Gukovsky G. A. Realism of Gogol. M., L., 1959
Dokusov A. M. Kachurin M. G. Gogol’s poem “Dead Souls.” M., 1982
Eremina L.I. About the language of artistic prose of N.V. Gogol. M., 1987
Zolotussky I. P. Gogol. M., 1984. P. 235 Mann Yu. V. Gogol’s Poetics. M., 1988

Troyat A. Nikolai Gogol. M., 2004
Shevyrev S.P. The Adventures of Chichikov or Dead Souls. Poem by N. Gogol. Article two // Russian criticism of the 18th-19th centuries. Reader. Comp. V. I. Kuleshov. M., Education, 1978.
Application. Dominant motives in the description of landscapes when characterizing each landowner
Landowner Items of description Color scheme Main motive Manilov Mountain, garden, flower beds, river, bridge, gazebo, distant forest Gray, ashy, bluish, greenish Striving for beauty and orderliness; incompleteness, chaos, wretchedness of the garden Box Poultry yard, vegetable garden (vegetables) Variety, darkness (night, thunderstorm) The desire to benefit, pragmatism combined with vanity. Nozdryov Kennel, the land owned by Nozdryov (forest, hummocks, swamp) Chaos, disorganization (in the absence of a desire for order), disorder. Sobakevich Village (huts), forest Gray, white, brown Pragmatism, no nature, but there is material from which you can benefit (wood for construction) Plyushkin Huge garden: gazebo, forest, birch trees, young shoots, crowns of overgrown trees Golden-green (sun and greenery) Decline, destruction, disappearance of a once beautiful garden. Degradation. Chichikov Road landscapes Variegation 1. Boredom, routine, melancholy, mediocrity;
2. Symbolism of the landscape, movement, development, flight.
Mashinsky S.I. “Dead Souls” by Gogol. M., 1978. P. 11
Voropaev V. A. N. V. Gogol. Life and art. M., 2002. P. 22
Dokusov A. M. Kachurin M. G. Gogol’s poem “Dead Souls.” M., 1982. P. 9
Zolotussky I. P. Gogol. M., 1984. P. 235
Gukovsky G. A. Realism of Gogol. M., Leningrad, 1959. P. 473
Gukovsky G. A. Realism of Gogol. P. 488
Smirnova E. A. Gogol’s poem “Dead Souls”. L., 1987. P. 188
Smirnova E. A. Gogol’s poem “Dead Souls”. P. 156
Gukovsky G. A. Realism of Gogol. P. 475
Voropaev V. A. N. V. Gogol. Life and art. M., 2002. P. 22
Mashinsky S.I. “Dead Souls” by Gogol. P. 22
Dokusov A. M. Kachurin M. G. Gogol’s poem “Dead Souls.” pp. 30-31
Shevyrev S.P. The Adventures of Chichikov or Dead Souls. Poem by N. Gogol. Article two // Russian criticism of the 18th-19th centuries. Reader. Comp. V. I. Kuleshov. M., Education, 1978
Mashinsky S.I. “Dead Souls” by Gogol. pp. 22-23
Gogol N.V. Dead souls. T. 1. M., 1980. Ed. S. I. Mashinsky and M. B. Khrapchenko. P. 19. Hereinafter, quotations from this edition indicating the page number in the text.
Mashinsky S.I. “Dead Souls” by Gogol. P. 30
Vinogradov I. A. Gogol - artist and thinker. Christian foundations of worldview. M., 2000. P. 323
Mashinsky S.I. “Dead Souls” by Gogol. P. 35
Mashinsky S.I. “Dead Souls” by Gogol. P. 40
2

Bibliography

Literature
1.Gogol N.V. Dead Souls. T. 1. M., 1980. Ed. S. I. Mashinsky and M. B. Khrapchenko
2. Vinogradov I. A. Gogol? artist and thinker. Christian foundations of worldview. M., 2000
3. Voropaev V. A. N. V. Gogol. Life and art. M., 2002. P. 22
4. Gukovsky G. A. Realism of Gogol. M., L., 1959
5. Dokusov A. M. Kachurin M. G. Gogol’s poem “Dead Souls.” M., 1982
6.Eryomina L.I. About the language of artistic prose of N.V. Gogol. M., 1987
7. Zolotussky I. P. Gogol. M., 1984. P. 235 Mann Yu. V. Gogol’s Poetics. M., 1988
8. Mashinsky S.I. “Dead Souls” by Gogol. M., 1978. P. 11
9. Smirnova E. A. Gogol’s poem “Dead Souls”. L., 1987. P. 188
10. Troyat A. Nikolai Gogol. M., 2004
11. Shevyrev S.P. The Adventures of Chichikov or Dead Souls. Poem by N. Gogol. Article two // Russian criticism of the 18th-19th centuries. Reader. Comp. V. I. Kuleshov. M., Education, 1978.

Please carefully study the content and fragments of the work. Money for purchased finished works will not be returned due to the fact that the work does not meet your requirements or is unique.

* The category of work is of an evaluative nature in accordance with the qualitative and quantitative parameters of the material provided. This material, neither in its entirety nor any of its parts, is a finished scientific work, final qualifying work, scientific report or other work provided for by the state system of scientific certification or necessary for passing intermediate or final certification. This material is a subjective result of processing, structuring and formatting the information collected by its author and is intended, first of all, to be used as a source for independent preparation of work on this topic.

DNEPROPETROVSK ORDER OF THE RED BANNER OF LABOR ■■. . State Agricultural University NAMED AFTER THE 300TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE REUNIFICATION OF UKRAINE WITH RUSSIA

As a manuscript

ZHUKOVA Natalya Dmitrievna.

SCENERY. IN "DEAD SOULS" BY N.V. GOGOL

Dnepropetrovsk - 1992

The work was carried out at the Department of Russian and Foreign Literature of Simferopol State University named after M.V. Frunze.

Scientific, supervisor: / Doctor of Philological Sciences,

Professor V.P. Kazarin.

Official opponents: Doctor of Philology,

Professor V.A. Koshelev; . Candidate of Philology, . ■ associate professor A.A. Karpov.

; The leading organization is the Kharkov State Pedagogical Institute named after G.S. Skovoroda.,

■",.""." The defense will take place ". /S - i", y..* ,:."! 1992 at /"K o'clock. at a meeting of the specialized council K.053.24.09 for the defense of dissertations for the academic degree of candidate of philological sciences at the Dnepropetrovsk Order of Labor; Red Banner: State University named after. 30th anniversary of the reunification of Ukraine. with Russia (320625, GSP, Dnepropetrovsk, Gagarina Avenue, 72).

The dissertation can be found in the library of Dnepropetrovsk State University.

Scientific Secretary U /"("

specialized council "/ Kolesnichenko T.V.

The problems of the poetics of Russian classical prose are among the least studied. True, in Russian literary criticism, from time to time, works appear whose authors remind us of the need to prioritize the study of problems of artistic form, and also try to implement this approach, but the study of the poetics of works of art has not become permanent and systematic.

Increased interest in the problems of poetics was observed in the 20-30s of our century. It gradually faded away by the end of the 40s. During that period, works by A.I. Beletsky, A. Bellgo, V.M. Zhirmunsky were published , Yu.N. Tynyanov, M.M. Bakhtin, G.A. Gukovsky, B.M. Eikhenbaum, V.V. Vinogradov.

Only in the late 60s - early 70s did this problem again attract the attention of literary scholars. At this time, already known ones are republished and new studies devoted to issues of poetics appear. Among the latter are the works of Yu.M. Lotman, A.P. Chudakov, Yu.V. Mann, S.M. Solovyov, B.E. Galanova and. etc.

In Gogol studies, the result of this natural intensification of interest in the artistic skill of the writer were monographs by Yu.V. Mann, I.V. Kartashova, E., A. Smirnova, as well as a number of articles: A.H. Goldsnberg, V.A. Voropaevg I. V. Egorov and E. LLSonstvntikovskaya. S.A. Goncharova, O.G. Di-laktorskaya, A.I. Parpenko and others.

Among the numerous problems of poetics, landscape is of great interest, the study of which was noted by researchers of the 19th - early 20th centuries. Thus, I.V. Zabelin, K.K. Arsenyev, V.F. Savodnik and others considered the “literary landscape” to be a reflection of the writer’s worldview, and the study of the verbal fabric of the landscape, its descriptive, symbolic system is one of the means of penetration into the artistic world , into the “deepest passages” of the soul and the “subtle nerves” of the writer’s creativity.

In the post-October period, no one, with the exception of A. Bely and A. I. Beletsky, addressed the special problems of the literary landscape. Back in 1934, V.S. Nechaeva noted that “the theory and history of literary landscape painting has no special literature,” and this remains relevant today. It is indicative: V.I. Gusev’s article “Landscape” was published only in

additional volume of the "Concise Literary Encyclopedia" (1978). Several pages are devoted to the problems of the landscape of Russian romantic prose in the work of V.Yu. Troitsky “Artistic discoveries of Russian romantic prose of the 20-30s of the PC century.” In it, the researcher proposes a classification of romantic landscapes, which is perhaps the first attempt of this kind.

