History of creation The idea for the story was nurtured by Kuprin for more than 10 years. The story was created in 1902 - 1905. The story “The Duel” was published in May 1905, during the days of the defeat of the Russian fleet at Tsushima. The image of a backward, incapacitated army, decayed officers, and downtrodden soldiers had an important socio-political meaning: it was an answer to the question about the causes of the Far Eastern catastrophe. With harsh strokes, as if reckoning with the past, Kuprin draws the army to which he devoted his youth.

Genre originality The story “The Duel” can be defined as psychological and philosophical. There hasn't been a work like this since Fathers and Sons. How

Theme of the story The main theme is the crisis of Russia, of all spheres of Russian life. Gorky noted the critical orientation of the story, classifying “The Duel” as civic, revolutionary prose. The story had a wide resonance and brought Kuprin all-Russian glory, became a reason for controversy in the press about the fate of the Russian army. The problems of the army always reflect the general problems of society. In this sense, Kuprin’s story is still relevant today.

Dedication to M. Gorky Having dedicated “The Duel” in its first publication to Gorky, Kuprin wrote to him: “Now, finally, when it’s all over, I can say that everything bold and violent in my story belongs to you. If you knew how much I learned from Vasya, how grateful I am to you for it.”

“Bold and violent in the story” From the denial of petty rituals (holding your arms at your sides and your heels together in a conversation with your superiors, pulling your toe down when marching, shouting “On your shoulder!”, Chapter 9, p. 336.) the main character of “The Duel” “Romashov comes to deny that in a rationally organized society there should be no wars: “Perhaps all this is some kind of general mistake, some kind of worldwide delusion, insanity? Is it natural to kill? “Let’s say, tomorrow, let’s say, this very second, this thought occurred to everyone: the Russians, the Germans, the British, the Japanese... And now there is no more war, no more officers and soldiers, everyone has gone home.” Romashov naively believes that in order to eliminate war, it is necessary for all people to suddenly see the light and declare with one voice: “I don’t want to fight!” and threw down their weapons."

Assessment of Leo Tolstoy “What courage! And how did the censorship miss this and how did the military not protest? “L. Tolstoy said admiringly.

The peacekeeping messages provoked strong attacks in the fierce magazine campaign unleashed around “The Duel,” and military officials were especially indignant. The story was a major literary event that sounded topical.

Images of officers Kuprin knew the army environment very well from his many years of experience. The images of the officers are given accurately. Realistic, with merciless authenticity. Almost all the officers in “The Duel” are nonentities, drunkards, stupid and cruel careerists and ignoramuses.

Images of officers Moreover, they are confident in their class and moral superiority, they treat civilians with contempt, who are called “grouse”, “shpak”, “shtafirka”. Even Pushkin is “some kind of shpak” for them. Among them, it is considered “youthful to scold or beat up a civilian for no reason, to put out a lit cigarette on his nose, to pull a top hat over his ears.”

Images of officers Groundless arrogance, perverted ideas about the “honor of the uniform” and honor in general, rudeness is a consequence of isolation, isolation from society, inactivity, and dull drills. In ugly revelry, drunkenness, and absurd antics, some kind of blind, animal, senseless rebellion against mortal melancholy and monotony was expressed. Officers are not used to thinking and reasoning; some seriously believe that military service in general, “you’re not supposed to think” (similar thoughts visited N. Rostov).

Images of officers “Officers of the regiment have a single “typical” face with clear signs of senseless cruelty, cynicism, vulgarity and arrogance. Every officer, at least for a moment, is shown as he could have become if not for the destructive influence of the army” (Yu. Babicheva)

Images of officers The writer shows the officer environment in a vertical section: corporals, junior officers, senior officers, senior command staff. “With the exception of a few ambitious and careerists, all officers served as forced, unpleasant, disgusting corvée, languishing in it and not loving it.” The picture of the “ugly general revelry” of the officers is terrible. (chapter 18).

Osadchy The ominous image of Osadchy. “He is a cruel person,” Romashov says about him. Osadchy's cruelty was constantly experienced by the soldiers, who trembled from his thunderous voice and the inhuman force of his blows. In Osadchy's company, suicides of soldiers occurred more often than in others. Bestial, bloodthirsty Osadchy, in disputes about the duel, insists on the need fatal outcome duels - “otherwise it will only be a stupid pity... a comedy.” At a picnic, he makes a toast “to the joy of former wars, to the cheerful bloody cruelty.” In a bloody battle he finds pleasure, he is intoxicated by the smell of blood, he is ready to chop, stab, shoot all his life - no matter who and for what (Ch. 8, 14)

Captain Sliva “Even in the regiment, which, thanks to the conditions of the wild provincial life was not distinguished by a particularly humane direction; it was some kind of outlandish monument to this ferocious military antiquity.” He did not read a single book, not a single newspaper, and despised everything that went beyond the boundaries of the system, regulations and company. This is a lethargic, degraded person, he brutally beats soldiers until they bleed, but is attentive “to the soldiers’ needs: he does not withhold money, he personally monitors the company boiler” (chapter 10)

Captain Stelkovsky Only the image of Captain Stelkovsky - patient, cold-blooded, persistent - does not cause disgust, “the soldiers truly loved: an example, perhaps, the only one in the Russian army” (chapter 15). “In his company they didn’t fight or even swear, although they weren’t particularly gentle, and yet the company was magnificently appearance and the training was not inferior to any guards unit." It was his company at the May review that brought tears to the corps commander’s eyes.

