The problematic of "Dog's Heart" allows one to fully explore the essence of the work of the famous Soviet writer Mikhail Bulgakov. The story was written in 1925. Why it is considered one of the key works of Russian literature of the early XX century, let's try to figure it out together.

A daring tale

The problematic of "Heart of a Dog" was imbued with everyone who came across this work. Its original title was "Heart of a Dog. A Monstrous Story". But then the author decided that the second part only made the title heavier.

The first listeners of the story were Bulgakov's friends and acquaintances, who gathered at the Nikitinsky subbotnik. The story made a great impression. They all discussed her lively, noting her insolence. The topic of the story "Heart of a Dog" has become one of the most discussed topics in the coming months among the capital's educated society. As a result, rumors about her reached law enforcement agencies. Bulgakov's house was searched, the manuscript was confiscated. It never came out during his lifetime, being published only during the years of perestroika.

And this is understandable. After all, it reflected the main problems of Soviet society, which manifested themselves almost immediately after the victory of the October Revolution. Indeed, in fact, Bulgakov compared power to a dog that turns into a selfish and vile person.

Analyzing the problems of "Heart of a Dog", one can study what was the cultural and historical situation in Russia after. The story reflects all the troubles that the Soviet people had to face in the first half of the 1920s.

At the center of the story is a scientific experiment that He is conducting by transplanting a human pituitary gland into a dog. The results exceed all expectations. In a few days, the dog turns into a person.

This work became Bulgakov's response to the events taking place in the country. The scientific experiment he depicted is a vivid and accurate picture of the proletarian revolution and its consequences.

In the story, the author poses many important questions for the reader. How does revolution compare with evolution, what is the nature of the new power and the future of the intelligentsia? But Bulgakov is not limited to general political topics. He is also concerned about the problem of old and new morality and ethics. It is important for him to find out which one is more human.

Contrasting strata of society

The problematic of Bulgakov's "Heart of a Dog" is largely in the opposition of different strata of society, the gap between which at that time was felt especially acutely. The intelligentsia is personified by the professor, the luminary of science Philip Filippovich Preobrazhensky. The representative of the "new" man, born of the revolution, is the house manager Shvonder, and later also Sharikov, influenced by the speeches of his new friend and propaganda communist literature.

Preobrazhensky's assistant, Dr. Bormental, calls him the creator, but the author himself clearly has a different opinion. He is not ready to admire the professor.

Evolution laws

The main claim is that Preobrazhensky encroached on the basic laws of evolution, tried on the role of God. He creates a person with his own hands, conducting, in fact, a monstrous experiment. Here Bulgakov makes a reference to his original title.

It is worth noting that it was exactly as an experiment that Bulgakov perceived everything that was happening then in the country. Moreover, the experiment is grandiose in scale and at the same time dangerous. The main thing that the author denies to Preobrazhensky is the moral right of the creator. After endowing the kind homeless dog with human habits, Preobrazhensky made Sharikov the embodiment of all that terrible that was in people. Did the professor have the right to do this? This question can characterize the problems of Bulgakov's "Heart of a Dog".

Science fiction references

Many genres are intertwined in Bulgakov's story. But the most obvious are the references to science fiction. They are the key artistic feature of the work. As a result, realism is brought to the point of utter absurdity.

One of the author's main theses is the impossibility of forcibly reorganizing society. Moreover, such a cardinal one. History shows that in many ways he was right. The mistakes made by the Bolsheviks today form the basis of history textbooks dedicated to that period.

Sharik, who became a man, personifies the average character of that era. The main thing in his life is class hatred of enemies. That is, the proletarians cannot stand the bourgeois. Over time, this hatred spreads to the rich, and then to educated people and ordinary intellectuals. It turns out that the basis of the new world is to everything old. Obviously, a world based on hate had no future.

Slaves in power

Bulgakov is trying to convey his position - slaves are in power. This is what "Heart of a Dog" is about. The problem is that they received the right to govern before at least a minimal education and understanding of culture. In such people, the darkest instincts awaken, as in Sharikov. Humanity is powerless before them.

Among the artistic features of this work, it is necessary to note the numerous associations and references to Russian and foreign classics. The key to the work can be obtained by analyzing the exposition of the story.

The elements that we meet in the set of the "Heart of a Dog" (blizzard, winter cold, stray dog) refer us to the poem of Blok "The Twelve".

An important part is played by such an insignificant detail as the collar. In Blok's collar, a bourgeois hides his nose, and in Bulgakov's collar the homeless dog defines the status of Preobrazhensky, realizing that before him is a benefactor, not a hungry proletarian.

In general, we can conclude that "Heart of a Dog" is an outstanding work of Bulgakov, which plays a key role both in his work and in the entire Russian literature. First of all, according to the concept. But both its artistic features and the problems raised in the story are worthy of high praise.

Lesson - Research Using CRC

"What is the mistake of Professor Preobrazhensky?"

(based on the story of M. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog")

1 slide

The story "Heart of a Dog" was written in 1925, but the writer did not see it in print. In Russia, the work was published only in 1987.

"It's spicy pamphlet in no case should it be published, ”- this is how LB Kamenev understood this work. How did you understand him?

Students 'answers (most often students' answers are reduced to the experiment of Professor Preobrazhensky)

The teacher asks a problematic question: “What did Professor Preobrazhensky understand in the finale of the story? What is his mistake? "

Different opinions of students lead to a problematic situation, in the course of solving which students will come to a deeper understanding of the work.

Student message about the history of the creation of the story "Heart of a Dog" (preliminary homework)

The story is based on a great experiment. Everything that happened around and what was called the construction of socialism was perceived by Bulgakov precisely as an experiment - huge in scale and more than dangerous. The writer was extremely skeptical about attempts to create a new perfect society by revolutionary (not excluding violence) methods, and about educating a new, free person by the same methods. For him, it was such an interference in the natural course of things, the consequences of which could be dire, including for the "experimenters" themselves. The author warns readers about this with his work.

2 slide

- “Satire is created when a writer appears who considers the current life to be imperfect, and, indignant, proceeds to artfully denounce it. I believe that the path of such an artist will be very, very difficult. " (M.A.Bulgakov)

Let's remember what satire is. What is the satire directed against? (Satire is a kind of comic. The subject of satire is human vices. The source of satire is the contradiction between universal values \u200b\u200band the reality of life).

The traditions of which Russian satirists did Mikhail Bulgakov continue? (M.E. Saltykov-Shedrin, N.V. Gogol).

Analytical group research:

1. How does the Moscow of the 1920s appear before the reader? Whose eyes do we see Moscow? (Through the eyes of a dog - a method of detachment, which allows the author to "hide" his attitude to what is happening and at the same time to reveal the nature of the observer through his perception of events and their assessment. Moscow seems to the guys dirty, uncomfortable, cold and gloomy. In this city where the wind, blizzard and snow reign, angry people live, trying to hold on to what they have, or even better - to seize more. Students find in the text details confirming their impressions, and come to the conclusion that in Moscow there is an atmosphere of chaos, decay , hatred: a person who was nobody, now receives power, but uses it for his own good, regardless of the people around him (an example of this is the fate of the "typist").

3 slide

How does Professor Preobrazhensky appear before us? Is the choice of the professor's surname accidental? How does the author relate to his hero in the first part of the story? What about the professor's lifestyle and views?

4 Slide

What are his moral principles? What is the essence of the professor's attitude to the new order?

For what purpose did the professor pick up a homeless dog? Why is he conducting an experimental operation?

Slide

How does Sharik appear to you? Describe him at the time of the meeting with the professor. What qualities of Sharik do you like, what - not? What qualities does the author emphasize in Sharik? For what purpose does he do this? What does Sharik notice in the surrounding reality and how does he react to it? What does Sharik like in the professor's house and what doesn't? (From the first lines, the reader's "stream of consciousness" unfolds. And from the first lines it is clear that this dog is fantastic. The dog, over whose body people have abused, of course, knows how to hate, but the "typist" evokes sympathy and pity in him.

6 slide (movie preview)

Meeting with Professor Preobrazhensky saves Sharik from death. And although the dog is aware of his slave soul and vile lot, but for a piece of Krakow sausage he gives his love and dedication to the "mental labor of the master." The lackey obsequiousness awakened in Sharik is manifested not only in the readiness to lick the master's boots, but also in the desire to avenge the past humiliations of one of those whom he previously feared like fire - “to bite the doorman on the proletarian calloused leg”)

7 slide

Does Sharik change from December 16 to December 23? Highlight the stages of these changes. Compare the behavior of the dog and the person (Sharikov) in the episodes of the first and second parts: choosing a name, lunch, visiting the house committee. Is there anything doggy in a person? Why? What's in Sharikov from the dog, what's from Chugunkin? (Sharikov, whose first word was the name of the store where he was scalded with boiling water, very quickly learns to drink vodka, be rude to servants, turn his ignorance into a weapon against education. He even has a spiritual mentor - the chairman of the house committee Shvonder. Sharikov's career is truly amazing - from a vagabond a dog to the authorized for the destruction of stray cats and dogs. And here one of the main features of Sharikov is manifested: gratitude is completely alien to him. On the contrary, he takes revenge on those who know his past. He takes revenge on his own kind in order to prove his difference from them, to assert himself. , inspiring Sharikov to feats (for example, to conquer Preobrazhensky's apartment), simply does not yet understand that he himself will be the next victim.)

Slide

Who is Sharikov's ideological mentor? Which impact is worse: physical or ideological? (Any violence cannot be justified)

What future did Bulgakov predict to Shvonder through the mouth of Professor Preobrazhensky? Did this prediction come true?

slide

Compare the parenting theories of Professor and Dr. Bormental. Which one and why turned out to be more effective? How did the results of the experiment affect the professor and his assistant? Does the author's attitude to the professor change throughout the story? What are the reasons for these changes?

10 slide

What did Professor Preobrazhensky understand by the end of the story? What is his mistake? What does the author warn his reader about? (Professor Preobrazhensky comes to the conclusion that violent interference in the nature of man and society leads to catastrophic results. In the story "Heart of a Dog" the professor corrects his mistake - Sharikov turns into a dog again. He is content with his fate and himself. But in life, such experiments And Bulgakov was able to warn about this at the very beginning of those destructive transformations that began in our country in 1917.

Bulgakov believes that building socialism is also an experiment. The new society is created by violence, to which the author has a negative attitude. For him, this is a violation of the natural course of events, which will turn out to be deplorable for everyone.

Unlike the happy ending of Mikhail Bulgakov's brilliant book, in real history everything turned out differently. After the 1917 revolution, numerous Sharikovs, led by Shvonders, came to power in the USSR. Proud of their proletarian origins, infinitely far from knowledge of the laws of history and economics, replacing true culture and education with immoderate "vocal impulses", these marginalized with "ruin in their heads" brought their country to a social catastrophe unheard of in world history. We are still healing the wounds of the bloody historical "operation" of 1917.

The great diagnostician and seer, M. Bulgakov predicted the tragic consequences of an "unprecedented in Europe" social experiment in the midst of historical events - in the article "Future Prospects", written in November 1919 9. The article ends with the words:

“It will be necessary to pay for the past with incredible work, the severe poverty of life. Pay both figuratively and literally.

To pay for the madness of the March days, for the madness of the October days, for the self-styled traitors, for Brest, for the insane use of machines for printing money ... for everything!