In Gogol studies, A. Bely, V.F. Pereverzev, V.T. Adam and some others addressed certain issues of the writer’s landscape. The latter raised the problem of the need to study Gogol’s “sense of nature” -. Interesting remarks regarding Gogol's landscapes are found in the works of G. A. Gukovsky, Yu. M. Lotman, M. B. Khrapchenko, Yu. V. Mann, E. S. Smirrova-Chikina, E. A. Smirnfroy, in a number of articles by the authors named above. From the point of view of this reality, K.V. Pigarev examines a number of Gogol’s landscapes. , .

Thus, insufficient knowledge of the literary landscape as one of the most important artistic means of embodying the author's idea determined the relevance and novelty of our research.

The choice of Gogol’s poem “Dead Souls” as the subject of research is due to the fact that this is the writer’s most controversial work. Despite the rather long history of its study and the abundance of works, the essence of Gogol’s plan and its artistic originality have still not been revealed sufficiently deeply and convincingly .

The purpose of the proposed work is to analyze the pose of the landscape of Gogol's "Dead Souls". The goal determines the research objectives:; identify the specifics of artistic details of Gogol’s landscapes; determine the laws to which they are subject; consider the landscape poem?■ the context of the writer’s work; reveal the originality of artistic images with the help of which the writer embodies his idea of ​​reality; to understand more clearly the positive program of Khudogapas, its “idea” of transforming man and the world.

The problem of the landscape of "Local Souls", like many others, is multifaceted. It is connected with the issues of “personal sources” (A.N. Veseloysky), which are embodied in the poem.

The works of B. Skvortsov (1917) and V.V. Danilov (1940) are specially devoted to this problem, the authors of which are looking for biographical realities on the pages of poetry. What is also of interest is the very mechanism of the transition of a fact of reality into a fact of creativity.

To understand the concept of “Dead Souls”, take into account the peculiarities of the spiritual make-up of the writer’s personality, which left an imprint on the artistic system of the poem. A.I. Beletsky rightly considered it necessary to study the “psychographics” of creativity.

Studying the poetics of the paisan poem is impossible without taking into account the context of everything, the work of the prose writer, including articles and epistolary heritage. Turning to the early works of the writer allows us to trace the path of formation of the artistic system of the poem, which in aesthetic form embodies the moral and philosophical quest of the author. At that time, since the poem was not completed, its correlation with “Selected Places, from Correspondence with Friends” helps to clarify “a number of ideas that the author intended to implement in subsequent volumes. Comparison of ideas and images” Dead Souls" with works from different periods of Gogol's work helps to decipher the poem's "sweet symbolism.

Let's note. th such aspect of the study of the poetics of the landscape of Gogol’s work, as its connection with other poetic means of embodying the author’s concept.

Thus, in order to understand the role of the landscape in Gogol's poem "Dead Souls", an integrated approach to the study of the problem is necessary. The principles of comparative historical and typological research methods are used in the work. A textual analysis of landscape sketches was undertaken.

Practical: the significance of the work lies in the fact that the materials and results of the study can be used in compiling comments on Gogol’s works, and such in preparing general and special courses on the history of Russian literature.

Analysis of the landscape sketches of the poem made it possible to classify them according to the thematic principle. The landscapes of “Dead Souls” can be divided into three types: urban, estate and, relatively speaking, rural (all-Russian) - which determined the structure

work. Thus, the dissertation consists of an Introduction, three chapters corresponding to each individual type of landscape, and a Conclusion.

The introduction is devoted to substantiating the novelty and relevance of the study, defining its goals and objectives.

In the first chapter - “The City Landscape in Dead Souls” - it is stated that the poetics of the city landscape of Gogol’s work never became the subject of special analysis. Individual elements of the description (at the same time, only the cities of N.5 were addressed by researchers to resolve issues directly... not related to the city landscape. They also missed the fact that the city landscape is presented in several varieties in the poem. In addition to descriptions of the city N.. in the poem we find pictures of the cities mentioned in the lyrical digressions, an image of the capital city and some others. .:

The image of the city N. embodies the “idea of ​​the city.” The writer reveals this “idea” in the notes “To the 1st part” as “emerging, to the highest degree, Emptiness. Idle talk. Gossip...”, “insensitive deadness,” “idleness” of life. The artistic means of its implementation also correspond to the nature of the author's plan.

An analysis of the most extensive, which has become a textbook, description of the city of N. at the beginning of the first chapter showed that, despite its sufficient volume, one cannot help but notice the absence in it of specific elements inherent only to the city of N.. that would distinguish it from the environment of other cities. The apparent variety of descriptive details hides the paucity of factual information. Before us is a description-catalog (V.M. Zhirmunsky), “built on the enumeration” of the characteristics of the city in general, each of which has a “speaking” character.

Judging by the description, the city of N. is deserted, and human figures are present only on signs, and then in unnatural poses. In addition, the writer depicts people through inanimate objects. The fact that the city seemed deserted until it was stirred up by the incident with the purchase of dead souls, in the further narration, is emphasized by the writer himself.

Revealing the idea of ​​the city, Gogol uses the principle of chaotic mixing of dissimilar objects. Chaos of things and phenomena,

The uniqueness of his attitude towards the city is determined by Gogol’s worldview, as evidenced by his letters. The author thinks of the city as the center of the “Yaki.” The deceitfulness of the urban environment is a persistent feature of Gogol’s work. In pride, according to the writer’s ideas, the natural, originally beautiful qualities of people, objects and phenomena are distorted or completely lost.

In the letters, the author emphasizes that urban plants “have lost their smell here (in the city - N.K.), as if transplanted by a violent hand onto soil that is not their own” (X, 180). De-ravya in descriptions of the city of N. are depicted as having lost their natural beauty. In.this.city, it is not the trees that are green, but the supports, while the other trees “turned white, they walked from the city’s village that had never left.”

Gogol had a special relationship with the blue sky. The natural color of the sky is present in the poem in the descriptions of the city. Gai of death, but only as the color.. “colosh” of one of the houses, the living room, which is “of course blue”, ii, a fashionable dress. White het -, -simgll" ""of moral purity and spirituality in Gogol's aesthetics - in the city of K"; turns out to be the color of "present *" nature. In this case, the sp is used by the author with obvious irony: regarding the “shst-totts ^yu placed” in it. positions." L with a similar meaning, the color white is used in the description of one1 j of the doyov.

The moral “desolation” of the inhabitants of the city of K. is embodied by the author l s! - with the help of a color symbolizing “Yaozlos”, - and tzkge: epithets such as “dirty”, “darkened”, “sound”, “dark”, etc. .

- ""Orzshchegnyo g produced! and Gogod’s letters from different years, as well as the writings of his contemporaries, showed that in the aesthetics of Gogol’s creativity, the natural, according to the author’s vision, the aspiration of plants and the human spirit upward, to the sky, acquires great significance.

La, ■ “the legislative idea - height” - architecture must also be subordinated. In the descriptions of the city of N. there is no sky, which means that its inhabitants have lost the “divine dimension of life and objects” (I.A. Ilyin). As a result, in Gogol’s image the trees are “no taller than reeds”, the houses are only “one, two and one and a half floors”, all objects are deliberately “down to earth”. 0

There is no natural light in the city. The “sun” in the world of the city of N. turns out to be the chairman of the government office, and the functions of sunlight are “performed” by the yellow paint on the houses, which “hit the eyes very hard.” Real moonlight appears only in the description of the “unknown city” in one of the lyrical digressions. And into the city of N. - “a blind, dark night” looked out of Chichikov’s window.”

In the descriptions of the city of N. there is no mention of fresh air and natural smells. Participates in creating the image of the city and the sound design of the landscape. Thus, the writer repeatedly speaks of either the “thunder” produced by Chichikov’s chaise, or the “rattling” of Korobochka’s tarantass. Annoying noises accompany all descriptions of city life in Gogol’s works.

3, the image of the city shows the idea of ​​its spatial limitation: the trees are propped up or behind bars, the flower is in the pot, the bird is in the clerk, and the man lives in a dark gray house. The urban space is filled with fences, and the city itself is fenced off by the repeatedly mentioned barrier. “All this embodies the idea of ​​mutual disunity, the spiritual limitations of people. The unifying principle in the city of N. is “gossip that has gone beyond limits.” The author himself dreamed of the unity of “people and brotherly love between them::”, of their “heavenly brotherhood.”

The descriptions of the city of N. embody the idea of ​​artificial orderliness, the monotonous monotony of life, which also indicates the spiritual ill-being of the city's inhabitants.

At first glance, the “capital” differs from the description of a provincial city, but in essence it has all the attributes of a small city. The only difference is their size. Elements of description inherent in the "capital" - bell towers, statues, towers - are used in the plural form. Sledova-

Actually, in the “capital” there are no buildings that distinguish it from other cities. The “capital” was created only by “the hand and quenelle of man,” which indicates the absence of a spiritual principle in it.

Gogol’s ideal of the habitat of a “beautiful person” formed the basis for the description of the dream city in one of the lyrical digressions of the 11th chapter. The author preaches the need for harmony between nature and art. In the description of the dream city, artistic details are used that are opposite in their figurative meaning to the details of the city of P.: “many-windowed, high palaces”, “countless millions of wild roses”, “the noise and eternal dust of waterfalls”, “mountains”, “silver, clear skies” ". In the image of a dream city, inanimate objects come to life. All elements of write-off are directed upward. In accordance with the laws of Gogol’s poetics, the external appearance of an ideal city reflects the spirituality of its inhabitants.

