A. Slonimsky believed that "the substitution of concepts is motivated by Sobakevich's desire to add value to dead souls." But Gogol does not give any motivation in this case; The reasons for Sobakevich's "substitution of concepts" are unclear, not disclosed, especially if we take into account a similar episode in Chapter VII: Sobakevich praises the product after the sale, when any need to "add up the price" has disappeared - he praises it to the chairman of the chamber, which was not entirely safe. The situation here is analogous to the duality of Gogol's characterology that we have already noted: psychological motivation is generally not excluded, but its unrecordedness, "closedness" leaves the possibility of a different, so to speak, grotesque reading. And in this case, no matter what motives govern Sobakevich, it remains possible to assume in his actions the presence of a certain share of "pure art". It seems that Sobakevich is genuinely fascinated by what he says ("... where did the lynx and the gift of speech come from"), believes (or begins to believe) in the reality of what he said. Dead Souls, having become the subject of bargaining, sales, acquire in his eyes the dignity of living people.

The image doubles all the time: the reflection of some strange "play of nature" falls on real objects and phenomena ...

The consequences of Chichikov's "negotiation" were not limited to rumors and speculations. Not without death - the death of the prosecutor, the appearance of which, says the narrator, is just as "terrible in small things as it is terrible in a great man." If, say, in the "Overcoat" from real events followed by a denouement close to fantasy, then in "Dead Souls" from an event not quite ordinary, painted in fantastic tones (the acquisition of "dead souls"), followed by quite tangible in its real tragedy results.

"Where is the exit, where is the road?" Everything is significant in this lyrical digression; and the fact that Gogol adheres to educational categories ("road", "eternal truth"), and the fact that, holding on to them, he sees a monstrous deviation of humanity from the straight path. The image of the road - the most important image of "Dead Souls" - constantly collides with images of a different, opposite meaning: "impassable backwoods", swamp ("swamp fires"), "abyss", "grave", "whirlpool" ... In turn, and the image of the road is stratified into contrasting images: these are (as in the just cited excerpt) both the "straight path" and "the roads leading far to the side." In the plot of the poem, it is both Chichikov's life (“but for all that, his road was difficult ...) and the road that runs through the boundless Russian expanses; the latter turns into either the road along which the Chichikov troika is hurrying, or the road of history along which the Troika Rus is racing.

The duality of the structural principles of "Dead Souls" ultimately rises to the antithesis of the rational and the illogical (grotesque).

Early Gogol felt the contradictions of the "mercantile age" sharper and more exposed. The anomaly of reality sometimes directly, dictatorially invaded Gogol's artistic world. Later, he subordinated fantasy to strict calculation, highlighted the beginning of synthesis, a sober and complete coverage of the whole, the image of human destinies in relation to the main "road" of history. But the grotesque beginning did not disappear from Gogol's poetics - it only went deeper, more evenly dissolving in the artistic fabric.

A grotesque beginning also manifested itself in Dead Souls, manifested itself at different levels: both in style - with its illogical descriptions, alternating plans, and in the very core of the situation - in Chichikov's "negotiation", and in the development of action.

The rational and the grotesque form two poles of the poem, between which its entire art system... In "Dead Souls", generally constructed in contrast, there are other poles: epic - and lyrics (in particular, condensed in the so-called lyrical digressions); satire, comic - and tragedy. But this contrast is especially important for the general structure of the poem; this is also evident from the fact that it permeates its "positive" sphere.

Thanks to this, we are not always clearly aware of whom exactly the inspired Gogol troika is racing. And these characters, as D. Merezhkovsky noted, are three, and all of them are quite characteristic. "The mad Poprishchin, the witty Khlestakov and the prudent Chichikov - that's who this symbolic Russian troika is rushing into in its terrible flight into the vast expanse or the immense emptiness."

The usual contrasts - say, the contrast between low and high - are not hidden in Dead Souls. On the contrary, Gogol exposes them, guided by his rule: “The true effect lies in a sharp contrast; beauty is never so bright and visible as in contrast. " According to this “rule”, in Chapter VI, a passage about a dreamer who stopped by “to see Schiller ... on a visit” and suddenly found himself “on earth” again: in Chapter XI - the “author's” reflections on space and Chichikov's travel adventures: An unnatural power lit up my eyes: y! what a sparkling, wonderful, unfamiliar distance! Russia! .. "

"Hold, hold, you fool!" - Chichikov shouted to Selifan. The opposite of inspirational dreams and sobering reality is shown.

But the contrast in the positive sphere, which we just talked about, is deliberately implicit, veiled either by the formal logic of the narrative turn or by an almost imperceptible, smooth change in perspective, points of view. An example of the latter is the passage about the troika concluding the poem: at first the entire description is strictly tied to Chichikov's troika and to his experiences; then a step was made to the feelings of the Russian in general ("And what Russian does not like to drive fast?"), then the addressee of the author's speech and description becomes the troika itself ("Oh, troika! bird troika, who invented you? .." to lead to a new author's appeal, this time - to Russia (“Aren't you, Russia, rushing like a brisk, overtaken troika? ..”). As a result, the border, where the Chichikov troika turns into Russia-troika, is masked, although the poem does not give a direct identification.

III. CONTRAST OF LIVING AND DEAD

The contrast between the living and the dead in the poem was noted by Herzen in his diary entries in 1842. On the one hand, Herzen wrote, "dead souls ... all these Nozdrevs, Manilov and tutti quanti (all others)." On the other hand: "where the gaze can penetrate through the fog of unclean dung fumes, there he sees a daring, full of strength nationality"

The contrast between the living and the dead and the mortification of the living is a favorite theme of the grotesque, embodied with the help of certain and more or less stable motives.

Here is a description of the officials from Chapter VII of Dead Souls. Entering the civil chamber for making the deeds of purchase, Chichikov and Manilov saw “a lot of paper, both rough and white, bowed heads, wide nape, tailcoats, provincial-style frock coats and even just some kind of light gray jacket, which had come off quite abruptly, which, turning its head on one side and putting it almost on the paper itself, briskly and ambitiously wrote out a protocol ... ". The increasing number of synecdoches completely overshadows living people; in the last example, the bureaucratic head itself and the bureaucratic function of writing turns out to be the property of the "light gray jacket."

Interesting, from this point of view, is Gogol's favorite form of describing similar, almost mechanically repeated actions or remarks. In Dead Souls, this form is especially common.

“All officials were pleased with the arrival of a new person. The governor said about him that he was a well-meaning person; the prosecutor that he is a sensible person; the gendarme colonel said that he scientist; the chairman of the chamber, that he is a knowledgeable and respectable police chief, that he is a respectable and amiable man; the wife of the police chief, that he is the most kind and courteous person. " The pedantic rigor of the narrator's recording of each of the lines contrasts with their almost complete homogeneity. In the last two cases, primitivism is strengthened by the fact that each picks up one word of the previous one, as if trying to add to it something of his own and original, but adds something equally flat and insignificant.

The author of "Dead Souls" also developed such grotesque motifs that are associated with the movement of characters in a row of animals and inanimate objects. Chichikov more than once finds himself in a situation very close to animals, insects, etc. “... Yes, like a hog, your whole back and side are covered in mud! where did you like to get greasy? " - says Korobochka to him. At the ball, feeling “all sorts of fragrances,” “Chichikov only raised howling up and smelled” - an action clearly hinting at the behavior of dogs. At the same Korobochka, the sleeping Chichikov was literally stuck with flies - "one sat on his lip, the other on his ear, the third strove to sit on his very eye", etc. Throughout the poem, animals, birds, insects seem to press Chichikov, filling him in "buddies". On the other hand, the case at Nozdryov's kennel is not the only one when Chichikov was offended by this kind of "friendship." Waking up at Korobochka, Chichikov “sneezed again so loudly that an Indian rooster who had come up to the window at that time ... chatted something to him suddenly and very soon in his strange language, probably“ I wish you good health, ”to which Chichikov told him a fool ".

What is the comedy of Chichikov's reaction based on? Usually, a person will not take offense at an animal, and even more so a bird, without risking getting into a funny situation. Feelings of resentment suggest either biological equality or superiority of the offender. In another place it is said that Chichikov "did not like to allow himself to be treated in any way, unless the person was of too high a rank."

The eyes are a favorite part of a romantic portrait. In Gogol, the contrast between the living and the dead, the death of the living is often indicated precisely by the description of the eyes.

In "Dead Souls" in the portrait of the characters, the eyes are either not indicated in any way (since they are simply superfluous), or their lack of spirituality is emphasized. What is objectified is that which in its essence cannot be objectified. So, Manilov "had eyes as sweet as sugar", and in relation to Sobakevich's eyes, the tool that nature used in this case was noted: "I poked my eyes with a big drill." It is said about Plyushkin's eyes: “Little eyes had not yet fizzled out and were running from under the high-grown eyebrows, like mice, when, sticking out their sharp muzzles from the dark holes, pricking their ears and blinking their mustache, they were looking for a cat or a mischievous boy hiding somewhere, and they smell the very air suspiciously. " It is already something animate and, therefore, higher, but it is not human vitality, but rather animal; in the very development of the conventional, metaphorical plan, the brisk briskness and suspicion of the little animal is conveyed.

The conventional plan either objectifies the phenomenon being compared, or translates it into a series of animals, insects, etc. - that is, in both cases it performs the function of the grotesque style.

The first case is a description of the faces of officials: “Some had faces like badly baked bread: their cheeks swelled to one side, their chin slanted to the other, the top oak was blown up with a bubble, which, in addition, also cracked ...” The second case - description of black tailcoats: "Black tailcoats flashed and were worn apart and in heaps here and there, like flies scamper on white shining refined sugar in the hot July summer, when an old beetle cuts and divides it into sparkling fragments ..." etc. C on the other hand, if the human moves to a lower, "animal" row, then the latter "rises" to the human: recall the comparison of the overflowing dogs with the choir of singers.

In all cases, the rapprochement of a human with an inanimate or animal occurs in a Gogolian subtle and polysemantic way.

But, of course, it is not Chichikov who embodies "that daring, full of strength nationality" about which Herzen wrote and which must confront "dead souls". The depiction of this force, passing through the "second plan", is nevertheless very important precisely for its stylistic contrast of grotesque immobility and mortification.

IV. ABOUT POEM COMPOSITION

It is believed that the first volume of "Dead Souls" is built on the same principle. A. Bely formulated this principle as follows: each subsequent landowner, with whom fate confronted Chichikov, "is more dead than the previous one." Is Korobochka really “more dead” than Manilov, Nozdrev is “more dead” than Maeilov and Korobochka, Sobakevich is deader than Manilov, Korobochka and Nozdrev? ..

Let us recall what Gogol says about Manilov: “You won't get any living or even arrogant word from him, which you can hear from almost everyone if you touch an object that is bullying him. Everyone has their own enthusiasm: in one the enthusiasm turned to greyhounds; to others it seems that he is a strong lover of music ... in short, everyone has their own, but Manilov had nothing. " If by "deadness" we mean the social harm caused by this or that landowner, then here it is still possible to argue who is more harmful: the economic Sobakevich, whose "peasant huts ... were cut down wonderfully," or Manilov, whose " the economy somehow went on by itself ”and the peasants were given over to the power of a cunning clerk. But Sobakevich follows Manilov.

In a word, the existing point of view on the composition of Dead Souls is rather vulnerable.

Speaking about the splendor of Plyushkin's garden, Gogol, by the way, notes: “... Everything was somehow deserted, good, how not to invent either nature or art, but as it happens only when they are united together, when, according to the piled up, often to no avail, human labor will be cut by nature with its final incisor, it will lighten the heavy masses, destroy the coarse correctness and the beggarly gaps through which the undisguised, naked plan is visible, and will give wonderful warmth to everything that has been created in the cold of measured purity and neatness.

It is useless to look for one "single principle" in works of genius.

Why, for example, does Gogol open the gallery of landowners by the Manilovs?