Bek-Agamalov boasts of his ability to chop, says with regret that he probably won’t cut a person in half: “I’ll take his head to hell, I know that, but so that it’s oblique... no.” My father did it easily...” (“Yes, there were people nowadays..."). With his evil eyes, hooked nose and bared teeth, he “looked like some kind of predatory, angry and proud bird” (chapter 1)

The brutality of many officers During the scandal in brothel this bestial essence emerges especially clearly: in Beck’s bulging eyes. Agamalov’s “exposed round whites sparkled terribly,” his head “was lowered low and menacingly,” “an ominous yellow sparkle lit up in his eyes.” “And at the same time, he bent his legs lower and lower, shrank all over and drew his neck into himself, like an animal ready to make a jump.” After this scandal, which ended in a fight and a challenge to a duel, “everyone dispersed, embarrassed, depressed, avoiding looking at each other. Everyone was afraid to read in the eyes of others their own horror, their slavish, guilty melancholy - the horror and melancholy of small, evil and dirty animals” (chapter 19).

The bestiality of many officers Let us pay attention to the contrast of this description with the following description of the dawn “with a clear, childlike sky and still cool air. The trees, wet, shrouded in barely visible steam, silently woke up from their dark, mysterious night dreams.” Romashov feels “short, disgusting, ugly and infinitely alien among this innocent beauty of the morning, smiling awake” (chapter 19).

The bestiality of many officers As Kuprin’s mouthpiece Nazansky says, “all of them, even the best, the most tender of them, wonderful fathers and attentive husbands, all of them in the service become base, cowardly, stupid animals. You will ask why? Yes, precisely because none of them believes in the service and does not see the reasonable purpose of this service.”

Regimental ladies Wives of officers are as predatory and bloodthirsty as their husbands. Evil, stupid, ignorant, hypocritical. Regimental ladies are the personification of extreme squalor. Their everyday life is woven from gossip, the provincial game of secularism, boring and vulgar connections. The most repulsive image is Raisa Peterson, the wife of Captain Talman. Evil, stupid, depraved and vindictive. “Oh, how disgusting she is!” - Romashov thinks about her with disgust. “And from the thought of his previous physical intimacy with this woman, he felt as if he had not washed for several months and had not changed his linen” (chapter 9).

Regimental ladies The rest of the “ladies” are no better. Even the outwardly charming Shurochka Nikolaeva shows features of Osadchy, who seems to be unlike him: she advocates fights with a fatal outcome, says: “I would shoot such people like mad dogs.” There is no truly feminine left in her: “I don’t want a child. Ugh, what disgusting!” she confesses to Romashov (chapter 14).

Images of soldiers Depicted as a mass, motley in national composition, but essentially gray. The soldiers are completely powerless: the officers take their anger out on them, beat them, crush their teeth, and break their eardrums.

Images of soldiers intimidated, deafened by the shouts of Arkhipov, who “does not understand and cannot learn the simplest things.”

Images of soldiers Loser Khlebnikov, whose image is more detailed than others. A ruined, landless and impoverished Russian peasant, “shaved into a soldier.” Khlebnikov's lot as a soldier is painful and pitiful. Corporal punishment and constant humiliation are his lot. Sick and weak, with a face “in a fist”, on which an absurdly upturned dirty nose stuck out, with eyes in which “stupid, submissive horror froze,” this soldier became a general laughing stock in the company and an object for mockery and abuse.

Images of soldiers drive him to thoughts of suicide, from which he is saved by Romashov, who sees a human brother in Khlebnikov. Feeling sorry for Khlebnikov, Romashov says: “Khlebnikov, are you feeling bad? And I don’t feel good, my dear... I don’t understand anything that’s going on in the world. Everything is some kind of wild, senseless, cruel nonsense! But we must endure, my dear, we must endure...” Khlebnikov, although he sees in Romashov kind person, humanly related to to a simple soldier, but, above all, he sees him as a master. The cruelty, injustice, and absurdity of life become obvious, but the hero sees no way out of this horror other than patience.

Images of soldiers Depicting gray, impersonal, oppressed by “their own ignorance, general slavery, superior indifference, arbitrariness and violence” soldiers, Kuprin evokes compassion in the reader for them, shows that in fact these are living people, and not faceless “cogs” war machine. .

Nazansky, who is considered Kuprin’s mouthpiece, preaches equality and happiness and glorifies the human mind. In Nazansky’s passionate speeches there is a lot of bile and anger, thoughts about the need to fight against the “two-headed monster” of the tsarist autocracy and the police regime in the country, premonitions of the inevitability of deep social upheavals: He believes in the future life.

Nazansky He is an opponent of military service and the army in general, condemns the brutal treatment of soldiers (chapter 21). Diatribes Nazansky are filled with open pathos. This is a kind of duel between the hero and a senseless and cruel system. Some statements of this hero, as Kuprin himself later said, “sound like a gramophone,” but they are dear to the writer, who invested in Nazansky a lot that worried him.

Romashov Lieutenant Romashov, the main character of “The Duel”. This is a typical Kuprin image of a truth-seeker and humanist. Romashov is given in constant movement, in the process of his internal change and spiritual growth. Kuprin does not reproduce the entire biography of the hero, but the most important moment in it, without a beginning, but with a tragic end.

Romashov The portrait of the hero is outwardly expressive: (chapter 1), and sometimes ingenuous. However, in Romashov’s actions one can feel inner strength, coming from a sense of rightness and justice. For example, he unexpectedly defends the Tatar Sharafutdinov, who does not understand Russian, from an insulting colonel (chapter 1).

