Above the great, golden-domed Moscow,

Above the Kremlin white stone wall

Because of the distant forests, because of the blue mountains,

Playfully on the plank roofs,

The gray clouds are accelerating,

The scarlet dawn rises;

She scattered her golden curls,

Washed with crumbly snow,

Like a beauty looking in the mirror,

He looks into the clear sky and smiles.

Why did you, scarlet dawn, wake up?

What kind of joy did you play out on?

How we got together and got ready

Daring Moscow fighters

To the Moscow River, to a fist fight,

Take a walk for the holiday, have fun.

And the king arrived with his retinue,

With the boyars and guardsmen,

And he ordered the silver chain to be stretched,

Soldered with pure gold in rings.

They cordoned off a place twenty-five fathoms,

For hunting combat, single.

And then Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich ordered

“Oh, where are you, good fellows?

You will amuse our king and father!

Come out into a wide circle;

Whoever beats someone, the king will reward him;

And whoever is beaten, God will forgive him!”

And the daring Kiribeevich comes out,

Silently bows to the king at the waist,

Throws off the velvet fur coat from his mighty shoulders,

Leaning your right hand to your side,

Adjusts another's scarlet hat,

He is waiting for his opponent...

They called out a loud cry three times -

Not a single fighter was touched,

They just stand and push each other.

The guardsman walks in the open space,

He makes fun of bad fighters:

“They calmed down, I suppose, became thoughtful!

So be it, I promise, for the holiday,

I will release him alive with repentance,

I’ll just amuse our king and father.”

Suddenly the crowd spread out in both directions -

And Stepan Paramonovich comes out,

A young merchant, a daring fighter,

Nicknamed Kalashnikov,

First I bowed to the terrible king,

After the white Kremlin and the holy churches,

And then to the entire Russian people.

His falcon eyes are burning,

He looks intently at the guardsman.

He becomes opposite to him,

He pulls on his combat gloves,

The mighty shoulders straighten

Yes, he strokes his curly beard.

And Kiribeevich said to him:

“Tell me, good fellow,

What kind of family, tribe are you?

What name do you go by?

To know for whom to serve a memorial service,

To have something to brag about.”

Stepan Paramonovich answers:

“And my name is Stepan Kalashnikov,

And I was born from an honest father,

And I lived according to the law of the Lord:

I did not disgrace someone else's wife,

I did not rob in the dark night,

Didn't hide from the heavenly light...

And you spoke the true truth:

They will sing a funeral service for one of us,

And no later than tomorrow at noon;

And one of us will boast

Feasting with distant friends...

Don't joke, don't make people laugh

I have now come to you, son of a Basurman,

I went out for a terrible battle, for the last battle!”

And hearing that, Kiribeevich

His face turned pale like autumn snow:

His fearful eyes became clouded,

Frost ran between the strong shoulders,

The word froze on open lips...

Here they both part silently,

The heroic battle begins.

Then Kiribeevich swung

And he hit the merchant Kalashnikov first,

And hit him in the middle of the chest -

The brave chest crackled,

Stepan Paramonovich staggered;

A copper cross hung on his chest

With holy relics from Kyiv,

And the cross bent and pressed into the chest;

Blood dripped from under him like dew;

And Stepan Paramonovich thought:

“What is destined to happen will come true;

I will stand for the truth to the last day!”

He contrived, prepared,

Gathered with all my might

And hit your hater

Directly to the left temple from all over the shoulder.

And the young guardsman groaned slightly,

He swayed and fell dead;

He fell onto the cold snow,

On the cold snow, like a pine tree,

Like a pine tree in a damp forest

Chopped under the resinous root.

And seeing this, Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich

Got angry and stomped on the ground

And he frowned his black eyebrows;

He ordered to seize the daring merchant

And bring him before your face.

Annotation.

This material proposes a way to analyze the introduction to Pushkin’s poem “The Bronze Horseman”, designed for 7th grade students. Historical facts, drafts of the poet, reproductions of paintings by Russian artists are involved in the analysis. The analysis is aimed at developing thoughtful reading skills and cultivating patriotic feelings in students.

Key words: poem, Russia, St. Petersburg, Peter the Great, love for St. Petersburg, capital, landscape, Peter's plans, contextual synonyms.

The poem “The Bronze Horseman” was written in 1833 in the village of Boldino, Nizhny Novgorod province, during the famous Boldino autumn. It was in this inspired autumn that Pushkin created many of his masterpieces, including this poem.

In it, too, the main character is Tsar Peter the Great, but here he no longer appears before us as a commander-in-chief, as in the poem “Poltava”, but first of all as a tsar, a statesman, a great reformer, building a powerful state and founding a new capital - St. Petersburg, with on the one hand, and on the other, a ruthless emperor who, for the sake of state plans, can sacrifice the lives of ordinary people if they interfere with their implementation.

At the end of the poem, he appears to readers no longer alive, thinking, dreaming, but as an equestrian statue pursuing the one who tried to object to him, threaten him, express his opinion - the Bronze Horseman.

By the way, the monument to Peter received this name thanks to Pushkin’s poem. In fact, the monument is cast from bronze; it was erected in St. Petersburg in 1782 on the initiative of Empress Catherine II. (Photos of the monument are shown.) The inscription on
The monument reads: “To Peter the Great, Catherine the Second.” It is made in Russian and Latin. Latin symbolized Russia's breakthrough into European space.

For now, we will only get acquainted with the introduction to the poem, which is addressed to St. Petersburg and its founder Peter the Great.

Cities, like people, have their own dates of birth. Only the trace of some is lost in the depths of centuries, while others are known for sure. The birthday of St. Petersburg is also known: it is May 16, 1703, when on the day of the Holy Trinity at the mouth of the Neva River on Hare Island the Peter and Paul Fortress was founded, which laid the foundation for the future city. And on June 23 of the same year, the laying of the first church in St. Petersburg began in honor of the holy apostles Peter and Paul.

The laying of the temple took place during a cannon salute from the ships of the Baltic Fleet. According to legend, Peter himself determined the location of the future temple, placed pieces of folded turf in the center of the fortress and said: “There will be a city here.” The ark with the relics of the Apostle Andrew the First-Called was placed at the foundation of the city...

What dictated Peter's decision to found St. Petersburg?
During the Northern War with the Swedes, the Russian army recaptured the Swedish fortress of Nyenschanz in battle. In order to consolidate his position in this territory, Peter gave the order to found a city not far from the fortress.

He independently began to explore the nearby territories to find a more suitable place - it had to be near the sea and be suitable for life. His search led him to Hare Island. Soon the first fortifications grew here. St. Petersburg was conceived as a port city, which also influenced the choice of its location.

What parts can this introduction to the poem be divided into? What is each of them about?

The introduction is clearly divided into three parts. The first tells about Peter's plans and dreams, the second tells about the birth of St. Petersburg, the third the poet declares his love for the city.

Let's title each part with a quote from the poem. This will give us a quotation plan.
Here he is:
1. “Here the city will be founded...”
2. “The young city... ascended magnificently, proudly...”
3. “I love you, Petra’s creation! .."