First, it is clear that Chichikov decided to start a detour of the landowners from Manilov, who, while still in the city, charmed him with his courtesy and courtesy and from whom (as Chichikov might have thought) dead souls would be acquired without difficulty. Features of characters, circumstances of the case - all this motivates the deployment of the composition, imparting to it such qualities as naturalness, lightness.

However, many others are immediately layered on this quality. What is important, for example, is the way of disclosing the case itself, Chichikov's "negotiation". In the first chapter, we don't know anything about her yet. "The strange property of the guest and the enterprise" opens for the first time in the communication between Chichikov and Manilov. Chichikov's extraordinary enterprise stands against the backdrop of Manilov's dreamy, “blue” ideality, gaping with its dazzling contrast.

But even this does not exhaust the compositional significance of the chapter on Manilov. Gogol first of all introduces us to a person who still does not evoke too strong negative or dramatic emotions. It does not cause just because of its lifelessness, lack of "enthusiasm". Gogol deliberately begins with a person who does not have sharp properties, that is, with "nothing." The general emotional tone around the image of Manilov is still serene, and the light spectrum, which has already been mentioned, comes in handy for him. Subsequently, the light spectrum changes; dark, gloomy tones begin to prevail in it - as in the development of the entire poem. This happens not because each subsequent hero is deader than the previous one, but because each brings his share of "vulgarity" into the overall picture, and the general measure of vulgarity, "the vulgarity of all together" becomes unbearable. But the first chapter is deliberately instructed so as not to anticipate the gloomy, oppressive impression, to make possible its gradual growth.

At first, the location of the chapters seemed to coincide with the plan of Chichikov's visits. Chichikov decides to start with Manilov - and now the chapter on Manilov follows. But after visiting Manilov, unexpected complications arise. Chichikov intended to visit Sobakevich, but lost his way, the chaise overturned, etc.

So, instead of the expected meeting with Sobakevich, there was a meeting with Korobochka. Until now, neither Chichikov nor the readers knew anything about Korobochka. The motive for such unexpectedness and novelty is reinforced by the question: Chichikova: Has the old woman even heard of Sobakevich and Manilov? No, I have not. What kind of landowners live around? - "Bobrov, Svinin, Kanapatiev, Harpakin, Trepakin, Pleshakov" - that is, a selection of deliberately unfamiliar names follows. Chichikov's plan is beginning to get frustrated. He is even more upset because in the silly old woman, with whom Chichikov was not very shy and stood on ceremony, he suddenly encountered unexpected resistance ...

In the next chapter, in a conversation between Chichikov and an old woman in a tavern, the name of Sobakevich appears again (“the old woman knows not only Sobakevich, but Manilov as well ...”), and the action seemed to be on track. And again a complication: Chichikov meets with Nozdrev, whom he met in the city, but whom he did not intend to visit.

Chichikov still gets to Sobakevich. In addition, not every unexpected meeting promises Chichikov trouble: a visit to Plyushkin (which Chichikov learned only from Sobakevich) brings him the "acquisition" of more than two hundred souls and seems to happily crown the whole voyage. Chichikov had no idea what complications awaited him in the city ...

Although everything unusual in Dead Souls (for example, the appearance of Korobochka in the city, which had the most sad consequences for Chichikov) is as strictly motivated by the circumstances and characters of the characters as usual, but the game itself and the interaction of “right” and “wrong”, logical and illogical, throws an alarming, flickering light on the action of the poem. It reinforces the impression of that, in the words of the writer, "confusion, bustle, confusion" of life, which is reflected in the main structural principles of the poem.

V. TWO TYPES OF CHARACTERS IN "DEAD SOULS"

When we come to Plushkin in the gallery of images of the poem, we clearly hear new, "hitherto not abusive strings" in his description. In the sixth chapter, the tone of the story changes dramatically - the motives of sadness and grief increase. Is it because Plyushkin is "deader" than all the previous characters? We'll see. In the meantime, let us note a common property of all Gogol images.

See what a difficult game of opposites; movements, properties occurs in any, the most "primitive" Gogol character.

“The little box is suspicious and distrustful; no persuasion of Chichikov worked on her. But "unexpectedly well" Chichikov mentioned that he was taking government contracts, and the "club-headed" old woman suddenly believed him ...

Sobakevich is cunning and cautious, but not only Chichikov, but also the chairman of the chamber (for which there was no need at all), he praises the coachman Mikheev, and when he recalls: “After all, you told me that he died,” he says without a shadow of hesitation : "It was his brother who died, but he was already quite a bit and became healthier than before" ... Sobakevich did not speak well of anyone, according to Chichikov he called him "a pleasant person" ...

Nozdryov is reputed "for a good friend", but is ready to play a trick on his friend. And he does dirty tricks, not out of malice, not out of self-interest, but so - no one knows from what. Nozdryov is a reckless boozer, a "smart guy", a reckless man, but in the game - cards or checkers - a calculating rogue. From Nozdryov, it seemed, the easiest way to get dead souls - what are they to him? And yet he is the only landowner who left Chichikov with nothing ...

Gogol's characters do not fit this definition, not only because they (as we have seen) combine opposite elements. The main thing is that the "core" of Gogol's types is not reduced to either hypocrisy, or rudeness, or gullibility, or any other well-known and clearly defined vice. What we call Manilovism, Nozdrevism, etc., is essentially a new psychological and moral concept, first "formulated" by Gogol. Each of these concept-complexes includes many shades, many (sometimes mutually exclusive) properties, which together form a new quality that is not covered by one definition.

There is nothing more mistaken to think that the character “opens up immediately”. It is rather an outline of a character, its outline, which will be further deepened and supplemented. And this "characteristic" is built not so much on the direct naming of already known qualities, but on figurative associations that evoke a completely new type in our minds. “Nozdryov was in some respects a historical person” - this is not at all the same as: “Nozdryov was impudent”, or: “Nozdryov was an upstart”.

Now - about the typological differences between the characters in "Dead Souls".

The new that we feel in Plyushkin can be briefly conveyed by the word "development". Plyushkin is given by Gogol in time and in change. Change - change for the worse - gives rise to the minor dramatic tone of the sixth, turning point of the poem.

Gogol introduces this motive gradually and imperceptibly. In the fifth chapter, in the scene of Chichikov's meeting with the beautiful "blonde", he already twice clearly breaks into the narrative. For the first time in a contrasting description of the reaction of a "twenty-year-old youth" ("he would have stood insensibly in one place for a long time ...") and Chichikov: "but our hero was already middle-aged and of a prudently chilled character ...". The second time - in the description of a possible change in the beauty herself: "Everything can be done from her, she can be a miracle, or rubbish can come out, and rubbish will come out!"

The beginning of the sixth chapter is an elegy about passing youth and life. Everything that is best in a person - his "youth", his "freshness" - is irrevocably wasted on the roads of life.

Most of the images of Dead Souls (we are talking only about the first volume), including all the images of landowners, are static. This does not mean that they are clear from the very beginning; on the contrary, the gradual disclosure of character, the discovery of unforeseen "readiness" in it is the law of the entire Gogol typology. But this is precisely the disclosure of character, not its evolution. The character, from the very beginning, is given to the established, with its stable, albeit inexhaustible "core". Let's pay attention: all landowners before Plyushkin have no past. All that is known about Korobochka's past is that she had a husband who loved it when his heels were scratched. Nothing is reported about Sobakevich's past: it is only known that for more than forty years he has not yet suffered from anything and that his father was distinguished by the same excellent health. “At thirty-five years old, Nozdryov was exactly the same as he was at eighteen and twenty ...” Manilov, it is said in passing, served in the army, where “he was considered the most modest and most educated officer,” that is, the same Manilov. It seems that both Manilov, and Sobakevich, and Nozdrev, and Korobochka were already born the way the action of the poem finds them. Not only Sobakevich, they all came out ready-made from the hands of nature, which "let them into the world, saying: they live!" - only used different tools.

At first, Plyushkin is a man of a completely different mental organization. In early Plyushkin there is only the possibility of his future vice ("wise stinginess", the absence of "too strong feelings"), no more. With Plyushkin, for the first time, a biography and a character history are included in the poem.

The second character in the poem with a biography is Chichikov. True, Chichikov's "passion" (unlike Plyushkin's) was formed a very long time ago, from childhood, but the biography - in Chapter XI - demonstrates, so to speak, the vicissitudes of this passion, its vicissitudes and its drama.

The distinction between the two types of characters plays an important role in the artistic concept of Dead Souls. The central motive of the poem is associated with it - the emptiness, immobility, death of a person. The motive of the "dead" and "living" soul.

In the characters of the first type - in Manilov, Korobochka, etc. - motives of puppetry, automaticity, which we have already mentioned, are more pronounced. With a wide variety of external movements, actions, etc., what happens in the soul of Manilov, or Korobochka, or Sobakevich is not known exactly. And do they have a "soul"?

The remark about Sobakevich is characteristic: “Sobakevich listened, everyone still bowed his head, and at least something similar to an expression appeared in his face. It seemed that this body did not have a soul at all, or he had it, but not at all where it should be, but like the immortal Koshchei somewhere behind the mountains and covered with such a thick shell that everything that was not tossing and turning at its bottom, produced absolutely no shock on the surface. "

It is also impossible to say with certainty whether or not Sobakevich, Manilov, etc. have a soul. Maybe they simply have it even further hidden than Sobakevich?

About the “soul” of the prosecutor (who, of course, belongs to the same type of characters as Manilov, Sobakevich, etc.) was learned only when he suddenly began to “think, think, and suddenly ... died”. “Then only with condolences did they learn that the deceased had, for sure, a soul, although he, out of his modesty, never showed it.”

But about Plyushkin, who heard the name of his school friend, it is said: "And on this wooden face a warm ray suddenly slid, not a feeling was expressed, but some pale reflection of a feeling, a phenomenon similar to the sudden appearance of a drowning man on the surface of the waters." Let it be only a "pale reflection of feeling", but still "feeling", that is, a true, living movement, which was previously spiritualized man. For Manilov or Sobakevich, this is also impossible. They are simply created from a different material. And they don't have a past.

Chichikov also experiences a “reflection of feelings” more than once, for example, when he meets a beautiful woman, or during a “fast ride,” or when he thinks about “the rampant wide life”.

Figuratively speaking, the characters of the first and second types belong to two different geological periods. Mani-ί fishing, perhaps, is "prettier" than Plyushkin, but the process in him has already ended, the image has turned to stone, while in Plyushkin one can still see the last echoes of underground blows.

It turns out that he is not deader, but more alive than the previous characters. Therefore, he crowns the gallery of images of landowners. In the sixth chapter, placed strictly in the middle, in the focus of the poem, Gogol gives a "break" - both in the tone and character of the narrative. For the first time, the theme of human mortification is translated into a time perspective, presented as a result, the result of his entire life; “And a person could condescend to such insignificance, pettiness, nastiness! could have changed so much! " Hence the "breakthrough" into the narrative just in the sixth chapter of sorrowful, tragic motives. Where a person has not changed (or it is no longer clear that he has changed), there is nothing to grieve about. But where, before our very eyes, a gradual extinction of life is taking place (so that its last gleams are still visible), there comicism gives way to pathos.

The difference between the two types of characters is confirmed, among other things, by the following circumstance. Of all the heroes of the first volume, Gogol (as far as can be judged from the surviving data) intended to take and lead through life's trials to rebirth - not only Chichikov, but also Plyushkin.

Interesting data for Gogol's typology of characters can be provided by its analysis from the point of view of the author's introspection. By this concept, we mean objective, that is, the narrator's own evidence of the character's inner experiences, his mood, thoughts, etc. With regard to the “quantity” of introspection, Plyushkin also noticeably surpasses all the characters mentioned. But Chichikov occupies a special place. Not to mention the "quantity" - introspection accompanies Chichikov constantly, - the complexity of its forms increases. In addition to single internal replicas, fixing an unambiguous internal movement, forms of instrospection of the current internal state are widely used. Cases of "disinterested" reflections, that is, not directly related to the idea of \u200b\u200bbuying dead souls, are sharply increasing, and the subject of reflections becomes more complicated and diversified: about the fate of a woman (in connection with a blonde), about the inappropriateness of balls.