Romashov He stands up for the soldier Khlebnikov when a non-commissioned officer wants to beat him (chapter 10). He even prevails over the bestial Bek-Agamalov, when he almost hacked to death a woman from brothel, where the officers were carousing (chapter 18). Bek-Agamalov is grateful to Romashov for not letting him, who was brutalized by drunkenness, hack a woman to death. In all these fights, Romashov comes out on top.

Romashov's lifestyle: Bored, drunk, lonely, in a relationship with an unloved woman.

Romashov's plans and dreams Extensive plans for self-education, studying languages, literature, art. But they remain only plans. Dreams about brilliant career, sees himself as an outstanding commander. His dreams are poetic, but are wasted.

Romashov's plans and dreams Romashov likes to go to the station to meet trains (chapter 2). His heart strives for beauty. The railway can be read as a theme of distance, a theme of searching for a way out in life.

The image of Romashov Romashov is gradually freed from a false understanding of the honor of an officer's uniform. The turning point was the hero’s reflections on the situation human personality in society, his internal monologue in defense of human rights, dignity and freedom. Romashov was “stunned and shocked by the unexpectedly bright consciousness of his individuality,” and he, in his own way, rebelled against the depersonalization of a person in military service, in defense of the ordinary soldier. He is indignant at the regimental authorities, who maintain a state of hostility between soldiers and officers. But his impulses to protest are replaced by complete apathy and indifference; his soul is often overwhelmed by depression: “My life is lost!”

Image of Romashov The feeling of absurdity, confusion, and incomprehensibility of life depresses him. During a conversation with the sick, disfigured Khlebnikov, Romashov experiences acute pity and compassion for him (chapter 16). He, brought up in the spirit of superiority over the mass of soldiers, indifference to heavy soldier's fate, begins to understand that Khlebnikov and his comrades are depersonalized and oppressed by their own ignorance, general slavery, arbitrariness and violence, that soldiers are also people who have the right to sympathy.

Romashov's image A modest personality grows spiritually, discovers the eternal values ​​of existence. Kuprin sees in the hero’s youth hope for the future transformation of the world. The service makes a repulsive impression on him precisely because of its unnaturalness and inhumanity. However, Romashov does not have time to fulfill his dream and dies as a result of betrayal.

The meaning of the title of the story is Romashov's duel with the bad that is in him. A sign of reality itself, the disunity of people. Civilians are officers. Officers and soldiers. Kuprin's duel with the entire army, which kills the personality in a person.

- 621.68 Kb

Traits of Bek-Agamalov are present in each of the officers. Many are generally distinguished by their animal-like nature. During a scandal in a brothel, this bestial essence appears especially clearly: in Bek-Agamalov’s rolling eyes, “exposed round whites sparkled terribly,” his head “was lowered low and menacingly,” “an ominous yellow shine lit up in his eyes.” “And at the same time, he bent his legs lower and lower, shrank all over and drew his neck into himself, like an animal ready to make a jump.”

Having gotten drunk, the officers caused a scandal in the brothel, quarreling with each other. After this scandal, which ended in a fight and a challenge to a duel, “everyone dispersed, embarrassed, depressed, avoiding looking at each other. Each of them has their own horror, their own slavish, guilty melancholy - the horror and melancholy of small, evil and dirty animals, whose dark mind was suddenly illuminated by a bright human consciousness.”

At the end of this story about the wild act of drunken officers, Kuprin draws our attention to contrast this description with the following description of the dawn: “It was dawn, with a clear, child-like sky and still cool air. The trees, damp and shrouded in barely visible steam, silently woke up from their dark, mysterious night dreams. And when Romashov, walking home, looked at them, and at the sky, and at the wet grass, gray with dew, he felt short, disgusting, ugly and infinitely alien among this innocent beauty of the morning, smiling from sleep.”

Thus, in “The Duel” he showed the moral and spiritual disintegration of the military intelligentsia, its distance from the people. Kuprin helped the officers to understand themselves, their position in life, all its informality and tragedy.

3.3. Officers' wives are the personification of extreme spiritual impoverishment

Officers' wives are just as predatory and bloodthirsty as their husbands. Regimental ladies are the personification of extreme squalor. Their everyday life is woven from gossip, the provincial game of secularism, boring and vulgar connections.

The most repulsive image - Raisa Peterson, evil, stupid, depraved and vindictive. “Oh, how disgusting she is!” - Romashov thinks with disgust. “And from the thought of his previous physical intimacy with this woman, he felt as if he had not washed for several months and had not changed his linen. And he says how disgusting, thought Romashov. - It's strange that I haven't noticed this until now. She speaks as if she has a chronic runny nose or a polyp in her nose: “bad shit.”

The rest of the “ladies” are no better. Even the outwardly charming Shurochka Nikolaeva displays features of Osadchy, who seems to be unlike her.

