Tragedies of Sumarokov. Their political and educational orientation

The plot of a parent abandoning a child, who later takes revenge on him, has been known since ancient times. It may not be told explicitly, but also with free assumptions. Consider the stories where the father is predicted to die at the hands of his son, as a result of which the birth of children is not allowed or the sons must certainly be killed. Sumarokov is not so cruel towards the younger generation; he looks more negatively at the parents who must accept fair punishment. Fathers have always suffered before, and they cannot avoid such a fate in the comedy “The Guardian.”

The narrative proposed by Sumarokov seems confusing. The characters will not fully know who will face what fate. Even the culprits have no idea how close they are to death. It’s all the more interesting to listen to what’s happening on stage. Not to say that Sumarokov raised acute social problems, but he managed to reflect modern realities. And you don’t have to be a particularly talented writer to tell truthfully about what’s happening around you.

The main culprit has a telling name - the Stranger. You have to understand right away that he likes to take what belongs to others and not give it back. There is no need to reveal what exactly he has taken possession of, so as not to distract the viewer or reader from the action taking place before his eyes. Or it makes sense to talk about it, since, knowing about this circumstance, much in the plot will become clear immediately. However, if the author keeps it secret from everyone, including the characters, then let it remain so.

The action of “The Guardian” begins with the servant wanting to leave the master’s house. He has endured a lot before, but he cannot tolerate the theft of property dear to his heart. He is very upset to lose touch with the past, ultimately being left without everything that was his aspirations. In addition, another maid, who is a noblewoman by birth, does not respond to his advances. It is simply unbearable to continue living in such an environment.

Subsequently, it turns out that there was no malicious intent in the theft, the reason was the curiosity of another character who decided to figure out why the servant liked that thing, which, apparently, should not have anything to do with him. So that the servant does not get angry, he is offered another thing of equal value. But he, of course, will refuse, since his human dignity stands above vanity, not allowing him to exchange things that are valuable to his heart for things that are priceless to his heart. It was here that Sumarokov revealed the secret of the stolen item in order to further fill the action with additional details.

The offended servant, in addition to the stolen item, was offered a path to the nobility, starting with a clerk and ending with the rank of registrar, quite a nobleman. Apparently, there is Sumarokov’s sarcasm here, explaining how easy it has become to achieve a court rank without having anything to do with it from birth.

Separately from the main storyline, the behavior of the Stranger is described, who believes that all issues can be resolved with the help of money. Even love can be bought, it is enough to offer the object of love the amount he requires. And how surprised the Stranger is when he receives a refusal. This businessman does not understand the importance of human feelings, which in reality cannot be bought. He is depressed by the need to pray to God, fully accepting and realizing his reality, as well as humbled to experience the torments of hell, since he has sinned enough during his life.

In addition to feelings, you cannot buy one more thing. It's about the law. If you have committed a violation, you will not be able to pay off. Sumarokov was sure of this, so he ensured that his last days were approaching for Chukhezhvat. The court will be harsh and will decide to apply the death penalty. That’s why the comedy turned out to be not at all funny, but rather full of dramatic events.

Additional tags: Sumarokov guardian criticism, analysis, reviews, review, book, Alexander Sumarokov analysis, review, book, content

This may also interest you:
–

Contemporaries ranked Sumarokov's comedies much lower than his tragedies. These comedies did not constitute a significant stage in the development of Russian drama, although they had a number of advantages that force the literary historian to take a closer look at them - and primarily because Sumarokov was still the first to write comedies in Russia, not counting interludes of the semi-folklore type and advanced plays.

In total, Sumarokov wrote twelve comedies. Chronologically, they are divided into three groups: first there are three plays: Tresotinius, An Empty Quarrel and Monsters, written in 1750. Then comes an interval of no less than fourteen years; from 1764 to 1768 six more comedies were written: “Dowry by Deceit” (circa 1764). “The Guardian” (1765), “The Covetous Man,” “Three Brothers Together,” “The Poisonous One,” “Narcissus” (all four in 1768). Then - the last three comedies of 1772 - “Cuckold by Imagination”, “Mother Companion to Daughter”, “Crazy Woman”. Sumarokov wrote his comedies in fits and starts, seizing on this genre, which was generally not very close to him, as a strong polemical or satirical weapon, during periods of aggravation of his anger at those around him. He did not work long and carefully on his comedies. This can be seen from their text, and from their dates, and from his own notes; So, with the text of “Tresotinius” he made a note: “Conceived on January 12, 1750, completed on January 13, 1750. St. Petersburg.” Along with the text of “Monsters” there is a note: “This comedy was composed in June 1750 at the Primorsky Courtyard.”