The artistic system of urban landscape painting was formed throughout the writer’s entire creative work. Its features lie in the worldview of the prose writer, in his attitude towards civilization. Gogolke considered the traditional romantic conflict between the city and nature to be antagonistic. The author of the poem believed that their harmonious fusion was necessary. He dreamed of an inspired civilization and civilized nature.

In the second chapter - “The estate landscape in “Dead Souls”” - the poetics of descriptions of landowner estates are analyzed.

As you know, the writer endows each of the landowners with only one, initially beautiful, but distorted and brought to the point of absurdity, trait of the Russian national character. In the estate landscape of each of the heroes, “our truly Russian, indigenous properties” found their embodiment.

Ah, Thor is trying to reveal the reasons for the deformation of the initially beautiful spiritual qualities of “all humanity en masse” and point out the path to its spiritual revival. According to Gogol's plan, convinced of his prophetic calling as an artist, his readers were to follow this path together with Chichikov and Plyushkin. Analysis of the estate landscape allows us to identify specific artistic means of realizing the author's idea.

The problem of “unjust management” is connected with the problem of the moral and spiritual revival of heroes. In the first one-

me poesh writer Using the method “from the opposite”, he affirms his idea of ​​​​the ideal Russian landowner, which will subsequently be directly expressed in “Selected passages from correspondence with friends;;, l”.

Gogol depicts landowners living in a closed, physically limited space. This spatial limitation, according to the precise remark of Yu.M. Lotchan, expresses the metaphorical meaning of spiritual limitation. The means of organizing the artistic space of each landowner have their own specifics.

The artistic space."Manilov is organized around a hill, and its center is the manor's house, which stood "alone" on a hill. The landowner's house turns out to be the personification" of the owner himself, and - "the openness of the house to the winds" whichever it pleases to blow means ; spinelessness of the landowner, lack of his own opinion. .

The writer emphasizes the deadness and spiritual emptiness of Manilov. Thus, in the description of the village, located "at the foot of the hill, attention is drawn to the absence of living trees. In addition, the sky above the estate is gray in color, which, according to Gogol, personifies vulgarity. Moreover, the writer compares the color of the sky with the color of “the old uniforms of garrison soldiers,” thereby introducing “into the characterization of the hero the motif of barracks, which for Gogol always meant a distortion of human nature.”

Manilov, although nodding in the village, is cut off from natural life. This id. I am symbolically embodied in the fact that his house is located on a hill, and the village is at the foot of the hill." The landowner is trying to establish life in a city manner. More than that, Manilov brings into his purely everyday life the external attributes of ancient culture, but not its essence, implying spirituality.

The oblivion of one’s own nature, one’s own culture, the mechanical copying of someone else’s and newfangled things led, in the writer’s opinion, to chaos “in the sciences, arts, in the image of life, and most of all in the head of a Russian person. This chaos is reflected in the description of the Manilovsky interiors and the estate. They combine inherently incompatible objects.

Gogol, through artistic means, embodies the idea of

the stubbornness of Manilov’s dreams, and also “emphasizing the tragic transformation of the human desire, with the help of a dream, to rise above everyday reality into an ugly subordination to it, this reality - in all its vulgarity and nakedness.

In the description of the estate, a number of other artistic details acquire a clearly expressed semantic significance, for example, a forest, a pond, the image of “two women”, a gazebo with a “flat” green” (?) dome and doves?, that (?) columns, etc. To clarify the meaning of individual images and motifs of Manilov’s estate landscape, different editions and versions of the text of Gogol’s pose are compared.

A characteristic feature of the Korobochka estate landscape is the pragmatic conditionality of all its elements. The image of Korobochka contains the idea of ​​a perversely understood economic caution, practicality, called “club-headedness.”

In her estate, the house and the chicken coop represent a single whole: they are literally connected by a “window. All visible prszt-ra! -tvo” outside the chicken coop house, “blocked by a board fence,” are occupied by vegetable gardens and “fruit” trees. They replace Korobochka with a real garden, which, in the writer’s opinion, should be an integral part of the landowner’s estates. The image of the landowner contains the idea of ​​hoarding, deadening housekeeping. Even objects and phenomena are subordinated to this idea and image of Korobochka’s estate. by its nature it is chukdae (huts built “scattered”, “scattered” trees, etc.).

"The well-being of the villages of Korobochki, noted by Chichikov, is only "fading." The contentment of the peasants, if it exists, is of a material nature, which, in the writer's opinion, is absolutely insufficient. It is about this that the eloquent speaker speaks the fact is that on the Korobochka estate there are no fugitives, but the best of its men (“such nice people, all workers”) are dying or drinking themselves to death.

The narrative is permeated with the idea of ​​the impossibility of Korobochka’s spiritual rebirth. Thus, the author notes that in peasant households there were new carts, or even two, but there is not even a mention of horses. Moreover, it turns out that there is no one to shoe the landowner’s own horse, since the “skilled blacksmith” has died.

The symbolic meaning of horses in the text of the poem is clearly revealed in connection with the image of the three-bird.

In the future, Korobochka will find herself in the city of N.. which, at first glance, means that she has overcome the isolation of her artistic space. However, in essence, this is just a continuation of economic activity. Moreover, the landowner takes her chicken coop with her, as follows from the description of the tarantass. Those. The spiritual space of Korobochka remains unchanged in its limitations.

In the description, the author also notes that Korobochka’s world is so narrow that for her, objects and phenomena that are outside tangible limits simply do not exist. With the help of a number of artistic elements, the writer realizes the idea of ​​​​the tenacity of the space of Korobochka - the spiritless world of bare material well-being.

The image of Nozdryov embodies the idea of ​​the breadth of the Russian soul, which has turned into the prowess of a fairground bully. His irrepressible vital energy is directed toward “empty” goals, spent on unbridled lies and “ebullient idleness.”

Nozdryov’s estate also has a “border” - a clearly defined limit, “consisting of a wooden post and a narrow ditch,” which organize the landowner’s artistic space. The “border” is at the same time a kind of conventional line between the desired and the actual, which is hidden from the landowner himself. Nozdryov easily overcomes the boundaries of truth and lies, and with no less ease the physical limitations of his space. He sometimes appears unexpectedly where no one is looking for him. All this is connected with Nozdrev’s loss of ideas about moral standards.

Nozdryov freely “overcomes” the “border” of his domain, declaring the web “on the other side” to be his own. The same as on this side. But on both sides he has a “emptiness”, the idea of ​​which is contained in the surname. The only advantage of the estate is the dogs, which, judging by the carefully selected nicknames, figuratively embody the passions of No: roar.

The writer allegorically conveys the peculiarities of the impulsive nature of the landowner in his description of the journey of Nozdryov’s guests to the border of his domain.

The image of Sobakevich embodies the idea of ​​perverted heroism. If Korobochka, who is no less economical than Sobakevich, has the living soul of nature buried under endless vegetable gardens, and in her estate you will not find either a plant or an animal that would not make sense from the point of view of economic pragmatism, then Sobakevich’s life is subordinated to the overwhelming web and the whole law of strength.

The writer extremely narrows the spatial boundaries of the landowner (“What a fist!” Chichikov said to himself). All the architectural transformations that he carries out are united by the idea of ​​​​quantitative reduction of elements; Sobakevich’s quince metaphor is the thrush living in the estate in a cage. Ka- and the bird , the world of the landowner is fenced with a “strong, excessively thick wooden lattice" and is located in the middle of a vast expanse. And if his soul had not been covered with a “thick shell,” there would have been room for the hero to “turn around.”

The image of the landowner reflected the duality of his nature, the dark and light principles. Sobakevich takes care of the flies, but not at the behest of his soul, but only “based on the fact that they are false, it will be worse for you.” In the pragmatic background of his concern for the peasants, according to Gog’s ideas, lies the hero’s greatest sin. This writer also speaks of the duality of Sobakevich’s image in “Reflections:?” about the heroes of “Dead Souls”.

Plyushkin’s world differs from the previous characters in its shabby spatial boundaries (green mold had already covered the dilapidated wood on the fence and gate; the garden was surrounded by a “low, broken town in places”). Only Plyushkin had runaway peasants.

In his description of the landowner's "estate," Gogol uses a whole series of symbolic images, for example: grain deposits, in which "faint rubbish" has grown; "blind-sighted" windows; "giant castle" on the dilapidated gate; stale crust of bread; "mold", etc. d. Having different meanings, these images embody the idea of ​​​​the absence of the divine, spiritual essence<-в этой усадьбе. А разрушенность, общий беспорядок и запустение - знак запустения душевного хозяйства ее обитателей. з

The image of Plyushkin embodies the idea of ​​a perishing soul, i.e. Not

dead, frozen, and “moving” in its very “fall.” In the description of the landowner’s appearance there are indications of a barely smoldering spiritual fire, since his eyes “have not yet gone out.” If the soul is not dead, then it potentially contains the possibility , revival.

Signs of the hidden possibility of the landowner’s spiritual rebirth are two churches, which are mentioned only in the description of Plyushkin’s estate.