Which of these parts reflects Peter’s view of St. Petersburg, and which reflects Pushkin’s view? Justify your opinion.

The first and second parts of the introduction reflect Peter’s view: in the first we see only the sovereign’s plan and the goals that he sets (“Here the city will be founded”, “From here we will threaten the Swede”, “All the flags will visit us ...”). : in the second, these plans become reality (the city has appeared, “ships / A crowd from all over the earth / Are striving for rich marinas ...”) - this is exactly what the Russian Tsar dreamed of. The third part contains the poet’s personal attitude towards the city he describes; he talks about what he loves and appreciates in him: his “strict, slender appearance,” thoughtful nights, frosty winters, “girls’ faces brighter than roses, / And the shine, and the noise, and the talk of balls,” “militant liveliness / of the Amusing Fields of Mars " etc.

How does St. Petersburg appear in this introduction? How does it make the reader feel?
Find all the contextual synonyms that Pushkin uses to call St. Petersburg. Petersburg appears before us as a majestic, beautiful city and evokes a feeling of admiration in the reader: it is passed on to us from the author. In the introduction there are many contextual synonyms associated with St. Petersburg: first it is “the shelter of a wretched Chukhonets”, then “the young city”, “the beauty and wonder of the full countries”, “the youngest capital”, “the new queen”, “Peter’s creation”, “the city of Petrov” "

How can you determine the historical path of St. Petersburg using these synonyms? What was in its place first? What impression does the Neva landscape make, looking at which Peter makes his plans? What parts of speech predominate in his description?
Contextual synonyms recreate before us the historical path of the city, first hidden in the “darkness of forests and swamps of blat” and then rapidly ascending “magnificently, proudly” into the light, turning into the new capital of Russia.

The initial landscape, peering into which the sovereign contemplates the birth of a new city, seems dull and even gloomy:
On the shore of desert waves
He stood there, full of great thoughts,
And he looked into the distance. Wide before him
The river rushed; poor boat
He strove along it alone.
Along mossy, marshy banks
Blackened huts here and there,
Shelter of a wretched Chukhonian;
And the forest, unknown to the rays
In the fog of the hidden sun,
There was noise all around.
There is almost no color in the landscape because there is no sun (it is hidden in the fog). Everything is miserable and joyless: the fast river, the “poor boat” that “lonely” struggles with the current, the black huts - “the shelter of the wretched Chukhon”.

The description is dominated by adjectives and participles: deserted waves, mossy, swampy shores, a poor boat, a wretched Chukhonian, a hidden sun, a forest unknown to the rays... Everything seems to be dormant, not yet aware of its strength...

Let us pay attention to the fact that in the first lines Peter is not even mentioned by name - only he is in italics. Why?

Everyone understands who he is, and at the same time this gives the image of Peter a special grandeur, as if endowing him with some special powers and capabilities. Pushkin worked very long and painstakingly on the beginning of the poem. Look how many variations he came up with and how many he discarded.

On the shores of the Varangian waves
I stood there full of deep thoughts
Great Peter. Rolled in front of him
Secluded (river?)

Once upon a time near the desert waves
I stood there, thinking deeply,
Great husband. Wide before him
The deserted Neva flowed.

Once upon a time near the Baltic waves
I stood there, thinking deeply,
Great king. Wide before him
The deserted Neva flowed.

What happened in the end? Compare with the final version. What did Pushkin remove or change? Why? What sound did this give to the poem?
Pushkin removed all proper names (the name of the Tsar and geographical names). He dropped the epithet great in relation to Peter; his thoughts were called great. He replaced with the phrase the thoughts of the great the full participial phrase, thinking deeply, which made the story about Peter the Transformer sublime and strengthened the scale of Peter’s plans (thoughts indicate a longer process of nurturing the desired plan than the participial phrase, thinking deeply).

The landscape has become more concrete and visible. The river not only rolls along its banks, but rushes along, the “poor boat” rushes along its waves. I remember the expression “river of life”, where a fragile shuttle with a man floating on it becomes a symbol of his defenselessness before fate and its unpredictability. It is on this river and the canoe that the king’s gaze is fixed, trying to pierce time and see the future. Let’s re-read the poems about his plans again and think about them:

And he thought:
From here we will threaten the Swede,
The city will be founded here
To spite an arrogant neighbor.
Nature destined us here
Cut a window to Europe,
Stand with a firm foot by the sea.
Here on new waves
All the flags will visit us,
And we’ll record it in the open air.

Pushkin called these plans great. Why? Explain what it means to “cut a window into Europe, / Stand with a firm foot by the sea.” Peter dreams of going to sea, of his own fleet, of trade and political ties with Europe. That is why Pushkin calls his plans great.

Which part of speech, in your opinion, is the most important in describing these plans? (The verb dominates in this passage: threaten, cut through, become, lock up. Moreover, all verbs are used in the future tense.)

Read the verbs carefully. How can you get access to the sea?
“Cutting a window” means mastering nature, cutting down forests, draining swamps, gaining civilized access to the sea, to Europe, by founding a port city.

Why do you need to do this?
To put up a barrier to the Western invaders and warn them that the road to the enemy is closed: “From here we will threaten the Swede...”. The city will be laid down “to spite the arrogant neighbor.” And at the same time, “all the flags will visit us, and we will lock them up in the open.” How to understand this? Does this combine - a stern warning and an invitation to visit? Yes, this is Mother Russia: impregnable for enemies and hospitable for good neighbors and invited guests...

Let's compare Peter's plans with the landscape against which they are born. The landscape is miserable, wild, and the plans are grandiose: the future civilization is opposed to nature and the elements. Peter feels like a creator who can ennoble the earth, and Pushkin admires his will and ability to implement large-scale plans. And this admiration is felt in the pronoun he highlighted by the poet, which includes his name, title, and talent as a politician. However, the implementation of the sovereign’s great plans would have been impossible without God’s help and without a great people, sacrificial and patient, capable of tireless work.

In the first part of the introduction to the poem, landscapes and plans of Peter are given equal space - 11 lines each, that is, they are still in balance.

The second part also consists of 22 lines, and it also contains a description of the previous landscape. Find him.

Where was the Finnish fisherman before?
Nature's sad stepson
Alone on the low banks

Thrown into unknown waters
Your own old net...

This landscape takes only 5 lines. What does this mean? What happened? What changed?
The former wild, gloomy landscape replaced the urban landscape. Petersburg was born... Peter's dream came true.

A hundred years have passed, and the young city,
There is beauty and wonder in full countries,
From the darkness of the forests, from the swamps of blat
Ascended magnificently, proudly...

What was the birth of this city like? Why does the poem say nothing about its construction? What motif does this introduce into the poem?
The birth of St. Petersburg is like a miracle, because there is not a word about how it was built. The children compare its appearance to a sprouted grain that no one saw while it was hidden in the ground. And suddenly it sprouted, first as a bold stem, and then turned into a mighty tree. The absence of a story about the construction of the city introduces the motif of a miracle into the poem. The city seemed to be born out of oblivion and surprised everyone. The one who threw this grain into the ground is relegated to the background, because the city turns out to be even more magnificent than the plan. He is “the beauty and wonder of all countries.”