Sumarokov's first comedies were still firmly connected with those traditions of drama that existed before Sumarokov in Russia and in Russian and, perhaps most of all, in Italian theater. In general, Sumarokov’s comedies have minimal connection to the traditions and norms of French classicism throughout his work, and especially in his first group; this does not mean, of course, that they stand outside the boundaries of Russian classicism. First of all, even externally: the correct, “real” comedy in France was considered a comedy in five acts in verse. Of course, Moliere and after him many wrote comedies in prose, but from the point of view of classical dogma, these comedies were considered, so to speak, of a lower grade. It’s a different matter for Sumarokov, the canonizer of Russian classicism; all his comedies are written in prose. None of them has the full volume and “correct” arrangement of the composition of the classical comedy of the West in five acts; Eight of Sumarokov’s comedies have only one act each, four have three. Basically, these are small plays, almost skits, almost interludes. Sumarokov only conditionally maintains even unity. The time and place of action fit into the norm, but there is no unity of action, especially in the first plays. There is nothing to say about the nobility of tone of the French classical comedy; there is no trace of it in Sumarokov’s rough, semi-farcical plays.

In Sumarokov’s first comedies, in fact, there is not even any real connecting plot. We will find in them, of course, the rudiment of a plot in the form of a couple in love, who at the end are married; but this rudiment of a love theme has no influence on the course of the action; or rather, there is, in fact, no action in comedy. Comedy consists of a series of more or less mechanically connected scenes; one after another, comic masks enter the theater; the characters representing the ridiculed vices, in a dialogue that does not move the action, show the public each their own vice. When the catalog of vices and comic dialogues is exhausted, the play ends. The struggle for the heroine's hand does not unite even a small fraction of the themes and dialogues. This construction of the play comes close to the construction of folk “square” sideshow games or nativity scenes, satirical scenes, and especially parsley comedy. It is characteristic that, in contrast to Sumarokov’s tragedies, in his first comedies, despite their small volume, there are a lot of characters; Thus, in “Tresotinius,” a comedy in one act, there are ten of them, in “Monsters” there are eleven.

If there is no single action taking place on the stage of Sumarokov’s early comedies, then there is no genuine everyday life in them. Like a conventional interlude scene, the stage area of “Tresotinius” or “Monsters” or “An Empty Quarrel” represents a conventional abstract place in which no one lives, but characters only appear to demonstrate their conventionally depicted shortcomings. Sumarokov's entire manner in these plays is conventionally grotesque. In "Monsters" a comic court hearing takes place on stage, and the judges are dressed like foreign judges - in large wigs, but in general they are not judges at all, and the trial itself takes place in a private house, and all this is a complete farce, and behind the ridiculousness of the scene It’s impossible to figure out how to understand it seriously. Sumarokov loves farcical comedy - fights on stage, funny picks between characters. All this grotesque ridiculousness in his work largely depends on the tradition of the Italian comedy of masks.

The very composition of the comic characters of the first Sumarokov comedies is determined mainly by the composition of the stable masks of Italian folk comedy. These are traditional masks, the centuries-old tradition of which most often dates back to Roman comedy. So, before us pass: a pedant-scientist (in “Tresotinius” there are three of them: Tresotinius himself, Xaxoximenius, Bobembius; in “Monsters” - this is Criticiondius); this is the “doctor” of Italian comedy; behind him comes a boastful warrior, lying about his unheard-of exploits, but in fact a coward (in “Tresotinius” Bramarbas); this is the “captain” of Italian comedy, going back to the “boastful soldier” Pyrgopolynics Plautus. Next are the clever servants Kimar in “Tresotinius” and “Empty Quarrel”, Harlequin in “Monsters”; this is "Harlequin" commedia dell"arte; finally - ideal lovers - Clarice and Dorant in "Tresotinius", Infimena and Valer in "Monsters". Characteristic of Sumarokov's conventionally grotesque manner are the very names of the heroes of his first comedies, not Russian, but conventionally theatrical

In addition to the tradition of Italian comedy, Sumarokov used in his early comedies the dramaturgy of the Danish classic Golberg, which he knew in German translation (for example, his Brambarbas was taken from Golberg along with his name); It should be noted that Golberg himself depended on the tradition of the same Italian comedy. Sumarokov also takes something from the French, but not the method, but individual motives, modified from him beyond recognition. Thus, from Molière (“Learned Women”) he took the name Tresotinius (Moliere’s Tresoten), and from Racine the scene in “Monsters” (from “Little Litigation”).

No matter how conventional the style of Sumarokov’s first comedies was, it contained features of Russian topicality that enlivened and made sense of it. Thus, the comic masks of the clerk and petimeter introduced by Sumarokov are closely related to his political and cultural preaching. His clerk in “Tresotinius” (only the intended image), in “Monsters” the sneaker Khabzey and the judges Dodon and Finist are included in the general line of his struggle with the bureaucracy; his petitmeters, Frenchmaniacs, social dandies - Dulizh in “Monsters” and Dulizh in “An Empty Quarrel” - are included in the line of his struggle against the court “nobility”, against Gallomania, for Russian culture, for his native language. Sumarokov's comedies, even the first three of them, are peppered with literary and polemical attacks, allusions to Sumarokov himself and his enemies. This especially applies to Tresotinius, the main character of which, which gives the comedy its name, is a pamphlet against Trediakovsky, unusually caricatured, but unambiguous. This is characteristic of Sumarokov’s entire comic style of this period; his comic masks do not rise to a broad social typology. This can even be said about the role of Fatyuya, the village landowner (“An Empty Quarrel”), the most Russian and in everyday life so full-bodied that one can guess in it some features of the future Mitrofan Prostakov. Finally, Sumarokov’s early comedies are enlivened by their language, lively, sharp, cheeky in its unvarnishedness, very little subjected to the sublime vivisection of French classicism.