And we will pay.

And only then, when it is already very late, will we again begin to create something in order to become full-fledged, so that we will be allowed back into the Versailles halls.

Who will see these bright days?

Oh no! Our children, perhaps, and perhaps grandchildren, for the scope of history is wide, and it “reads” decades as easily as individual years.

And we, representatives of the unlucky generation, dying in the rank of miserable bankrupts, will have to say to our children:

“Pay, pay honestly and remember the social revolution forever!”

Homework

Answer in writing to the question: what is the meaning of the ending of the story?

In preparation for the lesson, materials were used:

http://900igr.net/kartinki/literatura/Sobache-serdtse/011-M-A.-Bulgakov-1891-1940.html

http://www.bulgakov.ru/dogheart/dh6/

M. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog"

Foreground "Heart of a Dog" - an experiment of the brilliant medical scientist Preobrazhensky with all the tragicomic results that were unexpected for the professor himself and his assistant Bormental. Having transplanted human seminal glands and the pituitary gland of the brain into a dog for purely scientific purposes, Preobrazhensky, to his amazement, receives from a dog ... a person. Homeless Ball, always hungry, by all and sundry, offended, in a matter of days, in front of the professor and his assistant, turns into homosapiens'a. And already on his own initiative he receives a human name: Sharikov Polygraph Polygraph. His habits remain, however, canine. And the professor, willy-nilly, has to take up his education.
Philip Philipovich Preobrazhensky not only an outstanding specialist in their field. He is a man of high culture and independent mind. And he is very critical of everything that has been happening around since March 1917 of the year. Philip Philipovich's views have a lot in common with the views of Bulgakov... He is also skeptical of the revolutionary process and is also strongly opposed to all violence. Caress is the only way that is possible and necessary in dealing with living beings - intelligent and unreasonable. "Nothing can be done about terror ..."
And this conservative professor who categorically rejects the revolutionary theory and practice of rebuilding the world suddenly finds himself in the role of a revolutionary. The new system seeks to create a new man from the old "human material". Philip Philipovich, as if competing with him, goes even further: he intends to make a man, and even high culture and morality, out of a dog. "Caress, exclusively caress." And of course, by example.
The result is known. Attempts to plant Sharikov elementary cultural skills meet with strong resistance from him. And with each passing day, Sharikov is getting bolder, more aggressive and more dangerous.
If the "source material" for modeling Polygraph Polygraph there was only one Sharik, perhaps the professor's experiment would have been successful. Having settled down in the apartment of Philip Filippovich, Sharik at first, as a recent homeless child, still commits some hooligan acts. But in the end it turns into a completely well-bred domestic dog.
But by chance, the human organs went to the citizen Sharikov from a criminal. In addition, a new, Soviet formation, as emphasized in his official characterization, or, more precisely, in the very poisonous Bulgakov's parody of characterization:
"Klim Grigorievich Chugunkin, 25 years old, single. Non-partisan, sympathetic. He was tried 3 times and acquitted: the first time, due to lack of evidence, the second time, the origin saved, the third time - conditionally hard labor for 15 years.
A "sympathetic", sentenced to hard labor "conditionally" - this is reality itself intrudes into the experiment of Preobrazhensky.
Is this character so lonely? There is also in the story the chairman of the house committee Shvonder. In this case, this “personnel” Bulgakov character has a special become. He even writes articles to the newspaper, reads Engels. In general, he is fighting for a revolutionary order and social justice. The residents of the house should enjoy the same benefits. No matter how brilliant scientist Professor Preobrazhensky, he has nothing to occupy seven rooms. He can dine in the bedroom, perform operations in the examination room, where he cuts rabbits. And in general, it's time to equalize it with Sharikov, a man of a completely proletarian kind.
The professor himself is able to fight off Shvonder as well as possible. But beat back Polygraph Polygraph he is unable to. Shvonder already took over Sharikovpatronage and educates, paralyzing all professorial educational efforts, in their own way.
Two weeks after the dog skin came off Sharikova and he began to walk on two legs, this participant already has an identity document. And the document, according to Shvonder, who knows what he says, is "the most important thing in the world." In another week or two Sharikov neither more nor less - a co-worker. And not an ordinary one - the head of the department for cleaning the city of Moscow from stray animals. Meanwhile, his nature is the same as it was - a canine-criminal one .. What is his message about his work "in his specialty": "Yesterday the cats were strangled and strangled."
But what kind of satire is this, if in just a few years thousands of real ball-point ballpoints in the same way “choked-choked” no longer cats - people, real workers, who were not guilty of anything before the revolution ?!
Preobrazhensky and Bormentalmaking sure that they had managed to "turn the cutest dog into such scum that his hair stands on end", in the end they corrected their mistake.
But those experiments that have long been performed in reality itself are never corrected. In the very first lines of the story, a certain Central People's Council Farms... Under the shade The Central Councilthere is a canteen of normal food, where employees are fed cabbage soup made of stinking corned beef, where the cook in a dirty cap is a "thief with a copper face." And the manager is also a thief ...
And here Sharikov.Not artificial, professorial - natural ...: “I am now the chairman and, no matter how I cheat, everything is on a woman's body, on cancerous necks, on Abrau-Dyurso. Because when I was young I got hungry enough, it will be with me, and the afterlife does not exist. "
Isn't it a cross between a hungry dog \u200b\u200band a criminal? And this is no longer a special case. Something much more serious. Isn't it a system? The man got hungry, he was humiliated enough. And suddenly, on you! - position, power over people ... Is it easy to resist the temptations, which now, in turn, are plenty? ..

Boborykin, V.G. In the foreground of the "Dog's Heart" / V.G. Boborykin // Mikhail Bulgakov.-1991.-P.61-66

1. Mind and feeling

2. Mind and feeling

Everyone in his life is faced with a choice of how to act: in accordance with reason or succumb to the influence of feelings. And mind and feelings are an integral part of a person. If you completely surrender to your feelings, you can spend a lot of time and effort on unreasonable experiences and make many mistakes, which in turn cannot always be corrected. Following only reason, people can lose their humanity, become callous and indifferent to others. Such people cannot enjoy simple things, enjoy their good deeds. Therefore, in my opinion, the goal of every person is to find harmony between the dictates of the senses and the prompts of the mind.

In support of my position, I would like to give an example of Leo Tolstoy's novel “War and Peace”. One of the main characters is Prince Bolkonsky. For a long time, he tries to be like Napoleon. This character, surrendered himself completely to the mind, which is why he did not allow feelings to break through into his life, so he no longer paid attention to his family, but thought only about how to commit a heroic act, but when he is wounded during the war, he becomes disillusioned with Napoleon, who defeated the Allied army. The prince realizes that all his dreams of glory are useless. At that moment, he allows feelings to penetrate into his life, thanks to which he realizes how dear his family is to him, how he loves it and cannot live without it. Returning from the Battle of Austerlitz, he finds his wife already dead, who died during childbirth. At this moment, he realizes the time he spent on his career is irrevocably gone, regrets that he did not show his feelings earlier and completely abandons his desires.

As another argument, I want to cite as an example the work of I.S. Turgenev's "Fathers and Sons". The main character, Evgeny Bazarov, dedicated his life to science. He completely surrendered to reason, believing that love and feelings are a useless waste of time. Because of his position in life, he feels like a stranger and older than Kirsanov and his parents. Although deep down he loves them, his presence only brings them grief. Yevgeny Bazarov disdainfully treated others, does not allow feelings to break through, dies from a trifle scratch. Being near death, the hero allows feelings to open up, after that he gets closer to his parents and, albeit for a short time, finds peace of mind.

Thus, the main task of a person is to find harmony between reason and feeling. Everyone who listens to the prompts of the mind and does not deny feelings, gets the opportunity to live a full life, saturated with bright colors and emotions.

3. Mind and feeling

Probably everyone in his life was faced with a difficult choice of what to do: in accordance with reason or succumb to the influence of feelings. And mind and feelings are an integral part of a person. I believe that there should be harmony in the life of every person. Surrendering to feelings without a trace, we can make many mistakes, which in turn cannot always be corrected. By following only reason, people can gradually lose their humanity. That is, to enjoy simple things, to enjoy your good deeds. Therefore, in my opinion, the goal of every person is to find harmony between the dictates of the senses and the prompts of the mind.

In support of my position, I would like to give an example of Leo Tolstoy's novel "War and Peace". One of the main characters is Prince Balkonsky. For a long time, he tried to be like Napoleon. This character, surrendered without reserve to the mind, which is why he did not allow feelings to break through into his life. Because of this, he no longer paid attention to his family, and only thought about how to accomplish a heroic feat, but when he is wounded during the hostilities, he is disappointed in Napoleon, who defeated the allied army. He realizes that all his dreams of fame were insignificant and useless in his life. And at that moment he allows feelings to penetrate into his life, thanks to which he realizes how dear his family is, how he loves them and cannot live without them. Returning home from the Battle of Austerlitz, he finds his wife already dead, who died during childbirth. At this moment, he realizes the time he spent on his career is irrevocably gone, regrets that he did not show his feelings earlier and completely abandons his desires.

As another argument, I want to cite as an example the work of I.S. Turgenev's "Fathers and Sons". The main character, Evgeny Bazarov, dedicated his life to science. He completely surrendered to reason, believing that love and feelings are a waste of time. Because of his position in life, he feels like a stranger and an older Kirsanov and to his parents, deep down he loves them, but his presence only brings them grief. Yevgeny Bazarov disdainfully treated others, did not allow feelings to break through, dying from a trifle scratch. But being near death, he allows feelings to open up, after that he draws closer to his parents and finds peace of mind.

The main task of a person is to find harmony between reason and feeling. Anyone who listens to the prompts of the mind and at the same time does not deny feelings, gets the opportunity to live a full life.

4. Sense and Sense

Probably, every person at least once in his life faced a choice: to act based on rational judgments and logic, or to succumb to the influence of feelings and act as the heart tells. I think that in this situation you need to make a decision based on both reason and feeling. That is, it is important to find a balance. Because if a person rely only on reason, he will lose his humanity, and the whole meaning of life will be reduced to achieving the goals set. And if he is guided only by feelings, then he can make not only stupid and rash decisions, but also become a kind of animal, and it is the presence of intelligence that distinguishes us from him.

Fiction convinces me of the correctness of this point of view. For example, in the epic novel by L.N. Tolstoy's "War and Peace" Natasha Rostova, guided by feelings, almost made a big mistake in her life. A young girl who met Mr. Kuragin in the theater was so impressed by his courtesy and manners that she forgot about reason, completely surrendering to impressions. And Anatole, taking advantage of this situation, pursuing his selfish motives, wanted to steal the girl from the house, thereby ruining her reputation. But due to a coincidence, his evil intent was not implemented. This episode of the work is a vivid example of what rash decisions can lead to.

In the work of I.S. Turgenev's "Fathers and Sons", the main character, on the contrary, rejects any manifestations of feelings and is a nihilist. According to Bazarov, the only thing that a person should be guided by when making a decision is reason. Therefore, even when at one of the receptions he met the charming, besides intellectually developed Anna Odintsova, Bazarov refused to admit that he was interested in her and even liked him. But still, Eugene continued to communicate with her after, because he liked her company. After a while, he even confessed his feelings to her. But remembering his life views, he decides to stop communicating with her. That is, in order to remain true to his convictions, Bazarov loses true happiness. This work makes the reader realize how important the balance between feelings and reason is.