The famous Shshdka garden has many meanings. In three parts; his description contains several ideas. One of them is the idea of ​​two polar "states of the human spirit: its infinite height and no less infinite lowness. ; Pr1G this writer says that no matter how the soul falls, it always has a chance for rebirth (the symbol of rebirth is "a young branch of a maple", which was visible in a bottomless "abyss"). The "white colossal trunk of a birch, the liana top of a hushka", similar to a marble cotton, are also symbolic. It was in the description of Plyushkin’s garden that for the first time in the poem Gogol expressed the cherished thought that a true ideal, a true estheses perfection is possible only as a result of the harmonious unity of nature and art.

In the third verb - "." Rural. (all-Russian). The complete mayor is reflected in the third type of landscape. . “Already the very first description of Russian nature paintings of rural life, presented in the second chapter, introduces the atmosphere of dull monotony of its landscape. The landscape consists of two parts: the first embodies the idea of ​​dull: nature, and... the second.-. -;., the nature of man living in a “monotonously sad” environment. This landscape is characterized by the following artistic techniques: the use of descriptive details in the plural; the use of “formulas of a national spatial scale” (Y.V. Kann); pgobrzkeshsh bezde£otvu hda, static human: fshur (the image of yawning men is indicative); introducing the motif of artificial orderliness, barracks (“Aorevsh;” in the description of O^li are gray and “eighty by

lace"). The writer also uses the “minus technique” (Yu.M. Lotman), i.e., a significant absence of elements. Thus, in this description there are no “acoustic images” (A.I. Beletsky); -there is no mention of the natural lighting of the world; it is not clear what time of day and what time of year we are talking about. The landscape is more like a theatrical set and embodies the idea of ​​“the idleness of life”, its “dead insensibility”, “the untouchable world”. We find confirmation" , comparing it with pictures of rural life in one of the lyrical digressions and in the second volume of the poem.

In the second volume, in contrast to the first, the diversity of village life is emphasized. This is manifested both in the activities of people and in the objects and phenomena around them. In life embodied: in the second volume, “there is no emptiness, everything is completeness.” Life is filled with activities that “truly uplift the spirit.”

In the first volume, Gogol recreated the existence of people, from which the spiritual, divine principle leaves. Therefore, it is shrouded in a “haze” of boredom and... longing. The absence of God in the soul leads to the death of the sources of creativity. The monotony of life, as a result of the lack of creative and... other spiritual impulses, manifests itself in the active idleness of people, and melts away in the appearance of their cities and villages.

The idea of ​​desolation, sadness, and homelessness of Rus' is embodied with the help of other landscape sketches. The most extensive of them (see vol.: 71, p.220), despite the external variety of details, is subordinated to the same idea. In this case, Gogol uses a catalog description. The rapid succession of apparently heterogeneous elements creates the illusion of movement. The meaning of the landscape becomes clear in the context of the author’s entire work. This description embodies ideas that are the opposite of Gogol’s idea of ​​the ideal. The landscape “spreads” in width, all of it; details are small, insignificant. The writer calls them "small fry". Gogol uses plural, diminutive and even derogatory forms of words. There is nothing "original or noticeable" about this landscape. The smallness of objects in Gogol’s aesthetics has a metaphorical meaning of the smallness of the soul, the baseness of spiritual impulses, or the absence thereof. Among

In a monotonously monotonous environment, “simple faith” in God is lost, without which the moral image of people is distorted. This description embodies the chaos that, according to the author’s perception, prevails in the world.

The lines of one of the landscapes, contrasting with the image of the dream city, can be called generalizing: “Everything in you is open, deserted and smooth,” says the writer, addressing Rus'. For the author of Vansha, these two concepts are used to designate the Russian landscape, which, in his opinion, has a significant influence on the nature of the Russian soul. Other descriptions also testify to this.

Through the vast space with a “horizon without end,” through its infinity, boundlessness, the writer reveals the boundlessness of the Russian soul. The writer directly speaks about its lack of formalization, and therefore its ability to revive, in “Selected Places” in the article “Bright Sunday.”

In the poem, the image of the “road” acquires a symbolic meaning. In addition to numerous meanings,” noted by researchers, . this image means the path of spiritual revival of Rus'. And it takes you not just out of the darkness of the urban space into open space, but “flies”, “nowhere into the disappearing distance.”

In the lyrical digression about the “swamp lights” behind which people drag (VI, 210-211), parallels can be traced with the storyline about Chichikov’s journey through the province. These include the “thunderstorm” that led Chichikov to Korobochka, and the “roads” that “spread out in all directions, like caught crayfish when they are poured out of a bag.” “The thunderstorm”, from which the hero closed the “curtains,” -.”; in a lyrical digression it turns out to be a “meaning descending from heaven.” And “roads” indicate that the hero had a choice of path, but he steps on that , which will lead him to Nozdryov. In a lyrical digression, the writer talks about the existence of many paths leading to the “eternal truth.”

The artistic details of the last landscape of the poem acquire symbolic meaning: the dark “des” (the image of the Forest is framing in the poem); in the forest - “a crow’s cry” and “the sound of an ax”; "spruce and pines"; "sky"; “light clouds” and “pushing month”, etc. The symbolism of this landscape is evidenced by

There is also a combination in it of phenomena that are incompatible in real life.

The meaning of a number of details in the description is revealed in the context of the prose writer’s work. In addition, in the subsequent lyrical digression we find concepts that also help to identify the meaning of the symbolic images of the “forest” landscape.

For example, “heaven” in this description is a sign of immutability, the truth of the spiritual principle, as opposed to the transitory, vain desire of people for purely external material well-being. “If you take care of the economy, not the material one, but the economy?, the human soul. Only there you will find happiness,” the author said in one of the letters (K±1, 325).

Thus, in the all-Russian (rural) landscape, with the help of symbolic images and other artistic means, the writer explores the idea of ​​​​the spiritual revival of Rus'. This id (I is embodied in the image of a “road” that passes through deserted fields (with the help of which the writer allegorically conveys the Chukhov emptiness of life) and is carried away “into the vanishing distance” of centuries. At the same time, Rus' “rushes, all inspired by God.”

The Conclusion summarizes the results of the study. The study of the three types of landscapes, which we considered on a thematic basis, showed that their artistic system is subject to the uniform laws of poetics and has a number of common techniques with the help of which the author conveys his idea of ​​reality and affirms the idea of ​​​​the spiritual rebirth of people.

One of the most important principles of Gogol’s narration stems from the writer’s firm conviction that behind the external, visible side of existence lies the true essence of the objects depicted, invisible to ordinary consciousness.

The extreme formal conciseness and at the same time the exceptional “semantic” capacity of Gogol’s text gave rise to the polysemy of each element of the description, a complex, branched and stable system of symbols that formed their own specific “language”, without “deciphering” which a complete understanding of the meaning of “Dead Souls” is impossible ".

“The study of the landscape revealed” in the poem two pictorial plans. One - embodies the mundane, everyday world, reflecting Gogol’s perception of reality,

the other - concludes the dream of the author, his. ideal.\The description of the earthly world is, as it were, a distorted mirror image of the sublime world. It also betrays phenomena that are organic to the ideal, in the world of vulgarity they turn into their opposite or are absent altogether. The sublime world, according to the author, is not opposed to the earthly world, but was originally inherent in it, in the Russian spirit, but for a number of reasons it is simply deformed.

In conclusion, artistic techniques common to all types of landscape are named. Prospects for further research are outlined.

Approbation of work. The dissertation was discussed at the Department of Russian and Foreign Literature of Simferopol State University. The main provisions of the work were presented in reports at All-Union scientific conferences at the Nezhin and Vologda Pedagogical Institutes, Kiev University, and at annual scientific conferences at Simferopol University.

1. Poetics of landscape in “Dead Souls”. N.V. Gogol // The legacy of N.V. Gogol and modernity: Abstracts of reports and messages of the scientific-practical Gogol conference. - Part 2. -Nezhin, 1980. - P. 24-25.

2. On the problem of ancient reminiscences in “Dead Souls” by N.V. Gogol // Abstracts of reports of the Crimean scientific conference “Programs of Ancient Culture”. - Part I. - Simferopol,

3. The problem of romantic landscape and N.V. Gogol’s “Dead Souls” // N.V. Gogol’s work and modernity: Abstracts of the scientific-practical Gogol conference. - Part I, - Nezhin, 1989. - P. 52-53.

4. On the typology of rachitic landscape, from N.V. Gogol and M.Yu. Lermontov // Current issues of modern Lermontov. Literary studies. Materials and methodological recommendations for general and special courses. - Kyiv,

“Dead souls”: threshold semantics of landscape

Mehdiev V.G. (Khabarovsk)

The purpose of the article is to analyze the structure-forming details of the landscape in the poem “Dead Souls,” which hint at semantic echoes that go beyond the world of the characters themselves and express their author’s assessment. The landscape images of the work have traditionally (and rightly) been understood in line with Gogol’s characteristic method of typification. Gogol skillfully used his talent to fit whole content “into an infinitely small” space. But the discoveries made in connection with the concepts of “outlook,” “environment,” and “point of view” make it possible to see the nonlinear strategy of Gogol’s landscape.