Sumarokov's six comedies of 1764-1768 are noticeably different from the first three, although much of them is the same; the method of conventional depiction, the absence of life on stage, even most often conventional names remains the same: Sostrata, Nysa, Pasquin, Palemon, Dorant, Leander, Herostratus, Demiphon, Menedemos, Orontes, etc.; only in one comedy do the Tigrovs, their father, mother and daughter Olga, the three Radugina brothers, Yaroslav, Svyatoslav and Izyaslav (“Three Brothers Together”) appear. Meanwhile, the very structure of the plays has changed. Sumarokov moves on to the type of so-called comedy of characters. In each play, the center of his attention is one image, and everything else is needed either to shade the central image, or to fictionalize the plot, which is still insignificant. Thus, “The Guardian” is a play about a nobleman-usurer, a swindler and a hypocrite, the Stranger. This same image is the only one in “The Covetous Man” under the name of Kashchei, and it is the same one in “Dowry by Deception” under the name of Salidar. “Poisonous” is a comedy about the slanderer Herostratus. “Narcissus” is a comedy about a narcissistic dandy; his name is Narcissus. Apart from the indicated central images, and there are three of them, there are no characters in all of Sumarokov’s comedies of 1764-1768; all other characters are positive heroes, barely animated copybooks. On the contrary, the central characters are drawn carefully, especially the triple image of the Stranger - Kashchei - Salidar. They are furnished with a number of household details of a fairly real type; they are connected with the topic of the day not only by design, but also by individual hints. At the same time, the satirical and everyday features that build the character of Kashchei, Chuzhekhvat and others are empirical and not generalized, and do not form a unity of type. These roles are composed of individual particles and are not organic in nature; they do not change throughout the play, do not live on stage, although they have considerable power of sharp caricature. The fact is that even during this period Sumarokov was most often a pamphleteer, as he was in Tresotinius. His comedies have a personal address; These are satires “on the face”. Kashchey in “The Covetous Man” is Sumarokov’s relative Buturlin, and a number of details of Kashchey’s life are determined not by the logic of his character, but by his portrait resemblance to Buturlin. Apparently, both Salidar and the Stranger are the same person. Herostratus in “Poisonous” is the literary and personal enemy of F.A. Sumarokov. Emin. Probably Narcissus is a certain person. From interludes and commedia dell'arte, Sumarokov moved in comedy not to the French classics of the 18th century, but to Fonvizin.

Meanwhile, Sumarokov’s very movement towards comedy of characters in the mid-1760s was due not so much to his personal evolution as to the influence that he experienced from the emerging Russian comedy repertoire of the 1750-1760s. Sumarokov's first three comedies opened the way. When a permanent theater was organized in 1756, it needed a repertoire, and in particular comedy. The theater director, Sumarokov, did not write comedies at this time; his students began to work for him, and again I.P. Elagin. Young people followed Elagin, again all students of the Gentry Cadet Corps. These are A. Volkov, V. Bibikov, I. Kropotov, A. Nartov, Iv. Chaadaev and others. They mainly translate the comedies of Moliere and other French playwrights.

The first original Russian comedy after Sumarokov’s was the play by M.M. Kheraskov, also a student of Sumarokov and a graduate of the cadet corps, - “Atheist”; This is a small play in verse, standing apart from the theatrical and dramatic revival around the St. Petersburg Theater (Kheraskov lived in Moscow from 1755), continuing the line of not so much intermediary as instructive school drama. In the early 1760s, two original comedies by A.A. were written. Volkov “Unsuccessful stubbornness” and “Love of children”. These are conventional plays of intrigue that have nothing in common with Russian life, or indeed with any real life. At the same time, in the first half of the 1760s, Elagin attempted to propose a means of bringing the Western comedy repertoire closer to Russian life, namely: “inclining borrowed plays to our morals,” i.e. translate them, slightly altering them into Russian, replacing foreign names with Russian ones, etc. Thus, Elagin himself translated the comedy “French-Russian” from Golberg, and the young man Fonvizin, who served with him, remade his “Corion”, a comedy in verse, from Soren’s play “Sidney”. All this revival on the front of Russian comedy and, in particular, the influence of great French comedies of characters (for example Detouch) determined the direction of Sumarokov’s work as a comedian in 1764-1768.

In 1766, a great event occurred in the history of Russian comedy: Fonvizin’s “Brigadier” became known in metropolitan circles. In 1772, the first comedies of Catherine II appeared. The last three comedies of Sumarokov date back to the same year. They were most decisively influenced by the discovery made by Fonvizin already in “The Brigadier” - a new show of life on stage, and specifically the Russian provincial landowner life in the first place, and a new show of a person with a more complex psychological characteristic and in more clarified specific social conditions . All three of Sumarokov's latest comedies are more compact in plot.