The beautiful city has become a wonderful monument to its founder.

Who is missing from the description of this city?
Human! He is not visible behind these palaces and towers, bridges and gardens. Of course, he exists, and in every architectural monument of St. Petersburg, in its majestic buildings, embankments and bridges, gardens and parks, there is a trace of a working man.

The poor Chukhonian, in the role of “nature’s stepson” (that is, an unloved child), lived on the shores of “desert waves,” throwing “his old net” into the waters. In the second part, he has already become only a memory: neither he nor the inhabitants of St. Petersburg are visible... There are only “huges ... of palaces and towers”, “rich piers”, “dark green gardens”, granite banks, bridges “over the waters”.

Where do you first feel the appearance of a person?
A man appears in the third part of the introduction, and this man is Alexander
Sergeevich Pushkin. Let's reread this part. Literary scholars call it the anthem of St. Petersburg. Let's try to prove that this is true. Find lines where you can hear open admiration for the city, admiration for its beauty. Read them so that we can hear this admiration.

What word is repeated repeatedly in this hymn?
I love: “I love you, Peter’s creation, / I love your strict, slender appearance ...”, “I love your cruel winter / Still air and frost ...”, “I love the warlike liveliness / of the amusing Fields of Mars ...”, “I love, military capital, / Your stronghold is smoke and thunder...”

What does the poet like in St. Petersburg? Prove that the city in his perception is alive and spiritual.
Pushkin loves the St. Petersburg landscape, in which everything lives and breathes. He likes the “sovereign flow of the Neva” (even the flow of the river, encased in granite banks, is filled with the will of the state!), pensive nights, sleeping masses of houses, dawns hurrying to “replace” one another.

The military Field of Mars (the place where military parades took place) in the poem seems to be alive. Neva “rejoices”, “having broken her blue ice.” And everywhere you can feel the presence of a person - an author who reads “without a lamp” and peers into the shine of the Admiralty Needle, loves the frosty winter, “the running of a sled along the wide Neva, / Girls’ faces are brighter than roses,” “the hiss of foamy glasses” at a friendly feast, military parades on the Field of Mars, the thunder of cannons, “when the full-fledged queen / Gives her son to the royal house” ...

Created by the sovereign will of Peter on the model of European capitals, St. Petersburg became the most beautiful city on earth, a symbol of the state power of Russia, but it was raised “from the darkness of the forests, from the swamps of blat” by man and ennobled by his work and soul. Therefore, the reader, captivated by Pushkin’s verse, exclaims admiringly along with the poet: “I love you, Peter’s creation” and
Show off, city Petrov, and stand
Unshakable, like Russia,
May he make peace with you

5 / 5. 1

Or rather, we will talk not about one, but about two idols at once, two equestrian monuments in St. Petersburg, depicting the Russian Tsar Peter I in the image of an ancient triumphant.

One of these monuments, the work of Etienne Falconet, acquired the significance of a symbol of the Northern capital on Senate Square. He has few equals in world sculpture. Glorified by Pushkin as the Bronze Horseman, he organically fit into the ensemble of the Neva embankments.

In the unshakable heights,

Above the indignant Neva,

Stands with outstretched hand

Idol on a bronze horse...

What a thought on the brow!

What power is hidden in it!

And what fire there is in this horse!

Where are you galloping, proud horse?

And where will you put your hooves?

O mighty lord of Fate!

Aren't you above the abyss?

Raised Russia on its hind legs at a height with an iron bridle?

Another equestrian monument to Peter I, by Carlo Rastrelli, stands opposite the Mikhailovsky Castle. Cast during the reign of Peter I's daughter, Elizabeth, the statue waited in the wings for over forty years and was installed by the great-grandson of the converter, Paul I, in front of the southern facade of his new residence. Along with the swift Bronze Horseman Falcone, the proud monument to Rastrelli is a symbolic embodiment of a victorious, transformed Russia. Just like many years ago, today it is the compositional center of the ensemble of Klenovaya and Zamkovaya streets.

The artist was asked to tell the story of the creation of these amazing monuments of the Baroque and Classical era in Russia.

So, my dear readers, starting the story, I want to remind you that art never dies, it exists next to us, inside us, helps to set milestones along the historical path. The look at the figure and role in history of Peter the Great is ambiguous, but today we will look at him through the eyes of his contemporaries and descendants who replaced him. Elizabeth, Catherine II, Paul I - daughter, grandson's wife and great-grandson. And those who, with their talent and labor, created the image of the Transformer, the Father of the Fatherland and the Hero - Carlo Bartolomeo Rastrelli and Etienne Falconet.

Works and days of Carlo Rastrelli

1715 Peter I sends his trusted man, F. Lefort, to Europe in order to recruit noble architects, sculptors, mechanics, and engraving and embossing specialists to work in St. Petersburg. In Paris, Lefort enters into a three-year contract with the Italian architect and sculptor Count Carlo Bartolomeo Rastrelli. A talented artist travels to Russia with the goal of winning the favor of Tsar Peter.

According to the agreement, the Italian must draw up designs for two country palaces and carry out their construction. But Rastrelli himself cherishes other plans. He knows that in the country where he will work, churches are erected in memory of great events and heroes, and there is not a single secular monument. A year later, Rastrelli presented the Tsar with a model of an equestrian monument, but Peter, busy with war and construction, reacted coolly to the master’s idea. The time for monuments to kings and generals has not yet come. A king dressed in a Roman toga would have caused, at the very least, bewilderment and fear. Carlo Rastrelli devoted several years to creating a sculptural portrait. He created a whole gallery of images of courtiers and the king himself.

The sculptor clearly does not resort to flattery and creates the image of a man full of energy and intelligence, convinced of his grandiose plans, but at the same time, intolerant and merciless. Clenched jaws, slightly knitted eyebrows, a proudly raised chin, an easily recognizable mustache - this is Peter. Carlo Rastrelli managed to reveal his impetuous and impetuous nature. The all-conquering power of Peter is emphasized by the restless, brittle folds of the ermine mantle and the chased knight's armor. And now this bust is one of the treasures of the Russian Museum in St. Petersburg.

In 1720, it seemed that the time had come for a talented sculptor. Peter is preparing to assume the title of emperor. Before this, Russia was a kingdom, now it was destined to become an empire. In the time of Peter, the words “empire” and “emperor” sounded in a Western manner and undoubtedly expressed a new level of power and greatness. The splendor of the Constantinople court, which once blinded the Russian great princes, lost all meaning for Peter. Peter was interested in the customs inherited by Europe from Ancient Rome and in 1717 he made a new trip to Europe. In Paris, an equestrian statue of the “Sun King” Louis XIV appeared before him, and he wanted to raise his own prestige, to receive exactly the same monument glorifying the monarch. With his characteristic activity, he chose a place for the monument on Vasilyevsky Island, opposite the building of the Twelve Colleges, where St. Petersburg University is now located. And, of course, he appointed Carlo Rastrelli as the author and performer of the project. The sculptor understood the task: the equestrian statue of Peter in the armor of the Roman triumphant, erected in front of the building that housed government offices, should personify the connection between victories on the battlefield and state reforms.