In the dialogical concept of M.M. According to Bakhtin, “a twofold combination of the world with a person is possible: from within him - as his horizons, and from the outside - as his environment.” The scientist thought that “verbal landscape”, “description of the situation”, “depiction of everyday life”, etc. cannot be considered solely as “moments of the horizon of the acting, incoming consciousness of a person.” An aesthetically significant event takes place where the subject of the image is “turned outside itself, where it exists valuable only in another and for another, is involved in the world, where it does not exist from within itself.”

The theory of the hero’s outlook and environment, created by Bakhtin, in the science of literature was associated with the concept of “point of view.” There is an internal point of view - a first-person narration, where the depicted world fits as closely as possible into the character’s horizons; and an external point of view, giving scope to the author's omniscience, endowing the narrator with a higher consciousness. The external point of view has mobility, through it a multiplicity of perception and emotional and semantic assessment of the subject is achieved. N.D. Tamarchenko wrote that “the point of view in a literary work is the position of the “observer” (narrator, narrator, character) in the depicted world.” Point of view, “on the one hand, determines his horizons - both in terms of “volume,” “and in terms of assessing what is perceived; on the other hand, it expresses the author’s assessment of this subject and his outlook.” Based on the foregoing, we can conclude that the boundaries passing between unequal points of view in the narrative indicate certain moving, threshold meanings determined by the value position of observers.

The borderline meanings of the landscape in “Dead Souls” can be understood in the context of M. Virolainen’s thoughts: “describing this or that area of ​​life, Gogol likes to disrupt the direct connection with it,” “turn to it from the outside.” As a result, “a conflictual interaction arises between the subject of the image and the author’s view of the subject”; “the author’s view violates all boundaries”, “does not allow the phenomenon being described to remain equal to itself.” This position, I think, goes back to the well-known idea of ​​​​M. Bakhtin: “every moment of the work is given to us in the author’s reaction to it.” It “embraces both the subject and the hero’s reaction to it.” The author, according to the philosopher, is endowed with an “excess of vision,” thanks to which he “sees and knows something” that is “fundamentally inaccessible to the heroes.”

Indeed, an ordinary look at the poem “Dead Souls” reveals, first of all, details that have a typical meaning. In the creation of paintings of the provincial city, the life of provincial landowners, an emphasis on showing the dual unity of external and internal is noticeable. But the semantics of landscape is not limited to the typing function: Gogol presents the landscape from points of view bordering each other. About the hotel in the county town where Chichikov stayed, it is said that it belonged to a “famous family.” The landscape and the interior associated with it give rise to a feeling of ordinariness, typicality: this is all around and inside the hotel, but it can be seen everywhere. The formula “here” and “everywhere” includes, in particular, “rooms with cockroaches peeking out like prunes from all corners.” Typicality is expressed not only metaphorically, but sometimes through direct recording of coincidences, abolishing the boundaries between external and internal: “The external façade of the hotel corresponded to its interior<...>» .

Chichikov sees what corresponds to his adventurous plan. In his ideological assessment of the district landscape, he is passive. But the narrative initiative here belongs to the writer. It is the author who acts as the highest authority and forms the value-semantic space of the provincial city. N.V. Gogol seems to follow the character, takes a transpersonal position that coincides “with the position of the given character in terms of spatial characteristics,” but diverges “from it in terms of ideology, phraseology, etc.” . True, if we analyze the fragment in isolation from the context of the work, then the belonging of the evaluative paradigm to the writer is not so obvious. From what does it follow that the subject of perception is not only Chichikov, but also the author?

The fact is that Chichikov's point of view cannot perform a compositional function. She is devoid of narrative memory: she grasps what meets her situational interests. The author's evaluative position is a completely different matter. With the help of verbal details of the landscape and interior, a structural whole is created not only of individual episodes, but also of the text as a whole. Thanks to the culture of borders, the “closed form” “from the subject of the image” turns “into a way of organizing a work of art” (italics retained - M.V.).

This can be seen in the example of the epithets “yellow” and “black” used in the description of the hotel: the lower floor of the hotel “was plastered and remained in dark red bricks, darkened even more by the wild weather changes”; “The top one was painted with eternal yellow paint.” The expression “was painted with eternal yellow paint” can be understood to mean that the walls of the hotel were painted with yellow paint a long time ago; can be seen in the “eternal yellow paint” and a symbol of imperturbable staticity.

The epithet “black” is also given a special status, fulfilling not only a stylistic but also a compositional role. The epithet is used in different episodes of the poem in thirteen cases, and is included in contextual synonymous rows with the words “dark” and “gray”.

The dominance of the epithets “dark” and “black” should be attributed to the sphere of intentionality, dictated by the author’s intention. The description ends with a mention that one of the two samovars standing on the window “was pitch black.” The word-detail, as well as its contextual synonyms, create a ring composition of the landscape. The epithet “black” incorporates a holistic characteristic of “internal” and “external”. At the same time, the symbolic meaning of the word is not confined to a single picture, but extends to other episodes. In the description of a luxurious evening in the governor’s house, the epithet “black” enters into semantic connections with “an air squadron of flies,” “black tailcoats,” and, finally, into unusual connections with “light,” “white shining refined sugar”: “Everything was flooded with light. Black tailcoats flashed and rushed separately and in heaps here and there, like flies scampering on white shining refined sugar...”

Thus, the same picture in “Dead Souls” is drawn from two angles - from the place from which the adventurer Chichikov sees it, and from the value point from which the author-narrator contemplates it. On the moving border of Chichikov’s practical view of things and their author’s emotional, evaluative and creative perception, semantic levels of landscape arise, acting as something other than just a means of typification. These levels of semantics appear due to the combination of “different positions” that play the role of compositional means.

The landscape in the chapter about Manilov is presented at the level of conflicting interaction between two points of view - Chichikov and the author. The description is preceded by a three-dimensional picture, which the further, the more rapidly it strives to take over the “inner” space of Manilov: “The master’s house stood alone on the south, that is, on a hill open to all the winds...”. This is followed by “sloping mountains”, on which there are “trimmed turfs”, two or three “flower beds scattered in English style”, “five or six birches” “here and there raised their small-leaved thin peaks”. Under two of them there was a gazebo with the inscription: “Temple of solitary reflection”, and there, lower - “a pond covered with greenery<...>At the bottom of this elevation, and partly along the slope itself, gray log huts darkened along and across<...>There was no growing tree or any greenery between them; There was only one log visible everywhere. At some distance to the side, a pine forest darkened with some dull bluish color.”

The landscape becomes substantively denser, semantically significant details increase in it, but the description here is directed not in depth, but in breadth - it is linear. This perspective of the landscape does not reveal depth of character, but rather the absence of it. But the movement in breadth still has a limit, noted by the author. It passes where the presence of another world is noted - a darkening pine forest, as if from the things of boredom contemplating the man-made landscape of Manilov.

A constant detail in the characterization of Manilovism, designated by the word “dandy,” draws into its orbit a synonymous series that expands the reader’s perception: a house on an “elevation,” “Aglitsky gardens of Russian landowners,” “scattered flower beds in an English style,” etc. The space of “made beauty” can extend to infinity and increase in volume through the accumulation of details. But in any case, its openness is illusory, doomed to horizontality and devoid of verticality. Manilov’s landscape reaches the limit of the “top”: “The day was either clear or gloomy, but of some light gray color, which only happens on the old uniforms of garrison soldiers.” Here even the “top” loses its objective meaning, since it is reduced to comparison with the uniforms of garrison soldiers.

The word “dandy”, still only noticeable in the description of Manilov’s surroundings, is used as a key word when describing the interior: “wonderful furniture covered with dandy silk fabric”, “a dandy candlestick made of dark bronze with three antique graces, with a dandy shield”. The expressive word “dandy” compositionally connects the story about Manilov with the image of a city young man “in white rosin trousers, very narrow and short, in a tailcoat with attempts at fashion.” Thanks to the associative connection, “young man” and Manilov fall into the same semantic series.

Thus, Chichikov’s practical point of view in the description is not self-sufficient: it is shaded by the author’s point of view, revealing connections between individual fragments of the world that are invisible to the character. In the complex structure of “Dead Souls” by M.Yu. Lotman noted an unusual hierarchy: “the characters, the reader and the author are included in different types” of “special space”; “the heroes are on the ground, their horizon is obscured by objects, they know nothing except practical everyday considerations.” The heroes of the “stationary, “closed” locus are opposed by the heroes of the “open” space”, “heroes of the path” and, of course, the author himself, who is a man of the path.

The petrified life of provincial landowners, the semantic categoricalness of “mud of little things” unexpectedly collides with the energy of the author’s word. Mobile border semantic zones are exposed. So, entering Manilov’s office, Chichikov utters the words: “Nice room.” The writer picks up the phrase uttered by Chichikov, but subordinates it to his own point of view, which is necessary, first of all, to deepen the parodic meaning of the metaphor of “panache”: “The room was definitely not without pleasantness: the walls were painted with some kind of blue paint<...>tobacco<...>it was just piled up on the table. On both windows<...>there were piles of ash knocked out of the pipe, placed<...>very beautiful rows...”