The undoubted masterpiece of Sumarokov’s entire comedic work is his “Cuckold by Imagination,” a comedy that seems to stand in the way of Fonvizin from “The Brigadier” to “The Minor,” despite Sumarokov’s lesser comedic talent. The theme of this play was not new, but it was not framed in the same way as it was done in French comedy (Sumarokov’s play has nothing in common with Moliere’s comedy “Sganarelle, or the Imaginary Cuckold”). Sumarokov introduces the viewer to the life of a seedy, provincial, poor and uncultured landowner's house. Before us are two elderly people, husband and wife, Vikul and Khavronya. They are stupid, ignorant; these are backward, wild people, and comedy should ridicule their provincial barbarism. But at the same time, they are touching in their funny affection for each other. They are a little old-world landowners. In their house lives a poor noblewoman Florisa, educated and virtuous, but without a dowry. A noble and wealthy neighbor, Count Cassander, comes to visit them on the way from hunting. Old man Vikul was jealous of the brilliant count for his Khavronya. He is sure that Khavronya cuckolded him. In the end he learns that the Count and Florisa have fallen in love, that the Count will marry Florisa; thereby dissipating his jealousy.

The comedy is built primarily on showing two characters - Vikul and Khavronya; the rest of the faces are traditional and abstract, although in the role of the dowry Floriza there is a psychological picture that is very unique. But Vikul and especially Khavronya are everyday figures who are important in the history of Russian comedy. True, in both of these roles, and especially in the role of Khavronya, the influence of “The Brigadier” and, above all, the image of the foreman is noticeable. But Sumarokov managed to learn the lessons of his young rival in such a way that he was then able to give him something for his future great comedy.

“Cuckold by Imagination” has notes of “Undergrown.” First of all, the very circle of what is depicted is the same life of the poor and wild landowner province; this is the same rough and colorful language of non-metropolitan landowners. Floriza is in the family of Vikul and Khavronya, like Sophia with the Prostakovs, although Floriza is not offended; in general, these two roles are correlated. Similar to the famous scene after the fight between Prostakova and her brother, the exit of Vikula and his wife who had just fought (d. 2, episode 6). Khavronya’s name sounds like a pun on the Skotinins’ surname, and the manner of everyday drawing and the theme itself come close in places in both comedies.

Sumarokov set the theme developed in “Nedorosl” - about the barbaric social practice of the dark reactionary landowner “masses” (and right there - Skotinin’s pigs).

Sumarokov paints the life of Vikul and Khavronya with rich colors. His victory must be considered such scenes as, for example, Khavronya ordering a ceremonial dinner or the awkward “society” conversations with which she tries to keep the count busy. In these scenes, as in the dialogues of both spouses, Sumarokov reaches the highest point in his desire to convey everyday speech, bright, lively, completely conversational, in places close to the structure of a folk tale, interspersed with proverbs and sayings. He conveys this speech naturalistically, without crystallizing its forms; he considers it uncultured speech that serves to characterize his landowners as barbarians; but still genuine, real speech sounds in his play; it was also heard in his previous comedies, but “Cuckold by Imagination” is his best prose play in this regard.

Here, for example, is a conversation about jealousy:

“Havronya - Ugh, dad! How are you not afraid of God? What thoughts did you have in your old age? Telling people this will make them laugh. By the way, did you come up with this?

Vikul - Why not be afraid that this happens to other people too.

Khavronya - I’m no longer a young woman; so why should you be afraid!

Vikul - Yes, there is a proverb that thunder does not always thunder from a heavenly cloud, but sometimes from a dung heap.

Khavronya - Pip on your tongue; what kind of dung do you have? I am a pile of manure?

Floriza - What is this, madam?

Vikul - Wife, keep this to yourself.

Khavronya - FAQ about yourself? This is shame and rubbish.

Vikul - Don’t talk, my treasure, my diamond stone.

Khavronya - Yes, this is not good, my cherry berry.

Vikul - Wife, stop it.

Khavronya - Kiss me, strong, mighty hero.

Vikul - Let's kiss, my sunflower star.

Khavronya - Be more cheerful, and as bright as a new month, but don’t be jealous.

Vikul - Wife, who is talking about jealousy?

Khavronya - What broke through me! Come on, the horse has four legs, and even he stumbles, and I’m an illiterate woman, so I can’t say a word”...

) the following. Osnelda, the daughter of the former ruler of Kyiv, Zavlokh, is captured by the new prince of the city, Kiy. Zavlokh approaches the city with an army. Kiy wants his daughter back.

Osnelda in the dialogue reveals your soul to your mother: she wants to go to her father, but is unable to part with Khorev, Kiya’s brother, who is dear to her heart. The struggle between the duty of a daughter and a patriot - and the love of a woman fills her soul with confusion. Horev arrives; they are explained; he loves her too, but nevertheless, he is obliged to fulfill his duty as a defender of the fatherland - to go with the army against her father.