While Romashov is looking for ways of personal self-affirmation of a person, and by and large - of humanity, Shurochka Nikolaeva strives to realize as fully as possible the possibilities of her extraordinary nature, both physical - irresistible female charm, femininity, and intellectual - a lively, energetic mind. But to realize with an obvious selfish goal, the role of a regimental lady does not satisfy her. She longs for more: a brilliant and idle life, a real society, where “light, music, fans, subtle flattery, intelligent interlocutors.” How can a woman of ignoble birth, without sufficient funds and education, achieve this? Only thanks to the career of her husband or another person who selflessly loved her. Shurochka is not only selfish, but also bloodthirsty. Mercy, forgiveness, elementary concepts of goodness, spiritual nobility and tact are alien to her: they are “brakes”, obstacles on the way to the fairy tale she cherishes about “real” life. Therefore, she sharply condemns the “sentimental opponents” of officer duels. She is impressed by fights with blood: “What kind of tenderness is this: they are afraid of a shot! Your profession is to risk your life! She is ready to mercilessly dispose of the life of Nazansky, who loved her (I would shoot such people like mad dogs. Such officers are a disgrace to the regiment, an abomination!) and disposes of her life, bringing her husband, Romashov, who selflessly loves her, to the sure bullet in a duel. However, she would also leave her husband without remorse, even dispose of his life, if Nazansky or Romashov could become active assistants to her in the implementation of her selfish plan. It is impossible not to notice that in Shurochka Nikolaeva there is a further development of the character discovered by L. Tolstoy in Helen Kuragina-Bezukhova.

Why is Shurochka still depicted with a certain amount of authorial sympathy? The best heroes of the work are in love with her. Apparently, not only because Shurochka stands out against the background of the insipid, vulgar and depraved regimental ladies with her feminine charm and intelligence, but because, despite all her moral flaws, which for the time being remain unsolved, she has an integral, strong-willed nature, a predisposition to personal self-determination. And the writer’s sympathies were always on the side of those natures who found the strength to resist the flow, even with all the obvious or hidden depravity.

The image of Shurochka is one of the writer’s most successful creations in “The Duel.” A.V. Lunacharsky noted that Kuprin managed to “bring out both a curious and completely lively and undeniably interesting female type» .

Nevertheless, the egoism of an ambitious bourgeois woman, external charm and intelligence are intertwined in Shurochka. Her will and perseverance are aimed at achieving selfish, selfish goals.

Thus, although Shurochka’s “ideal” is petty, vulgar and limited, the other regimental ladies are many times worse than Shurochka: evil, stupid, ignorant, hypocritical. These are Raisa Peterson, Anna Ivanovna Morgunova, the wife of Captain Talman and others.

Kuprin depicted the world of the “regimental ladies” with the same ruthlessness as the world of officers.

3.4. Moral and ideological orientation of the main characters of the story - Romashov and Nazansky

Romashov is conceived as a real hero, an opponent of both negative and affirmed as positive value orientations generally accepted in the society of that time in the story. Nazansky appears in the work as a herald of a new faith, a new philosophy of the century, which impresses the author, one might say, a mouthpiece of his ideas, in short, a mentor, an inspirer of the increasingly active Romashov.

In the plot of the story, Nazansky completes the characterization of human “quality”, and, accordingly, the social and state expediency of the officer corps, and also proclaims promising, from the author’s point of view, philosophical ideas of the time. So far, Nietzsche’s ideas of the “superman” and the rejection of traditional humanism are recognized in Nazansky’s speeches. But the ideas of Vl. Solovyov and N. Berdyaev occupied a significant place in these speeches. In the criticism of traditional mercy, there is a noticeable intertextual echo with the famous remark of Dostoevsky’s Ivan Karamazov about Julian the Merciful (in Kuprin, for some reason, John the Merciful).

The substantive richness of the model of the future man postulated by Nazansky is impressive. These are, first of all, ideas of personal independence, self-confidence, self-esteem, a sense of harmony with the natural world, based on the mobilization of the principles of existence that are still little in demand (“love for yourself, your mind, the infinite wealth of your feelings”), personalistic motives of denial power, false, illusory authorities determined by human culture (“You are the king of the world, its pride and adornment<…>the god of all living things”), equality not of similarities, but of different ones, that is, of individuals who are unequal not in the legal, but in the existential sense (“do not be afraid of anyone in the universe, because there is no one above everyone and no one is equal to you”), in Tolstoy-Dostoevsky motifs of a careful sense of the beauty of living life, nature (“how beautiful, how seductive life is!<…>oh joy, oh divine beauty of life<…>blue sky, evening sun, still water <…>Oh, how wonderful everything is, how tender and happy everything is!”).

This model lacks what can be called selfishness, violence against others for the sake of one’s own benefit. The main thing in this model is the aspiration of freedom of spirit: “somewhere far from our dirty, stinking parking lots, a huge, new, radiant life is taking place. New, brave, proud people have appeared: fiery free thoughts light up in their minds...” On the contrary, adherents of traditional values ​​have intolerance to freedom of spirit and a tendency to violence: “We (raised on previous values ​​- V.L.), puffed up like Indian roosters... arrogantly chatter: “What? Where? Be silent! Riot! I’ll shoot you!” The role of love in this model is enormous - for a woman, for one’s neighbor. Kuprin took with interest the idea of ​​the high ethical meaning of sexual love, the role that was assigned to it in the harmonization of society in the philosophy of Vl. Solovyov (“The Meaning of Love”), N. Berdyaev (“Metaphysics of Sex and Love”). This idea is pathetically expressed by Nazansky: “for Dante, all love is the beauty, the charm of spring!... I’m talking about love in the literal, bodily sense. But it is the lot of the chosen ones... Love... has its peaks, accessible only to a few out of millions.” Such love is capable of sacrificing everything, motivating one to overcome one’s own egoism, in the spirit of the philosophy of Solovyov and Berdyaev: “always adoring, always ready to give for her (the chosen one - V.L) - no, why for her, for her whim, for her husband, for her lover, for her beloved dog - to give life, and honor, and everything that is possible to give!...handsome men and winners do not know such joys.” This is a paraphrase of Solovyov’s postulate: “the moral meaning of love requires the reunification of what is unjustly divided, requires the identification of both.”