Vi. TO THE QUESTION ABOUT GENRE

The feeling of genre novelty of Dead Souls is conveyed in the famous words of Leo Tolstoy: “I think that every great artist should create his own forms. If the content of works of art can be infinitely varied, then so can their form ... Take Gogol's Dead Souls. What is it? Not a novel, not a story. Something completely original. " L. Tolstoy's statement, which has become a textbook, goes back to the equally well-known words of Gogol: “The thing that I am sitting and working on now ... does not look like either a story or a novel ... If God helps me to fulfill my poem as must, then this will be my first decent creation ”(letter to M. Pogodin dated November 28, 1836).

Let us take the "lesser kind of epic" indicated by Gogol, a genre to which Dead Souls are usually called (from the "Educational Book of Literature for Russian Youth").

“For new ages,” we read in the “Educational Book of Literature ...” after characterizing the “epic,” “a kind of narrative works has emerged, which constitutes, as it were, the middle between the novel and the epic, the hero of which is, although a private and invisible person, but however, significant in many respects for the observer of the human soul. The author leads his life through a chain of adventures and changes, in order to present, at the same time, a true picture of everything significant in the features and morals of the time he has taken, that earthly, almost statistically captured picture of shortcomings, abuse, vices and everything that he noticed in the given era and a time worthy of attracting the eye of any observant contemporary seeking in the past, past living lessons for the present. From time to time such phenomena appeared among many peoples "

The similarities between the described genre and “ Dead souls»More than you might expect! The focus is not on the biographies of the characters, but on one major event, namely the "strange enterprise" just mentioned. In the novel, a "remarkable incident" affects the interests and requires the participation of all actors. In Dead Souls, Chichikov's scam unexpectedly determined the lives of hundreds of people, becoming for some time the focus of the entire “NN city”, although, of course, the degree of participation of the characters in this “incident” is different.

One of the first reviewers of Dead Souls wrote that Selifan and Petrushka are not connected with the main character by a unity of interest, they appear "without any relation to his cause." This is inaccurate. Chichikov's companions are indifferent to his "case". But the "business" is not indifferent to them. When the frightened officials decided to make an inquiry, then it was the turn of Chichikov's people, but "from Petrushka they only heard the smell of living quarters, and from Selifan that he was performing state service ...". Among the parallels that can be drawn between Gogol's definition of the novel and Dead Souls, the following is most interesting. Gogol says that in the novel "every arrival of a person first ... heralds his participation later." In other words, the characters, revealing themselves in the "main incident", involuntarily prepare changes in the plot and in the fate of the protagonist. If not to everyone, then to many persons of "Dead Souls" this rule is applicable.

• Specialty VAK RF10.01.01
• Number of pages 216

GOGOL'S AESTHETIC PROGRAM AND THE PROBLEMS OF DEAD SOULS POETICS

IDEAL AND AESTHETIC ROLE OF ELEMENTS OF THE PEOPLE

CREATIVITY (PROVERSE, EXPERIMENTS, - "

FOLKLORE SOURCES AND IDEA-ARTISTIC FUNCTION OF INSERTED EPISODES OF THE POEM - "THE STORY ABOUT CAPTAIN KOPEYKIN" AND PARABLES ABOUT KIF MOKIEVICH AND MOKIA KIFOVICH.

Dissertation introduction (part of the abstract) on the topic "Traditions of Russian folk art in the poetics of" Dead Souls "N.V. Gogol "

Dead souls "opened new era in the history of Russian literature * The power of Gogol's realism was most fully manifested in them. His pathos is, first of all, in a critical analysis of the social phenomena of our time. According to Herzen, "Dead Souls" "shook the whole of Russia" (120, p. 229) * "For the first time in Russian literature tragic contradictions Russian reality have been artistically reproduced with such depth and truth. ” hitherto not yet revealed to their own consciousness and elusive for any definition "(104, p. 158)

Gogol's great creation with extraordinary power showed the inconsistency of the autocratic-serf system in Russia. ”At the same time, when Belinsky was drawing political conclusions from the work, they seemed unacceptable to Gogol. This is one of the deepest contradictions of Gogol's work. This contradiction can only be explained on the basis of artistic world Gogol, his poetics. The social types created by the writer, in themselves, served as a sufficient basis for considering them satirical and drawing those conclusions from the work,

1 Here and below, the serial number of the work on the bibliography and the page, and, if necessary, the volume of the publication or the number of the journal are indicated in brackets. which Belinsky did * In the mind of Gogol, the correlation of the types he created with social reality was clearly visible. His letters, critical opinions, participation in Sovremennik — all testify to the fact that Gogol was clearly aware of the social needs that Russia lived with. The writer took the main colors for creating his heroes from reality, from the landlord, bureaucratic life, which he knew, perhaps, better than anyone in Russia.

Based on this, several main approaches to the analysis of Dead Souls have long been outlined. First of all, mention should be made of the approach from the side of the content and social significance of the poem, its realism and artistic and grotesque sharpenings.

At the same time, the prism through which Gogol looks at Russian reality is extremely complex. There may be other approaches to the poetics of Dead Souls, in particular, the one proposed by the author of this dissertation. It should be noted that the category of poetics is understood in work in a broad sense, involving the study of the most important moments of the internal organization of a work of art, such as composition, plot composition, principles of characterizing characters, etc. This understanding of it was written, in particular, by V.V. Vinogradov (116, p. 184) and L.I. Timofeev (261, p. 6-7).

The originality of Gogol's creative manner cannot be understood without deep understanding of the organic connection between his poetics and Russian and Ukrainian folk culture. Compared to other Russian classics, he is much less associated with the literary tradition.

In an article about "Petersburg Collection" of 1846, Belinsky wrote about "the unparalleled in our literature originality and originality of the works of Gogol." "We say: unparalleled," the critic emphasized, "because from this side no Russian poet can be compared with Gogol. Every talent of genius is original and original, but there is a difference between one and the other originality, between one and another originality", And further Belinsky explained his idea by comparing Gogol with Pushkin: "" To the credit of Pushkin's predecessors, I must say that they had more or less influence on him, and their poetry was more or less a harbinger of his poetry, especially his first experiments * Even more direct and the influence of contemporary European poets on Pushkin was more direct. "/" ") Gogol had no predecessors in Russian literature, there was (and could not have been) samples in foreign literature. His poetry appeared suddenly, unexpected, unlike any other poetry.Of course, one cannot deny the influence on Gogol from, for example, Pushkin; but this influence was not direct: it was reflected on the work of Gogol, and not on the peculiarities, not on the physiognomy, so to speak, of Gogol's work. This was the influence of more time that Pushkin pushed forward than Pushkin himself "(108, p. 122-123)

In fact, in order to understand the same Pushkin, one must know Derzhavin, Zhukovsky, Baratynsky, Batyushkov, one must know French fine literature, a whole host of English classics. In other words, Pushkin (despite all his originality and originality) is perceived by us against the background of a certain literary tradition. The same can be said about other Russian classics. The situation with Gogol is more complicated: he is much less connected with his predecessors and contemporaries.

Following Belinsky, other critics also expressed the idea of \u200b\u200bGogol's exceptional originality and originality: "Gogol undeniably represents something completely new among personalities who possessed the power of creativity," said N.A. Nekrasov shortly after Gogol's death, "something that cannot be summed up under any theories developed on the basis of works given by other poets. And the basis for judging him should be new "(201, p. 342)"

In general, it must be said, - wrote N. G "Chernyshevsky," that in his development Gogol was more independent of outside influences than any of our first-class writers "(273, p. 40).

The phenomenon of "Gogol to this day remains largely unsolved. MM Bakhtin made an attempt to explain the exceptional originality of the writer by the connection of his poetics with folk culture. According to the scientist, the work of such a" genius exponent of national consciousness "like Gogol is like Rabelais' creativity - "can really be understood only in the flow of folk culture, which has always, at all stages of its development, opposed the official culture and developed its own special point of view on the world and special forms of its figurative reflection" (97, p. 492,484). "Positive. "," bright "," high "laughter of Gogol, which grew on the basis of folk laughter culture, was not understood (in many respects it has not been understood to this day). However, this laughter was fully revealed in Gogol's poetics, in the very structure of language. language freely enters the non-literary speech life of the people (its non-literary layers) "(97, p. 491).

The ideas of M.M. Bakhtin found a response in the works of Gogol scholars. Thus, Yu.V. Mann called the first chapter of his generalizing monograph on the poetics of Gogol "Gogol and the Carnival Principle." "The statement of this problem," the researcher believes, "can serve as a key to entering the poetic world of Gogol" (186, p. 7).

Elements of folk-festive, fairground culture as one of the main principles expressing the folk outlook, are inherent mainly early creativity Gogol *. It is not by chance that in the light of this idea in the book of Yu.V. Mann, mainly the first works of the writer are analyzed, and his further evolution is thought of as a departure from the carnival element. Without questioning the fruitfulness of Gogol's idea of \u200b\u200ba folk-festive beginning, one cannot, however, fail to note a certain mechanism in the transfer of the concept inherent in Western European culture ("carnival") to Russian soil. Perhaps, in relation to Gogol, it would be more reasonable to talk about phenomena similar to carnival in Ukrainian folk culture *

No less attention should be paid to the other side of the concept of M.M. Bakhtin, concerning the non-literary layers of the language (in

1 MM Bakhtin, however, points out that "at the heart of Dead Souls, a careful analysis would reveal the forms of a merry (carnival) walk through the underworld, through the land of death." However, the researcher immediately makes a reservation: "Of course, this deep traditional basis of Dead Souls is enriched and complicated by a lot of material of a different order and other traditions" - (97, p. 488,489) with words - oral speech) as the basis of Gogol's poetics. This idea has not yet been developed.

The question of the traditions of folk-poetic culture in the work of Gogol has long been in the field of vision of researchers, but within relatively narrow limits, in relation only to his early works»

The conspicuous proximity of the first stories of the writer to folklore, the multicolored brightness and plasticity of the Ukrainian people's world, the lively humor of the narrative - all this has inseparably merged among many generations of readers and critics with the idea of \u200b\u200bthe Gogol people, the folklorism of his works "Many works of pre-revolutionary researchers are devoted to the study of this issue - NI Pearov (210), A. Sobolevsky (245) , BM Sokolov (246), A. Fomin (265), G. Ludakova (278) and others. This view has been preserved to a certain extent in Soviet science. "It is known," wrote V. Chaplenko in the generalizing article "Folklore in the work of Gogol," that the influence of folklore was mainly reflected in those works of Gogol, which were written on Ukrainian themes, - in "Evenings on a farm near Dikanka" and in "Mirgorod" (271, p. 78).

Works of modern researchers, where the connection between Gogol's work and folk poetry culture is considered

V.V. Gippius (121), G.A. Gukovsky (139), S.I. Mashinsky (190; 193), G.N. Pospelova (216), N.L. Stepanova (255), M.B. Khrapchenko (269), as well as V.K. Sokolova (247), O.A. Derzhavina (143),

S.F.Eleonsky (151), A.I. Karpenko (160), V.I. Eremina (153) and others - are limited mainly to the study of these particular works - "Evenings on a farm near Dikanka" (with the exception of "Ivan Fedorovich Shponka and his aunt ") and two stories from Mirgorod -" Viy "and" Taras Bulba ".

On the other hand, the following fact is extremely indicative: researchers hardly turn to the topic "Gogol and Folklore" when studying the writer's mature work. However, it should be noted that the term "mature creativity" in this case has a rather conventional meaning "The development of Gogol the artist is unusually intensive" Less than four years separate "Evenings" from the beginning of work on "Dead Souls", and by the age of thirty Gogol created almost all of his works of art, including wrote most of the first volume of the poem "The second edition of" Taras Bulba "was created simultaneously with" Dead Souls ", and Belinsky emphasized the aesthetic closeness of the works:" This poem ("Taras Bulba" - V. V.) is written with the same hand with which "The Inspector General" and "Dead Souls" are written * (109, p. 311). Meanwhile, "Taras Bulba" is deeply and organically connected with folklore tradition * As a special study shows, there is no one lyric or historical motive that would not have its analogy in Ukrainian folk songs and thoughts (160) 1.