Alexander Petrovich Sumarokov. Lecture by A. N. Uzhankov

In the second act, the suspicious boyar Stalverh instills in Kiy mistrust of Khorev. Khorev's advice to make peace with Zavlokh increases Kiy's suspicion.

In the third act, Osnelda receives a letter from her parent prohibiting her from loving the enemy of her homeland, Khorev. The heroine wants to take her own life. The mother holds her. Horev appears and learns the contents of the letter; His despair, however, is overcome by a sense of duty to his brother and fatherland - he goes into battle.

In the 4th act, Kiy, seeing his brother’s heroism, begins to believe in his honesty, but Stalverh continues to support Kiy’s suspicion and brings one witness who, with his story, ruins Osnelda: the enraged Kiy does not believe the princess’s speeches, sends her to prison and orders her to be poisoned.

In the 5th act, Khorev, after the victory, brings Zavlokh prisoner. Cue is convinced of his innocence and hurries to hand Osnelda over to him, but she has already died in prison. (This plot twist is clearly influenced by Shakespeare's King Lear.) Stalverh throws himself into the river and drowns, and then Khorev is stabbed to death.

The construction of the tragedy is completely formulaic: it is composed of long tirades and monologues, which tell in detail the inner state of the soul of the heroes.

To characterize the style of monologues, we will cite several tirades from this tragedy. The confidant mother informs Osnelda that her father has come with an army near Kyiv:

Princess, this day promises you freedom,
This is the last time the sun will shine on you here! –
Zavlokh, your father, came to the city today
And they arm themselves for defense here.
Rumor is already spreading among the local people,
That Kiy, fearing disasters, gives you freedom.

Kiy sends his brother on a campaign with the following speech:

Take up arms, duty calls you,
And glory in the fields awaits you with victory,
Who wove crowns for you many times,
Command the trumpets to sound and rise up against your enemies,
Throw your banners into the winds and go to battle,
Go and win! and return gloriously,
Just like in the Scythian wars under the laurels recently!

Khorev’s monologue at the news of Osnelda’s death:

Isn’t it a dream to frighten me, unforeseen by fate!..
Osnelda!.. I truly parted with you!..
Where am I?.. and what have I become?.. an evil day, a fierce hour!
Oh, righteous gods, Horev has angered you.
...Draw my passionate soul from me!
Run! rush to save the unfortunate princess!
Sorry, my dear... but, oh, she’s already gone!
I'm sorry... Alas, my light has completely faded!..
Oh, life is unbearable! Oh, fierce fate!..

From the monologues of the tragedy it is possible, to some extent, to restore the images of the heroes. Kiy is a weak, gullible ruler, Khorev is a humane, honest, enthusiastic young man, who in the heat of military preparations forgets even about his love. Stalverkh is a slanderer not out of malice, but out of excessive distrust. The realization of his mistake leads him to commit suicide.

The action takes place at the end of the 6th - beginning of the 7th century, at a time when Kiy rules in Rus', and his power is strong and undeniable.

Sixteen years ago, Kiy overthrew Zavlokh, the Kyiv prince, from the throne in order to reign in his place. In that battle, the sons of Zavlokh were killed, and the defeated prince himself was forced to hastily flee with the remaining army to the steppe. His wife, hearing that the victorious Kiy was already at the city gates, and she, who had lost her children, was condemned to separation from her beloved husband, kissed her one-year-old daughter Osnelda goodbye and committed suicide. Little Osnelda was taken prisoner by Kiy.

Although the grown-up girl does not remember either her father or her mother, she does not forget about her origin and hates Kiya, a killer of her kind. However, Kiya's younger brother Khorev evokes different feelings in Osnelda. She likes the noble young man, who tried to the best of his ability to ease the burden of the girl languishing in captivity.

One day, Osnelda’s mother Asgrada brings the princess happy news: Zavlokh, having approached the walls of Kyiv with his army, demands her daughter, and Kiy, not wanting bloodshed, agrees to let Osnelda go... Asgrada is surprised to see that the girl is not happy. In response, Osnelda reveals to her mother her love for Khorev. Although she wants to unite with her father, at the same time she understands that the day of her meeting with Zavlokh will be the day of parting with her lover. Torn between her daughter's duty and love, she no longer knows whether to have fun or be sad that the moment of parting with this city is near, which for her is “a collection and mixture of sorrows and joys...”.

Khorev finds her in this state of mind. He comes to say goodbye to Osnelda and, once again expressing his love to her, begs her to answer at least on the last day whether his feeling has found a response in her soul. The girl admits to reciprocal feelings, but immediately asks Khorev to forget her - after all, Osnelda must leave Kyiv forever. The young man begs her to stay and become his wife, but she remembers her filial duty: how can she marry Kiy’s brother? Khorev objects: “What if your father allows us this?..”. Inspired by this hope, the lovers decide to send Zavlokh a letter and ask for permission to marry, which will again glorify the Zavlokh family and end the long-standing strife in peace.