Peter only managed to approve the sketch of the future monument, and the sculptor began to work on making the model - when suddenly on January 28, 1725, the emperor passed away. With the death of Peter, work on the monument was delayed. Rastrelli was commissioned to produce death masks and the so-called “wax persona with dresses” of the late sovereign. By the way, Peter Rastrelli made a plaster mask back in 1719. Then Pope Clement wished to place the figure of the Russian Tsar Peter in the wax museum in the Vatican. The pope called the king to Rome, but he did not have time to go and had to take off his mask at home and send it along with casts of his hands and feet. At the same time, Peter I ordered the production of his own wax bust in armor, painted in accordance with the fashion of the time. I must say, a very painful technology! Peter had to shave his head and shave off his famous mustache. Then he was seated in a chair, his arms were tied to the armrests, and his torso was tied to the back. They covered their eyes with a plaster. The head and face were smeared with goose fat. They put a barrel on top - formwork - securing it on supports. Tubes were inserted into my nostrils to help me breathe. This entire structure was filled with liquid gypsum and they waited for the gypsum to harden. During the procedure, the master was assisted by the king's orderlies and son Francesco. When the plaster hardened, the master checked its readiness by knocking. They tore off the formwork and began to split what came out - it was something like a white cabinet in which the king’s head was located. The hardened plaster was chipped, assembled, and all the pieces were peeled off from the face. Peter endured bravely. This custom of removing masks from human faces was inherited in the west from the Romans.

Wax person of Peter I. 1725

Peter's "persona" is dressed in a rich dress made of blue grodetour - a high-quality ribbed silk material. The costume was sewn by Catherine's hands for her own coronation. Before this event, Peter preferred to wear the green Preobrazhensky uniform, in which he fought near Poltava. Peter wore it only once - on the day of his wife’s coronation on May 7, 1724. The sculptor himself carved the figure of Peter from wood in exact accordance with the measurements of the king’s body. The wig on his head is made from his own hair. The wide-open eyes, looking directly at the viewer, were made in enamel on gold by the famous miniature artist Andrei Ovsov. To give the figure mobility, special round joints are machined for the arms and legs. Currently on display at the State Hermitage Museum.

Catherine I was in no hurry to erect a monument to her husband. She reigned for two years. The grandson Peter who replaced her, the son of the executed Tsarevich Alexei, did not even think about immortalizing his grandfather as a Roman commander. During the reign of Anna Ioannovna there was no time for Peter the Hero. Everything changed with the coming to power of Peter’s daughter, Elizabeth. It was important for her, who seized the throne as a result of a palace coup, to justify her act by demonstrating a blood connection with her great father. Therefore, already in the first days of her reign, there was talk of an equestrian monument to the founder of the empire.

Carlo Rastrelli enthusiastically took up the statue of a hero-demigod, standing above people, alien to worries and suffering, unforgiving to everything that goes against his will. His new face under the sculptor’s chisel has lost the impetuosity and passion, the piercing gaze of the viewer that he was endowed with in the bronze bust. Now the emperor, crowned with a laurel wreath, seated on a horse walking with a ringing step, was filled with a silent consciousness of his superiority.

The work went well. Already in 1743, Elizaveta Petrovna “tested,” as they said then, a life-size model of the monument. However, the following year, 1744, Carlo Rastrelli died before he could begin casting the monument.

How the statue was cast

Casting of an equestrian statueCarlo Rastrelli's assistant, the Frenchman Martel, was entrusted with the task.The royal office reported that Martel “has the art of making excellent portraits from silver and copper and knows other skills.” But this master never cast equestrian statues! Having taken on important work, the Frenchman slowly moved towards success and in nine years he only managed to remove a collapsible mold from a clay model (in pieces) and cast a new one on it - from wax. He began making the wax statue in 1753.

At this time, the son of the author of the monument, Bartolomeo Rastrelli, was designing a new Winter Palace, the same one that is now occupied by the State Hermitage. The embodiment of the rapidly growing greatness of the empire, the palace amazed the imagination with hundreds of snow-white columns on an azure (now green) background - ordinary, paired, grouped in bunches, nearly a thousand windows in stucco frames, gilded vases and statues along the roofs. How infinitely far from all this splendor is the modest summer palace of Peter! That is why it seemed especially necessary to the architect that the founder of the empire himself should decorate his daughter’s residence with his own presence. Therefore, it was decided to install the statue by Rastrelli the Father in front of the Winter Palace in the center of the round square. Rastrelli the son intended to surround the square with a double colonnade, which would connect the monument even more closely with the palace and separate it from the city. Everyone had to see with their own eyes that the very memory of Peter belonged to his daughter. Elizabeth liked Bartolomeo Rastrelli's idea.

The implementation of the plan was prevented by the war with Prussia. The country was experiencing financial difficulties, and Elizabeth had to save on everything, including her whims. But work on the statue continued. For eight years they prepared, dried, bound a form of refractory clay with iron hoops, burned and melted wax from this form. And then the day came when the craftsmen lit the smelting furnace and cast the statue. This happened in 1761, but in the same year, on December 25, Elizaveta Petrovna died. Ironically, Elizabeth’s nephew and heir, Grand Duke Peter Fedorovich, was not only the grandson of Peter I, but also the great-nephew of Charles XII. Having grown up at the court of his father Karl Friedrich of Holstein in hatred of everything Russian (his mother, Elizabeth’s elder sister Anna Petrovna, died three months after his birth), he reigned under the name of Peter III. His short reign was marked by worship of the military leadership of the enemy of Russia, the Prussian king Frederick II, the replacement of Peter's uniforms with Prussian ones and the conclusion of peace with Prussia, when our army victoriously entered Berlin. Under such an emperor, even mentioning the installation of a triumphal monument to his grandfather in front of the Winter Palace was dangerous. Six months later, Peter III, who did not have time to be crowned, was overthrown by the guard and killed by those close to his wife Catherine. The new empress was in dire need of the love of her people and wished to acquire immortal glory and greatness. Catherine II was wise. She understood how important it was to perpetuate the memory of Great Peter, emphasizing her own role as his successor. But at the same time, the already finished statue ordered by his daughter was not suitable. She emphasized the daughter’s connection with her father, and for yesterday’s German princess this was unacceptable. It was in vain that Rastrelli the son anticipated the imminent installation of his father’s brainchild on the square in front of the Winter Palace. Offensive news came from the Senate: “Her Imperial Majesty did not deign to try the said portrait, reasoning that it was not made with the kind of art that should represent such a great monarch and serve to decorate the capital St. Petersburg.”

Falcone's daring plan

Catherine decided to entrust the creation of a new monument to a sculptor capable of surpassing Carlo Rastrelli. This was not an easy matter. The great French encyclopedist, philosopher and art critic Denis Diderot helped the Empress, recommending the sculptor Etienne Falconet.