It is indicative that the most significant works, which study the influence of folklore on Gogol's work, practically do not touch Dead Souls. Summarizing the achievements of our country, the Researcher sometimes speaks of specific thoughts as sources of certain Gogol motives and episodes, although it would be legitimate to talk about an analogy, since Gogol uses not so much the text of a certain folk song or thoughts, how much the general spirit of folklore works. of scientific research in this area ^ B * I "Eremina assesses the evolution of Gogol folklorism in the following way" During the creation of "Evenings" "artistic and aesthetic views. Gogol< * ) сливаются воедино с народно-поэтической формой мышления» Отдельные сказочные (реже песенные) реминисценции органически входят в повествование, становятся одним из способов выражения индивидуальной мысли автора» Вот почему анализ "Вечеров на хуторе близ Диканьки" сводился в основном к выявлению источников и рассмотрению их преломления в повестях Гоголя"(153, с»287).

During the creation of "Taras Bulba" "the processing of the folklore image becomes more complicated" It goes from a generalized collective folklore image (***) to individual, unique, heroic types of Gogol's epic. From the standpoint of difference, distance from the source and analyzed the folklore material of the story " Taras Bulba "(153, p. 287-288),

The work of V.I. Eremina contains separate notes on the nature of the use folklore traditions and in "Dead Souls" - a comparison of Russia with a bird-three, built on the principle of a folk lyric song; the theme of heroism, developed in the poem, on the one hand, as mundane, spiritless heroism (So-bakevich, Mokiy Kifovich), on the other hand, as an expression of the people's spirit, national strength. "However, the conclusion of the researcher is formulated quite definitely:" Find whatever there were folklore sources in "Dead Souls"< ) почти не представляется возможным» Совершенно конкретная проблема фольклоризма творчества Гоголя перерастает в эстетическую, мировоззренческую проблему народности" (153, с»288)»

In the 19th century, the aesthetic problem of the nationality of literature could not be solved without resorting to folk art. Belinsky wrote about this: “Although Russian fictional literature did not develop from folk poetry, the former, under Pushkin, met with the latter, and the question of Russian folk poetry is now one of the most interesting questions of modern Russian literature, because it merges with the question of nationality in poetry "(106, p. 524),

In his very first response to Dead Souls, Belinsky gave them a characteristic that has become a classic: a purely Russian, national creation, snatched from the hiding place of popular life, as true as it is patriotic, mercilessly pulling off the veil from reality and breathing passionate, nervously, blood love for the fertile seed of Russian life; creation is immensely artistic in concept and execution, in the characters of the characters and the details of Russian life - and at the same time deep in thought, social, social and historical. "(102, p. 51). In this definition of Gogol's poem, the key to understanding of its ideological and aesthetic originality "

In modern literary criticism, the issue of the connection of "Dead Souls" with folk art is devoted to articles by O. A. Krasilnikova (167), V. I. Glukhov (125), E. A. Smirnova (237), A. Kh. Gol-denberg (133, 134, 136), but they are either too general in nature, or contain private observations that indicate the stage of accumulation of material rather than an attempt to solve the problem. Today, on the topic of interest to us, in essence, only one question has been raised with all certainty - about the folklore source "The Tale of Captain Kopeikin". Meanwhile, the state of the problem was formulated by G.A. Gukovsky (he did not develop it later): "The question of Gogol's folklorism, even in relation to" Evenings on a Farm ", is by no means limited to the establishment of more or less folklore parallels to motives, stitches , images or even individual expressions of his works. For example, usually such parallels are not at all matched to "Dead Souls"; meanwhile, the first volume of "Dead Souls", the triumph and crown of Gogol's work

The most folklore work in its basis and method (hence the name "poem"), and it is based in its entire imaginative system on the artistic experience accumulated by a millennium of the life of peoples, and it seeks to embody in the concrete unity of one book judgments about life, about people and society is not so much Gogol - individuality, personality, as the collective wisdom of the people and humanity "(139, p. 57).

The crux of the problem is not that Gogol borrowed certain plots, images and motives from folklore. The very artistic basis of his works - and especially Dead Souls

Created according to the laws of folk art. Without analyzing the deep connection between Gogol's poetics and these laws, it is impossible to understand the ideological and aesthetic features of the poem Dead Souls.

In this dissertation, an attempt is made to study the traditions of Russian folk art in the poetics of Dead Souls. This determines its novelty and relevance. Claiming to provide an exhaustive coverage of the problem, the author limited his task to an analysis of some elements of folk art and their functions. It should be emphasized that the expression "folk art" was not used by chance, since along with folklore proper (following the definition of this term in domestic science as the oral artistic creation of the people), the work examines the connections of Gogol's poetics with some other elements of folk culture - in particular, with popular prints *

The set task stipulates the composition of the thesis, consisting of three chapters. ”The first chapter examines the principles of Gogol's aesthetics, focused on the oral folk tradition, the history of the poem's conception, gives a brief overview of the main directions in its study. The second chapter is devoted to the analysis of individual elements of folk art (proverbs, popular prints and signs) in the poetics of "Dead Souls" * The third analyzes the folklore origins and ideological and artistic function of the so-called "plug-in" episodes of the poem - "The Tale of Captain Kopeikin" and the parable of Keith Mokievich and Mokii Kifovich,

Similar dissertations in the specialty "Russian Literature", 01.10.01 code VAK

• Gogol traditions in the poetics of M. M. Zoshchenko's prose 2001, Candidate of Philology Dolganov, Dmitry Alexandrovich

• Interpretations of N.V. Gogol in Russian book illustration of the 19th - 20th centuries. 2011, PhD in Cultural Studies Shin Hye Cho

• The figurative structure "Evenings on a farm near Dikanka" by N.V. Gogol in the context of romantic historiosophy and aesthetics 2006, candidate of philological sciences Kardash, Elena Valerievna

• Gogol and Irving 2005, Candidate of Philology Fedulova, Olga Vladimirovna

• The artistic originality of the cycle "Selected Passages from Correspondence with Friends" in the context of the poetics of the "late" Gogol 1999, candidate of philological sciences Alekseeva, Ulyana Sergeevna

Thesis conclusion on the topic "Russian literature", Voropaev, Vladimir Alekseevich

CONCLUSION

The originality of Gogol's creative manner cannot be understood without a deep understanding of the organic connection between his poetics and the traditions of Russian and Ukrainian folk poetry culture. Only a careful study of these traditions themselves and their interaction with the culture of books and writing will allow one to penetrate into the depths of the artistic world of this, in the words of M.M. Bakhtin, "a genius exponent of the people's consciousness."

In this dissertation, a specific study of the traditions of Russian folk art in the poetics of Dead Souls is undertaken.

Gogol's contemporary reality was in deep contradiction with the ideal that opened up to his creative inspiration. In the first volume of the poem, Gogol the artist reveals the forced sterility of the "fertile seed of Russian life." Belinsky's definition of the pathos of the work as "the contradiction of social forms of Russian life with its deep substantive beginning" was the realization of the reason for such sterility *

In Dead Souls, Russian reality is artistically reproduced in its most essential manifestations. In his search for means of generalizing a whole series of national and socio-psychological phenomena, Gogol resorted to typification means specific to folk art, in particular, to the language of proverbs and sayings, which has great expressive power. The more generalized the figurative pictures and characteristics of the characters, in which the writer expresses the essence of this or that phenomenon, situation or human type, the more they approach the traditional folk poetic formulas.

The era of romanticism sharpened public interest in national antiquities, in all manifestations of originality. Gogol not only collected, but also carefully studied printed folklore and ethnographic material. One of his book sources was the four-volume "Russians in their Proverbs" by IM Snegirev, published in 1883I-1834. Comparison of "Dead Souls" and Snegirev's research leads to the conclusion that while working on the first volume of the poem, Gogol in one way or another proceeded from those features of Russian life and properties of the Russian character that Snegirev deduced from proverbs and sayings, of course, reworking these features and properties, sometimes comically reducing them. It should be emphasized that, unlike Snegirev, Gogol sees in proverbs not the vices and virtues of the Russian people, but the expression of the typical properties of the national character. The writer's involvement in folk philosophy is manifested in the fact that folk proverbial wisdom is ambiguous. The proverb lives its real, genuine life not in collections, but in living folk speech. Its meaning can vary depending on the situation in which it is used. The truly popular character of Gogol's poem lies not in the fact that it contains an abundance of proverbs, but in the fact that the author uses them as they are in oral tradition.

An important ideological and compositional function in the poem is played by the proverb "Russian people with hindsight", which Gogol interprets as the ability of a Russian person to draw correct conclusions. With this property of the Russian mind, which is akin to the mind of popular proverbs, Gogol connects the future greatness of the Russian people. The possibility of "correcting" the Russian person is inherent, according to the writer, already in popular character, a special warehouse of the people's mind - "the very mind with which the Russian person is strong, the mind of conclusions."

Gogol was one of the first in Russian literature to consider national character in a social context. A writer 's assessment of this or that "property of Russian nature" entirely depends on the specific situation in which this "property" manifests itself. The author's irony is directed not at the "property" itself, but at its real being. This provided opportunities for the broadest realistic generalizations, made Gogol's poem especially socially significant and effective, allowing revolutionary democratic criticism to come to conclusions about the failure of the social system in Russia,

Out of the field of view of researchers remained the ideological and compositional function of signs in the work. Chichikov's path through the city of U is associated with two signs. Leaving to the neighboring landowners, he meets a priest on his way, which, according to popular belief, portends failure in business. Tsrimeta was justified. Forced to flee the city, the hero meets the funeral. This meeting is fortunate. Happiness, however, can be understood in different ways. Chichikov himself buys up the dead, and a meeting with the deceased promises him good luck. According to the author, the hero's happiness is his future rebirth through the complete collapse of the "enterprise", the happiness of saving a lost soul. Thus, the signs predict the entire path of the protagonist of the poem, his fall and the coming revival.

The work attempts to determine the ideological and artistic meaning of Russian folk pictures (popular prints) in the poetics of Dead Souls. Analogs of portraits and paintings by Sobakevich and Korobochka can be found in the collection of folk engravings by D.A. Rovinsky, which contains the signatures to them. the text with the inscriptions of the corresponding popular prints shows that the writer, as it were, plays with these inscriptions, expanding the theme set in them into lengthy descriptions and characteristics of the characters.

In the light of the traditions of folk art, the key role of the so-called "plug-in" episodes: "The Tale of Captain Kopeikin" and the parable of Kif Mokievich and Mokiya Kifovich, looks in a new way. The work analyzes their folklore origins and ideological and cultural function. A new interpretation of "The Tale" is proposed, without which Gogol, as is known, could not imagine a poem. In the context of the entire first volume, Gogol's parable acquires special significance for the perception of the work. Growing into a symbol of generalizing meaning, her characters concentrate in themselves the most important, generic traits and properties of other characters in Dead Souls.

Revealing the ideological and artistic meaning of the parable sheds additional light on the content of Gogol's notes "To the 1st part": "The idea of \u200b\u200bthe city. Emptiness that has arisen to the highest degree." The key idea of \u200b\u200bthe outline - the idea of \u200b\u200b"idleness" or "emptiness of business" - is most impudently embodied in the "proverbial" image of Kifa Mokievich. Expressed in the notes in a conceptual form, the idea of \u200b\u200b"urban idleness", symbolizing the "idleness" of the life of all mankind in the mass, "is embodied in the poem in artistic images. According to the author of the dissertation, the content of the sketch, up to textual coincidences, is implemented in the final, urban chapters of the poem and it should be dated to the period of the final stage of work on the first volume - 1839-1840, instead of the generally accepted 1845-1846.