Thus, the conclusion suggests itself: every time when making a decision, a person is guided by reason and feeling. But, unfortunately, he can not always find a balance between them, in which case his life becomes incomplete.

5. Mind and feeling

Each person throughout his life makes decisions, guided by reason or feelings. I believe that if you rely only on feelings, then you can make stupid and rash decisions that will lead to negative consequences. And if you are guided only by reason, then the whole meaning of life will be reduced only to the achievement of the set goals. This will lead to the fact that the person may become callous. Therefore, it is very important to try to find harmony between these two manifestations of the human personality.

Fiction convinces me of the correctness of this point of view. So in the work of NM Karamzin "Poor Liza" the main character faces a choice: reason or feelings. A young peasant woman, Liza, fell in love with the nobleman Erast. This feeling was new to her. At first, she sincerely did not understand how such an intelligent person could turn his attention to her, so she tried to keep her distance. As a result, she could not resist the surging feelings and gave herself to them entirely, without thinking about the consequences. At first, their hearts were full of love, but after a while, a moment of oversaturation comes, and their feelings fade away. Erast becomes cold towards her and leaves her. And Lisa, unable to cope with the pain and resentment from the betrayal of her beloved, decides to commit suicide. This work is a shining example of what rash decisions can lead to.

In the work of I.S. Turgenev's "Fathers and Sons", the main character, on the contrary, rejects any manifestations of feelings and is a nihilist. Evgeny Bazarov makes decisions relying only on reason. This is his position throughout his life. Bazarov does not believe in love, so he was extremely surprised that Odintsov was able to attract his attention. They began to spend a lot of time together. He was pleased with her company, because she is charming and educated, they have many common interests. Over time, Bazarov began to surrender to feelings more and more, but realized that he could not afford to contradict his life convictions. Because of this, Eugene stopped communicating with her, thereby unable to know the true happiness of life - love.

Thus, the conclusion suggests itself: if a person does not know how to make decisions, guided by both reason and feeling, then his life is incomplete. After all, these are two components of our inner world, which complement each other. Therefore, they are incredibly powerful together and insignificant without each other.

6. Sense and Sense

Reason and feelings are two forces, equally needing each other, they are dead and insignificant without each other. I completely agree with this statement. Indeed, both mind and feelings are two components that are an integral part of every person. Although they perform different functions, the connection between them is very strong.

In my opinion, both mind and feelings are part of the personality of each person. They must be in balance. Only in this case people will be able not only to objectively look at the world, to protect themselves from stupid mistakes, but also to know such feelings as love, friendship and sincere kindness. If people trust only their minds, then they lose humanity, without which their life will not be full and will turn into a banal achievement of goals. If you follow only sensual impulses and do not control emotions, then the life of such a person will be filled with ridiculous experiences and rash acts.

In support of my words I will cite as an example the work of IS Turgenev "Fathers and Sons". The main character, Evgeny Bazarov, has relied only on reason all his life. He considered him to be the main advisor in the choice of solutions to certain problems. In his life, Eugene never gave in to feelings. Bazarov sincerely believed that you can live a happy and meaningful life, relying only on the laws of logic. However, at the end of his life, he realized the importance of feelings. Thus, Bazarov, due to his wrong approach, lived an incomplete life: he did not have real friendship, did not let his soul in his only love, could not experience peace of mind or spiritual solitude with anyone.

In addition, I will give as an example the work of I.A. Kuprin "Garnet Bracelet". The main character, Zheltkov, is so much blinded by his feelings. His mind is clouded, he completely succumbed to feelings and, as a result, love leads Zheltkov to death. He believes that it is his destiny - to love madly, but unrequited, that it is impossible to escape from fate. Since the meaning of Zheltkov's life was in Vera, after she rejected the attention of the protagonist, he lost his desire to live. Being under the influence of feelings, he could not use reason and see another way out of this situation.

Thus, the importance of reason and feeling cannot be overemphasized. They are an inseparable part of each and the predominance of one of them can lead a person on the wrong path. People who rely on one of these forces, in the end, must reconsider their life orientations, since the longer they go to extremes, the more negative consequences their actions can lead to.

7. Sense and Sensibility

Feelings play a big role in every person's life. They help us to feel all the beauty and beauty of our world. But is it always possible to completely surrender to feelings?

In my opinion, surrendering ourselves to sensual impulses without a trace, we can spend a huge amount of time and effort on unreasonable experiences, make many mistakes, not all of which can subsequently be corrected. Reason, on the other hand, allows you to choose the most successful path to achieve your goals, to make fewer mistakes in your life. But by doing things, guided exclusively by logic and rational judgments, we risk losing our humanity, therefore it is very important that both components are always in harmony, since if one of them begins to prevail, a person's life becomes inferior.

In support of my position, I would like to cite as an example the work of IS Turgenev "Fathers and Children". One of the main characters is Yevgeny Bazarov - a man who was guided by reason all his life, trying to completely ignore his feelings. Because of his approach to life and an overly rational point of view, he cannot get close to anyone, since he is looking for a logical explanation in everything. Bazarov is convinced that a person should be of specific benefit, like chemistry or mathematics. The hero sincerely believes: "A decent chemist is 20 times more useful than any poet." The realm of feelings, art, religion do not exist for the Bazaars. In his opinion, these are inventions of aristocrats. But over time, Eugene becomes discouraged in his life principles when he meets Anna Odintsova - his true love. Realizing that not all of his feelings are amenable to control and that the ideology of his whole life is about to crumble to dust, the protagonist leaves for his parents to plunge into work and recover from unfamiliar emotions experienced by him. Further, Eugene, having made an unsuccessful experiment, becomes infected with a fatal disease and soon dies. Thus, the main character lived an empty life. He rejected the only love, did not know true friendship.

An important figure in this work is Arkady Kirsanov, a friend of Evgeny Bazarov. Despite the strong pressure from his friend, on Arkady's desire for logical explanations of his actions, the desire for a rational understanding of everything that surrounds him, the hero did not exclude feelings from his life. Arkady always treated his father with love and tenderness, defended his uncle from the attacks of his comrade - a nihilist. Kirsanov Jr. tried to see the good in everyone. Having met Ekaterina Odintsova on his life path and realizing that he had fallen in love with her, Arkady immediately reconciled with the hopelessness of his feelings. It is thanks to the harmony between reason and feeling that he gets along with the life around him, finds his family happiness and thrives on his estate.

Thus, if a person is guided exclusively by reason or feelings, his life becomes incomplete and meaningless. After all, mind and feelings are two integral components of human consciousness that complement each other and help us achieve our goals without losing our humanity and without depriving ourselves of important life values \u200b\u200band emotions.

8. Sense and Sense

Each person throughout his life faces a choice of what to do: trust his own mind or surrender to feelings and emotions.

Relying on our own mind, we reach the goal we have set much faster, but by suppressing feelings, we lose our humanity, change our attitude towards others. But surrendering to feelings without a trace, we risk making many mistakes, not all of which can subsequently be corrected.

There are many examples in the world literature that confirm my opinion. I.S. Turgenev in the novel "Fathers and Sons" shows us the main character - Evgeny Bazarov, a man whose life is built on the denial of all possible principles. Bazarov tries to find a logical explanation in everything, considering any manifestations of feelings nonsense. When Anna Sergeevna appears in his life - the only woman who could make a big impression on him, and with whom he fell in love, Bazarov realizes that not all feelings are subject to him and that his theory is about to crumble. He cannot stand all this, he cannot come to terms with the fact that he is an ordinary person with his weaknesses, which is why he leaves for his parents, closes in himself and completely surrenders to work. Due to his wrong priorities, Bazarov lived an empty and meaningless life. He did not know true friendship, true love, and even in the face of his death, there is too little time left to make up for what he lost.

As a second argument, I want to cite as an example Arkady, a friend of Yevgeny Bazarov, who is his complete opposite. Arkady lives in complete harmony between reason and feelings, which does not allow him to commit rash acts, but at the same time he respects ancient traditions, allows feelings to be present in his life. Humanity is not alien to him, because he is open, kind in relation to others. He imitates Bazarov in many ways, this will cause a conflict with his father. But having rethought a lot, Arkady begins to look more and more like his father: he is ready to enter into compromises with life. The main thing for him is not the material basis in life, but spiritual values.

Each person during his life chooses what he will become, what is closer to him: reason or feelings. But I believe that a person will live in harmony with himself and with those around him, only if he is able to balance in himself the “element of feelings” and “cold mind”.

9. Sense and Sensibility

Each person in his life faced a choice of what to do: submit to a cold mind or surrender to feelings and emotions. Guided by reason and forgetting about feelings, we quickly achieve our goal, but at the same time we lose our humanity, we change our attitude towards others. Surrendering to feelings, ignoring reason, we can waste a lot of mental strength in vain. Also, if we do not analyze the results of our actions, we can do a lot of stupid things, not all of which will be possible to correct.

There are many examples in the world of fiction that confirm my opinion. I.S. Turgenev in the work "Fathers and Sons" shows us the main character, Evgeny Bazarov - a man whose whole life is built on the denial of all kinds of principles. He is always looking for a logical explanation in everything. But when a young beautiful woman appears in the hero's life - Anna Andreeva, who made a strong impression on him, Bazarov realizes that he cannot control his feelings and that he, like ordinary people, has weaknesses. The main character tries to suppress the feeling of love in himself and leaves for his parents, completely devoting himself to work. During the autopsy of a typhoid patient, the hero becomes infected with a fatal disease. Only being on his deathbed, Bazarov realized all his mistakes and gained invaluable experience that helped him live the rest of his life in harmony between reason and feelings.

The striking opposite of Evgeny Bazarov is Arkady Kirsanov. He lives in complete harmony between reason and feelings, which prevents him from committing rash acts. But at the same time, Arkady respects ancient traditions, allows feelings to be present in his life. Humanity is not alien to him, because he is open, kind in relation to others. Arkady imitates Bazarov in many ways, this is the main reason for the conflict with his father. Over time, having rethought everything, Arkady begins to look more and more like his father: he is ready to make compromises with life. The main thing for him is spiritual values.

Thus, each person throughout his life should try to find harmony between the "element of feelings" and "cold mind". The longer we suppress one of these components of the human personality, the more internal contradictions we end up with.

1. Experience and mistakes

Probably, the main wealth of every person is experience. It consists of knowledge, skills and abilities that a person receives over the years. The experiences we receive during our lives can influence the formation of our views and worldview.
In my opinion, experience is impossible without making mistakes. After all, it is they who give us the knowledge that allows us not to commit such wrong actions in the future. A person commits wrong actions throughout his life, regardless of age. The only difference is that at the beginning of the life path they are more harmless, but they occur much more often. A person who has lived for a long time makes less and less mistakes, since he draws certain conclusions and does not allow the same actions in the future.