The paraphrase is minted like an aphorism in Nazansky’s monologue: “Love, freed from the dark shackles of property, will become a bright religion of the world, and not a secret shameful sin in a dark corner, with caution, with disgust.”

The main thing is that in the model of a perfect person proposed by Kuprin, the slightest possibility of confrontation of people with each other is excluded: “great faith in one’s self will overshadow the heads of all people, like the fiery tongues of the holy spirit, and then there will be no more slaves or masters,<…>How dare I then insult, push, deceive a person in whom I feel my equal..."

Designing existential harmony excludes its achievement through social confrontation, which was in the atmosphere of that time. This would contradict the essence of the Russian spiritual Renaissance, which Kuprin is focused on. Through the mouth of Nazansky it is said: “What interest will make me break my head for the happiness of the people of the thirty-second century?” He does not share calls for a violent breakup of the regime, does not agree with those who cry: “Let’s join hands, let’s go and die, but we will prepare a bright and easy life for future generations.” According to Kuprin, the harmony of a bright life is possible only through the spiritual transformation of a person, the predominance of not the egoistic, individualistic, but the personal principle. Of course, the mass man of the past, as well as of the present new century, was and is far from this romantic ideal. It turned out to be illusory happy life which they tried to achieve through social confrontational revolutions.

The allure, brightness, and beauty of the new model of man are also supported by the portrait of its champion: “Golden hair fell in large, solid curls around his high, clean forehead, a clean, rectangular-shaped, red, small beard lay in regular waves, as if corrugated, and his whole massive and the graceful head, with a bare neck of noble design, looked like the head of one of the Greek heroes or sages... Clear, slightly moist blue eyes looked animated, intelligent and meek...".

But life according to the old, established rules and norms destroys fresh, new shoots. The outer beauty of the character turned black, burned, like bright greenery in dry weather: “The eyes were deeply sunken and blackened around, the eyelids turned yellow, and the cheeks with uneven dirty skin sank and swam downwards, and were ugly overgrown with thin curly hair.”

Nazasky is a thinker, a evangelist, a herald of new ideas, a reasoning and explaining character, one might even say, the mouthpiece of the author. Romashov is called upon to implement these ideas in his activities, in practice. He is the most lively, dynamic, active hero in “The Duel.” Already in the exposition of the plot, he is distinguished from the masses by non-officer traits: he blushes with embarrassment, speaks haltingly, adjusts his glasses unnecessarily. The main thing is that he does not share the hackneyed officer ethics, which allows him to mock the “spaki” - civilians. True, in exceptional cases: “if he is a decent person, a nobleman, and so on... why would I attack him, unarmed, with a saber.”

Kuprin experts (V. Afanasyev, A. Volkov, F. Kuleshov, O. Mikhailov) call Romashov mediocre and weak. Most likely, they reproduce the opinion of Shurochka Nikolaeva, to whom, from the point of view of strong-willed, selfish aspirations, Romashov seemed weak because he could not spiritually accept them. But already in the first portrait description of Romashov, strength is declared, as well as the non-officer trait restraining it: “of average height, thin, and although quite strong for his build, he is awkward due to great shyness.”

The physical strength of the character in the plot finds a way out in the dominant of consistently growing spiritual strength, the basis of a real, effective opposition to the generally accepted, both caste and broader - universal, mass, worship of generally accepted traditional priorities. Already at the outset of the plot, Romashov spoke out against the undeserved insult of a lower rank by the regimental commander, and stood up for the defenseless, dumb Tatar Sharafutdinov. The hero’s bid to overcome the musty, stagnant atmosphere of provincial life is in the ambitious fantasies that the hero lives in his free time from service. Evening walks to the station, evening dawns seem to signal the exhaustion of old values, the search for a path to new ones, the enlightenment of them at the end of the day. Most of the plots of these fantasies branch out according to established images. Like Andrei Bolkonsky, Romashov dreams of his own “Toulon” - of achieving feats in the field of defending the Fatherland, even while pacifying workers’ riots, but more like a military intelligence officer, or the commander of a general battle that determines the fate of the war. It doesn’t matter that these are the fantasies of a romantic youth. They train the will and spirit of the character in an existential battle with ordinary, inert everyday life. The challenge posed to soldier Colonel Shulgovich on the parade ground required no less courage than worthy behavior in battle. Determine the features of his worldview, views on life, which are reflected in the stories “Moloch”, “Olesya”, “Duel”;
To comprehend and compare the specificity of the common and the different in the depiction of the spiritual and emotional world of the heroes of the stories;
Analyze the author’s position in relation to his characters;

Chapter 1. Features of the depiction of the spiritual and emotional world of man in the stories of A.I. Kuprin - “Moloch”, “Olesya”, “Duel”

1.1. With pain for a person: the story “Moloch” by A.I. Kuprin………………….....10

1.2. Reflection of the social and ethical problems of the people and the intelligentsia in the story “Moloch”……………………………………………………………………………….25

1.3. Character traits spiritual and emotional world of the heroes of the story “Moloch”…………………………………………………………………………………………...30