Etienne Maurice Falconet began his career in a craftsman's workshop. At the age of 25, the “carpenter’s apprentice” barely knew how to sign his name, but his passion for knowledge and enormous capacity for work turned him into one of the most educated artists of his time. In the articles and treatises he wrote. comprising six voluminous volumes, he argued that the only purpose of art is to enlighten, instruct people on the good path, and instill in them high ideals.

Falconet arrived in Russia in 1766, accompanied by his seventeen-year-old student Marie Anne Collot, and was immediately presented with a program for the monument drawn up by the president of the Academy of Arts, Betsky. It was a multi-figure composition. The pedestal with the statue should have been surrounded by four statues of virtues, which constituted the glory of the Great Peter, trampling on vices.

“My monument will be simple,” the sculptor answered. He defined the image of Peter as follows: “Creator, Transformer, Legislator.” Falcone decided to create an image that embodies the country and its progress. He considered it unacceptable to pit the hero against the crowd. After all, heroes are the sons of the people, always inextricably linked with its history and destiny. Having carefully studied all the historical material, lifetime sculptural portraits and the mask of Peter created by Rastrelli, at the beginning of 1768 the sculptor began work on a model of the monument the size of the future statue. Previously, he studied the movement of the horse and rider for a long time. For this purpose, a mound of earth was poured, the shape corresponding to the pedestal. Hundreds of times the rider, on Falcone's orders, galloped on various horses. “Because the eye can grasp the effects of such rapid movements only with the help of many repeated impressions,” the sculptor himself wrote. Having studied the movement of the horse, he began to examine, draw, sculpt each part from below, above, in front, behind, on both sides. A suitable model of the horse was found in the stables of Count Orlov. General P.I. posed for the figure of the horseman. Melissino, who in height and physique resembled Tsar Peter.

Meanwhile, Catherine, who did not want to follow her predecessor Elizabeth in anything, chose a different place for the monument. Next to the Admiralty, where St. Petersburg once began, there was a vast area. The end of the Admiralty limited one of its sides, the second was the building of the Senate, the third side of the square was open towards the mirror of the Neva, and in the fourth, in the depths, a cathedral was founded in the name of Isaac of Dalmatia, the saint on whose day Peter saw the light. On April 12, 1768, it was recorded in the Chamber-Fourier journal that the Empress, while traveling to Tsarskoe Selo, deigned to visit the “portrait foundry house,” that is, Falconet’s workshop. Here the sculptor introduced Her Majesty to the finished model. Catherine praised his work, with the exception of the head of the statue, but gave the sculptor the freedom to continue creating.

“Your statue will be, perhaps, the first good one I have seen. Every schoolchild understands your art more than I do,” she said.

Unlike Catherine, the President of the Academy Betsky intervened in the work on any occasion. He either took the master away from work, ordering him to provide an analysis of equestrian monuments erected in European countries, or demanded that one eye of the rider look at the Admiralty, and the other - to the building of the Twelve Colleges. Falcone complained to Catherine about Betsky. He explained to her that Peter, in his opinion, should be represented on a horse rearing up at the edge of a cliff. “Raising his hand on high,” he turns with menacing force towards the overseas distance, like a ruler not only over people, but also over the elements. The horse is completely in motion, the impulse covers him entirely, and the rider’s pose personifies majestic peace. This contrast is the essence of the composition.

Monument to Peter I. Modern view

Peter does not sit on a horse, as in Rastrelli’s statue, but commands it, indicating a sharp and impetuous movement. The horse does not just obey its rider - it has the same passion, the same desire. The absence of a saddle and stirrups and the cloak falling from the rider’s shoulders to the horse’s croup merges them together. Under the hooves, writhing, the snake dies. It symbolizes the forces of evil trampled by Peter. Truth and goodness triumph. Nothing stops the rider from racing into the vast distance anymore.

Snake. Modern look

The work was nearing completion, but the horseman's head still failed to reach Falcone. He made three sculptural versions of the portrait, but they were rejected by the empress. Many took advantage of this to criticize the statue. Falcone was nervous, offended and irritated. Catherine at least encouraged him: "Laugh at the fools and go your own way,” it was clear that she did not like Peter’s head.

How this wounded Falcone’s pride!

Marie Collot pleases

empress

And then young Marie Anne Collot asked her teacher to allow her to sculpt Peter’s head. Marie came to Falcone's studio as a little girl. He immediately noticed the talented child and began to teach her. In Russia, Marie was his assistant for 12 years, and then became his daughter-in-law, marrying his son Pierre Etienne, a painter.

Working on Peter's head, Collo came from a plaster death mask. The sketch she made delighted the master. The student, using a plaster cast of the Tsar’s face, achieved not only a portrait resemblance, but also managed to express Peter’s high intelligence, determination, and will.

The proudly raised head of the king in a wreath of laurels amazes with the expression of high thought. The eyes are wide open, they illuminate the face with the light of reason.

And the fact that Peter’s gaze is directed in the same direction as the hand gesture is directed, enhances the feeling of purposefulness. Peter is Russia, uncontrollably striving forward.

This time the empress liked Peter's head.

"Thunder Stone"

Now Falcone is relieved to begin preparing the pedestal. He conceives it in the form of a rock and, following the advice of the military engineer Carbury Lascari, decides to carve it out of the monolith. The rock was supposed to show how the rider, at full gallop, overcame a steep climb and reared his horse over the abyss. What was needed was a block that looked like a sea wave with a smooth rise and a sharp drop down.

A suitable rock was discovered 12 versts from St. Petersburg, near the village of Lakhta. in the middle of a difficult swamp. It was a granite boulder. According to legend, it was struck by lightning and cracked. Local residents nicknamed it “Thunder Stone” and said that Tsar Peter surveyed the area from here even before the founding of the capital.

But to extract and deliver a monolith weighing more than one hundred thousand pounds seemed crazy. Betsky believed that the matter was hopeless. Falcone persisted in his position.

In September 1768, work began to prepare the rock for transportation. Excavators dug a pit around a stone buried five meters into the ground and exposed its lower part. The following winter, under the leadership of military engineer Lascari, second lieutenant Ivan Shpakovsky and “without rank” Ivan Khozyainov, piles were driven into the frozen swamp. A clearing was cut in the forest leading to the shore of the Gulf of Finland. Iron-lined wooden gutters were installed along the road like rails. In March 1769, twelve 30-meter levers lifted the Thunder-Stone and installed it on a wooden platform adapted for movement on runners. The runners had semicircular grooves with bronze balls on which it moved. The block was pulled using ropes and two gates, which were driven by 32 people. In fact, hundreds of working people were involved in transporting the stone block. Thanks to their efforts, she, as if reluctantly, slowly crawled towards the Gulf of Finland.