In support of my position, I want to cite as an example, the novel by L.N. Tolstoy's "War and Peace". The main character, Pierre Bezukhov, is very different from people who belonged to high society in unattractive appearance, fullness, excessive softness. Nobody took him seriously, and some treated him with disdain. But as soon as Pierre receives the inheritance, he is immediately accepted into high society, he becomes an enviable groom. Having tried the life of a rich man, he realizes that this is not his, that in high society there are no people like him, close to him in spirit. Having married Helen, under the influence of Kuragin, and having lived with her for a certain time, the main character realizes that Helen is just a beautiful girl, with an ice heart and a cruel disposition, with whom he cannot find his happiness. After that, he begins to be attracted by the ideology of the Masonic order, in which equality, brotherhood, and love are preached. The hero develops a belief that there should be a kingdom of good and truth in the world, and a person's happiness lies in striving to achieve them. Having lived for some time according to the laws of brotherhood, the hero realizes that Freemasonry is useless in his life, since Pierre's ideas are not shared by his brothers: following his ideals, Pierre wanted to alleviate the plight of serfs, build hospitals, orphanages and schools for them, but finds no support among other Masons. Pierre also notices hypocrisy, hypocrisy, careerism among the brothers and, in the end, becomes disillusioned with Freemasonry. Time passes, the war begins, and Pierre Bezukhov rushes to the front, although he does not understand military affairs. In the war, he sees how many people suffer at the hands of Napoleon. And he gains the desire to kill Napoleon with his own hands, but he fails, and he is captured. In captivity, Pierre meets Platon Karataev, and this acquaintance plays an important role in his life. He realizes the truth that he was looking for: that a person has a right to happiness and should be happy. Pierre Bezukhov sees the true value of life. Soon, Pierre finds long-awaited happiness with Natasha Rostova, who was not only his wife and mother of his children, but also a friend who supported him in everything. Pierre Bezukhov went a long way, made many mistakes, but each of them was not in vain, he learned a lesson from each mistake, thanks to which he found the truth he had been looking for for so long.

As another argument, I would like to cite as an example the novel by F.M. Dostoevsky's "Crime and Punishment". The main character, Rodion Raskolnikov, is a romantic, proud and strong personality. A former law student who left due to poverty. Soon Raskolnikov kills an old woman-finder and her sister Lizaveta. Because of his deed, the hero experiences a spiritual shock. He feels like a stranger to others. The hero has a fever, he is close to suicide. Nevertheless, Raskolnikov helps the Marmeladov family by giving her the last money. It seems to the hero that he can live with it. Pride awakens in him. With his last strength, he confronts the investigator Porfiry Petrovich. Gradually, the hero begins to realize the value of ordinary life, his pride is crushed, he is ready to come to terms with the fact that he is an ordinary person, with all his weaknesses and shortcomings. Raskolnikov can no longer remain silent: he talks about his crime to Sonya. Then he confesses everything at the police station. The hero is sentenced to seven years in hard labor. Throughout his life, the main character made many mistakes, many of which were terrible and irreversible. The main thing is that Raskolnikov was able to draw the correct conclusion from the experience and change himself: he comes to a rethinking of moral values: “Did I kill an old woman? I killed myself. " The protagonist realized that pride is sinful, that the laws of life do not obey the laws of arithmetic and that people should not be judged, but loved, accepting them as God created them.

Thus, mistakes play an important role in everyone's life, they teach us, help us gain experience. You need to learn to draw conclusions from your mistakes so as not to commit them in the future.

2. Experience and mistakes

What is experience? How is it related to errors? Experience is precious knowledge that a person learns throughout his life. Errors are its main component. However, there are times when, making them, he does not always get experience in the way he does not analyze them and does not try to understand where he was wrong.

In my opinion, experience cannot be obtained without making mistakes and without analyzing them. Correction of errors is also quite an important process by which a person is fully aware of the whole essence of the problem.

In support of my words, I will cite as an example the work of A. Pushkin "The Captain's Daughter". The main character, Aleksey Ivanovich Shvabrin, is a dishonest nobleman who uses any means to achieve his goals. Throughout the entire work, he commits vile, vile deeds. Once he was in love with Masha Mironova, but he was refused for his feelings. And, seeing the favor with which she meets the attention from Grinev, Shvabrin tries in every possible way to denigrate the name of the girl and her family, as a result of which Peter challenges him to a duel. And here Alexey Ivanovich behaves unworthily: with a dishonorable blow he wounds Grinev, but this act did not bring him relief. More than anything else, Shvabrin fears for his own life, so when a rebellion begins, he immediately goes over to Pugachev's side. Even after the rebellion is suppressed, while in the courtroom, he commits his last dastardly act. Shvabrin tried to tarnish the name of Pyotr Grinev, however, this attempt was also a failure. Throughout his life, Aleksey Ivanovich committed many vile deeds, but he did not draw conclusions from one of them and did not change his worldview. As a result, his whole life was empty and full of anger.

In addition, I will cite as an example the work of L.N. Tolstoy's War and Peace. The main character, Pierre Bezukhov, made many mistakes throughout his life, but they were not empty and each of them contained the knowledge that further helped him to live. Bezukhov's main goal was to find his own path in life. Disappointed in Moscow society, Pierre enters the Masonic order, hoping to find answers to his questions there. To share the thoughts of the order, he tries to improve the position of the serfs. In this, Pierre sees the meaning of his life. However, seeing careerism and hypocrisy in Freemasonry, he becomes disillusioned and severs contact with it. Once again, Pierre finds himself in a state of melancholy and sadness. The war of 1812 inspires him, he seeks to share the difficult fate of the country with everyone. And, having gone through the pain of war, Pierre begins to understand the true logic of life and its laws: "What he previously sought and did not find in Freemasonry was re-revealed to him here, in close marriage."

Thus, using the knowledge gained in the course of correcting mistakes, a person will eventually find his own path and live a happy and joyful life.

3. Experience and mistakes

Probably, experience can be considered the main wealth of every person. Experience is a unity of skills and knowledge acquired in the process of direct experiences, impressions, observations, and practical actions. Experience influences the formation of our consciousness, worldview. Thanks to him, we become who we are. In my opinion, experience cannot be gained without making mistakes. A person commits wrong acts and actions throughout his life, regardless of age. The only difference is that at the beginning of life, there are much more mistakes and they are more harmless. Often, young people, spurred on by curiosity and emotions, take action quickly without much thought, without realizing the further consequences. Of course, a person who has lived for more than a dozen years does much less wrong actions, he is more inclined to constant analysis of the environment, his own actions and deeds, he can predict possible consequences, therefore every step of adults is measured, thoughtful and unhurried. Based on his experience and wisdom, an adult can predict any action several steps ahead, he sees a much more complete picture of the environment, various hidden dependencies and interconnections, and that is why the advice and guidance of elders are so valuable. But no matter how wise and experienced a person is, it is impossible to avoid mistakes at all.

In support of my position, I would like to cite as an example the work of I.S. Turgenev's "Fathers and Sons". The main character, Evgeny Bazarov, throughout his life, did not listen to the elders, he ignored the centuries-old traditions and experience of generations, believed only in what he could personally verify. Because of this, he was in conflict with his parents, and felt like a stranger towards those close to him. The result of such a worldview was the too late realization of the true values \u200b\u200bof human life.
As one more argument, I would like to cite as an example the work of MA Bulgakov “Heart of a Dog”. In this story, Professor Preobrazhensky turns a dog into a man, by his deed interferes with the natural course of nature and creates Polygraph Poligrafovich Sharikov - a man without moral principles. Subsequently, realizing his responsibility, he realizes what mistake he made. Which became an invaluable experience for him.

Thus, we can conclude that mistakes do happen in a person's life. Only overcoming obstacles, we come to the goal. Mistakes teach, help gain experience. You need to learn to draw conclusions from your mistakes and not allow them in the future.

4. Experience and mistakes




In support of my position, I want to cite as an example, the novel by L.N. Tolstoy's "War and Peace". The main character, Pierre Bezukhov, is very different from people who belonged to high society in unattractive appearance, fullness, excessive softness. Nobody took him seriously, and some treated him with disdain. But as soon as Pierre receives the inheritance, he is immediately accepted into high society, he becomes an enviable groom. Having tried the life of a rich man, he realizes that this is not his, that in high society there are no people like him, close to him in spirit. Having married Helen, under the influence of Kuragin, and having lived with her for time, he realizes that Helen is just a beautiful girl, with an ice heart and a cruel disposition, with whom he cannot find his happiness. After that, he begins to listen to the ideas of Freemasonry, believing that this is what he was looking for. In Freemasonry, he is attracted by the ideas of equality, brotherhood, love, the hero develops a belief that there should be a kingdom of good and truth in the world, and a person's happiness lies in striving to achieve them. Having lived for some time according to the laws of brotherhood, the hero realizes that Freemasonry is useless in his life, since his ideas are not shared by his brothers: following his ideals, Pierre wanted to ease the plight of serfs, build hospitals, shelters and schools for them, but does not find support among other Freemasons. Pierre also notices hypocrisy, hypocrisy, careerism among the brothers and, in the end, becomes disillusioned with Freemasonry. Time passes, the war begins, and Pierre Bezukhov rushes to the front, although he is not a military man and does not understand this. In the war, he sees how many people suffer at the hands of Napoleon. And he gains a desire to kill Napoleon with his own hands, but unfortunately he does not succeed and he is taken prisoner. In captivity, he meets Platon Karataev and this acquaintance plays an important role in his life. He realizes the truth that he was looking for: that a person has a right to happiness and should be happy. Pierre Bezukhov sees the true value of life. Soon, Pierre finds long-awaited happiness with Natasha Rostova, who was not only his wife and mother of his children, but also a friend who supported him in everything. Pierre Bezukhov went a long way, made many mistakes, but still came to the truth, which he had to understand after going through difficult trials of fate.

Another argument, I want to cite as an example the novel by F.M. Dostoevsky's "Crime and Punishment". The main character, Rodion Raskolnikov, is a romantic, proud and strong personality. A former law student who left due to poverty. After that, Raskolnikov kills the old money-lender and her sister Lizaveta. After the murder, Raskolnikov experiences a spiritual shock. He feels like a stranger to all people. The hero has a fever, he is close to insanity and suicide. Nevertheless, he helps the Marmeladov family by giving her the last money. It seems to the hero that he can live with it. Pride and self-confidence awaken in him. With his last strength, he confronts the investigator Porfiry Petrovich. Gradually, the hero begins to realize the value of ordinary life, his pride is crushed, he is ready to come to terms with the fact that he is an ordinary person, with all his weaknesses and shortcomings. Raskolnikov can no longer remain silent: he confesses his crime to Sonya. After that, he goes to the police station and confesses everything. The hero is sentenced to seven years in hard labor. There he realizes the whole essence of mistakes and gains experience.

Thus, we can conclude that mistakes in human life occur, only overcoming obstacles, we come to the goal. Mistakes teach us, help us gain experience. You need to learn to draw conclusions from your mistakes and not allow them in the future.

5. Experience and mistakes

Throughout his life, a person not only develops as a person, but also accumulates experience. Experience is knowledge, skills and abilities that accumulate over time, they help people make the right decisions and find a way out of difficult situations. I believe that experienced people are those people who, having made a mistake, do not repeat it twice. That is, a person becomes wiser and more experienced only when he is able to realize his mistake. Therefore, many mistakes made by young people are the result of their impulsiveness and inexperience. And adults make mistakes much less often, because they, first of all, analyze the situation and think about the consequences.