The study of the traditions of folk art enriches our ideas about the artistic whole of the poem, about the organic connection of its socially-concrete content with the philosophical, universal, allows us to better understand what caused the great artistic achievements of the writer. Gogol's types, of course, are not reducible to proverbial formulas. But it is important to emphasize that, like proverbs, the images of "Dead Souls" can be filled with new content in a changed historical situation. In many respects, thanks to the closeness of folk aesthetics, Gogol's work, despite the presence of conservative and utopian elements in the writer's worldview, had such a powerful revolutionary impact on Russian society, contributed to the formation of the revolutionary-demo! Aesthetics of Belinsky, Herzen, Chernyshevsky.

List of dissertation research literature candidate of Philology Voropaev, Vladimir Alekseevich, 1985

1. Lenin V.I. About literature and art. 5th ed. M .: Art. liter, 1976.827 p. Lenin V.I. Another campaign for democracy. Poli.sobr.soch., V. 22, p. 82-93. P 3 "Register of books sent from Moscow to Rome. Gogol I84I July II day. TsGM I USSR, f. 2591, op. 1, item 385, sheets 1-10.

2. Book of manuscripts of the Moscow Censorship Committee. TsGIA Moscow, f.31, op.1, d.14, l.121 ob.

3. Journal of meetings of the Moscow Censorship Committee. TsGIA Moscow, f.31, op.5, d "1b8, l.71. 4. Materials of the 9th edition of "Songs Collected by PV Kireevsky". OR GBL, f. 125, p. 57, ll. 2659-2660.

5. Materials of the 10th edition of "Songs collected by P. Kireevsky", OR GEN, f.125, p.51, l.1952. Sh

6. Gogol N.V. Poli.sobr.soch .: In 14 t.Bm .: Publishing house of AN SSSR, I940-I952.

7. Gogol N.V. Op. and letters: In b-t. Ed. P.A. Kulish. SPb., 1857, vol. 4. 556 s.

8. Gogol N.V. Cit .: In 7 volumes, 10th ed. The text is verified with the author's own manuscripts and the original editions (whether his works by Nikolai Tikhonravov. M., 1889, T.Z. 615 p.

9. Gogol N.V. Letters: In 4 volumes / Ed. V.I.Shenrok. SPb., I90I, t L 639 p. 1U

10. Aksakov T "The story of my acquaintance with Gogol. M: Publishing House of the USSR A, I960. 294 s. H 13. / Astakhova A.M./ Ilya Muromets / Preparation of texts, article and J comments by A.M. Astakhova. M .; L .: Publishing house of the USSR, 1958.

11. Ashukin N.S., Ashukina M.G. Winged words. Literary quotes. Figurative expressions. 3rd ed., Lit., 1966.824 p.

12. Basili K.M. Archipelago and Greece in 1830 and 1883. SPb., 1834, Part 1-2.

13. Basili K.M. Bobolin. In the book: Encyclopedic Lexicon of Plushard. SPb., 1836, tb, pp. 135-136. 17. / Bakhtin Vl., Moldavsky Dm. / Russian lubok X ShX X centuries. AlU -1 bom. M .; L .: State publishing house visual arts, 1962.

14. Belinsky V.G. Letter to N.V. Gogol dated April 20, 1842. Collected works: In 9 volumes. M., 1982, vol. 9, p. 513-515.

15. Belinsky V.G. Letter to V.P. Botkin dated March 8, 1847. Collected works: In 9 t. M., 1982, t.9, p. 631-633.

16. Belinsky V.G. Letter to K.D. Kavelin dated December 7, 1847 Collected works: In 9 volumes, Moscow, 1982, vol. 9, pp. 702-710.

17. Buslaev F.I. Ivan Mikhailovich Snegirev (I793-I868) Izv. Moscow University, 1869, I, pp. 1-7.

18. Butashevich-Petrashevsky M.V. Pocket Dictionary of Foreign Iscr. and add. M: Art.

19. Veltman A. Koschey the Immortal. Epic of Old Time. Moscow: 1833, Part 1-3. 24. / Vulpius H.A. / Bobelina, the heroine of Greece of our time. Composition of the Author Rinaldo-Rinaldini. With 4 engraved paintings and a portrait of the heroine Bobelina / Translated from German by Andrey Pesche. M., 1823, Part 1-2.

20. Vyazemsky P.A. Poems. A large series of the poet's library. 2nd ed. L .: Soviet writer, 1958.507 p.

21. A.I. Herzen A diary. 1842 Collected works: In 30 volumes, Moscow, 1954, Vol. 2, pp. 201-255.

22. A.I. Herzen The past and thoughts. Part 8. (Excerpts (1865-1868)

23. Herzen A.I. Letter to I.S.ZDgenev dated April 21 (9), 1862. Collected works: In 30 volumes. M., 1963, vol. 27, book 1, pp. 217-218

24. Glinka Historical and political painting of New Greece. With eleven engraved portraits. M., 1829.- 127s.

25. Gogol in the memoirs of his contemporaries. Preface and comm. Nashinsky. Bm .: Goslitizdat, 1952.719 p. 31. / Gogol N.V. / Songs collected by N.V. Gogol. With an introduction by G.P. Georgievsky. In the book: In memory of V.A. Zhukovsky and N.V. Gogol. Issue 2. Pb., 1908, p. 1-444.

26. Dal V. Where you lose, you don’t tea, where you will find, you don’t know. Op. SPb., I86I, Vol. 7, p. 165-190.

27. Dal V. Proverbs of the Russian people. M., 1862.401 p.

28. Diev M. Ya. Letter to I. M. Snegirev dated June 4, 1983. Readings in them. Society of Russian History and Antiquities at Moscow University "M", 1887, book.

29. Historical materials. Correspondence between years full members of society, pp. 27-29.

30. Ermolov A * S. Folk agricultural wisdom in proverbs, sayings and omens. SPb., I902-I905, vol. 1-4.

31. Knyazev V. Rus. A collection of selected proverbs, sayings, sayings and jokes. L .: B.I., 1924.115 s.

32. Knyazev VV, Book of proverbs. Selections from the proverbial encyclopedia. L .: Publishing house Krasnaya Gazeta, 1930.132 p.

33. Kurganov N.G. Collection different proverbs and sayings. In the book: KurU ganov N.G. Russian universal grammar, or the Universal Writing Language ... Published in the city of St. Peter in 1769, p.109125.

34. Lermontov M.Yu. Hero of our time. Collected works: In 4 volumes, Moscow, 1976, Vol. 4, C.7-I42.

35. Warrant officer Kropotov and his petitions. 1

36. Russian antiquity, 1876, v. 17, 9, C.I8I-I85.

37. Nekrasov N.A. Who lives well in Russia. Poly.collected works and letters. M., 1949, t * 3, p. 151-393.

38. A. V. Nikitenko. Letter to N.V. Gogol dated April 1, 1842. Russian antiquity, 1889, v. 63, 8, p. 384-385.

39. A. Nikitenko. Report on the Department of Russian Language and Literature for 1868. In the book: Collection of articles read in the department of Russian language and literature imp. Academy of Sciences. SPb., 1870, Vol.7, 2, C.3-I6. 53. P.S. Letters from the Caucasus. Moscow Telegraph, 1830, part ЗЗ, 10, May, pp. 167-196; II, June, pp. 313-339.

40. Pushkin AS (Notes and aphorisms of different years.) - Poli.sobr. cit .: In 10 volumes. L., 1978, vol. 7, p. 352-357.

41. Pushkin A.G "Diary. Poli.sobr.soch .: In 10 t. L ", 1978, T. 8, pp. 7-47 57 "Pushkin A.S. Letter to V.L.Davstsov First half of March, 1982. Collected works: In 10 volumes, Leningrad, 1979, vol. Yu., C.2I-23.

42. Pushkin A.S. Letter to P.A. Vyazemsky dated June 24-25, 1824. Complete collection of works: In 10 volumes, Leningrad, 1979, vol. Yu., Pp. 74-75.

43. Rovinsky D.A. Russian folk pictures. SPb., I88I, vol. 1-5.

44. Rovinsky D.A. Dictionary of Russian engraved portraits. In the book: Collection of the Department of Russian Language and Literature of the Emperor of the Academy of Sciences. SPb., 1873, vol. Yu., 4, 1-1U1; 1-236. 61. / Rybnikov P.N. / Songs collected by P.N. Rybnikov. 4 1 Folk epics, antiquities and visits. M., I86I. 516 s.

45. Sadovnikov D.N. Tales and legends of the Samara region. Notes of the Russian Geographical Society for the Department of Ethnography. SPb., 1884, v. 12. 388 s.

46. \u200b\u200bSaltykov-Shchedrin M.E. Cultured people. 1875-1

47. Collected works; In 20 t. M., I97I, t.12, p. 295-332; notes, pp. 686-694.

48. Dictionary of the modern Russian literary language. M .; L .: Publishing house of the USSR, 1963, v. 14. N 65. / Snegirev I.M # / Russian People's Gallery, or popular prints. Otechestvennye zapiski, 1822, parts 12, 30, p.85-96 *

49. Snegirev I. Experience of reasoning about Russian proverbs. Works of the society of lovers of Russian literature with them. Moscow University. M., 1823, part 3, book 7, p.51-97 *

50. Snegirev I.M. Russian folk holidays and superstitious rituals. M., I837-I839. Book. 1-1U.

51. Snegirev I.M. About popular prints of the Russian people M., 1844.33 p.

52. Snegirev I.M. Russian folk proverbs and parables. M., 1848, p. 1-X1U, 1-505.

53. Snegirev I.M. Supplement to the collection of Russian folk proverbs and tsritches. M., 1854.28 p.

54. Snegirev I.M. Popular pictures of the Russian people in the Moscow world. M., 1861.136 p.

55. Snegirev I.M. Letters to V.G. Anastasevich (I828-I83I). Ancient and New Russia, 1880, November, pp. 537-576.

56. Snegirev I.M. A diary. T.I (1822-1852). M., 1904; T.2 (1853 -1865). M., 1905.

57. Sobolevsky A. From the article "Mysterious signs in the life of Pushkin". B book: A.S. Pushkin in the memoirs of contemporaries. M .: Art literature, vol. 2, 1974, p. 5-7.

58. Collection of 4291 ancient Russian proverbs. Printed with them. Moscow University in 1770. 244 s.

59. V. V. Stasov. School of jurisprudence forty years ago, I836-I842. Russian antiquity, I88I, vol. ZO, 2, p. 393-422.

60. Tolstoy A.K. History of the Russian state from Gostomysl to Timashev. Collected works; In 4 t. M., 1980, t 1 p. 256-269,

61. Tolstoy L.N. Who can learn to write from, the peasant children from us, or we from the peasant children? Collected works: In 22 volumes, Moscow, 1983, vol. 15, p. 10-33.

62. Khudyakov I * A. Great Russian fairy tales. M., 1860-1862. Issue 1-3.

63. Chekhov A.P. My life. (A provincial's story). Poly.collected works and letters: In 30 volumes. Op. M., 1977, vol. 9, pp. 192-280.

64. Chizhov F.V., Letter to N.V. Gogol dated March 4, 1847. Russian antiquity, 1889, t. BZ, 8, p. 368-371. 86. / Chulkov M. / Abevega of Russian superstitions. M., 1786.326 p.

65. Shevyrev SP. Letters to N.V. Gogol. In the book: Report of the Imperial Public Library for 1893. SPb., 1

66. Appendices, pp. 1-69. 88 Shenrok V. Materials for the biography of Gogol. M., I892-I897, vol. 1-4.

67. Yazykov N.M. Poems, Fairy Tales, Poems. Dramatic Scenes, Letters. M; L .: GIHL, 1959, 507 s, 90, Abramovich G, L, Popular thought in "Evenings on a farm near Dikanka" by N.V. Gogol. Uch.zap.Moscow region ped. Institute named after N. K. Krupskaya, 1949, t, KhSh, issue, 1, p, 3-53, 91, Azadovsky M.K, History of Russian folklore. M .: Uchpedgiz, 1958, v.1-2. 92, Annensky J.F., Aesthetics of "Dead Souls" and its legacy, V

68. P. Antokolsky "Dead Souls". In the book: Gogol, N, V... Dead Souls: A Poem. M., 1969, p. 5-35.

69. Antonov SP. N. Gogol. "The Tale of Captain Kopeikin". In the book: Antonov SP. From the first person. Stories about writers, books and words. M., 1973, p. 325-360.