The word “heap” plays a special role in the text, giving, at first glance, the impression of situational use. Gogol uses it often in the poem (in nineteen cases). It is noteworthy that it is absent in the chapter about Sobakevich, but is used with particular intensity in the episodes dedicated to Plyushkin. The noun “heap” is also found in chapters devoted to the provincial city. It is clear that Chichikov’s point of view is, in principle, devoid of such creative activity.

The iconic components of the landscape and interior can be called key in the author's plan; they can also be considered as hermeneutical pointers on the path to understanding the author's intention. Being included in the writer’s horizons, they carry the semantic energy of previous landscape drawings. Their function is to create invisible, barely perceptible threads between the individual parts of the work.

The landscape of the provincial city is revealed through the perception of Chichikov. Thanks to the author's view, it gradually acquires a two-voiced character. Here are the dominant signs of the city: “yellow paint on stone houses”, “gray on wooden ones”, the houses had an “eternal mezzanine”; in some places these houses seemed “lost among a street as wide as a field”, “in some places huddled together”; a drawing of “billiards with two players in tailcoats, the kind that our theater guests wear.” The city garden “consisted of thin trees, poorly grown, with supports at the bottom, in the form of triangles, very beautifully painted with green oil paint.”

Taken separately, these details do not seem to penetrate into other descriptions. But upon mental contemplation of the entire Gogol text, they acquire unity. It turns out that there are semantic relationships between them, so the writer’s use of the word “heap” to the city landscape, the description of the evening in the governor’s house, and Manilov’s interior is not accidental. The author connects the individual parts of the poem not only by plot; he connects and unites them thanks to repeated verbal images. The word “heap” is used in describing the world of Plyushkin and Korobochka. Moreover, it is constantly adjacent to the epithet “correct,” that is, with the characters’ own ideas about symmetry and beauty.

The picture of landowner life and the signs of space in the chapter about Korobochka are given through the eyes of Chichikov, and twice. The first time Chichikov comes here is at night in rainy weather. And the second time, when the hero contemplates the world of Korobochka in the early morning, the same details of space and setting are supplemented with new details. The case is unique, since in the description of Korobochka’s yard the boundaries between the perception of the character and the author-narrator are almost invisible.

Chichikov is presented with a “small house,” only “one half” of which is “illuminated with light.” “There was also a puddle in front of the house, which was directly hit by the same light. The rain pattered loudly on the wooden roof,<...>the dogs burst into all possible voices.” It is eloquent that the episode reflected the non-pragmatic activity of the character, which is evident from the convergence of his point of view with the point of view of the author (“illuminated with light” is a Gogol expression). Chichikov's gaze selects the details of the landscape in accordance with the logic with which the writer created the landscape, depicting the space of the county town, Manilov. Rare cases of closeness between Chichikov and the author were pointed out by Yu. Mann, who noted that in some episodes of the poem “the narrator’s reasoning leads to the character’s introspection,” in turn, “the character’s (Chichikov’s) introspection turns into the narrator’s reasoning.” By author's introspection, the scientist meant an objective idea of ​​the subject of the image belonging to the narrator.

The interior of Korobochka is also given through the eyes of Chichikov: “The room was hung with old striped wallpaper; paintings with some birds; between the windows there are old small mirrors with dark frames in the form of curled leaves...". And at the same time, the description is not free from the energetic words of the author-narrator. The writer is recognized by his passion for diminutive suffixes, the word “dark”, and light painting (“illuminated with light”). The author can also guess that he willingly gives objects a figurative embodiment (frames in the form of “curled leaves”). And yet, Chichikov’s point of view dominates the picture. For the first time, the character finds himself not inside the depicted world, but outside it. And this is no coincidence. In the morning Chichikov “began to examine the views before him: the window looked almost into a chicken coop<...>a narrow courtyard filled with birds and all kinds of domestic creatures<...>There were apple trees and other fruit trees scattered around the garden.<...>Following the vegetable garden were peasant huts, which, although they were built scattered and not enclosed in regular streets...”

Despite the fact that the Korobochka estate gives the impression of a fortress, it does not correspond to the ideal: its dilapidation is felt. The epithet “wrong” appears, which, in the course of the plot, finds itself in new verbal and semantic contexts. It is in the chapter about Korobochka that he is directly correlated with the image of Chichikov, which makes it possible to see connections between the characters that they do not realize.

It is appropriate here to mention the story “Old World Landowners”, where the landscape, in contrast to the Korobochka estate, creates a feeling of abundance. The world of old-world landowners is associated with a corner of paradise: God did not offend the humble inhabitants of the Russian land in any way. In this regard, the story of fruit trees bent low to the ground from the weight and many fruits on them is illustrative.

In the description of Korobochka’s space, the motif of “animal” abundance is intensively introduced. The main characteristics of her world are “animal” metaphors and the epithet “narrow”. The phrase: “a narrow courtyard filled with birds and all kinds of domestic creatures” absorbs the characteristics of the hostess. She also hints at Chichikov: a not entirely linear description of the character is outlined, the prospect of his “internal” reflection.

The world of Korobochka correlates with the world of Chichikov himself - the image of her “narrow yard” is correlated with the “internal location” of Chichikov’s box, a detailed description of which appears in the chapter about the landowner. In “the very middle is a soap dish, behind the soap dish there are six or seven narrow partitions for razors.” The following expression “all sorts of partitions with and without lids” is associated with the story of peasant huts that “were built randomly and were not enclosed in regular streets.” Order and “correctness” in Chichikov’s box, thanks to the indicated convergences, become synonymous with Korobochka’s “wrong” way of life. And the “animal” motif, in turn, semantically and emotionally prepares the reader for the perception of “Nozdrevism”.

Nozdryov's yard was no different from a kennel, just like Korobochka's yard was no different from a chicken coop. The associative series continues to hint at the poverty of “land abundance”: the field along which Nozdryov led the guests “consisted of hummocks.” The author persistently emphasizes the idea: the land belonging to these landowners is barren, as if it had lost God’s mercy. The motif of the barrenness of the land originates in the description of the provincial “garden” (consisting of “thin trees” “no taller than reeds”); it expands spatially and semantically deepens in the story about Manilov’s estate (“sloping mountains”, “small-leaved thin tops” of birch trees); about Korobochka’s yard (“apple trees and other fruit trees were scattered here and there throughout the garden”). But in the description of Nozdryov’s estate, the motif reaches its semantic peak.

At the same time, the opposition between “right” and “wrong” is deepening. Depth is achieved by the fact that the description combines (to a certain extent) the position of the character and the position of the narrator. In the chapter on Sobakevich, Chichikov’s perception paradoxically combines details that meet his pragmatic interests and elements that bring his point of view closer to the author’s. The epithet “wrong”, referred to the world of Korobochka, becomes a metaphorical expression of an entire way of life. Chichikov could not get rid of the feeling of some blatant asymmetry of the entire landowner way of life and Sobakevich’s appearance. Here, apparently, Chichikov’s travel impressions could not be avoided. The road, as noted by a modern researcher, “in the poem also serves as a test for the hero, a test of his ability to go beyond his own horizons.” The motif of the path is probably no less important for deepening the semantics of the opposition “right” - “wrong” - it reaches a concrete, objective embodiment in the chapter about Plyushkin. In the description of Plyushkin's estate, the author develops the landscape motifs outlined in previous chapters. Here they receive semantic completion and unity.

The first part of the landscape is entirely given in Chichikov’s horizons; but the author, in turn, seems to penetrate into the character’s horizons, comments, evaluates what might not correspond to Chichikov’s character. Obviously, Gogol, by his presence in the description, on the one hand, introduces what he saw to the reader’s perception, and on the other, to the consciousness of Chichikov himself. Thus, the “double illumination” technique used by the writer imperceptibly prepares a shift in the hero’s moral sense. In the landscape, given, at first glance, through the perception of Chichikov, a style stands out that refers to the position of the author-narrator: “the balconies are askew and turned black, not even picturesquely”; “all sorts of rubbish grew”; “two village churches: an empty wooden one and a stone one, with yellow walls, stained. This strange castle looked like some kind of decrepit invalid<...>» .

The author is also recognizable by his passion for painting. But there is something in the text that certainly cannot be correlated with Chichikov’s point of view - bewilderment at the fact that the balconies “turned black” so ugly that there was nothing “picturesque” in them. This is, of course, the artist’s view. Adjacent to it is the ballad image used by Gogol (“strange castle”) and correlated with the physically tangible image of a “decrepit disabled person.” There is nothing even insignificantly “picturesque”, and therefore there is nothing to “raise into the pearl of creation.” The colloquial “all sorts of rubbish grew,” meaning that the earth “dried up,” “degenerated,” could be mentally uttered by both Chichikov and the author.

The story about the picturesque garden makes up the second part of the landscape, but it is included exclusively in the author’s horizons. The path to the artistic, symbolic meaning of the landscape is closed to Chichikov. Reminiscences referring to Dante, Shakespeare, Karamzin, folklore confirm what has been said. The landscape has a “summative” meaning. He appears as a “familiar stranger.” In addition, when describing the garden, Gogol freely uses heterogeneous semantic and stylistic figures: the garden, “overgrown and decayed” - the garden “was alone picturesque in its pictorial desolation”; “green and irregular trembling-leaved domes” - birch “like a regular sparkling marble column” - “nature has destroyed the grossly perceptible correctness”, etc. Gogol creates a landscape in exact accordance with the ideal that he told his contemporary: “If I were an artist, I would invent a special kind of landscape<...>I would link tree to tree, mix up the branches, throw light where no one expects it, that’s the kind of landscapes you should paint!” .