Fiction convinces me of the correctness of this point of view. In the work of FM Dostoevsky, "Crime and Punishment", the protagonist goes to the crime in order to test his theory in practice, while not thinking about the consequences. Having killed the old woman, Rodion Raskolnikov realizes that his beliefs are wrong, realizes his mistake and feels guilty. In order to somehow get rid of the pangs of conscience, he begins to take care of others. So the main character, walking down the street and seeing a man who was crushed by a horse, and who needs help, decides to do a good deed. Namely, he brought the dying Marmeladov home so that he could say goodbye to his family. Then Raskolnikov helps the family in organizing the funeral and even gives money to cover expenses. Providing these services, he does not demand anything in return. But, despite his efforts to atone for guilt, his conscience continues to torment him. Therefore, in the end, he confesses that he killed the pawnbroker, for which he was sent into exile. Thus, this work convinces me that a person gains experience by making mistakes.

I would also like to cite as an example the fairy tale "The Wise Gudgeon" by ME Saltykov-Shchedrin. From a young age, the gudgeon wanted to achieve success in life, but he was afraid of everything and hid in the bottom mud. As the years passed, the minnow continued to shake with fear and hide from real and imagined danger. He never made friends in his entire life, did not help anyone, never stood up for the truth. Therefore, already in old age, the gudgeon began to torment his conscience for the fact that he had existed in vain. Yes, only too late he realized his mistake. Thus, we can conclude: mistakes that are committed by a person give him invaluable experience. Therefore, the older a person is, the more experienced and wiser he is.

6. Experience and mistakes

Throughout his life, a person develops as a person and accumulates experience. Errors play an important role in its accumulation. And the knowledge, skills and abilities acquired subsequently help people avoid them in the future. Therefore, adults are wiser than young people. After all, people who have lived for more than a dozen years are able to analyze the situation, think rationally and think about the consequences. And young people are too hot-tempered and ambitious, not always able to monitor their behavior and often make rash decisions.

Fiction convinces me of the correctness of this point of view. Thus, in the epic novel by Leo Tolstoy "War and Peace", Pierre Bezukhov had to make many mistakes and face the consequences of wrong decisions before finding true happiness and the meaning of life. In his youth, he wanted to become a member of Moscow society, and, having received such an opportunity, he took advantage of it. However, he felt uncomfortable in it, so he left him. After that, he married Helen, but could not get along with her, as she turned out to be a hypocrite, and divorced her. Later he was interested in the idea of \u200b\u200bFreemasonry. Having entered it, Pierre was delighted that he had finally found his place in life. Unfortunately, he soon realized that this was not the case and left Freemasonry. After that, he went to war, where he met Platon Karataev. It was the new friend who helped the protagonist to understand what the meaning of life is. Thanks to this, Pierre married Natasha Rostova, became an exemplary family man and found true happiness. This work makes the reader be convinced that making mistakes, a person becomes wiser.

Another striking example is the work of FM Dostoevsky "Crime and Punishment" for the protagonist, who also had to go through a lot before gaining knowledge and skills. Rodion Raskolnikov, in order to test his theory in practice, kills an old lady and her sister. Having committed this crime, he realizes the seriousness of the consequences and is afraid of arrest. But, despite this, he experiences a pang of conscience. And in order to somehow smooth out his guilt, he begins to take care of others. So, walking in the park, Rodion rescues a young girl whose honor they wanted to defile. And also helps a stranger who has been run over by a horse to get home. But upon the arrival of the doctor, Marmeladov dies of blood loss. Raskolnikov organizes the funeral at his own expense and helps his children. But all this cannot ease his torment, and he decides to write a sincere confession. Only this helps him to find peace.

Thus, a person throughout his life makes many mistakes, thanks to which he acquires new knowledge, skills and abilities. That is, over time, he accumulates invaluable experience. Therefore, adults are wiser and smarter than young people.

7. Experience and mistakes

Probably the main wealth of every person is experience. It consists of knowledge, skills and abilities that a person receives over the years. The experience that we receive during our lives can influence the formation of our views and worldview.

In my opinion, experience is impossible without making mistakes. After all, it is mistakes that give us knowledge that allows us not to commit such wrong actions and deeds in the future.

Fill out the form
and get a 50% discount on 1 of 4 blocks

video course on preparation for the Unified State Exam / OGE in the Russian language or mathematics

from the teacher who raised the result more than 2000 students different levels of knowledge up to 80-100 points

In support of my position, I would like to cite as an example the novel by L.N. Tolstoy's "War and Peace". The protagonist, Pierre Bezukhov, is very different from people who belonged to high society, unattractive appearance, fullness, excessive softness. Nobody took him seriously, and some treated him with disdain. But as soon as Pierre receives the inheritance, he is immediately accepted into high society, he becomes an enviable groom. Having tasted the life of a rich man, he realizes that it does not suit him, that in high society there are no people like him, close to him in spirit. Having married a secular beauty, Helen, under the influence of Anatol Kuragin, and having lived with her for some time, Pierre realizes that Helen is just a beautiful girl, with an icy heart and a cruel disposition, with whom he cannot find his happiness. After that, the hero begins to listen to the ideas of Freemasonry, believing that this is what he was looking for. In Freemasonry, he is attracted by equality, brotherhood, love. The hero develops a belief that there should be a kingdom of good and truth in the world, and a person's happiness lies in striving to achieve them. Having lived for some time according to the laws of brotherhood, Pierre realizes that Freemasonry is useless in his life, since the hero's ideas are not shared by the brothers: following his ideals, Pierre wanted to alleviate the plight of serfs, build hospitals, shelters and schools for them, but finds no support among other Freemasons. Pierre also notices hypocrisy, hypocrisy, careerism among the brothers and, in the end, becomes disillusioned with Freemasonry. Time passes, the war begins, and Pierre Bezukhov rushes to the front, although he is not a military man and does not understand military affairs. In the war, he sees the suffering of a huge number of people from Napoleon's army. He has a desire to kill Napoleon with his own hands, but he does not succeed, and he is captured. In captivity, he meets Platon Karataev and this acquaintance plays an important role in his life. He is aware of the truth that he has been looking for for so long. He understands that a person has a right to happiness and should be happy. Pierre Bezukhov sees the true value of life. Soon, the Hero finds the long-awaited happiness with Natasha Rostova, who was not only his wife and mother of his children, but also a friend who supported him in everything. Pierre Bezukhov went a long way, made many mistakes, but nevertheless came to the truth that could only be found after passing the difficult trials of fate.

As another argument, I would like to cite as an example the novel by F.M. Dostoevsky's "Crime and Punishment". The main character, Rodion Raskolnikov, is a romantic, proud and strong personality. A former law student who left due to poverty. After completing his studies, Rodion Raskolnikov decides to test his theory and kills the old money-lender and her sister Lizaveta. But, after the murder, Raskolnikov is experiencing a spiritual shock. He feels himself a stranger to others. The hero develops a fever, he is close to suicide. Nevertheless, Raskolnikov helps the Marmeladov family by giving her the last money. It seems to the hero that his good deeds will allow him to ease the pangs of conscience. Even pride awakens in him. But this is not enough. With his last strength, he confronts the investigator Porfiry Petrovich. Gradually, the hero begins to realize the value of ordinary life, his pride is crushed, he is ready to put up with the fact that he is an ordinary person, with his weaknesses and shortcomings. Raskolnikov can no longer remain silent: he confesses his crime to his girlfriend - Sonia. It is she who puts him on the right path, and after that, the hero goes to the police station and confesses everything. The hero is sentenced to seven years in hard labor. Sonia, who fell in love with him, goes to hard labor after Rodion. Raskolnikov is sick for a long time in hard labor. He painfully experiences his crime, does not want to come to terms with it, does not communicate with anyone. Sonechka's love and Raskolnikov's own love for her resurrect him for a new life. As a result of long wanderings, the hero still understands what mistakes he made and, thanks to the experience gained, realizes the truth and finds peace of mind.

Thus, we can conclude that mistakes do happen in people's lives. But, only after passing through difficult trials, a person comes to his goal. Mistakes teach us, help us gain experience. You need to learn to draw conclusions from your mistakes and not allow them in the future.

8. Experience and mistakes

He who does nothing is never wrong.I completely agree with this statement. Indeed, making mistakes is inherent in all people and it is possible to avoid them only in case of inaction. A person who stands in one place and does not receive invaluable knowledge that comes with experience excludes the process of self-development in himself.

In my opinion, making mistakes is a process that brings a useful result to a person, that is, provides the knowledge he needs to solve life's difficulties. Enriching their experience, people improve each time, so they do not commit wrong actions in similar situations. The life of a person who does nothing is boring and dull, since it is not motivated by the task of improving oneself, knowing the true meaning of one's life. As a result, such people waste their precious time on inaction.
In support of my words, I will cite as an example the work of IAGoncharov “Oblomov”. The main character, Oblomov, leads a passive lifestyle. It is important to note that such inaction is a conscious choice of the hero. The ideal of his life is a calm and peaceful existence in Oblomovka. Inaction and a passive attitude towards life devastated the person from the inside, and his life became pale and dull. In his heart, he has long been ready to solve all problems, but the matter does not go beyond desire. Oblomov is afraid to make mistakes because of which he chooses inaction, which is not a solution to his problem.

In addition, I will cite as an example the work of Leo Tolstoy "War and Peace". The main character, Pierre Bezukhov, made many mistakes in his life and, in this regard, received invaluable knowledge, which he used in the future. All these mistakes were made for the sake of knowing their purpose in this world. At the beginning of the work, Pierre wished to live a happy life with a beautiful young lady, however, seeing her true essence, he became disillusioned with her and with the whole of Moscow society. In Freemasonry, he was attracted by the ideas of brotherhood and love. Inspired by the ideology of the order, he decides to improve the lives of the peasants, but does not receive approval from his brothers and decides to quit Freemasonry. It was only when he went to war that Pierre realized the true meaning of his life. All his mistakes were not made in vain, they showed the hero the right path.

Thus, a mistake is a stepping stone to knowledge and success. It is only necessary to overcome it and not stumble. Our life is a high staircase. And I would like to wish that this staircase would only lead up.

9. Experience and mistakes

Is the saying "Experience is the best mentor" true? After reflecting on this question, I came to the conclusion that this judgment is correct. Indeed, throughout his life, a person, making many mistakes and making wrong decisions, draws conclusions and gains new knowledge, skills and abilities. Thanks to this, a person develops as a person.

Fiction convinces me of the correctness of this point of view. Thus, the protagonist of Leo Tolstoy's epic novel War and Peace, Pierre Bezukhov, made many mistakes before he found true happiness. In his youth, he dreamed of becoming a member of Moscow society, and soon got the opportunity. However, he soon left him, as he felt like a stranger there. Later, Pierre met Helene Kuragina, who charmed her with her beauty. Not having time to know her inner world, the hero married her. He soon realized that Helen was just a beautiful doll with a cruel hypocritical disposition, and filed for divorce. Despite all his life disappointments, Pierre continued to believe in true happiness. So, having entered the Masonic society, the hero rejoiced that he had acquired the meaning of life. Brotherhood ideas interested him. However, he quickly noticed careerism and hypocrisy among the brothers. Among other things, he realized that it was impossible to achieve the goals set, so he severed ties with the order. After some time, the war began, and Bezukhov went to the front, where he met Platon Karataev. The new friend helped the protagonist understand what true happiness is. Pierre overestimated the values \u200b\u200bof life and realized that only his family would make him happy. Having met Natasha Rostova, the hero saw kindness and sincerity in her. He married her and became an exemplary family man. This work makes the reader feel that mistakes play a huge role in gaining experience.