Unfortunately, Stalverkh, the first Kyiv boyar, having overheard the end of the conversation between the lovers, mistakenly concludes that Khorev, with the assistance of Zavlokh, wants to take the throne in Kyiv himself, and warns Kiya about this. Kiy cannot believe that his brother, his heir, whom he loves like a son, is capable of treason. To test Khorev's loyalty, he calls his brother and orders him to gather soldiers and go against Zavlokh. Khorev objects: why fight and shed blood if you can end things peacefully by simply giving Osnelda to his father? But if this is the order of his brother, he, Khorev, will go to battle without hesitation and return with the head of Zavlokh. Kiy calms down: Khorev is not a traitor.

Hearing the sound of trumpets calling the regiments to battle, Osnelda understands that they will not give her to her father. Shedding tears, the girl sends Astrada to beg Kiya for mercy. But Kiy does not heed her pleas. And Horev is already gathering an army... All hopes are crumbling. Therefore, it is not surprising that when Horev comes to Osnelda, she unleashes a stream of reproaches on him. The young man makes an excuse: to evade the order means to bring dishonor upon oneself, and Khorev cannot bear this - death is better. The princess begs her beloved to at least spare her father and shed as little blood as possible in the battle. But both still hope that news will come from Zavlokh promising an end to the discord.

Alas! In his letter, Zavlokh forbids his daughter to love Khorev. Osnelda decides to commit suicide, but Astrada manages to take the dagger from her pupil at the last minute.

The siege of the city begins. Khorev leads the army and performs miracles of courage. However, Stalverh does not give up his suspicions. He tells Kiy that, according to his information, one of Zavlokhov’s former subjects was released from captivity by Velkar, Khorev’s confidant, and sent to the enemy’s camp, after which he was returned back. Kiy demands that witnesses be presented to him, and the boyar brings the dungeon guard, who says that the prisoner was allegedly taken away from him to the sovereign, and the guard of the city gate, who testifies that he let the prisoner through to Zavlokh, allegedly with a letter from Kiy. And since Kiy still has doubts, Stalverh calls the slave himself. Kiy promises him freedom if he tells the truth, and the captive admits that Velkar led him to Osnelda, who asked him to take a letter to his father; he did this and brought Zavlokh’s answer, but he doesn’t know what was in those letters. The slave is freed.

Kiya's last doubts are dispelled. Angry, he exclaims: “Let me not be thrown into hell by Horus’s slave,” deciding to kill himself before his brother does, but before that, having killed the culprit of all troubles, Osnelda.

Presented before the eyes of Kiya, Osnelda does not want to justify herself and ask for mercy - she is ready to accept execution. The princess only passionately convinces the sovereign that Khorev is innocent, and to prove this, she reveals to Kiya what kind of correspondence she actually had with her father. Kiy says that he will believe her if she presents him with Zavlokh’s letter, but Osnelda cannot do this - after all, she tore up the letter. Then Kiy, suppressing the pity that he against his will feels for the girl, orders Stalverh to take her a cup of poison.

However, Velkar soon arrived and brought news of the victory over the enemy and gave Kiy the sword of Zavlokh, taken prisoner by Khorev. Having received such irrefutable proof of his brother’s loyalty, the king immediately orders one of the soldiers to run to Osnelda and free her; he now even agrees to the girl’s wedding to Khorev. But, unfortunately, the order is late: the princess is already dead.

Meanwhile, Khorev generously invites the defeated Zavlokh to forget the past and enter into an alliance, and he, touched by the nobility of the enemy, agrees to become his friend and give his daughter for him. Hearing this, Kiy is even more horrified by his own mistake. Immediately news comes that Stalverh, realizing how terribly he had slandered an innocent girl, committed suicide by rushing into the Dnieper. In despair, Kiy publicly confesses to the murder he committed and begs his brother to subject him to fair punishment.

But Khorev has no idea of killing his brother or depriving him of the throne - after all, neither this nor tears will bring back his forever lost beloved. The young man asks Kiy to return Zavlokh’s freedom and let him and his army leave the city, and Zavlokh to take Osnelda’s body with him, bury him with dignity and write over the coffin: “The maiden, whose ashes rest in this place, / And in hell with her Horev remains, Whom she loved in this life, - Khorev, having lost her, followed her!”

With these words, Khorev stabs himself with a dagger.

Option 2

According to one chronicle legend, Horeb is one of the brothers who founded Kyiv. The source for Sumarokov’s writing of his work “Khorev” was the information “Synopsis, or Brief description from various chroniclers about the beginning of the Slavic people, about the princes and about the life of the holy noble prince Vladimir.” True, the plot of the play has no historical beginning and was composed by the author himself.