70. Babushkin N. Creativity of the people and the work of the writer. Novosibirsk: West Siberian book publishing house, 1966.174 p.

71. Balandin A.I., Ukhov P.D. The fate of the songs collected by P.V. Kireevsky (publication history). In the book “: Literary heritage. Songs Collected by Writers. New materials from the archive of P.V. Kireevsky. M., 1968, t.79, C.77-I20. 72. Bakhtin M. Rabelais and Gogol (The art of words and folk culture of laughter). In the book: Bakhtin M. Questions of literature and aesthetics. Research over the years. M., 1975, p. 484-495. 98.

73. Berdnikov G. Gogol's creative heritage. Banner, 1983, 10, p. 204-

74. Belinsky V.G. Literary dreams. Collected works: In 9 volumes. M., 1976, T.I, S. 47-I27.

75. Belinsky V.G. About the Russian story and the stories of Gogol. Collected works: In 9 t. M., 1976, t 1 p. 138-184.

76. Belinsky V.G. Russian fairy tales, told by Ivan Vanenko. Russians folk talescollected by Bogdan Bronnitsyn. Complete collection of works: In 13 t M., 1953, vol. 2, p. 506-511.

77. Belinsky V.G. Adventures of Chichikov, or Dead Souls. Collected works: In 9 volumes. M., 1979, vol. 5, p. 43-55.

78. Belinsky VG, Speech on criticism of A. Nikitenko. Coll. cit .: In 9 volumes. M., 1979, v. 5, pp. bZ-124.

79. Belinsky V.G. Explanation for explanation about Gogol's poem "Dead Souls". Collected works: In 9 t. M., 1979, t.5, p. 139-160. Yub Belinsky V.G. Works by Nikolai Gogol. Four volumes. SPb., 1

80. Collected works: In 9 t. M., 1979, t 5 p. 380-386.

81. Belinsky V.G.<0бщее значение слова литература.V- Собр. соч.: В 9-ти т. М., I98I, т.6, с.493-524.

82. Belinsky V.G. Ivan Andreevich Krylov. Collected works: In 9 volumes M., I98I, Vol.7, C.258-28I.

83. Belinsky V.G. Petersburg collection, published by N. Nekrasov. Collected works: in 9 volumes. M., 1982, t, 8, p. 121-156.

84. Belinsky V.G. Answer to "Moskvityanin". Collected works *: In 9 TI M., 1982, T. 8, p. 290-336. BUT. Bely A. The skill of Gogol. Study. M .; L .: OGIZ GYKHL, 1934.322 p.

85. Good D. Gogol-critic. In the book: Blagoy D. From Kantemir to the present day. M., 1973, vol. 2, p. 371-405.

86. Bocharov G. About Gogol's style. In the book: Theory of literary styles. Typology of stylistic development of modern times. M., 1976, p. 409-445. IZ Bocharova A.K. Plug-in episodes in Nikolai Gogol's poem "Dead Souls". Academic manager of the Penza State Pedagogical Institute named after V.G. Belinsky. Penza, 1956, issue Z, pp. 277-298.

87. B. I. Bursov. National identity of Russian literature. L .: Sov. Writer, 1967, 396 p. 115. / Bukharev A.M./ Three letters to N.V. Gogol, written in 1848. SPb., I860. 263 s.

88. Vinogradov V.V. Stylistics. The theory of poetic speech. Poetics. Moscow: Publishing House of the USSR, 1963.255 p. H

89. Voronsky A. Gogol. Ser. "ZhZL". B. m., 1934.412 p.

90. Voropaev V. Ifenrn for Gogol. In the book: Prometheus, M., 1983 vol. 13, SL28-142.

91. Herzen A.I. On the development of revolutionary ideas in Russia. Coll. cit .: In 30 volumes. M., 1956, vol. 7, p. 133-263 *

92. Gippius V. Gogol. L .: Mysl ', 1924.239 p.

93. Gippius V. Gogol's Literary Views. Literary study, 1936, II, p, 52-73.

94. V. Gippius. "Evenings on a Farm near Dikanka" by Gogol. Proceedings of the Department of New Russian Literature. Works of the Pushkin House. Issue 1. L .; M., 1948, p. 9-38.

95. V. V. Gippius. The creative path of Gogol. In the book: Gippius V.V. From Pushkin to Blok. M .; L., 1966, p. 46-200.

96. Glukhov V.I "Gogol the satirist and a folk tale. High school scientific reports. Philological Sciences, 1967, 3, p. 66-75. 126. N, V \u200b\u200b"Gogol. Materials and research / Ed. V.V. Gippius. M .; L .: AN SSSR, 1936, vol. 1-2.

97. Nikolai Vasilievich Gogol. Digest of articles. M .: Publishing house of Moscow University, 1954.227 s *

98. Gogol. Articles and materials / Ed. M.P. Alekseev. Publishing house of Leningrad University, 1954.395 p.

99. Gogol in Russian criticism. Digest of articles. Moscow: GIKHL, 1953.651 p.

100. Gogol and the present: The writer's creative legacy in the movement of eras. Kiev: Vishcha school. Publishing house at the Kiev University, 1983.150 p. L .:

101. Goldenberg A.Kh. On some features of the poetics of the second volume of "Dead Souls" by Nikolai Gogol. In the book: The structure of a literary work. Interuniversity collection. Issue

102. Vladivostok, 1978, p.54-60.

103. Goldenberg A.Kh. To the question of folklorism in the second volume of Dead Souls. In the book: Problems of language and style in literature. Volgograd, 1979, p. 86-93.

104. Goldenberg A.Kh. Petr Petrovich Petukh (about folklore reminiscences in the 5th volume of "Dead Souls") In the book: Folklore tradition and literature (Interuniversity collection of scientific works). Vladimir, 1980, pp. 35-43.

105. Goldenberg A. Life tradition in "Dead Souls". Literary study, 1982, 3, p. 155-162. 13b. Goldenberg A.Kh. Folklore transformations in Gogol's poetics. In the book: Russian literature and folklore tradition. Collection of scientific papers. Volgograd, 1983, p. 53-63. 137 "Gomon NM, Verbal means of comic Russian literature of the ХУШ century. in the works of N.V. Gogol. Uch.zap. Nezhinsky pedagogical institute. T.1U-U. Kiev, 1954, p. 135-152.

106. Gudziy N.K. Gogol is a critic of Pushkin. Kiev, I9I3. (From the "Readings of the Historical Society of Nestor the Chronicler", book "XXIU, VYP.1). 40 s.

107. Gukovsky G.A. Gogol's realism. M .; L .: Goslitizdat, 1957.532 p. 140. Gus M.S. Gogol and Nikolaev Russia. Moscow: Goslitizdat, 1957.375 p.

108. Danilov V. Ukrainian reminiscences in "Dead Souls" by Gogol. HayKOBd notes of Nbrzhinsky sovereign ped. Mr. Shsh Gogol. T.I. Chernigov, 1940, p. 77-91.

109. Derzhavina O.A. Motives of folk art in Ukrainian stories and stories by Nikolai Gogol. Uch.zap. Moscow mountains. ped. in-ta them. V.P. Potemkina, vol. 34, issue Z. M., 1954, p. 17-45.

110. Desnitskiy V.A. The tasks of studying the life and work of Gogol. In the book: V. A. Desnitsky. Articles and research. L., 1979, S. 59-I64. 145. / Dostoevsky F.M. / Literary heritage. Unpublished Dostoevsky. T.

111. Notebooks and notebooks I860-I88I. Moscow: Nauka, I97I. 727 s.

112. Dostoevsky F.M. Diary of a writer for 1876. April. Poly.collected works: In 30 volumes L., I98I, v.22, p.103-135.

113. Dostoevsky Sh.M. Diary of a writer for 1877. May-June. Poli. Collected works: In 30 volumes. L., 1983, vol. 25, p. 122-171.

114. Dostoevsky F.M. Writer's diary. 1988I year. Poly.collection cit .: In 30 volumes. L., 1984, v.27, p.5-40; Notes, pp. 265-429.

115. I. Egorov. Problems of typology of epic genres and the genre nature of "Dead Souls" by Nikolai Gogol. Author's abstract. dis. Cand. philol. sciences. Donetsk, 1974.30 p.

116. Eleonsky FNV Gogol and the traditions of Russian literature X Sh early. XIX centuries. Academic manager of the Moscow city pedagogical institute U im. V.P. Potemkin. T. 34, issue 3, M., 1954, p. 47-86.

117. The Olives F. Gogol and folk poetry. "Evenings on a farm near Dikanka", "Taras Bulba" .- In the book: Literature and na118. Zharavina L.V., Kompaneyats V.V. Ideological and aesthetic searches of the late Gogol and the problem of the artistic method. In the book: Aesthetic positions and artistic skills of the writer. Chisinau, 1982, c "16-28"

119. Zalygin Reading Gogol (Reflections and Notes). In the book ": Zalygin S" Literary concerns, 2nd ed. add. M., 1979, p. 206-229,

120. Zolotussky Igor. Gogol. Ser »" ZhZL ". M ": Young Guard, 1979. 512 p.

121. Kazarin VP "Some topical problems of studying the work of Gogol in Soviet literary criticism, Bulletin of Leningrad University. L ", 1977, 20, p. 55-62.

122. Kazarin VP "Typology of the hero in Russian literature of the XIX century" Textbook for foreign students. Simferopol: Publishing house of the Simferopol state. un-that, 1984. 86 p, 160 "Karpenko AI, On the nationality of NV Gogol (Artistic historicism of the writer and his folk sources), Kiev: Publishing house of Kiev un-that, 1973. 278 p.

123. A. I. Karpenko. Folklore motive of the road in the work of N.V. Go /

124. Kartasheva I.The. Gogol and Romanticism * Special course * Kalinin: Publishing house of Kalinin University, 1975.125 p.

125. Kedrov K.A. An epic beginning in a Russian novel of the first half of the 19th century ("Eugene Onegin" by A.S. Pushkin, Theroy of our time "by M.Yu. Lermontov," Dead Souls "by N.V. Gogol). M .: Publishing house of Moscow University, 1973.24 p.

126. Kenevich V. Bibliographic and historical notes to Krylov's fables. 2nd ed. SPb., 1878.414 p.

127. V.A. Koshelev. "Dead Souls" by NV Gogol in the Slavophil interpretation. In the book: V.A. Koshelev Aesthetic and literary views of Russian Slavophiles (1840-1850s) L., 1984, pp. 106-142.

128. O. A. Krasilnikova Phraseological composition of N. V. Gogol's poem "Dead Souls". Author's abstract. dis. Kharkov, 1953.16 p.

129. O. A. Krasilnikova Proverbs and sayings in Nikolai Gogol's poem "Dead Souls". Sci. Zap. Dnepropetrovsk state fur boots. T.47, Issue

131. O. A. Krasilnikova. Folk colloquial and everyday phraseology of NV Gogol's poem "Dead Souls". Sci. Zap. Dnepropetrovsk state University, 1956, v.52, issue, 9, p.45-61.

132. Krikmann A.A. On the problem of researching the content and worldview of proverbs. Author's abstract. dis. Cand. philological sciences. Tallinn, 1975.55 p.

133. V. I. Kuleshov. Slavophiles and Russian Literature. M .: Art. literature, 1976.288 p. Department of Philological Sciences.

134. Kupreyanova E.N. N "V" Gogol. In the book ": History of Russian Literature. L I98I, T.2, p.530-579.

135. Kurilov A.S., Gurevich A.M. Theoretical and literary glances of Russian writers of the first half of the 19th century In the book: The emergence of Russian science of literature. M., 1975, p. 375-411.

136. Literary archive. Materials on the history of literature and social movement. / Issue / 4 / Edited by M.P. Alekseev. M .; L., 1953.438 p.