1.4. Revealing the contradictions in the character of the main character of the story, Bobrov.39

1.5. The importance of a realistic depiction of reality in the grouping of images…………………………………………………………………………………..42

Chapter 2. Incarnation moral ideal in the story “Olesya” by A.I. Kuprin

2.1. Kuprin’s discovery of true poetry in ordinary people…………….47

2.2. Autobiographical nature of the story “Olesya”……………………………………………………….52

2.3. The role of landscape in revealing the emotional and spiritual world of the main

heroines………………………………………………………………………………………......58

Chapter 3. Depiction of the crisis of the army as a crisis of Russian life in A.I. Kuprin’s story “The Duel”

3.1. The originality of the conflict in the story “The Duel”: personality in the army

environment………………………………………………………………………………....67

3.2. Immorality and lack of spirituality in the army……………………..76

3.3. The wives of officers in the story “The Duel” are the personification of extreme spiritual impoverishment…………………………………………………………………………………79

3.4. Moral and ideological orientation of the main characters of the story - Romanov and Nazansky……………………………………………………………..81

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………..87

List of references………………………………………………………...…90

Women's images

A. I. Kuprin’s story “The Duel” was first published in 1905. In it, the author showed all the shortcomings of an officer’s life, which he himself knew firsthand. He slightly gave autobiographical features to the main character of the story, young second lieutenant Romashov. Reading the story, we see that it has several thematic lines at once. First of all, this is an officer environment. Then the combat and barracks life of soldiers and, finally, the personal relationships of people.

As for the “regimental ladies,” the author did not give them positive qualities. Living long years among officers, they became more pragmatic, tougher and callous. Kuprin openly refers to some officers’ wives as “dolls” and “mannequins.” They are cutesy, wear cloying perfume, are ready to whiten their whole face with makeup, but their souls remain dark. Such, for example, is the mature married lady Raisa Peterson, who annoys the protagonist, a young second lieutenant, with her harassment.

Tired of constant harassment, he refuses the woman and asks her to leave him alone. But Peterson is not happy with this arrangement.

He learns that Romashov visits the Nikolaevs’ house in the evenings and begins to suspect him of having a warm relationship with the lieutenant’s wife Shurochka. Then the annoyed woman begins to write anonymous letters to Nikolaev asking him to pay attention to his wife’s behavior. These anonymous letters subsequently become the reason for the breakdown of friendly relations between both officers.

So the author shows that Raisa is a vulgar and insignificant person, with the absence of any moral principles. Moreover, she is not the only one in the garrison. There are also the evil hypocritical gossips, the wife of Captain Telman and A.I. Migunov. As for Alexandra Petrovna Nikolaeva (Shurochka), the only author portrays her as more or less virtuous, sensible and charming. She does not participate in regimental gossip and intrigue, does not lead vulgar games seduction.

At the same time, she shows a little more to Romashov than just friendly relations. Shurochka is smart, talented and interesting. She knows how to win someone over, knows with whom and how to communicate, and has a natural taste in choosing clothes. The author shows that her main task is to help her mediocre husband pass the academy exam and not lose face. For the sake of this stupid and mediocre man, she sacrifices Romashov. For this reason, all its advantages at the end of the work are reduced to zero.

Nazansky also loved Shurochka even before Nikolaev, but she refused him. Since then, strained relations have developed between the two lieutenants. Thus, despite all its advantages, main character The story is also not the best female character ever described by Kuprin. The character of this woman is truthful and realistic, but her prudence led to her death best friend.

(No ratings yet)

Other works on this topic:

1. Honor and dishonor The story “The Duel” is considered one of best works A. I. Kuprin. The story centers on the lives of army officers. The author managed to create a whole gallery...
2. Friendship and enmity The story “Duel” is one of the few works by Kuprin, dedicated to the topic Russian army. The author himself studied at the military academy, which was later transformed into...
3. We meet Yuri Romashov in his second year of service in the regiment. From the very beginning of our acquaintance with the young second lieutenant, we see in him a dreamer, a natural...

The story “The Duel” was published in 1905. This is a story about the conflict between the humanistic worldview and the violence that flourished in the army of that time. The story reflects Kuprin’s own vision of army order. Many of the heroes of the work are characters from real life writers he encountered during his service.

Yuri Romashov, a young second lieutenant who is having a hard time experiencing the general moral decay reigning in army circles. He often visits Vladimir Nikolaev, with whose wife Alexandra (Shurochka) he is secretly in love. Romashov also maintains a vicious relationship with Raisa Peterson, the wife of his colleague. This romance ceased to give him any joy, and one day he decided to break off the relationship. Raisa set out to take revenge. Soon after their breakup, someone began to bombard Nikolaev with anonymous letters with hints of a special connection between his wife and Romashov. Because of these notes, Shurochka asks Yuri not to visit their house anymore.

However, the young second lieutenant had plenty of other troubles. He did not allow non-commissioned officers to start fights, and constantly argued with officers who supported moral and physical violence against their charges, which displeased the command. Financial situation Romashov also left much to be desired. He is lonely, service loses its meaning for him, his soul is bitter and sad.

During the ceremonial march, the second lieutenant had to endure the worst shame of his life. Yuri was simply daydreaming and made a fatal mistake, breaking the order.

After this incident, Romashov, tormenting himself with memories of ridicule and general censure, did not notice how he found himself not far from railway. There he met soldier Khlebnikov, who wanted to commit suicide. Khlebnikov, through tears, talked about how he was bullied in the company, about the beatings and ridicule that had no end. Then Romashov began to realize even more clearly that each faceless gray company consists of separate destinies, and each fate matters. His grief paled against the background of the grief of Khlebnikov and others like him.