It is striking with what consistency and intensity Gogol uses the same words and verbal forms to express the artistic idea of ​​a landscape. Almost all the details of the picture are familiar from previous descriptions. The symbolic image of the garden is crowned with a series of words that was associated with the point of view and value position of the author. The spatial density of the depicted garden is also striking, especially striking if you compare it with the “empty” land of the landowners.

The motif of infertile land in Manilov’s world was emphasized by reference to “sloping mountains.” At the same time, the forest was also mentioned, but the fact of the matter is that the “darkening forest” did not seem to be part of Manilov’s world, since it was located on the other side of Manilov’s world (“to the side”). There is a natural analogy with the garden in the provincial town: it “consisted of thin trees, badly grown, with supports at the bottom, in the form of triangles.” Only in the chapter about Plyushkin, describing the garden, does Gogol introduce the motif of the reborn earth. But the fertile land, the sun, the sky are also on the other side, they seem not to be involved in Plyushkin’s world: “a garden that went beyond the village and then disappeared into the field.”

In Gogol's description, the contrasting meanings of “dark” are smoothed out. As for the opposition “correct” - “wrong”, it is completely removed (“green and incorrect...”, “birch as correct”); Even the “narrow path” is poetic here. Both of them, created by the joint efforts of nature and art, are in perfect agreement with the laws of beauty and symmetry, with the idea of ​​“fertile land.” It is interesting that here even the color detail reaches its finale: supports in the form of “triangles”, “painted with green oil paint.” In the image of Plyushkin’s yard, the color green becomes a symbol of death: “Green mold has already covered the dilapidated tree on the fence and gate.” The motif of death is intensified in the depiction of Plyushkin’s interior space: “a wide entryway from which the wind blew, as if from a cellar”; “The room is dark, slightly illuminated by light.”

In the poem “Dead Souls” the landscape is endowed with a multi-level semantic and narrative plan. The first level includes an imaginary, ideal landscape, functioning in the context of the lyrical theme of the work. It is included exclusively in the author’s horizons and serves as the boundary between the world of Chichikov, the landowners and the ideal world of Gogol. The background includes a landscape implying “known views”, correlated with the theme of “dead souls” and here fulfilling the function of typification. But the second plan of the landscape strategy is not linear: it is endowed with semantic polyphony, a change of subjects of perception, and a combination of points of view. The mobility of the semantics of the landscape serves to “expose” the linear life path of the characters. Repetitive details included in the sphere of the author's perception, thanks to their repetition, acquire the polysemy of the symbol, smooth out the satirical, typifying orientation of the landscape, and reveal implicit connections with the lyrical digressions in the poem. The character is described, on the one hand, from the point of his passive contemplation of his own existence, in unity with the vulgar surroundings (the character’s horizons and surroundings are thought of as something closed); and from the creatively active position of the author-narrator, who opens this isolation and illuminates it with the thought of the spiritual principles of human life.

Bibliography

Annenkov P.V. Gogol in Rome in the summer of 1841 // Annenkov P.V. Literary Memoirs. - M.: Pravda, 1989. - 688 p.

Bakhtin M.M. Aesthetics of verbal creativity. - M.: Art, 1979. - 424 p.

Virolainen M.N. Historical metamorphoses of Russian literature. St. Petersburg: Amphora, 2007. - 495 p.

Gogol N.V. Collected Works in eight volumes. - T. 5. - M.: Pravda, 1984. - 319 p.

Dobin E.S. Plot and reality. The art of detail. - L.: Soviet writer, 1981, - 432 p.

Krivonos V.Sh. Gogol’s “Dead Souls: Road Views” // New Philological Bulletin. - 2010. - No. 1. - P. 82-91.

Lotman Yu.M. Artistic space in Gogol’s prose // Lotman Yu.M. At the school of poetic word. Pushkin. Lermontov. Gogol. - M.: Education, 1988. - 352 p.

Mann Yu.V. Gogol's poetics. - M.: Fiction, 1989. - 413 p.

Smirnova E.A. Gogol's poem "Dead Souls". - L.: Science (Leningrad branch), 1987. - 201 p.

Tamarchenko N.D. Point of view // Introduction to literary criticism. Literary work: basic concepts and terms. - M.: Higher School, 2004. - P. 379-389.

Uspensky B.A. Poetics of composition. - St. Petersburg: Azbuka, 2000. - 352 p.

Eliade M. Selected Works. Essays on comparative religion. Transl. from English - M.: Ladomir, 1999. (Electronic version). Access mode: http://wwwgumer.info/bogoslov_Buks/comparative_bogoslov/eliade/09.php. (date of access: 01/03/2013).

It seems that the motif of the “sterility” of the earth, as well as the image of the garden in Gogol’s poem, can be correlated with the ancient cult of “plowing the earth”; in honor of this event, wheat was symbolically fertilized by the opening of the Nile dams; the “gardens of Osiris” were laid out; At the beginning of November, ritual plowing of the land and ritual sowing took place.

According to Gogol, Pushkin best of all grasped the originality of the writing style of the future author of Dead Souls: “Not a single writer had this gift to expose the vulgarity of life so clearly, to be able to outline in such force the vulgarity of a vulgar person that all that trifle , which eludes the eyes, would flash large in everyone’s eyes.” Indeed, the main means of depicting Russian life in the poem is artistic detail. Gogol uses it as the main means of typifying heroes. The author identifies in each of them the main, leading feature, which becomes the core of the artistic image and is “played out” with the help of skillfully selected details. Such leitmotif details of the image are: sugar (Mani-lov); bags, boxes (Korobochka); animal strength and health (Nozdrev); rough but durable things (Sobakevich); a bunch of rubbish, a hole, a hole (Plyushkin). For example, Manilov’s sweetness, dreaminess, and unreasonable pretentiousness are emphasized by the details of the portrait (“eyes as sweet as sugar”; his “pleasantness” was “too much transferred to sugar”), details of behavior with people around him (with Chichikov, with wife and children), the interior (in his office there is beautiful furniture - and then there are two unfinished armchairs covered in matting; a dandy candlestick - and next to “some kind of just a copper invalid, lame, curled up to the side and covered in grease”; on there is a book on the table, “bookmarked on the fourteenth page, which he has been reading for two years already”), speech details that allow you to create a unique manner of speaking “sweetly” and vaguely (“May day, name day of the heart”; “if you please this cannot be allowed").

These kinds of leitmotif details are used as a means of characterizing all characters, even episodic ones (for example, Ivan Antonovich - “a jug snout”, the prosecutor has “very black thick eyebrows”) and collective images (“thick and thin” officials). But there are also special artistic means that are used to create a certain number of images. For example, in order to more clearly highlight what is characteristic of each of the landowners as a certain type, the author uses such a construction of the corresponding chapters that the same sequence of details is observed. First, the estate, courtyard, and interior of the landowner's house are described, his portrait and author's description are given. Then we see the landowner in his relationship with Chichikov - his manner of behavior, speech, we hear reviews of neighbors and city officials and get acquainted with his home environment. In each of these chapters, we witness a dinner or other treat (sometimes very unique - like Plyushkin's) that Chichikov is treated to - after all, Gogol's hero, an expert on material life and everyday life, often receives characterization precisely through food. And in conclusion, a scene of the purchase and sale of “dead souls” is shown, completing the portrait of each landowner. This technique makes it easy to make comparisons. Thus, food as a means of characterization is present in all chapters about the landowners: Manilov’s dinner is modest, but with pretension (“cabbage soup, but from the heart”); at Korobochka's - plentiful, in a patriarchal taste (“mushrooms, pies, skorodumki, shanishki, pryagly, pancakes, flat cakes with all sorts of toppings”); Sobakevich serves large and hearty dishes, after which the guest can barely get up from the table (“when I have pork, put the whole pig on the table; lamb, bring the whole lamb”); at

Nozdryov's food is not tasty, he pays more attention to the wine; At Plyushkin’s, instead of dinner, the guest is offered liqueur with flies and “crumbs from Easter cake”, left over from the Easter treat.

Particularly noteworthy are the household details that reflect the world of things. There are a lot of them and they carry an important ideological and semantic load: in a world where the soul has been forgotten and has become “dead,” its place is firmly occupied by objects, things to which their owner is firmly attached. That’s why things are personified: such as Korobochka’s clock, which “had a desire to strike,” or Sobakevich’s furniture, where “every object, every chair seemed to say: I too Sobakevich!”

Zoological motifs also contribute to the individualization of characters: Manilov is a cat, Sobakevich is a bear, Korobochka is a bird, Nozdryov is a dog, Plyushkin is a mouse. In addition, each of them is accompanied by a specific color scheme. For example, Manilov's estate, his portrait, his wife's clothes - everything is given in gray-blue tones; Sobakevich’s clothes are dominated by red-brown colors; Chichikov is remembered for a clear detail: he likes to dress in a “lingonberry-colored tailcoat with a sparkle.”