137. Likhachev D.S. Social roots of the Manilov type. In the book: Likhachev D.S. Literature is the reality of literature. L., I98I, 37-5E.

138. Lotman Y. The problem of artistic space in Gogol's prose. Uch.zap. Tartu State un-that. Works on Russian and Slavic philology. Vol.2, no.

140. Lotman Yu.M. Gogol and the correlation of "laughter culture" with the comic and the serious in the Russian national tradition. In the book: Materials of the All-Union Symposium on Secondary Modeling Systems. Issue 1 (5). Tartu, 1974, p. 131-133.

141. Lotman Yu. The artistic nature of Russian folk pictures. In the book: Folk engraving and folklore in Russia XUP-XIX centuries. (To the 175th anniversary of the birth of D.A. Rovinsky). M., 1976, p. 247-267.

142. Lotman Yu.M. The Story of Captain Kopeikin (Reconstruction of the concept and the ideological and compositional function). Sci. Zap. Tar143. Maksimovich M.A. Popular prints of Little Russian cities (from 2 ill.). Kievlyanin, 1850, book Z, pp. 186-188.

144. Mann Yu. About the poetics of "Dead Souls". In the book: Russian classical literature. Analyzes and analyzes. M., 1969, p. 186-211. 183 "Mann Yu.V. On the genre of "Dead Souls". News of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Ser. literature and language, 1972, v. 31, issue 1, p. 7-17.

145. Mann Y. "Dead Souls" in the context of European literature * Literature Voprosy, 1973, 8, pp. 263-268.

146. Mann Yu, Gogol's Dead Souls and the Traditions of the Western European Novel. In the book: Slavic Literature: US International Congress of Slavists. M., 1978, p. 235-255.

147. Mann Y. Poetics of Gogol. M .: Art. liter, 1978.398 p.

148. Mann Yu. What is the story of Captain Kopeikin related to the action of the poem? In the book: Mann Yu. Courage of invention. Features of the artistic world of Gogol. 2nd ed., Add. M., 1979, C. I03-II5.

149. Mann Yu. How "Dead Souls" are built Literary Studies, 1984, 3. p. 157-166.

150. Mann Yu. In search of a living soul. "Dead Souls": Writer Criticism Reader. Moscow: Kniga, 1984.416 p.

151. S. Mashinsky. Historical story of Gogol. M .: Sov. writer, 1940.248 p.

152. Mashinsky "Dead Souls" by N.V. Gogol. 2nd ed., Add. M .: Art. liter, 1978.117 p.

153. Mashinsky SI "Dead Souls". Notes. In the book: Gogol N.V. Collected works: In 7 vols. M., 1978, v. 5, p. 499-539.

154. Melnichenko OG, Gogol as a literary critic. Scientist. app. Vologda ped. in-ta, 1953, t. KhP, s.Z-YuO. 196 * Mikhailova N, G. N.S. Leskov and oral folk art. Author's abstract. dis. Candidate of Philological Sciences. M .: Publishing house of Moscow University, 1970.14 p.

155. Mikhelson V.A. The aesthetic concept of N.V. Gogol in "Evenings on a Farm near Dikanka", Kuban University. Scientific works. Issue

156. Aesthetic views of the writer and artistic creation. Book Z. Krasnodar, 1979, pp. 33-45.

157. L.A. Morozova Ideological and artistic value of Russian folk proverbs. Author's abstract. dis. Cand. philol. sciences. M .: Publishing house of Moscow University, 1974.17 p.

158. N. Nadezhdin. "Evenings on a Farm Near Dikanka". Stories published by Rudy Pank, a pasichnik. The first book. SPb., I83I. In the book: Nadezhdin N.I. Literary criticism. Aesthetics, M., 1972, pp. 280-282.

159. Nazarevsky A.A. Gogol and art. Kiev, 1910.42 p.

160. Nekrasov N.A. Journal Notes for October 1855. Poly.collected works and letters. M., 1950, t.9, p. 332-352.

161. D. Nikolaev Satire Gogol. M., 1909.124 p. 204 "Ogienko I.I. Elizabeth Sparrow. Two words in justification of SoM .: Khudozh.lit-ra, 1984 * - 367s "

162. Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky D.N. Gogol in his works.

163. In memory of Gogol, Scientific and literary collection, ed. Historical Society of Nestor the Chronicler / Edited by N.P. Dashkevich. Kiev, 1902, 650 s,

164. Paremiological collection. Proverb. Riddle. (Structure, meaning, text). Moscow: Nauka, 1978.320 p.

165. Pereverzev V.F. Creativity Gogol. 4th ed. Ivanovo-Vozne Senek: Osnova, 1928.181 p.

166. Pereverzev V.F. At the origins of the Russian realistic novel. Moscow: Khudozh.lit-ra, 1965.216 p.

167. Peretz V. Gogol and the Little Russian literary tradition. SPb., 1902.9 p.

168. Petrov N.I. Kkno-Russian folk element in the early works of Gogol. Kiev, I90I. 26 p.

169. Pokusaev E. Gogol about "a truly public comedy". Russian Literature, 1959, 2, pp. 31-44. 212. / Polevoy N.A. / Russians in their proverbs. Reasoning and research on Russian proverbs and sayings of I. Snegirev. Book I. M., I83I. Moscow Telegraph, I83I, Ch. 38, 7, C.38I-385.

170. N.A. Polevoy. Evenings at the station near Dikanka. Stories published by Pasichnik Rudy Pank. Book one. SPb., I83I. Moscow Telegraph, I83I, parts 41, 17, p. 91-95.

171. N. Polevoy Adventures of Chichikov, or Dead Souls. Poem by N. Gogol "M., 1

172. Russian Bulletin, 1842, 5-

174. Polishchuk F. Gogol and Ukrainian folk song. Soviet Ukraine, 1952, pp. 99-107.

175. Pushkarev L.N. The Tale of Eruslan Lazarevich. Moscow: Nauka, 1980.184 p.

176. Pushkin A.S. About magazine criticism. Poli.sobr.soch .: In 10 t. L., 1978, Vol. 7, p. 69-70.

177. Pushkin A.S. Evenings on a Farm Near Dikanka. Stories published by Pasichnik Rudy Pank. The second edition “Two parts * Complete collection of works: In 10 volumes. L., 1978, v. 7, p. 237. 178. Pypin A.N. History of Russian ethnography. SPb., I890-I892, vol. 1-4.

179. Rovdestvensky, V. On the aesthetic glances of N.V. Gogol. Sci. Zap. Moscow mountains. pedagogical institute named after V.P. Potemkina * Department of Russian Literature. Vol. 34, issue Z. M., 1954, p. 177-196,

180. VV Rozanov "The Legend of the Grand Inquisitor F.M. Dostoevsky. Experience of critical commentary with the addition of two etudes about Gogol. 2nd ed. SPb., 1902.144 p.

181. Russian literature and folklore (first half of the 19th century Leningrad: Nauka, Leningrad branch, 1976. 455 p.

182. Russian literature and folklore (the second half of the 19th century Leningrad: Nauka, Leningrad branch, 1982. 444 p.

183. A. V. Samyshkina. Philosophical and historical origins of N.V. Gogol's creative method. Russian Literature, 1976, 2, p. 3858.

184. Sanninsky B.Ya, About the main character of Nikolai Gogol's poem "The Dead

185. Rostov-on-Don, 1974, C.8I-86. 228 "Sviyasov EV" Episode of the polemic about Gogol in 1852, Russian literature, 1980, I, pp. 127-134. 229 * Serbian G.P. Author's oversights and auto-censorship in the first volume of Gogol's "Dead Souls". In the book: Pages of the History of Russian Literature * (To the 80th anniversary of Corresponding Member of the USSR A N NF Belchikova). M., I97I, pp. Zbb-375. 230 "Skachkova SV From the history of the Russian literary tale (Zhukovsky about Pushkin). Russian Literature, 1984, 4, p.120128.

186. Slonimsky A. L. Gogol's technique. Pg., 1923, 65 p. 232 * Slonimsky A.L. Questions of Gogol's text. Izv. AN USSR. Department of Literature and Language, 1953, vol. KhP, issue 5, C.40I-4I6. 233 "Smirnova E.A. Gogol and the idea of \u200b\u200ba "natural" person in the literature of the XIII century. In the book; Russian literature of the 10th century. The era of U U of classicism. M .; L *, 1964, s, 280-293.

187. E.A. Smirnova. Gogol's work as a phenomenon of Russian democratic thought in the first half of the 19th century. In the book: Liberation movement in Russia. Saratov, I97I, issue 2, p. 7393.

188. EA Smirnova "The evolution of Gogol's creative method from the 1830s to the 1840s. Author's abstract. dis. Candidate of Philological Sciences. Tartu: Publishing house of Tartu University, 1974.26 p.

189. E.A. Smirnova. Social and aesthetic position of Gogol in the last decade of his life. In the book: Liberation

190. E.A. Smirnova National past and modernity in "Dead dzshah". Izv. And the USSR. Ser, literature and language. T. 38, N 1979, 2, S. 85-95.

191. Smirnova E # A. On the multiple meanings of Dead Souls. In the book: Context-82. M., 1983, p. 164-191.

192. Smirnova-Chikina E.S. Commentary on Gogol's poem * Dead Souls ". M ,: Mir, 1934. 174 pp. (Commentary on the monuments of fiction. Issue 7),

193. Smirnova-Chikina E.S. The second volume of "Dead Souls". In the book: Gogol at school. M., 1954, p. 409-471.

194. Smirnova-% kin of E.S. Who is the owner of the title and plot of Dead Souls? Russian Literature, 1959, 3, pp. 189-191.

195. Smirnova-Chikina E.S. The Legend of Gogol. October, 1959, 8, pp. 257-263.

196. Smirnova-Chikina E.S. "Bobelina, Greek heroine". Questions of history, 1967, 12, 2СВ-205.

197. Smirnova-Chikina E.S. Poem by NV Gogol "Dead Souls". Comment. Teacher's guide. 2nd ed., Rev. L .: Education, 1974.318 p.

198. Sobolevsky A. Gogol in the history of Russian ethnography. Kharkov, 1909.7 p.

199. Sokolov B. M. Gogol the ethnographer (Gogol's interests and occupations in ethnography). Ethnographic Review. M., 1909, 2-3.

200. Sokolova V.K. Ethnographic and folklore materials by Gogol. Soviet Ethnography, 1952, 2, pp. 114-128.

201. Sollertinsky E.E. A novel-poem of double perspective ("Dead Souls" by Nikolai Gogol). In the book: Sollertinsky E.E. Russian

202. Feinberg J.L. History of one manuscript. "The Tale of Captain Kopeikin" "In the book": Feinberg I.L. History of one manuscript. Stories of a literary critic. 2nd ed. M ", 1967, p. 10-19.

203. Fomin A. Gogol and folk art "Knowledge of Russia, 1909, 3, C.2I8-223.

204. Friedlander G. M "Gogol and Slavic literature. In the book: Slavic literature. M., 1983, c "I04-II9,

205. Khalizev V "Writers and folk aesthetics of everyday life: Gogol, Leskov, their contemporaries and successors" Literary study, M ", 1982, 3 c" I3I-I4I.

206. Khrapchenko MB "Incomplete ideas and their interpretation. In the book ": Cultural Heritage of Ancient Rus" Formation "Traditions" M ", 1976, pp. 245-25I. 269 \u200b\u200b"Khrapchenko MB" Nikolay Gogol. Literary path. The greatness of the writer "M: Contemporary, 1984" 653 p. 270 "Tsarynny A.N" (Storozhenko A.Ya ")" Thoughts of the Little Russian on reading the stories of the pasichnik Rudy Pank, published by him in

207. Chaplenko V "Folklore in the works of Gogol. Literary study, 1937, 12, p. 73-89. 272 * Cherepnin L.V * Historical views of N.V. Gogol. In the book: L.V. Cherepnin Historical views of the classics of Russian literature. M ", 1968, S. 79-II0. 273 # Chernyshevsky N * G. Essays on the Gogol period of Russian literature * Poli.sobr.soch .: In 1b-t.M., 1947, vol. 3, p.5-309 *

208. Chernyshevsky N. G. Works and letters of Nikolai Gogol. Published by P.A. Kulish. Six volumes. SPb., 1

209. Complete collection: In 16 volumes. M., 1948, Vol. 4, p. 626-665.

210. Chernyaeva T.G. Gogol's literary-aesthetic and journalistic-critical program of the mid-1830s (from "Arabesques" to "Contemporary"). Author's abstract. dis. Cand. philological sciences. Tomsk, 1979, 18 p.