Transportation of "Thunder Stone" There were people on the rock during the movement. Two drummers gave signals to the workers at the gate in a rhythmic beat. Forty stonemasons continued to work the rock. Several blacksmiths were correcting and sharpening tools using a small forge installed here. Many St. Petersburg residents came out of curiosity to see how the stone was moving towards the bay. Catherine also came to Lakhta with her retinue. Having reached the shore, the stone was loaded onto a raft secured between two ships and the Gulf of Finland, and then transported along the Neva to a place chosen by the empress. The news of the unprecedented engineering enterprise spread throughout Europe. The world had never seen anything like it, people admired it. In honor of the event, a medal was struck with the inscription: “Like daring. 1770.” Casting a statue Falcone’s relationship with Betsky did not improve. The nobleman continued to attack the sculptor, either demanding more magnificent folds of clothing, or rejecting the image of a snake under the hooves of a horse. Suddenly, Catherine also began to cool towards the master. Among the Russian craftsmen, no one took on the task of casting the monument. The foundry master Ersman was called from France, but he also considered the task impossible. Things turned out in such a way that Falcone was left to take on the casting himself. He was not a beginner in this matter, having mastered it in Paris. He began work in 1775, spending four years on preparation. The casting of the statue almost ended in disaster. In the smelting furnace, which had been burning for many days, the workers lit a strong fire. The foreign foundry worker on duty fell asleep and the upper part of the mold burned out. The metal that poured into this part turned into a shapeless mass. A fire started in the workshop. Falcone was wounded and lost consciousness. All the workers ran away, except for the foundry worker Emelyan Kailov. The courageous foundry worker, left alone, did the job for everyone, forcing bronze to flow from the furnace into the mold to the last drop. Processing the cast statue took Falcone another three years. Together with the experienced embosser Sandoz, the sculptor himself minted and finished the bronze. In 1778, Falconet, in his last letter to the Empress, reported on the completion of the work. But during this time, his relationship with the Court deteriorated so much that he did not receive an answer from Catherine. She no longer needed the artist, and so he left Russia without waiting for his monument to be installed. Catherine's triumph After Falconet's departure, the management of the construction of the monument passed to the architect Felten. For another four years they leveled Senate Square, installed the pedestal, mounted the figure, and cast the lattice. The opening of the monument was scheduled for August 7, 1782. This year just celebrated the centenary of Peter's accession to the throne. Peter's Guard regiments arrived on the square - a total of 15 thousand soldiers and officers. As soon as Catherine appeared on the balcony of the Senate building, a rocket took off. Immediately the canvas shields surrounding the monument fell onto the pavement. The army saluted the monument “with guns and dodging the banners, and the ships by raising the flags, and at the same moment the firing from both fortresses and from the ships, mixed with the rapid fire of the regiments and the beating of drums and the playing of military music, shook the city created by Peter with delight.” . And do you know who remembered him? The son of Catherine the Great is Paul I. After the death of his mother, which followed on November 5, 1796, who did not love him and kept him away from the Court, and even thought about relinquishing the throne to her grandson Alexander, Paul began to act contrary to her. However, he had very serious reasons to emphasize that he inherited the crown from his father, the grandson of Peter I, and not from his mother, who seized the throne by force. After all, his father was killed before he could perform the coronation ceremony and was buried not in the royal tomb of the Peter and Paul Cathedral, but in the Alexander Nevsky Monastery. A year later, Pavel will rename it Lavra. Catherine II seemed to have crossed out Peter III from the list of Russian tsars. And so, the day after his mother’s death, Paul ordered to dig up his father’s ashes from the grave. The coffin was placed in the monastery cathedral and... for the first time in history, the coronation was performed over the ashes. Then the remains of Peter, simultaneously with the body of Catherine, were buried in the Peter and Paul Cathedral. Paul's legacy was vindicated and justice was done. The new emperor showed by this that he received his power from God and did not consider himself obliged to the nobility, like his mother. Everyone is equal before God’s anointed one, and he is fair to everyone - this is how Paul thought. When meeting an imperial carriage, now any nobleman, no matter how noble he was, had to get out of the carriage and bow to the anointed one, even if the mud on the road was knee-deep. For any offence, the nobleman was subject to corporal punishment, like a peasant. For the slightest omission at the parade, the regiment marched in full force to Siberia. This is justice. Paul declared a merciless war on round hats, turn-down collars, vests and boots with cuffs. Everyone was ordered to powder their hair and wear braids. Combing hair over the forehead was strictly prohibited. This was equality. Paul constantly imagined that the hated spirit of Mother Catherine still lived within the walls of the royal palaces. He decided to build himself a new residence and chose a place near the Campus Martius - a large area for parades and drills. Here a powerful citadel began to be built - beyond all styles and eras - a castle full of grandeur and tragic beauty. It was intended to embody the Russian emperor's dream of the home of an ideal knight, such as the Camelot of the legendary King of the Britons Arthur. The castle was founded in February 1797. A project drawn up by the famous architect Vasily Bazhenov and working drawings were prepared with amazing speed, and all work was completed in two and a half years. Bazhenov's assistants were Vincenzo Brenna and young Carlo Rossi. An absolute record for that time! The work was carried out day and night, by the light of torches and lanterns. Still unfinished. "raw", Pavel's new residence impressed everyone! The entrance with granite obelisks on the sides resembled a triumphal arch. According to the custom of Ancient Rome, it was decorated with images of trophies and monograms. A moat connected to the Fontanka and Moika rivers cut off the castle from the city. It was possible to get into it only through a drawbridge, guarded day and night. The castle was named Mikhailovsky, since Paul placed himself under the protection of Archangel Michael, the traditional patron of Russian tsars. It was decided to erect a statue in front of the main facade. It was then that they remembered the unrealized project of a monument to Peter I, abandoned under Catherine. And Paul once again emphasizes that he should go against his mother in everything. The sculpture is carefully restored and placed in the middle of the square in front of the castle on a pedestal made of polished granite. Peter is presented in the form of an ancient triumphant commander in a Roman toga with a laurel wreath on his forehead. In his hand is a field marshal's baton. On the pedestal, to the right as the horse moves, there is a relief “victory at Poltava” - Peter’s greatest land triumph. On the left is the “Victory of Gangut” - a triumph in a naval battle. The inscription on the front expresses Paul's thought that he alone should be considered the successor of his grandfather's glorious deeds. She is laconic: “Great-grandfather - great-grandson.” The image of not only the rider, but also the knight’s horse is impressive. The horse arched its neck and flared its nostrils, like a predatory animal. The horseman, who has arrogantly straightened his body and thrown back his head crowned with laurels, is arrogant and even somewhat gloomy. The image of Peter, created by Carlo Rastrelli, is endowed with superhuman strength, will and knowledge inaccessible to ordinary people. The monument found its place, but did not provide protection for the great-grandson. For only 38 days, Paul admired the moat, square square and equestrian monument of his great-grandfather from the windows of the castle. On March 11, 1801, he was killed by the conspirators with the tacit consent of his son Alexander. The dead emperor was taken to be buried past the bronze great-grandfather, who still looked arrogantly at the procession and the tear-stained great-great-grandson. Subsequently, an eyewitness will write with irony: “The Emperor walked with his eyes full of tears - his father’s killers were ahead, his grandfather’s killers were behind.” But no one can interrupt the victorious march of the bronze horsemen. One strives forward, not stopping in front of the yawning abyss, asserting the connection of royal power with the state, military and spiritual life of the country. The other personifies the power and will of the ruler. In the 18th century, Christian symbolism was replaced by secular symbolism. The language of art is allegorical. Peter the Great, what was he like? Address this question to the works of Carlo Rastrelli, who knew him personally, sculpted him from life, touched him with his hands. Or trust the genius of Falcone, a thinker and philosopher who managed to capture a moment and thereby express an entire heroic era.