The speech characteristics of the characters also arise through the use of details: Manilov’s speech has many introductory words and sentences, he speaks pretentiously, and does not finish the phrase; Nozdryov’s speech contains a lot of swear words, jargon of a gambler, a horseman, he often speaks in alogisms (“he came from God knows where, and I live here”); Officials have their own special language: along with bureaucratic language, when addressing each other they use phrases that are stable in this environment (“You lied, mommy Ivan Grigoryevich!”). Even the surnames of many characters characterize them to a certain extent (Sobakevich, Korobochka, Plyushkin). For the same purpose, evaluative epithets and comparisons are used (Korobochka - “club-headed”, Plyushkin - “a hole in humanity”, Sobake-vich - “man-fist”).

All together, these artistic means serve to create a comic and satirical effect and show the illogical existence of such people. Sometimes Gogol also uses the grotesque, as, for example, when creating the image of Plyushkin - “a hole in humanity.” This is both a typical and fantastic image. It is created through the accumulation of details: a village, a house, a portrait of the owner and, finally, a bunch of old things. Material from the site

But the artistic fabric of “Dead Souls” is still heterogeneous, since the poem presents two faces of Russia, which means the epic is contrasted with the lyrical. Russia of landowners, officials, men - drunkards, lazy people, incompetents - is one “face”, which is depicted using satirical means. Another face of Russia is presented in lyrical digressions: this is the author’s ideal of a country where genuine heroes walk in the open spaces, people live a rich spiritual life and are endowed with a “living” and not a “dead” soul. That is why the style of lyrical digressions is completely different: satirical, everyday, colloquial vocabulary disappears, the author’s language becomes bookish-romantic, solemnly pathetic, and is saturated with archaic, bookish vocabulary (“a menacing blizzard of inspiration will rise from clothed in holy horror and splendor chapters"). This is a high style, where colorful metaphors, comparisons, epithets (“something ecstatically wonderful,” “daring diva of nature”), rhetorical questions, exclamations, appeals (“And what Russian doesn’t like driving fast?”) are appropriate. O my youth! O my freshness!").

This paints a completely different picture of Rus', with its endless expanses and roads running into the distance. The landscape of the lyrical part contrasts sharply with that which is present in the epic, where it is a means of revealing the characters of the heroes. In lyrical digressions, the landscape is connected with the theme of the future of Russia and its people, with the motif of the road: “What does this vast expanse prophesy? Isn’t it here, in you, that a boundless thought will not be born, when you yourself are endless? Shouldn’t a hero be here when there is a place where he can turn around and walk?” It is this artistic layer of the work that allows us to speak of its truly poetic sound, expressing the writer’s faith in the great future of Russia.

Didn't find what you were looking for? Use the search

On this page there is material on the following topics:

• a certain detail characterizing Sobakevich
• the story of captain kopeikin summary
• artistic detail in the poem Dead Souls
• Gogol's artistic details
• artistic detail in dead souls

Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol is the most enigmatic and mysterious classic of Russian literature. His works are filled with mysticism and secrets. Getting acquainted with the work of this greatest writer, readers, each in their own way, understand the deepest meaning inherent in his works.

In this work we will try to determine the role of the garden in the sixth chapter of the poem “Dead Souls” by N.V. Gogol, as well as find out the meaning and function of each element.

Plyushkin - purgatory

The entire journey of entrepreneur Chichikov is a journey through hell, purgatory and heaven. Ad-Manilov, Korobochka, Nozdryov and Sobakevich; purgatory is Plyushkin. It is no coincidence that the description of his estate is located in the middle, in the sixth chapter.

Gogol presented his creation on a par with Dante’s “Divine Comedy,” which consists of three parts: “Hell,” “Purgatory,” and “Paradise.” By analogy with this work, the author decided to conduct Chichikov: the first volume is hell, the second volume is purgatory, the third volume is heaven. This is the opinion of Honored Teacher of Russia, Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences Natalya Belyaeva. We, analyzing the chapter, will adhere to this point of view and will attribute Plyushkin to purgatory.

An estate is a manor house in a village, with all the manor, a garden, a vegetable garden, etc., therefore, setting as our goal to determine the meaning and function of the garden in the sixth chapter, we will touch upon, as necessary, those estates that are mentioned next to it (house) .

There is something human left in Plyushkin, he has a soul. This is confirmed, in particular, by the description of the transformation of Plyushkin’s face when it comes to his comrade. An important distinguishing feature is that Plyushkin has lively eyes: “ The small eyes had not yet gone out and ran from under the high eyebrows like mice...". There are two churches (presence of God) in his village.

House

In the chapter we are considering, a house and a garden are mentioned. The house is even shown twice: when entering the estate and when leaving it. Chichikov sees the house when he approaches the estate.

Let's pay attention to the windows that indicate the “face” of the house: facade - from face- face, and the window is from " eye"- eye. The author writes: “Only two of the windows were open, the others were covered with shutters or even boarded up. These two windows, for their part, were also weak-sighted; on one of them there was a dark stick-on triangle made of blue sugar paper.”. The triangle on one of the windows refers to “divine symbolism.” The triangle is a symbol of the Holy Trinity, and blue is the color of the sky. The house symbolizes the descent into darkness before rebirth, that is, in order to get to heaven (in this case, the garden), you need to go through darkness. The garden is located behind the house and thus grows freely, going beyond the village and disappearing into the field.

Garden

The garden is one of the favorite images of fiction. The garden landscape is characteristic of the Russian tradition, especially the poetic one. Thus, A.S. Pushkin mentions the garden in "Eugene Onegin"; “Desolation” by E.A. Baratynsky; “The garden is deaf and wild” by A.N. Tolstoy. Gogol, creating the landscape of Plyushkin's garden, was part of this tradition.

The garden, as an image of paradise, is the abode of the soul. And if we proceed from the fact that Plyushkin, as mentioned above, reveals signs of the soul, then the garden in the sixth chapter of the poem “Dead Souls” is a metaphor for the soul of our hero: “ An old, vast garden stretching behind the house, overlooking the village and then disappearing into a field, overgrown and dead..." Plyushkin's garden has no fences; it goes beyond the village and disappears into the field. There is no one watching him, he is left to his own devices. It's like it's limitless. Like a soul.

The garden is the kingdom of plants, so it is always important what grows in it and how. In Plyushkin's garden, Gogol mentions birch, hops, elderberry, rowan, hazel, chap, maple, and aspen. Let's dwell on the first tree mentioned in Plyushkin's garden - the birch. Birch plays the role of a cosmic tree, connecting the earthly and spiritual levels of the universe. The roots of the tree symbolize hell, the trunk symbolizes earthly life, and the crown symbolizes paradise. The birch was deprived of the top, but not the entire crown. You can see a parallel with the image of Plyushkin, who still has a soul, unlike Manilov, Korobochka, Nozdryov and Sobakevich.

The author compares a birch tree with a column. The column symbolizes the world axis, holding the Sky and connecting it with the Earth; also symbolizes the Tree of Life. From this it follows that Plyushkin’s soul reaches out to Heaven, to paradise.

The break that ends the birch trunk is represented in the form of a bird. The bird is a symbol of the human soul freed from the flesh. But the bird is black. Black is a symbol of night, death, repentance, sin, silence and emptiness. Since black absorbs all other colors, it also expresses denial and despair, is the opposition to white and denotes a negative principle. In the Christian tradition, black symbolizes grief, mourning and mourning. White is a divine color. Symbol of light, purity and truth.

Let us dwell on some other plants whose connection with Plyushkin and our understanding of him was established. These are: hops, willow, chapyshnik. " ...A hollow, decrepit trunk of a willow, a gray-haired shrub, with thick bristles poking out from behind the willow, withered and crossed leaves and twigs from the terrible wilderness...“, - this fragment resembles the description of Plyushkin’s appearance: “ But then he saw that it was more like a housekeeper than a housekeeper: at least the housekeeper doesn’t shave his beard, but this one, on the contrary, shaved, and, it seemed, quite rarely, because his entire chin with the lower part of his cheek looked like a hair comb made of iron wire, such as is used to clean horses in a stable". The hair on Plyushkin’s face is like a gray, hard cape. However, the wire comb is already losing its connection with the garden: it is not living flesh, but metal.

There were hops growing all over the garden. It grew from the bottom, wrapped around the birch tree to the middle and from there hung down, clung to the tops of other trees, and hung in the air. Hops are considered a plant that connects a person with the spiritual world. Thus, in Plyushkin’s garden there is not only horizontal infinity, but also a vertical, connecting the earth with the sky. Broken in birch, it is restored by hops.

Maple is mentioned next. Maple is a symbol of youth, youthful beauty, love, fresh strength, life. The meanings of fire are added to these meanings. Fire - symbolizes the sun and sunlight, energy, fertility, divine gift, purification. In addition, fire is a mediator that connects heaven and earth. Of course, one cannot think about the possible transformation of Plyushkin, but Gogol, apparently, hopes for the spiritual transformation of man.

This is followed by a description of the aspen. The aspen represents a symbol of crying and shame. The crow is a symbol of loneliness. Plyushkin's life provides the basis for both.

Thus, everything that was or can be better and alive in a person goes into the garden. The human world is dim and dead, but the garden is wildly alive and shining. The garden, as a place where the soul resides, allows us to remember that in Gogol’s world of the dead there is a glimpse of life.