A little later, a soldier hanged himself in one of the mouths. This incident led to a wave of drunkenness. During a drinking session, a conflict broke out between Romashov and Nikolaev, which led to a duel.

Before the duel, Shurochka came to Romashov’s house. She began to appeal to the tender feelings of the second lieutenant, saying that they must definitely shoot, because refusal to duel could be misinterpreted, but none of the duelists should be wounded. Shurochka assured Romashov that her husband agreed to these conditions and their agreement would remain secret. Yuri agreed.

As a result, despite Shurochka’s assurances, Nikolaev mortally wounded the second lieutenant.

The main characters of the story

Yuri Romashov

Central character works. A kind, shy and romantic young man who does not like the harsh morals of the army. He dreamed about literary career, often walked, immersed in thoughts and dreams of another life.

Alexandra Nikolaeva (Shurochka)

The object of Romashov's affection. At first glance, she is a talented, charming, energetic and intelligent woman; gossip and intrigue in which local ladies participate are alien to her. However, in reality it turns out that she is much more insidious than all of them. Shurochka dreamed of a luxurious metropolitan life; everything else did not matter to her.

Vladimir Nikolaev

Shurochka's unlucky husband. He does not shine with intelligence and fails the entrance exams to the academy. Even his wife, helping him prepare for admission, mastered almost the entire program, but Vladimir could not manage it.

Shulgovich

A demanding and stern colonel, often dissatisfied with Romashov’s behavior.

Nazansky

A philosophical officer who likes to talk about the structure of the army, about good and evil in general, is prone to alcoholism.

Raisa Peterson

Romashov's mistress, wife of Captain Peterson. She is a gossip and an intriguer, not burdened by any principles. She is busy playing at secularism, talking about luxury, but inside her there is spiritual and moral poverty.

In “The Duel,” A. Kuprin demonstrates to the reader all the inferiority of the army. Main character, Lieutenant Romashov, is becoming more and more disillusioned with the service, finding it pointless. He sees the cruelty with which officers treat their subordinates, witnesses assault that is not stopped by management.

Most of the officers resigned themselves to the existing order. Some find in it an opportunity to take out their own grievances on others through moral and physical violence, to show the cruelty inherent in their character. Others simply accept reality and, not wanting to fight, look for an outlet. Often this outlet becomes drunkenness. Even Nazansky, smart and talented person, drowns in a bottle thoughts about the hopelessness and injustice of the system.

A conversation with soldier Khlebnikov, who constantly endures bullying, confirms Romashova in the opinion that this entire system is rotten through and through and has no right to exist. In his reflections, the second lieutenant comes to the conclusion that there are only three occupations worthy honest man: science, art and free physical labor. The army is a whole class, which in Peaceful time they use the benefits earned by other people, and in the military they go to kill warriors like themselves. This makes no sense. Romashov thinks about what would happen if all people unanimously said “no” to war, and the need for the army disappeared by itself.

The duel between Romashov and Nikolaev is a confrontation between honesty and deceit. Romashov was killed by betrayal. Both then and now, the life of our society is a duel between cynicism and compassion, loyalty to principles and immorality, humanity and cruelty.

You can also read the biography of Alexander Kuprin, one of the most prominent and popular writers in Russia in the first half of the twentieth century.

Surely you will be interested summary the most successful, in the opinion of Alexander Kuprin, is his story “Olesya”, imbued with a fabulous, or even mystical atmosphere.

The main idea of ​​the story

The problems raised by Kuprin in “The Duel” go far beyond the army. The author points out the shortcomings of society as a whole: social inequality, the gap between the intelligentsia and common people, spiritual decline, the problem of the relationship between society and the individual.

The story “The Duel” received positive feedback from Maxim Gorky. He argued that this work should deeply touch “every honest and thinking officer.”

Portrayal of the Army Crisis

as a crisis of Russian life in A. I. Kuprin’s story “The Duel”

The purpose of the lesson: show the significance of Kuprin’s story for society’s awareness of the crisis of all Russian life; humanistic, anti-war pathos stories.

Methodical techniques: analytical conversation, commented reading.

During the classes

I. Teacher's word

The story “The Duel” was published in May 1905, during the days of the defeat of the Russian fleet at Tsushima. The image of a backward, incapacitated army, decayed officers, and downtrodden soldiers had an important socio-political meaning: it was an answer to the question about the causes of the Far Eastern catastrophe.

II. Conversation on the story “The Duel”

— What is the theme of the story “The Duel”?

(The main theme of the story is the crisis of Russia, of all spheres of Russian life, shown through the crisis of the army.)

Teacher's comment:

Gorky noted the critical orientation of the story, classifying “The Duel” as civic, revolutionary prose. The story had a wide resonance, brought Kuprin all-Russian fame, and became a reason for controversy in the press about the fate of the Russian army. The problems of the army always reflect the general problems of society. In this sense, Kuprin’s story is still relevant today.

Having dedicated the story “The Duel” in its first (1905) publication to M. Gorky, Kuprin wrote to him: “Now, finally, when everything is over, I can say that everything bold and violent in my story belongs to you. If you only knew how much I have learned from you and how grateful I am to you for it.”

— What, in your opinion, in “The Duel” can be defined as “brave and violent”?

(Discussion.)

— What topic, besides the crisis of the army, the crisis of Russia, especially concerns Kuprin?

(The theme of protest against war. Kuprin shows the senselessness and inhumanity of wars.)