Sections: Literature

Concept of the work. Setting diagnostic goals, distributing material among lessons.

The age of the students, the recommendation of the program, and literary analysis make it possible to create a general methodological concept: by reading and analyzing the work of M.Yu. Lermontov, we can reveal the connections of fiction with the historical past of Rus' and folklore, showing the significance of pictures of everyday life of the 16th century and the reflection of folklore traditions in the author’s representations of the characters and the form of the work.

The focus will be on the issue of duty, honor and human dignity. We will consider this problem as a test of man, traditional for Russian fiction. Let us reveal the position of the author, who admired a simple man from the people, before whose feat both time and power are powerless.

Based on the concept of the poem and the features of its artistic form, taking into account the characteristics of the students, we form diagnostic goals by answering the questions:

1. What can students learn from our lessons?
   They learn that the fate of M.Yu. Lermontov is similar to the fate of A.S. Pushkin not only in terms of intransigence with autocracy and the arbitrariness of the authorities, but also in terms of the attitude of the authorities towards them. They learn that M.Yu. Lermontov - unique in the literature of the 19th century - recreated the image of Ivan the Terrible and his era based on folk songs; about the role of oral folk art in creating the characters and form of a work. They will learn about the life, way of life, and customs of Rus' in the 16th century; that the poet, dissatisfied with modern reality (19th century), takes us to the distant past in order “to look for life there, which he does not see in the present.”
2. What concepts will students learn or continue to learn in class?
   They will continue to improve literary concepts: theme, idea, composition of a work of art, features of the poem. They will master the concepts: lyric-epic genre; the author's attitude and ways of expressing it in the poem; continues to master artistic means of expression (epithets, comparisons, repetitions), epic verse.
3. What will they learn? What skills will they learn?
   Working with the text of the poem, they will learn:

• compare the characters not only with each other, but also with the works of artists, and on this basis penetrate into the depths of the characters’ characters, taking into account the author’s point of view;
• determine the character of the characters by their actions and attitude towards other characters;
• determine the author's attitude towards the characters.

They will improve:

• the ability to visually concretize the images of characters and the location of the action;
• the ability to determine the theme, problematics, and idea of ​​a work; correlate the title of the work with its idea;
• the ability to read expressively and in reading intonationally convey the feelings of the characters and their attitude towards each other.

1. In what independent activities will students demonstrate their knowledge, understanding and skills? What can they do during and after school at home?
   As a result, students will be able to:

• answer the questions: “Why M.Yu. Lermontov called his work “Song...”? “Why are the names in the title arranged in this order?”, “Why couldn’t the conflict between Kalashnikov and Kiribeevich be resolved peacefully?”, “Is the Tsar’s court fair?”;
• create verbal portraits of heroes;
• convey in verbal form the idea of ​​the work and explain which plot elements help Lermontov express it;
• highlight the elements of the poem’s composition, its features and explain their role;
• explain why there are so many old words, constant epithets, comparisons, and repetitions in the poem;
• read characters' dialogues expressively;
• accurately characterize each character, reveal their relationship to each other.

System of lessons on the topic:

1. Secrets of Ancient Rus'.
2. “Yes, there were people in our time, a mighty, dashing tribe...”
3. Folklore traditions in “Song...”

The first lesson in the system plays the role of creating a reading mindset. Since M.Yu. Lermontov is a regular author in school textbooks; students know many facts about his biography. By the 7th grade, they are already familiar with such works as “Borodino”, “Three Palms”, “Cliff”, “Leaf”, which present the main motives of his work: a feeling of loneliness and melancholy, a thirst for struggle and freedom, the love of an exiled poet for leaving the homeland, admiration for the feat of the Russian warrior. Now students will get acquainted with a historical song that reveals the conflict between power and an ordinary person doomed to death.

TO first lesson Students were offered a story about the life of M.Yu. based on memoirs and memories of contemporaries. Lermontov and answer the questions: “What is the similarity of Lermontov’s fate with the fate of Pushkin? How can we explain this similarity? (facts of despotism and autocratic tyranny that caused angry protest from poets).

In order to create a certain emotional mood before studying the topic and orient children towards the perception of the poem, we will introduce them to historical material: “The History of the Russian State” by N.M. Karamzin, “A course of lectures on Russian history” by V.O. Klyuchevsky, excerpts from “Domostroy” and works of “related” art: paintings by I. Repin “Ivan the Terrible Kills His Son”, V. Vasnetsov “Ivan the Terrible”, illustrations depicting old Moscow by I. Bilibin, B. Kustodiev, P. Korovin , which captured the stern ruler of Rus' and his unforgettable time, important for understanding the ideological content and images of the “Song...”.

Before we start reading the poem, let's find out the meaning and role of ancient words and expressions. Next, we need to determine the educational task, which will dictate to us the methods of working with the text and the types of activities of the students. As a problematic question, we will choose the following: “Could the conflict between Kalashnikov and Kiribeevich be resolved peacefully?” Children's reflection on this question will lead students to the idea for the work.

What episodes and artistic elements of the work will help us come to its idea? First of all, we must identify the conflict and the features of its artistic embodiment. To do this, we highlight the elements of the composition: exposition, the beginning of the action, episodes of the development of the action, the climax and denouement. The author’s attention first turns to Ivan the Terrible, then to his faithful guardsman Kiribeevich, followed by Alena Dmitrievna, the merchant Kalashnikov, and then again to the Tsar, Kiribeevich, Kalashnikov. At the climax, Kiribeevich dies, at the denouement - Kalashnikov. But there are also characters in the poem - the guslars, with the mention of whom each chapter begins and ends. Although they are conventional narrators, it is their feelings and relationships that help determine the author’s position in relation to the characters and the genre of the work.

In the poem, in addition to the conflicts “Kiribeevich - the Kalashnikov family” and “Kalashnikov - the Tsar”, there is one more - the conflict between a worthy person and the crowd, which in this case took the form of historical social psychology. The fact that the head of a dishonored family killed the “offender of his own free will” should be known to everyone. This is what will wash away the stain of shame from the family.

Our task is to understand what qualities the author values ​​in people, what unites the Kalashnikov family and what distinguishes them from the world of people in power. Thus, the focus of the second lesson is the analysis of the images of the “Song...”

2nd lesson. Lesson project “Yes, there were people in our time, a mighty, dashing tribe...”

Created on the basis of the literature program for the 7th grade, ed. V. Ya. Korovina, textbook-reader and methodological recommendations. In the 1st lesson, students got acquainted with historical materials, paintings depicting the life of old Moscow, as well as facts from the biography of M.Yu. Lermontov, which largely explain why he turned to the distant past. We got acquainted with the text of “Songs about Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich, the young guardsman and the daring merchant Kalashnikov”

Lesson objectives:

• During the lesson, students will continue to develop and improve their ability to compare characters, determine the characters’ personalities by their speech and actions;
• will understand what role composition plays in embodying the author’s position and what means help the author in creating characters;
• intonationally convey the feelings of the characters and their relationships to each other; compare literary images with images of artists.