Another striking example is the main character of the novel by F. M. Dostoevsky, "Crime and Punishment", Rodion Raskolnikov. In order to test his theory in practice, he killed old money-giver and her sister, without thinking about the consequences. After what he had done, his conscience tormented him, and he did not dare to confess to the crime, as he was afraid of exile. And in order to somehow smooth out his guilt, Rodion began to take care of those around him. So, walking in the park, Raskolnikov saved a young girl whose honor they wanted to defile. He also helped a stranger who was run over by a horse to get home. Upon the arrival of the doctor, the victim died of blood loss. Rodion organized the funeral at his own expense, and helped the children of the deceased. But nothing could ease his torment, so the hero decided to write a frank confession. And only after that Raskolnikov was able to find peace.

Thus, experience is the main wealth that a person accumulates throughout his life and allows him to avoid many mistakes. Therefore, it is impossible to disagree with this statement.

1. Honor and dishonor

In our cruel age, it seems that the concepts of honor and dishonor have died. There is no particular need to preserve honor for girls - striptease and viciousness are paid dearly, and money is much more attractive than some ephemeral honor. I recall Knurov from AN Ostrovsky's "Dowry": "There are boundaries beyond which condemnation does not go: I can offer you such a huge content that the most evil critics of someone else's morality will have to shut up and open their mouths in surprise."

Sometimes it seems that men have long ceased to dream of serving for the good of the Fatherland, protecting their honor and dignity, and defending the Motherland. Probably, the literature remains the only evidence of the existence of these concepts.

The most cherished work of A.S. Pushkin begins with the epigraph: "Take care of honor from your youth" - which is part of the Russian proverb. The whole novel "The Captain's Daughter" gives us the best idea of \u200b\u200bhonor and dishonor. The main character Petrusha Grinev is a young man, almost a youth (at the time of his departure for the service he turned "eighteen" years old according to the testimony of his mother), but he is so determined that he is ready to die on the gallows, but not tarnish his honor. And this is not only because his father bequeathed to him to serve in this way. Life without honor for a nobleman is like death. But his opponent and envious Shvabrin acts in a completely different way. His decision to go over to Pugachev's side is determined by fear for his life. He, unlike Grinev, does not want to die. The outcome of the life of each of the heroes is logical. Grinev lives a dignified, albeit not rich life of a landowner and dies with his children and grandchildren. And the fate of Alexei Shvabrin is understandable, although Pushkin does not say anything about this, but most likely death or hard labor will cut off this unworthy life of a traitor, a man who has not retained his honor.

War is a catalyst for the most important human qualities, it shows either courage and courage, or meanness and cowardice. We can find proof of this in V. Bykov's story "Sotnikov". The two heroes are the moral poles of the story. A fisherman - energetic, strong, physically strong, but courageous? Once captured, on pain of death, he betrays his partisan detachment, betrays its deployment, weapons, strength - in short, everything in order to eliminate this hotbed of resistance to the Nazis. But frail, sickly, puny Sotnikov turns out to be courageous, endures torture, and resolutely ascends to the scaffold, not doubting the correctness of his deed for a second. He knows that death is not as terrible as the remorse of betrayal. At the end of the story, Rybak, who escaped death, tries to hang himself in the outhouse, but cannot, since he cannot find a suitable weapon (the belt was taken from him during his arrest). His death is a matter of time, he is not a completely fallen sinner, and living with such a burden is unbearable.

Years pass, in the historical memory of mankind there are still samples of acts of honor and conscience. Will they become an example for my contemporaries? I think yes. The heroes who died in Syria, rescuing people in fires, in catastrophes, prove that there is honor, dignity, and there are carriers of these noble qualities.

2. Honor and dishonor

Every newborn is given a name. Together with the name, a person receives a history of his kind, the memory of generations and an idea of \u200b\u200bhonor. Sometimes the name obliges to be worthy of its origin. Sometimes you have to wash off your actions, correct the negative memory of your family. How not to lose your dignity? How to protect yourself in the face of the emerging danger? It is very difficult to be prepared for such a test. Many examples of this can be found in Russian literature.

Viktor Petrovich Astafiev's story "Lyudochka" tells the story of the fate of a young girl, yesterday's schoolgirl, who came to the city in search of a better life. Growing up in the family of a hereditary alcoholic, like frozen grass, she has been trying all her life to preserve honor, some kind of female dignity, trying to work honestly, build relationships with people around her, without offending anyone, pleasing everyone, but keeping her at a distance. And people respect her. Respects for the reliability and diligence of her landlady Gavrilovna, respects for the severity and morality of the poor Artyom, respects in her own way, but for some reason is silent about this, stepfather. Everyone sees her as a person. However, on her way there is a disgusting type, a criminal and scum - Strekach. He does not care about a person, his lust is above all. The betrayal of the "boyfriend-friend" Artyomka turns into a terrible ending for Lyudochka. And the girl is left alone with her grief. For Gavrilovna, there is no particular problem in this: "Well, they broke the plonba, you think, what a disaster. But this is not a flaw, but now they get married at random, ugh, now for these things ..."

The mother generally withdraws and pretends that nothing has happened: an adult, they say, let herself get out. Artyom and "friends" are calling to spend time together. And Lyudochka does not want to live like this, with a soiled, trampled honor. Seeing no way out of this situation, she decides not to live at all. In her last note, she asks for forgiveness: "Gavrilovna! Mom! Stepfather! What is your name, I did not ask. Good people, forgive me!"

The fact that Gavrilovna, and not her mother, is in the first place here, testifies to many things. And the worst thing is that no one cares about this unfortunate soul. In the whole world - to nobody ...

In the epic novel “Quiet Don” by Sholokhov, each heroine has her own idea of \u200b\u200bhonor. Daria Melekhova lives only with the flesh, the author says little about her soul, and the heroes in the novel do not perceive Daria at all without this base beginning. Her adventures, both during her husband's life and after his death, show that honor does not exist for her at all, she is ready to seduce her own father-in-law, just to satisfy her desire. It is a pity for her, because a person who has lived his life so mediocre and vulgar, who has not left any good memory of himself, is insignificant. Daria remained the embodiment of a base, lustful, dishonorable female gut.

Honor is important to every person in our world. But especially the honor of women, girlish remains a visiting card and always attracts special attention. And let them say that in our time morality is an empty phrase, that “they will marry at random” (according to Gavrilovna), it is important who you are for yourself and not for others. Therefore, the opinions of immature and narrow-minded people are not taken into account. For everyone, honor has been and will be in the first place.

3. Honor and dishonor

Why is honor compared to clothing? “Take care of your dress again,” a Russian proverb demands. And then: "... and honor from a young age." And the ancient Roman writer and poet, philosopher, author of the famous novel "Metamorphoses" (A.S. Pushkin wrote about him in the novel "Eugene Onegin") claims: "Shame and honor are like a dress: the more worn, the more careless you are towards them." ... Clothing is external, and honor is a deep, moral, internal concept. What common? They meet by their clothes ... How often, behind the outer veneer, we see a fiction, not a person. It turns out that the proverb is true.

In NS Leskov's story "Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District" the main character Katerina Izmailova is a beautiful young merchant's wife. She got married "... not out of love or any attraction, but because Izmailov got hold of her, and she was a poor girl, and she did not have to go through with suitors." Life in marriage was torment for her. She, not being a woman endowed with any talents, even faith in God, spent time empty, wandering around the house and not knowing what to do with her idle existence. Suddenly, the impudent and desperate Seryozha, who turned up, completely captured her consciousness. Surrendering to his power, she lost all moral guidelines. The murder of the father-in-law, and then the husband, became something commonplace, unpretentious, like a chintz dress, tattered and out of use, suitable only for a floor rag. So it is with feelings. They turned out to be rags. Honor is nothing compared to the passion that possessed her completely. Finally dishonored, abandoned by Sergei, she decides on the most terrible act: suicide, but in such a way as to take away from life the one that the former lover found to replace. And they were both swallowed up by the terrible icy haze of the winter freezing river. Katerina Izmailova remained a symbol of stupid immoral dishonor.

Katerina Kabanova, the main character of the drama "The Thunderstorm" by Ostrovsky, has a completely different attitude to her honor. Her love is a tragic, not vulgar feeling. She resists her thirst for true love until the last second. Her choice is not much better than Izmailova's choice. Boris is not Sergei. He is too soft, indecisive. He cannot even seduce the young woman he loves. In fact, she did everything herself, because she also very much loved the handsome metropolitan, not dressed in a local way, with a different speaking young man. Barbara pushed her to this act. For Katerina, her step towards love is not dishonorable, no. She makes a choice in favor of love, because she considers this feeling sanctified by God. Having surrendered to Boris, she did not think to return to her husband, because this was a dishonor for her. Living with an unloved person would be dishonorable to her. Having lost everything: love, protection, support - Katerina decides to take the last step. She chooses death as deliverance from a sinful living next to the vulgar, sanctimonious bourgeoisie of the city of Kalinov, whose customs and customs never became her own.

Honor must be protected. Honor is your name, and the name is your status in society. There is a status - a worthy person - happiness smiles at you every morning. And there is no honor - life is dark and dirty, like a dark cloudy night. Take care of honor from a young age ... Take care!

1. Victory and defeat

Probably, there are no people in the world who would not dream of victory. Every day we win small victories or fail. Striving to achieve success over yourself and your weaknesses, getting up in the morning thirty minutes earlier, doing in the sports section, preparing lessons that are poorly given. Sometimes such victories become a step towards success, towards self-affirmation. But this is not always the case. An apparent victory turns into a defeat, and a defeat, in essence, is a victory.

In Woe From Wit, the main character, AA Chatsky, after a three-year absence, returns to the society in which he grew up. He is familiar with everything, he has a categorical opinion about every representative of the secular society. “The houses are new, but the prejudices are old,” a young, ardent man concludes about a renewed Moscow. Famus society adheres to the strict rules of the times of Catherine: "honor according to father and son", "be bad, but if there are two thousand souls of kin, he and the groom", "the door is open for invited and uninvited, especially from foreign ones", "not that, never to introduce novelties "," judge everything, everywhere, there are no judges above them. "

And only servility, honor, hypocrisy dominate the minds and hearts of the "chosen" representatives of the top of the noble class. Chatsky with his views is not to the court. In his opinion, “ranks are given by people, but people can be deceived”, it is low to seek protection from those in power, one must achieve success with intelligence, not servility. Famusov, barely hearing his reasoning, plugs his ears, shouts: "... on trial!" He considers the young Chatsky to be a revolutionary, "Carbonari", a dangerous person, when Skalozub appears, he asks not to express his thoughts out loud. And when a young man nevertheless begins to express his views, he quickly leaves, not wanting to be held responsible for his judgments. However, the colonel turns out to be a narrow-minded person and only catches reasoning about uniforms. In general, very few people understand Chatsky at the ball at Famusov: the owner himself, Sophia and Molchalin. But each of them makes their own verdict. Famusov would forbid such people to drive up to the capital for a shot, Sophia says that he is “not a man - a snake,” and Molchalin decides that Chatsky is simply a loser. The final verdict of the Moscow world is madness! At the climax, when the hero makes his keynote speech, no one in the audience listens to him. We can say that Chatsky is defeated, but this is not so! IA Goncharov believes that the hero of the comedy is the winner, and one cannot but agree with him. The appearance of this man shook up stagnant Famus society, destroyed Sophia's illusions, shook the position of Molchalin.