Teacher's comment:

The anti-war orientation of the story was noted by L. N. Tolstoy. By the way, Tolstoy’s story “After the Ball,” the theme of which is close to that of “The Duel,” was also written in 1905. The main character of “The Duel,” Romashov, thinks that in a rationally organized society there should be no wars: “Maybe all this is some kind of common mistake, some kind of worldwide delusion, insanity? Is it natural to kill? Romashov naively believes that in order to eliminate war, it is necessary for all people to suddenly see the light and declare with one voice: “I don’t want to fight!” and threw down their weapons. The story has several thematic lines: the life of officers, the combat and barracks life of soldiers, relationships between people. It turns out that not all people hold the same pacifist views as Romashov.

— How does Kuprin paint images of officers?

(Kuprin knew the army environment very well from his many years of experience. The images of the officers are given accurately, realistically, with merciless authenticity. Almost all the officers in “The Duel” are nonentities, drunkards, stupid and cruel careerists and ignoramuses. Moreover, they are confident in their class and morality superiority, they treat civilians with contempt, who are called “grouse”, “shpak”, “shtafirki”. Even Pushkin is considered “some kind of shpak” among them. , put out a lit cigarette on his nose, pull a top hat over his ears.”)

— What is the reason for the arrogance and rudeness of officers?

(Unfounded arrogance, perverted ideas about “uniform honor” and honor in general, rudeness is a consequence of isolation, isolation from society, inactivity, stultifying drills. Some kind of blind, animal, senseless person expressed himself in ugly revelry, drunkenness, and absurd antics a rebellion against mortal melancholy and monotony. Officers are not used to thinking and reasoning; some seriously believe that in military service “you are not supposed to think at all.” Let us remember that such thoughts visited, for example, Nikolai Rostov from the novel “War and Peace.”

Teacher's comment:

Literary critic Yu. V. Babicheva writes about “The Duel”: “The regiment’s officers have a single “typical” face with clear signs of caste limitations, senseless cruelty, cynicism, vulgarity and arrogance. At the same time, as the plot develops, each officer, typical in his caste ugliness, is shown at least for a moment as he could have become if not for the destructive influence of the army.”

— Do you agree that the officers in the story “The Duel” have a single “typical” face? If so, how does this “unity” manifest itself?

— Is it true that each of the officers, the heroes of Kuprin’s story, “at least for a moment is shown as he could have become if not for the destructive influence of the army”?

(The writer shows the officer environment in a vertical section: corporals, junior officers, senior officers, senior officers. “With the exception of a few ambitious and careerists, all officers served as forced, unpleasant, disgusted corvée, languishing with it and not loving it.” Except common features characteristic of most officers, each of them has personality traits, depicted so vividly and expressively that the image becomes almost symbolic.)

— What can you say about Osadchy’s image?

(The image of Osadchy is ominous. “He is a cruel man,” Romashov says about him. Osadchy’s cruelty was constantly experienced by the soldiers, who trembled from his thunderous voice and the inhuman force of blows. In Osadchy’s company, suicides of soldiers occurred more often than in others. Bestial, The bloodthirsty Osadchy, in discussions about the duel, insists on the need for a fatal outcome of the duel - “otherwise it will only be a stupid pity... a comedy.” At the picnic, he makes a toast “to the joy of former wars, to the cheerful bloody cruelty, in a bloody battle he finds pleasure.” he is intoxicated by the smell of blood, he is ready to chop, stab, shoot all his life - no matter who and for what ( Chapter VIII, XIV).)

— Tell us about your impressions of Captain Slive.

(Captain Sliva - “even in the regiment, which, thanks to the conditions of wild provincial life, was not distinguished by a particularly humane direction, he was some kind of outlandish monument of this ferocious military antiquity.” He did not read a single book, not a single newspaper, and despised everything that went beyond the boundaries of the formation, regulations and company. This is a lethargic, degraded man, he brutally beats the soldiers until they bleed, but is attentive to the needs of the soldiers: he does not withhold money, he personally monitors the company boiler (Chapter X).

— What is the difference between the image of Captain Stelkovsky?

(Perhaps, only the image of Captain Stelkovsky - patient, cold-blooded, persistent - does not cause disgust. The soldiers “truly loved him: an example, perhaps, the only one in the Russian army” (Chapter XV).)

- What are distinctive features Bek-Agamalova?

(Bek-Agamalov boasts of his ability to chop, says with regret that he probably won’t cut a person in half: “I’ll take his head to hell, I know that, but so that it’s oblique... no. My father did it easily...” (“Yes, there were people in our time...”) With his evil eyes, a hooked nose and bared teeth, he “looked like some kind of predatory, angry and proud bird” (Chapter I).

Traits of Bek-Agamalov are present in each of the officers. Many are generally distinguished by their animal-like nature. During a scandal in a brothel, this bestial essence appears especially clearly: in Bek-Agamalov’s rolling eyes, “exposed round whites sparkled terribly,” his head “was lowered low and menacingly,” “an ominous yellow shine lit up in his eyes.” “And at the same time, he bent his legs lower and lower, shrank all over and drew his neck into himself, like an animal ready to make a jump.”)

— What feelings do officers experience after a scandal in a brothel?

(After this scandal, which ended in a fight and a challenge to a duel, “everyone dispersed, embarrassed, depressed, avoiding looking at each other. Everyone was afraid to read in the eyes of others their own horror, their slavish, guilty melancholy - the horror and melancholy of small, evil and dirty animals (Chapter XIX).)