The tragedy takes place at the end of the 6th - beginning of the 7th century, when Kiy is the king of Rus', and his power is strong and undeniable. Sixteen years ago, in a ruthless struggle, he conquered the city of Kyiv and almost completely destroyed the family of the Kyiv prince Zavlokh, and his little daughter Osnelda became a hostage in the palace of the Tsar of Rus'. The girl does not forget her people and began to hate Kiya. The king had a younger brother, Horev, who is trying with all his might to make life easier for the hostage. They like each other. After some time, Zavlokh gathered a new army and went to Kyiv to free his daughter. Osnolda's mother, Asgarda, told the girl everything that was happening, but was surprised that she was not happy. The girl did not want to part with Khorev because she loved him. At that very moment her lover arrives and asks to stay and marry him, to which the girl refuses. She explained this by saying that she had a duty to her people, and her father would not want her to marry her brother Kiy. Then the lovers decide to send Zavlokh a letter in which Khorev asks permission to marry his daughter, which will again glorify their family.

But boyar Kiya Stalverh overheard the lovers’ entire conversation and tells everything to his king, who could not believe his brother’s betrayal. Then he decides to test Khorev, ordering him to gather an army and go to Zavlokh. Kiya's brother agrees, but still hopes that the enemy will receive the letter in time and agree to do anything to end the battle. But Zavlokh begins a siege of the city and forbids his daughter to love Khorev, who bravely fights in battle. Meanwhile, Stalverh still doubts the tsar’s brother’s infidelity, and is trying in every possible way to prove it. But he can't do it. Kiy finds out that Osnelda gave the letter to her father and wants to poison the girl. After some time, one servant brings news to the king about the victory over Zavlokh, who was taken prisoner by Horev. Having received further proof of his brother’s devotion, Kiy greatly regretted ordering his servant to bring a glass of poison to Osnelda.

The king immediately gives the order for the girl to be released, and he is ready to marry the lovers. But, alas, she is already dead. Meanwhile, Khorev enters into an alliance with Zavlokh, who is touched by the nobility of his enemy. He is ready to give his daughter in marriage to Kiy's brother. Unfortunately, this will not happen, because the Tsar of Rus' confessed to the murder he committed and asks his brother to punish him. Khorev does not want to do anything and asks Kiy for only one thing - to release Zavlokh and his army, and he kills himself with a dagger.

(No ratings yet)

Other writings:

Dimitri the Pretender Since Dimitri took the Russian throne by deception, he has committed many atrocities: he exiled and executed many innocent people, ruined the country, and turned Moscow into a prison for the boyars. But in 1606 his tyranny reached Read More......
Alexander Petrovich Sumarokov Alexander Petrovich Sumarokov, the most consistent of the classicist writers, along with the practice of literary activity, was able to provide a theoretical justification for classicism as a literary movement characteristic of mid-century Russia. In literature, Sumarokov acted as a successor and at the same time antagonist of Lomonosov. Read More......
Mrs. Yang kills a dog to bring her husband to reason. Only his two bosom friends, two scoundrels, Liu Longqing and Hu Zizhuan, should come to the merchant Sun Rong's birthday. The wife, who has set the festive table, bitterly reproaches her husband for not Read More......
The Tale of the Shemyakin Court There lived two peasant brothers: one rich and the other poor. For many years the rich lent money to the poor, but he remained just as poor. One day a poor man came to ask a rich man for a horse to bring firewood. He reluctantly Read More ......
Khoephori Many years have passed since the murder of Agamemnon. One day two people dressed as wanderers approached his grave. The younger one had a sword, and the older one held two spears in his hands. One of the wanderers, who is younger, according to Read More......
The rebellion of Wang Xinzhi About how Wang Xinzhi saved his entire family with his death. During the Southern Song Dynasty, many people received royal favors. But it happened more than once that worthy men never met a happy fate. Rich man Wang Shizhong got Read More......
The stupid artist This author hears the story from the nanny of his younger brother Lyubov Onisimovna, a former beautiful actress of the Oryol theater of Count Kamensky. On Trinity Sunday she takes the author to the cemetery, where at a simple grave she tells the story of the “stupid artist” Arkady. Arkady – hairdresser Read More ......
Village Russia. The end of the 19th – the beginning of the 20th century. The Krasov brothers, Tikhon and Kuzma, were born in the small village of Durnovka. In their youth, they were engaged in small trade together, then they quarreled, and their paths diverged. Kuzma went to work for hire. Tikhon rented an inn, Read More ......

Summary Khorev Sumarokov

Sumarokov also had his say in the comedy genre. By exposing human vices in a funny way, exposing them, comedy should thereby contribute to liberation from them. Comedy must be separated from tragedy, on the one hand, and from farcical games, on the other. Sumarokov nevertheless turned to the practice of people. theater They are small in volume (1-3 acts), written in prose, and often lack a plot basis. (Let’s pray to Santa Nikolaus once again - how good it is that he will no longer be there J), characterized by farcical comedy, characters - clerk, judge, etc., note. Sumarokov in Russian. life. Trying to imitate the French. The comedies of Moliere and Sumarokov are far from the comedies of Western classicism (5 acts, in verse, compositional rigor, completeness, etc.). Imitation of the French comedy was reflected in the borrowing of character names: Erast, Isabella, etc.