During the classes

1. Stage of identifying perception (conversation).

What feeling did you have after reading the poem?

What pictures of old Moscow and its life does the poet paint? Do they help explain the characters' behavior?

Who is the real hero in “Song…” and why?

Why are the heroes of “The Song…” arranged in the title in this order: “about Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich, the young guardsman and the daring merchant Kalashnikov”?

What do you see as the main problem of the poem?

Checking homework. (For the lesson, the children had to re-read the poem again, highlighting the elements of the composition in it and create a slide show of the work, using illustrative material and Internet resources).

Reproduce the content of the poem with a slide show in strict accordance with the development of the action (Figures 1-9), highlight the elements of the composition (Appendix 1), and identify conflicts.

Why couldn’t the conflict between Kalashnikov and Kiribeevich be resolved peacefully? (this will be a learning task).

2. The stage of analyzing the work, or working with the text. (Pattern analysis).

In the exhibition “Feast in the Royal Chambers” the central place is given to the king. How does M.Yu. show it? Lermontov and how artists see him?

a) Comparison of the descriptions of Tsar Lermontov and V. Vasnetsov, I. Repin. (Verbal drawing).

What comparisons and epithets does the guslar use to characterize the king?

What artistic details do you think are especially expressive? Can Ivan the Terrible be called wise and fair?

In Lermontov, the Tsar smiles, he seems to be cheerful... but let’s take a closer look: aren’t “blue clouds” too often running into the “red sun”?

What makes Ivan Vasilyevich frown?

To whom does the king pay more attention at the feast? Why?

What do you know about the guardsmen? How does the king treat them? How does this show up in the poem?

b) Oral story about Kiribeevich.

What is the guardsman sad about?

Why does he tell the Tsar about Alena Dmitrievna, but does not say that she is a married woman?

Would the king help him if he knew this?

c) Characteristics of Alena Dmitrievna using illustrations by P. Korovin.

Does Alena Dmitrievna love her husband?

Why was Kalashnikov surprised when he didn’t find his wife at home? How to explain the words with which a husband greets his wife? What do you remember about Domostroy?

How do Alena Dmitrievna’s character reflect popular ideas about an ideal woman – a wife?

How do Kiribeevich and Kalashnikov show their love for Alena Dmitrievna?

d) Comparative analysis. Kiribeevich - Kalashnikov (slide demonstration: “Merchant Kalashnikov in the shop”, “Fist Fight” (art. I. Bilibin, B. Kustodiev), “Death of the Oprichnik”, “Kalashnikov answers to the Tsar”, “Farewell of the merchant to his brothers”) .

Why did each of them come out to fight? Who do heroes bow to before battle? Why?

e) Expressive reading based on the roles of the dialogue between Kiribeevich and Kalashnikov before the battle.

Do pictures of the harsh life of the 16th century matter for revealing the characters’ characters? What qualities do you think a person should have in order to dare to defend his honor in front of all the people under these conditions? Are the final lines of “Borodino”, included in the title of the topic of our lesson, applicable to the heroes of the “Song…”?

Expressive reading of lines about the death of Kiribeevich and Kalashnikov.

What feeling are they imbued with? How do you explain this feeling?

How did Kiribeevich and Kalashnikov die? What memory does each person leave behind?

f) Comparison of an excerpt from Lermontov’s poem with an excerpt from a folk song about Stepan Razin “Bury me, brothers...”, “They buried him beyond the Moscow River...”

What are the similarities? Which passage is more poetic? What are they convincing of?

3. Final stage.

In the third chapter we meet the king again.

What is his role in the poem? After all, the main clash is between Kalashnikov and Kiribeevich.

Why did the king order the execution of the winner of a fist fight? Did he act fairly?

What is the genre of this work? Why M.Yu. Lermontov calls it “Song...”? Does this clarify the author's position?

The theme and plot of “Song...” is associated with the 16th century.

Why did the poet turn to the distant past?

Did he manage to convey the flavor of that era? What?

What folklore traditions does the poet continue in his work?

4. Homework:

• memorize an excerpt from the poem “The Rising of the Dawn...”;
• choose musical themes for the images of “Song...”;
• write down examples of figurative means, ancient words, and expressions on cards. (for Game).

On final lesson, dedicated to folklore traditions in “Song...”, it is important to find out what M.Yu. Lermontov did not imitate oral folk poetry, he imbued with its spirit and, relying on its features, created a unique, original work, where every image, every scene of the poem is marked by Lermontov’s powerful talent. Comparisons of “Songs...” with epics (about Stavr Godinovich) and folk songs will help us with this. A literary game, with the help of which we will show the features of the use of tropes in the poem, its connection with folklore, and discuss the problem of duty and honor, will be the final chord in the lesson system, after which the children will write essays on the poem.

Children, young, adults and elderly - most of us know many of the works of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin. One of the most famous, beloved and fascinating works of Pushkin is. The plot of this verse is quite simple to understand, but very captivating. A child and an adult, reading this work, imagine a bright picture where actions are transformed in their own way, and the character’s appearance emerges in their own way. But absolutely everyone identifies for themselves evil and good actions and, therefore, a bad and a positive character.

Positive characters include:

Tsar Saltan- the sovereign of his kingdom. On the one hand, the king is a real warrior, courageous and strong, who is ready to fight for his state. On the other hand, he is a kind character who has a gentle character. From the actions that this hero performs, it becomes clear that he is an unforgiving and even simple, naive character, and because of this, some readers may think that he is a weak-willed king. In fact, this is absolutely not the case. Simply because of his good nature, he did not punish the evil and treacherous sisters, but, on the contrary, forgave them.

Prince Guidon- son of the queen and king Saltan. Throughout the entire verse he reveals himself as a brave and strong hero. This character prefers to prove his courageous character with actions rather than actions. In addition to courage, strength and masculinity, he shows hospitality and determination, which readers really like.

Swan Princess- a sensible and beautiful sorceress, sister of 33 sea heroes and at the end of the fairy tale becomes the wife of Prince Guidon. Being one of the main characters, she also belongs to the kind characters, because she personifies generosity, wisdom and honesty.

Queen- This is one of the first girls the reader meets in the first lines of the fairy tale. In the future, become a queen and the mother of a beautiful hero. Like the king himself, she is a very positive character, because she is kind, honest, patient and kind-hearted. Thanks to these qualities, the queen sympathizes with many readers.

Negative heroes:

Weaver- sister of the Queen and cook. Her actions indicate that she is a very envious, angry and negative character. In addition, she is very touchy and vindictive, which is why she carries out insidious actions.

Cook- sister of the weaver and the Queen. Like the weaver, the cook is a bad character, because she has such qualities as envy, rancor, deceit and selfishness.

Matchmaker Babrikha– refers to a negative character, as he has such negative character traits as hatred, harshness and vindictiveness. Because of these qualities, many readers dislike her.