In the novel by IS Turgenev "Fathers and Sons" two opponents clash in a heated dispute: a representative of the younger generation - the nihilist Bazarov and the nobleman P.P. Kirsanov. One lived an idle life, spent the lion's share of the allotted time on love for a famous beauty, a socialite - Princess R. But, despite this lifestyle, he gained experience, experienced, probably, the most important feeling that overtook him, washed away everything superficial, arrogance and self-confidence knocked down. This feeling is love. Bazarov boldly judges everything, considering himself "self-styled", a man who made his name only by his own labor, mind. In a dispute with Kirsanov, he is categorical, harsh, but observes external decency, but Pavel Petrovich breaks down and breaks down, indirectly calling Bazarov a "blockhead": "... before they were just idiots, but now they suddenly became nihilists."

Outward victory of Bazarov in this dispute, then in a duel turns out to be a defeat in the main confrontation. Having met his first and only love, the young man is not able to survive defeat, does not want to admit the failure, but he cannot do anything. Without love, without lovely eyes, such desired hands and lips, life is not needed. He becomes distracted, cannot concentrate, and no amount of denial helps him in this confrontation. Yes, it seems, Bazarov won, because he is stoically going to death, silently fighting his illness, but in fact he lost, because he lost everything for which it was worth living and creating.

Courage and determination in any struggle are essential. But sometimes you have to reject self-confidence, look around, re-read the classics, so as not to be mistaken in the right choice. After all, this is your life. And when defeating someone, think about whether this is a victory!

2. Victory and defeat

Victory is always desired. We expect victory from early childhood, playing catch-up or board games. We need to win by all means. And the one who wins feels like the king of the situation. And someone is a loser, because he doesn’t run so fast, or the chips just fell out the wrong ones. Is victory really necessary? Who is the winner? Is victory always an indication of true superiority?

In Anton Pavlovich Chekhov's comedy "The Cherry Orchard", the conflict is centered on the confrontation between the old and the new. The noble society, brought up on the ideals of the past, stopped in its development, accustomed to receive everything without much difficulty, by birthright, Ranevskaya and Gaev are helpless before the need for action. They are paralyzed, unable to make decisions, to budge. Their world collapses, flies into tartaras, and they build rainbow projections, start an unnecessary holiday in the house on the day of the estate auction at auction. And then Lopakhin appears - a former serf, and now - the owner of the cherry orchard. The victory intoxicated him. At first he tries to hide his joy, but soon triumph overwhelms him and, no longer hesitating, he laughs and literally shouts: “My God, Lord, my cherry orchard! Tell me that I am drunk, out of my mind, that all this seems to me ... "

Of course, the slavery of his grandfather and father may justify his behavior, but in the face of, according to him, his beloved Ranevskaya, it looks at least tactless. And here it is already difficult to stop him, as a real master of life, the winner demands: “Hey, musicians, play, I wish to listen to you! Come all to watch how Yermolai Lopakhin has enough ax in the cherry orchard, how the trees will fall to the ground! "

Perhaps, from the point of view of progress, Lopakhin's victory is a step forward, but it becomes somehow sad after such victories. The garden is cut down, without waiting for the departure of the former owners, Firs is forgotten in the boarded-up house ... Does such a play have a morning?

In the story of Alexander Ivanovich Kuprin "Garnet Bracelet", the focus is on the fate of a young man who dared to fall in love with a woman not of his circle. G.S.Zh. for a long time and devotedly he loves Princess Vera. His gift - a pomegranate bracelet - immediately attracted the woman's attention, because the stones suddenly lit up like “lovely deep red living lights. "Like blood!" - thought Vera with unexpected alarm. Unequal relationships are always fraught with serious consequences. The anxious premonitions did not deceive the princess. The need to put in the place of a presumptuous villain at all costs arises not so much from her husband as from her brother Vera. Appearing in front of Zheltkov, representatives of the high society a priori behave like winners. Zheltkov's behavior strengthens them in their confidence: "his trembling hands ran, fiddling with buttons, pinching his light reddish mustache, touching his face unnecessarily." The poor telegraph operator is crushed, confused, and feels guilty. But only Nikolai Nikolaevich recalls the authorities, to whom the defenders of the honor of his wife and sister wanted to turn, how Zheltkov suddenly changes. Over him, over his feelings, no one has power, except for the object of adoration. No authorities can forbid loving a woman. And to suffer for the sake of love, to give his life for it - this is the true victory of the great feeling that G.S.Zh. was fortunate enough to experience. He leaves silently and confidently. His letter to Vera is a hymn to a great feeling, a triumphant song of Love! His death is his victory over the insignificant prejudices of the miserable nobles who feel they are the masters of life.

Victory, as it turns out, is more dangerous and disgusting than defeat if it tramples on eternal values \u200b\u200band distorts the moral foundations of life.

3. Victory and defeat

Publius Cyrus - a Roman poet, a contemporary of Caesar believed that the most glorious victory is a victory over oneself. It seems to me that every thinking person who has reached the age of majority must win at least one victory over himself, over his shortcomings. Perhaps it is laziness, fear, or envy. But what is victory over oneself in peacetime? So petty struggle with personal flaws. But victory in the war! When it comes to life and death, when everything around you becomes an enemy, ready at any moment to end your existence?

Aleksey Meresiev, the hero of Boris Polevoy's "The Tale of a Real Man", withstood such a struggle. The pilot was shot down on his plane by a Nazi fighter. The desperately courageous act of Alexei, who entered into an unequal struggle with a whole link, ended in defeat. The wrecked plane crashed into trees, which softened the blow. The pilot who fell on the snow received serious injuries to his feet. But, despite the unbearable pain, he, overcoming his suffering, decided to move towards his own, taking several thousand steps a day. Each step becomes agony for Alexey: he “felt that he was weakening from tension and pain. Biting his lip, he continued walking. " After a few days, the blood poisoning began to spread throughout the body, and the pain became more and more unbearable. Unable to get to his feet, he decided to crawl. Losing consciousness, he moved forward. On the eighteenth day, he reached the people. But the main test was ahead. Alexey had both feet amputated. He lost heart. However, there was a man who was able to restore his faith in himself. Alexey realized that he could fly if he learned to walk on prostheses. And again, torment, suffering, the need to endure pain, overcoming our weakness. The episode of the return of the pilot to the ranks is shocking, when the hero tells the instructor, who made a comment about the shoes, that his feet will not freeze, since they are not there. The instructor's surprise was indescribable. Such a victory over oneself is a real feat. It becomes clear what the words mean, that fortitude ensures victory.

In the story of M. Gorky "Chelkash" in the center of attention are two people, completely opposite in their mentality, goals in life. Chelkash is a tramp, a thief, a criminal. He is desperately daring, impudent, his element is the sea, true freedom. Money is rubbish for him, he never seeks to save it. If they are (and he gets them, constantly risking freedom and life), he spends them. If not, he is not sad. Gavrila is another matter. He is a peasant, he came to the city to work in order to build his house, to get married, to start a farm. In this he sees his happiness. Having agreed to a scam with Chelkash, he did not expect that it would be so scary. It is clear from his behavior how cowardly he is. However, seeing a wad of money in Chelkash's hands, he loses his mind. The money intoxicated him. He is ready to kill a hated criminal, just to get the amount necessary to build a house. Chelkash suddenly regrets the unfortunate, unlucky, failed killer and gives him almost all the money. So, in my opinion, the Gorky tramp overcomes the hatred for Gavrila, which arose at the first meeting, and takes a position of mercy. It seems that there is nothing special here, but I believe that conquering hatred in oneself means defeating not only oneself, but also the whole world.

So, victories begin with small forgiveness, honest deeds, with the ability to enter the position of another. This is the beginning of a great victory, whose name is life.

1. Friendship and enmity

How difficult it is to define such a simple concept as friendship. Even in early childhood, we make friends, they somehow spontaneously appear at school. But sometimes the opposite is true: former friends suddenly become enemies, and the whole world exudes hostility. In the dictionary, friendship is a personal selfless relationship between people based on love, trust, sincerity, mutual sympathy, common interests and hobbies. And hostility, in the opinion of linguists, is relations and actions imbued with hostility and hatred. How does the complex process of transition from love and sincerity to dislike, hatred and enmity take place? And to whom is love in friendship? To friend? Or to yourself?

In Mikhail Yuryevich Lermontov's novel A Hero of Our Time, Pechorin, reflecting on friendship, claims that one person is always the slave of another, although no one admits it to himself. The hero of the novel believes that he is not capable of friendship. But Werner shows the most sincere feelings towards Pechorin. And Pechorin gives Werner the most positive assessment. What else is needed for friendship? They understand each other so well. Starting an intrigue with Grushnitsky and Mary, Pechorin gets the most reliable ally in the person of Dr. Werner. But at the most crucial moment, Werner refuses to understand Pechorin. It seems natural to him to prevent the tragedy (on the eve he predicted that Grushnitsky would become Pechorin's new victim), but he does not stop the duel and allows the death of one of the duelists. Indeed, he obeys Pechorin, falling under the influence of his strong nature. But then he writes a note: "There is no evidence against you, and you can sleep peacefully ... if you can ... Goodbye."

In this “if you can” one hears a refusal of responsibility, he considers himself entitled to reproach his “friend” for such a misdeed. But he no longer wants to know him: "Goodbye" - sounds irrevocably. Yes, a real friend would have done something wrong, he would have shared responsibility and would not have allowed tragedy not only in thought, but in deed. So friendship (although Pechorin does not think so) turns into dislike.

Arkady Kirsanov and Yevgeny Bazarov come to the Kirsanovs' family estate to rest. This is how the story of Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev's novel Fathers and Sons begins. What made them buddies? Common interests? Common cause? Mutual love and respect? But both of them are nihilists and do not take feelings for truth. Maybe Bazarov goes to Kirsanov only because it is convenient for him to travel half the way home at the expense of a friend? .. In his relationship with Bazarov, Arkady every day discovers some new character traits in his friend. His ignorance of poetry, misunderstanding of music, self-confidence, boundless pride, especially when he claims that "no gods burn pots", referring to Kukshina and Sitnikov. Then love for Anna Sergeevna, with which his "friend-god" does not want to be reconciled. Self-esteem does not allow Bazarov to admit his feelings. He would rather give up friends, love, than admit himself defeated. Saying goodbye to Arkady, he throws: “You are a nice fellow; but still a little liberal barich ... ”And although there is no hatred in these words, the dislike is felt.

Friendship, true, real, a rare phenomenon. The desire to be friends, mutual sympathy, common interests are only prerequisites for friendship. And whether it will develop to become time-tested depends only on patience and the ability to abandon oneself, on self-love, in the first place. Loving a friend is thinking about his interests, and not about how you will look in the eyes of others, whether it will offend your self-esteem. And the ability to get out of the conflict is worthy, respecting the opinion of a friend, but not sacrificing one's own principles, so that friendship does not grow into hostility.