Wrote 12 books, according to ideological significance and art. values are lower than tragic. First com. – 1750 – “An Empty Quarrel” and others. In the 60s. – “Guardian” and others. In 1772 – “Cuckold by Imagination” and others. Com. served as a means of polemics - the pamphlet character of most of them. Unlike tr. over the room worked for a short time. In the first com. – each action the face showed the public its vice, the scenes were mechanically connected. In a small room. - a lot of actions. persons (10-11). Their portraiture made it possible for contemporaries to find out who in reality served as the prototype. Real persons, everyday details, negative phenomena Russian. life - gave the room, despite the conventionality of the image, a connection with reality. Bright, expressive language, often colored with the features of a lively dialect - the desire to individualize the speech of characters. Early com. directed against enemies in lit. field. The images had a conventional character and were far from typical generalizations.

Second group com. – com. characters are distinguished by greater depth and conditionality of the depiction of the main characters. All attention is focused on the main character, other actions. faces - to reveal character traits ch. hero, I suppose. characters, performance reasoners. The most successful images are denied. heroes, in the character of a cat. a lot of satire. and everyday traits.

One of the best com. this period - "Guardian"(com in 1 action), com. about the nobleman-usurer, swindler and hypocrite Stranger, fleecing orphans, cat. came under his care. The “original” of the Stranger is Sumarokov’s relative Buturlin. Sumarokov does not show the bearer of one vice, but draws a complex one. character Before us is a miser who does not know. no conscience, no pity, a bigot, an ignoramus, a libertine. Sumarokov creates a generalized conditional satyr. Russian image vicious nobleman. The disclosure of character is facilitated by speech character (speech is full of proverbs and sayings, in addressing God - Church Slavonicisms) and everyday life. details. Valery - put it down. the hero is a reasoner, devoid of vitality. Figurative names will be denied. characters (Stranger) – moralizing goals characteristic of classicism. Valid persons: Stranger (70 l) - nobleman, Sostrata - courtyard. daughter, Valery - lover of Sostrata, Nisa (17 years old) - noblewoman and servant of the Stranger, Pasquin - servant of the Stranger, Palemon - friend of Valery's late father, secretary, soldiers. The action takes place in St. Petersburg. One of his own stole a cross with his name from Pasquin. Sostrata admits to the theft. Pasquin – present name Valerian, brother of Valery, which turns out later. Pasquin loves Nysa, Stranger wants to marry her. The stranger prevents the marriage of Valery and Sostrata, because he does not follow either past or current fashion, he is smart, and it is difficult to deceive him. The stranger is afraid of God's judgment, repents, wants to go to Kyiv to atone for his sins. As a result, all the atrocities of the Stranger are revealed (he used to be a hypocrite so that they would not interfere with his getting rich), he is taken to trial, his estate goes to Valerian (Pasquin), everyone gets married, the power of the rulers is exposed, cat. they don't deserve her. “Lawlessness disappear, virtue flourish!” Lots of talk about the soul. The main thing: money solves everything. The stranger is a slacker and the servants are the same.

Con. 60's - 70's – the growth of opposition sentiments towards enlightened absolutism among the progressive nobility and the various intelligentsia. The peasant question and the relationship between landowners and peasants are raised. Attention to everyday life, surroundings. man, the desire for more complexity. psychologist. disclosure of characters in definition. social conditions. The best play in Sumarokov’s comedy TV "Cuckold by Imagination"(3 acts) appeared after Fonvizin’s “Brigadier” and anticipated the appearance of “Undergrowth” (commonality of situations, characters).

The focus is on the life of the provincial poor landowners, Vikul and Khavronya. Limited interests, ignorance, narrow-mindedness characterize them. The characters are not one-sided. Making fun of the savagery, the absurdity of these people, cat. they only talk about sowing (no, not our Megaseva, but it’s a pity, it would be interesting))), about reaping, about threshing, about chickens,” from the cat. peasants walk around the world (Havronya forces all the peasants to work, puts money aside for a rainy day), Sumarokov shows traits, a challenge. sympathy for them. Vikul and Khavronya touch with their affection, they are kind to their pupil, the poor girl in the yard. clan Florise. The absurdity of Vikula and Khavronya’s life is emphasized by the plot of the comedy. Vikul was jealous of Khavronya (60 l) of the brilliant Count Cassander, a rich neighbor, cat. I loved Floriza. The dialogues are full of comedy, cat. Vikul reproaches Khavronya for infidelity, believing that she cuckolded him.

The speech characteristics of the characters help to recreate the appearance and morals of the provincial nobles.

Their language is rich and expressive. This is not the smooth, correct speech of noble salons, but rough, colorful, peppered with proverbs and sayings, akin to the common language of the provincial nobility.

Valid persons: Vikul - a nobleman, Khavronya - his wife, Floriza - a poor noblewoman, Kasander - Count, Dvoretskoy, Nisa - Khavronya's maid, Count Cassandra's huntsman. The Count is going to come to them for lunch, Khavronya is giving instructions, she knows Cassandra - they were sitting next to each other in the theater in Moscow. Vikula is jealous. The count marries Floriza, Khavronya gives way to Nisa. The Count is ready to share everything with them.