2. Friendship and enmity

Among the eternal values, friendship has always occupied one of the very first places. But everyone understands friendship in their own way. Someone is looking for benefits in friends, some additional privileges in obtaining material benefits. But such friends before the first problem, before the trouble. It is no coincidence that the proverb says: "friends are known in trouble." But the French philosopher M. Montaigne argued: "In friendship there are no other calculations and considerations, except for itself." And only such friendship is real.

In the novel by FM Dostoevsky "Crime and Punishment", an example of such friendship can be considered the relationship between Raskolnikov and Razumikhin. Both law students, both living in poverty, both seeking additional earnings. But at one fine moment, infected with the idea of \u200b\u200ba superman, Raskolnikov drops everything and prepares for "business." Six months of constant self-examination, searching for ways to deceive fate knock Raskolnikov out of the usual rhythm of life. He does not take translations, does not give lessons, does not go to classes, in general, does nothing. And yet, in difficult times, his heart leads him to a friend. Razumikhin is the complete opposite of Raskolnikov. He works, spins all the time, earning pennies, but these cents are enough for him to live and even have fun. Raskolnikov seemed to be looking for an opportunity to leave the “path” he had taken, because “Razumikhin was still remarkable because no setbacks ever embarrassed him and no bad circumstances, it seemed, could crush him.” And Raskolnikov is crushed, driven to an extreme degree of despair. And Razumikhin, realizing that a friend (although Dostoevsky insistently writes "friend") in trouble no longer leaves him until the very trial. And at the trial he acts as a defender of Rodion and cites evidence of his spiritual generosity, nobility, testifying that "during his time at the university, from his last means he helped one of his poor and consumptive university friend and almost supported him for six months." The term for a double murder was cut by almost half. Thus, Dostoevsky proves to us the idea of \u200b\u200bGod's providence, that people are saved by people. And let someone say that Razumikhin was not a loser, having got a beautiful wife, a friend's sister, but did he think about his own benefit? No, he was completely absorbed in caring for a person.

In IA Goncharov's novel Oblomov, Andrei Shtolts is no less generous and caring, who all his life has been trying to pull his friend Oblomov out of the swamp of his existence. He alone is able to lift Ilya Ilyich off the couch, give movement to his monotonous philistine life. Even when Oblomov finally settles with Pshchenitsyna, Andrei makes several more attempts to lift him off the couch. Having learned that Tarantiev with the Oblomovka manager actually robbed a friend, he takes matters into his own hands and puts things in order. Although this does not save Oblomov. But Schtolz honestly fulfilled his duty to a friend, and after the death of an unlucky childhood comrade, he takes his son for upbringing, not wanting to leave the child in an environment that is literally dragged into the mud of idleness, philistinism.

M. Montaigne asserted: "In friendship there are no other calculations and considerations, except for itself."

Only this kind of friendship is real. If a person who calls himself a friend suddenly starts asking for help, currying favor, or starts settling scores for the service rendered, they say, I really helped you, but what did I do for me, give up such a friend! You will not lose anything except an envious look, an unfriendly word.

3. Friendship and enmity

Where do enemies come from? It was always incomprehensible to me: when, why, why do people have enemies? How does enmity, hatred arise, what is in the human body guiding this process? And now you already have an enemy, what to do with him? How to relate to his personality, actions? To follow the path of retaliatory measures, on the principle of an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth? But what will this enmity lead to? To the destruction of the personality, to the destruction of good on a global scale. Suddenly all over the world? Probably, everyone in one way or another faced the problem of confrontation with enemies. How to defeat hatred of such people?

V. Zheleznyakov's story "Scarecrow" shows a terrible story of a girl's collision with a class that boycotted a man, on false suspicion, not understanding the justice of his own sentence. Lenka Bessoltseva - a compassionate, open-minded girl - once in a new class, she found herself alone. Nobody wanted to be friends with her. And only the noble Dimka Somov stood up for her, extended a helping hand. It became especially scary when the same reliable friend betrayed Lena. Knowing that the girl was not to blame, he did not tell the truth to his rabid, embittered classmates. I was afraid. And he allowed her to be poisoned for several days. When the truth was revealed, when everyone found out who was to blame for the unfair punishment of the entire class (the cancellation of the long-awaited trip to Moscow), the anger of the schoolchildren now fell on Dimka. Thirsty for revenge, classmates demanded that everyone vote against Dimka. One Lenka refused to declare a boycott, because she herself went through the horror of the persecution: “I was at the stake ... And they drove me down the street. And I will never chase anyone ... And I will never poison anyone. At least kill! " With her desperately courageous and selfless act, Lena Bessoltseva teaches the entire class nobility, mercy and forgiveness. She rises above her own resentment and treats her tormentors and her traitorous friend equally in the same way.

In a small tragedy by Alexander Pushkin "Mozart and Salieri" is shown the complex work of consciousness of the recognized greatest composer of the eighteenth century - Salieri. The friendship of Antonio Salieri and Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart was based on the envy of a successful, hardworking, but not so talented composer, recognized by the whole society, rich and successful to a younger, but such a sparkling, bright, extremely talented, but poor and not recognized person during his lifetime. Of course, the version of the poisoning of a friend has long been debunked, and even a two-hundred-year veto on the performance of Salieri's works has been lifted. But the story thanks to which Salieri remained in our memory (largely because of Pushkin's play) teaches us not to always trust our friends, they can pour poison into your glass, only out of good intentions: to save justice for the sake of your noble name.

Friend-traitor, friend-enemy ... where is the border of these states. How often is a person able to move into the camp of your enemies, change their attitude towards you? Happy is he who has never lost friends. Therefore, I think that Menander was still right, and friends and enemies should be judged by an equal measure, so as not to sin against honor and dignity, against conscience. However, one should never forget about mercy. It is above all the laws of justice.

The October Revolution not only broke the old foundations of life and changed life, it also gave birth to a new, completely phenomenal type of person. This phenomenon, of course, interested writers, many of them tried to unravel it, and some, such as M. Zoshchenko, N. Erdman, V. Kataev, succeeded quite well. The “new” man in the street, the so-called “homo sovieticus”, not only adapted to the new government, he accepted it as his own, found his place in it. Distinctive features of such a "homo sovieticus" are heightened aggressiveness, belief in his own infallibility and impunity, and categorical judgment.

M. A. Bulgakov did not pass by such a phenomenon either. As an employee of the newspaper "Gudok" in the early 1920s, he, of course, had seen enough of such types, and the results of his observations were reflected in the satirical stories "Fatal Eggs", "The Devil" and "Heart of a Dog".

The protagonist of the story "Heart of a Dog", written in 1925, is the professor of medicine Philip Philipovich Preobrazhensky, who is dealing with the problem of rejuvenation of the human body, which was fashionable at that time. The surname that Bulgakov gives his hero is not accidental, because the professor is engaged in eugenics, that is, the science of improving, transforming the biological nature of man.

Preobrazhensky is very talented and devoted to his work. Not only in Russia, but also in Europe, he has no equal in his field. Like any talented scientist, he completely devotes himself to work: he receives patients during the day, in the evening, or even at night, studies special literature and sets up experiments. In all other respects, this is a typical intellectual of the old sourdough: he likes to eat well, dress tastefully, watch the premiere in the theater, chat with his assistant Bormental. Preobrazhensky is not demonstratively interested in politics: the new government irritates him with lack of culture and rudeness, but the matter does not go further than poisonous grumbles.

Life as usual flows along the rolled rail, until one fine day in the apartment of Professor Preobrazhensky there appears a homeless dog Sharik, brought by the professor himself for an experiment. The dog shows its quarrelsome and aggressive character immediately. Sharik thinks about the doorman at the entrance: "I wish I could bite him by the calloused proletarian leg." And when he saw a stuffed owl in the professor's waiting room, he came to the conclusion: “And this owl is rubbish. Impudent. We will explain it. "

Preobrazhensky does not even suspect what monster he brought into the house and what will come of it.

The professor's goal is grandiose: he wants to do good to humanity, giving him eternal youth. As an experiment, he transplants the seminal glands to Ball, and then the pituitary gland of the deceased person. But rejuvenation does not work - before the eyes of the amazed Preobrazhensky and Bormental, Sharik gradually turns into a person.

The creation of an artificial person is not a new plot in literature. Many authors have contacted him. What kind of monsters they did not create on the pages of their works - starting with Frankenstein and ending with modern "transformers" and "terminators", solving with their help quite real, earthly problems.

So it is for Bulgakov: the plot of the “humanization” of the dog is an allegorical interpretation of modernity, the triumph of rudeness, which has taken the form of state policy.

Surprisingly, for the half-man-half-beast Sharik (or Sharikov Polygraph Poligrafovich, as he decided to call himself), a social niche is found very quickly. He "takes under his wing" and becomes his ideological inspirer by the chairman of the house management, demagogue and ham Shvonder. Bulgakov spares no satirical colors to describe Shvonder and other members of the house management. These are faceless and sexless creatures, inhumans, but "labor elements" who, as Preobrazhensky says, have "ruin in their heads." All day long they are engaged in singing revolutionary songs, holding political talks and solving problems of compaction. Their main task is to divide everything equally, as they understand social justice. They are also trying to "tighten" the professor, who owns a seven-room apartment. Arguments that all these rooms are necessary for normal life and work are simply beyond their comprehension. And if not for the high patron, Professor Preobrazhensky would hardly have been able to defend his apartment.

Before, before the fatal experiment, Philip Philipovich practically did not encounter representatives of the new government, but now he has such a representative at his side. Drunkenness, debauchery, rudeness are not limited to Sharikov's insolence; now, under the influence of Shvonder, he begins to assert his rights to living space and is going to start a family, as he considers himself to be a "labor element". Reading about this is not so much funny as scary. One involuntarily thinks about how many of these balls will be in power both in these years and in the following decades and will not only poison the lives of normal people, but also decide their fates, determine the domestic and foreign policy of the country. (Probably, similar thoughts appeared among those who banned Bulgakov's story for many years).

Sharikov's career is developing successfully: on the recommendation of Shvonder, he is accepted into the civil service as the head of the sub-department in the ICC for catching stray cats (a suitable occupation for a former dog!). Sharikov is sporting a leather coat, like a real commissar, giving orders to the maid in a metallic voice and, following Shvonder, professes the principle of equalization: “But what about: one is settled in seven rooms, he has forty pairs of pants, and the other is hanging around in trash boxes looking for food ". Moreover, Sharikov writes a denunciation against his benefactor.

Too late the professor realizes his mistake: this half-man, half-animal, scoundrel and boor has already thoroughly established himself in this life and has completely blended into the new society. An intolerable situation arises, from which Bormental is the first to suggest a way out - they should destroy a monster created by their own hands.

"The crime has ripened and fell like a stone ..."

The professor and his assistant become accomplices in the crime, but they are criminals "by necessity." Since the change in Sharikov's social status, the conflict between Preobrazhensky and Sharikov has gone beyond the home. And the professor decides on another operation - he returns Sharikov to his original state.

It would seem that M. Bulgakov's story ends happily: Sharik in his natural guise is quietly dozing in the corner of the living room and normal life in the apartment has been restored. However, Shvonder, members of the house management and many other polygraph polygraphs, before whom medicine is powerless, remained outside the apartment.

The results of the local experiment were easy to invalidate; the price paid for a social experiment unprecedented in history, carried out on the scale of an entire country, turned out to be exorbitant for Russia and the Russian people.