211. A. V. Chicherin. Unknown statement of V.F. Odoevsky about Gogol. Proceedings of the Department of Russian Literature of the Philological Faculty of the Lviv State University named after I. Franko. Literary criticism. Issue 2, 1958, pp. Bb-72,

212. A. V. Chicherin. Early romantic Gogol. In the book: A.V. Chicherin The rhythm of the image. M., 1980, p. 258-276.

213. Chudakov G.I. * Reflection of the motives of folk literature in the works of N.V. Gogol. University news. Kiev, 1906, 12, p. 1-37.

214. Chudakov G.I. The attitude of N.V. Gogol's creativity to Western European literatures. Kiev, 1908.182 p.

215. Chukovsky K. Gogol and Nekrasov. Moscow: GIKHL, 1952.86 p.

216. A Brief History of Collecting and Studying Russian Proverbs and Sayings "in the book: Soviet folklore, M ,; L., 1936, 4-5, p. 299-368. 283 "Shakhnovich MO" Signs in the light of science, 2nd ed. rework. and add. Lenizdat, 1969.238 p.

217. Shevyrev SP "The Adventures of Chichikov, or Dead Souls". Poem by N. Gogol. Article one. "The Adventures of Chichikov, or Dead Souls" "Poem by N. Gogol. Second article. Muscovite, 1842, 7.8.

218. Shcheglov I. N. V. Gogol. B. m., I9I2. 179 s.

219. Engelgardt N.A. Gogol and the novels of the twenties. Historical Bulletin, 1902, 2, p. 561-580. 287. Y * F "Ivan Vyzhigin" and "Dead Souls". Russian archive, 1902, 8, p, 596-b03.

220. Yankovsky Yu # Patriarchal and noble utopia (Page of Russian social and literary thought of 1840-1850). -M .; Art literature, I98I. 373 s.

Please note that the above scientific texts are posted for review and obtained by means of recognition of the original texts of dissertations (OCR). In this connection, they may contain errors associated with imperfection of recognition algorithms. There are no such errors in PDF files of dissertations and abstracts that we deliver.

The poem "Dead Souls" is perhaps the most mysterious work of Gogol. An adventurous plot and realistic characters coexist in it with a constant sense of the irrational, with a very special atmosphere. What is behind the characters in the poem, what themes and motives do they introduce into the narrative, what is the symbolism of Dead Souls?

Let's try to figure it out by analyzing the work. First of all, the poem amazes with the mixing of two semantic planes, their interchangeability: the living is often described as dead, and vice versa. The plot center of "Dead Souls" is an adventure - Pavel Ivanovich Chichikov's purchase of the souls of dead peasants in order to put them in a bank as living ones and receive a large sum of money for them.

Movement in Dead Souls is a moral self-improvement, a search for the right path in life. And this is precisely the reason for the infinity of this movement: a person must tirelessly strive for virtue.

Thus, the true content of Gogol's poem is the writer's thoughts about the moral nature of man, his thoughts about the Russian soul, about the vain and eternal.

Gogol in Dead Souls, as in The Inspector General, creates an absurd artistic world in which people lose their human essence and turn into a parody of the possibilities inherent in them by nature.

In an effort to find in the characters signs of necrosis, the loss of spirituality (of the soul), Gogol resorts to the use of subject and everyday detail. Each landowner is surrounded by many objects that can characterize him.

In the history of Russian literature, it is difficult to find a work, the work on which would bring its creator so much mental anguish and suffering, but at the same time so much happiness and joy as Dead Souls - the central work of Gogol, the work of his entire life. Of the 23 years devoted to creativity, 17 years - from 1835 until his death in 1852 - Gogol worked on his poem. Most of this time he lived abroad, mainly in Italy. But of the entire huge and grandiose trilogy about the life of Russia, only the first volume (1842) was published, and the second was burned before his death, the writer never started working on the third volume.

The work on this book was not easy - many times Gogol changed the idea, rewrote the parts that were already straightened out, achieving the completeness of the conceived and artistic perfection. The discerning artist worked on the first volume alone for 6 years. In the fall of 1841, he brought the first volume, ready for publication, from Italy to Moscow, but an unexpected blow awaited him here: the censorship resisted the publication of a work titled Dead Souls. I had to send the manuscript to St. Petersburg, where his influential friends stood up for the writer, but even here everything was not immediately settled. Finally, after lengthy explanations about the misunderstanding with the title and the introduction of corrections, in particular concerning the "Tale of Captain Kopeikin", the first volume of the poem was published in May 1842. Making concessions, the author changed the title: the book was published under the title "The Adventures of Chichikov, or Dead Souls." Readers and critics greeted her favorably, but much in this unusual work immediately caused controversy, which grew into heated discussions.

In an effort to explain to the reader his new grandiose plan, Gogol is actively starting to work on the continuation of the work, but it is very difficult, with long breaks. During the creation of the poem, Gogol experienced several severe spiritual and physical crises. In 1840, a dangerous illness befell him, he was already ready to die, but suddenly healing came, which Gogol, a deeply religious man, took as a gift sent to him from above in the name of fulfilling his lofty plan. It was then that the philosophy and moral idea of \u200b\u200bthe second and third volumes of "Dead Souls" with the plot of human self-improvement and movement towards the achievement of the spiritual ideal were finally formed. This is already felt in the first volume, but such an idea should have been fully realized throughout the trilogy.

Coming to work on the second volume in 1842, Gogol feels that the task he has set is very difficult: the utopia of some imaginary new Russia does not in any way agree with reality. So, in 1845 another crisis arises, as a result of which Gogol burns the second volume already written. He feels that he needs intense inner work on himself - Gogol reads and studies spiritual literature, Holy Scripture, and enters into correspondence with close-minded friends. The result is the artistic and journalistic book "Selected Passages from Correspondence with Friends", published in 1847 and provoking the most fierce criticism. In this book, Gogol expressed an idea similar to that underlying the idea of \u200b\u200bthe Dead Souls trilogy: the path to creating a new Russia lies not through breaking the state system or various political transformations, but through the moral self-improvement of each person. This idea, expressed in a journalistic form, was not accepted by the writer's contemporaries.

Then he decided to continue its development, but already in the form of a work of art, and this is related to his return to the interrupted work on the second volume of Dead Souls, which is being completed in Moscow. By 1852, the second volume was virtually complete. But again the writer is overcome by doubts, he begins editing, and within a few months the white paper turns into a draft. And the physical and nervous forces were already at the limit. On the night of February 11-12, 1852, Gogol burns the white manuscript, and on February 21 (March 4) he dies.

Literary criticism of the 19th century, starting with Belinsky, began to call Gogol the initiator of a new period in the development of Russian realistic literature. If Pushkin was characterized by the harmony and objectivity of the artistic world, then in Gogol's work this is replaced by a critical pathos, which determines the artist's desire to reflect the real contradictions of reality, to penetrate the darkest sides of life and the human soul. That is why in the second half of the 19th century, supporters of the democratic camp strove to see in Gogol, first of all, a satirist, who designated the arrival of new topics, problems, “ideas and ways of their artistic embodiment” in literature, which were first picked up by the writers of the “natural school” united around Belinsky , and then developed in the realistic literature of the "Gogol period" - as opposed to Pushkin began to call the literature of critical realism of the second half of the XIX century.

Now many scientists dispute this point of view and say that, along with critical pathos, Gogol's realism is distinguished by an aspiration for the ideal, which is genetically related to the romantic worldview. The position of Gogol, who realizes himself as an artist-missionary, called upon not only to show acute social problems and the full depth of the moral decline of contemporary society and man, but also to indicate the path to spiritual revival and transformation of all aspects of life, was especially clearly manifested in the process of working on Dead Souls ".

All this determined the originality of the genre specificity of the work. It is obvious that Gogol's poem is not a traditional one, it is a new artistic construction that had no analogues in world literature. It is not for nothing that the debate about the genre of this work, which began immediately after the release of Dead Souls, has not ceased to this day. The writer himself did not immediately determine the genre of his work: it was the result of a complex creative process, a change in the ideological concept. At first, the work he created was thought of as a novel. In a letter to Pushkin dated October 7, 1835, Gogol notes: “In this novel I would like to show at least one side of the whole of Russia .... The plot stretched out into a long novel and it seems to be very funny. " But already in a letter to Zhukovsky dated November 12, 1836, a new name appears - a poem.

A new concept also corresponded to this change: "All Russia will appear in it." The general features of the work are gradually becoming clearer, which, according to Gogol's plan, should become similar to the ancient epic - the epic poems of Homer. He imagines the new work as a Russian "Odyssey", but in the center of it was not the cunning Homeric traveler, but the "scoundrel-acquirer", as Gogol called the central - "through" - the hero of his poem Chichikov.

At the same time, an analogy is being formed with Dante's poem "The Divine Comedy", which is associated not only with the peculiarities of the general three-part structure, but also with the striving for the ideal - spiritual perfection. It was the ideal beginning in such a work that should. "Be decisive. But as a result of this entire grandiose plan, only the first part turned out to be complete, to which, first of all, the words about the depiction of Russia only" from one side "were. It is not for nothing that the writer retained the genre definition of the poem for him, because here, in addition to the depiction of the real state of life, which provokes the writer's protest, there is an ideal beginning, manifested primarily in the lyric part of the poem - lyrical digressions.

The composition and plot of the work also changed as the concept developed and deepened. According to Gogol himself, Pushkin gave him the plot of Dead Souls. But what was this "gifted" plot? According to the researchers, it corresponded to an external intrigue - the purchase of Dead Souls by Chichikov. Dead Soul is a nineteenth-century bureaucratic jargon for a deceased peasant. A "mirage intrigue", the first storyline of the work, spins around the scam with the serfs, who, despite the fact of death, continue to be listed in the revision tale alive and whom Chichikov wants to lay at interest in the Board of Trustees.

But another story is more important - an internal one, showing the transformation of Russia and the rebirth of the people living in it. It did not appear immediately, but as a result of a change in the general concept of the poem. It is when the concept of Dead Souls begins to be associated with the grandiose poem The Divine Comedy by the great Italian writer of the early Renaissance Dante Alighieri that the entire artistic structure of Dead Souls is redefined. Dante's work consists of three parts ("Hell", "Purgatory", "Paradise"), creating a kind of poetic encyclopedia of the life of medieval Italy. Focusing on him, Gogol dreams of creating a work in which the true Russian path would be found and Russia in the present and its movement towards the future would be shown.

In accordance with this new idea, the general composition of the poem "Dead Souls" is built, which was supposed to consist of three volumes, like Dante's "Divine Comedy". The first volume, which the author called "the porch to the house", is a kind of "Hell" of Russian reality. It was he who turned out to be the only one fully realized from the entire vast plan of the writer. In the second volume, similar to "Purgatory", new, positive characters were to appear, and on the example of Chichikov it was supposed to show the way of purification and resurrection of the human soul. Finally, in the third volume - "Paradise" - a beautiful, ideal world and truly spiritualized heroes were to appear. In this plan, Chichikov was assigned a special compositional function: it was he who had to walk the path of resurrection of the soul, and therefore could become a connecting hero who unites all parts of the grandiose picture of life presented in three volumes of the poem. But even in its 1st volume, such a function of the hero is preserved: the story of Chichikov's journey in search of sellers from whom he acquires "dead souls" helps the author unite different storylines, easily introduce new faces, events, pictures that make up the broadest a panorama of the life of Russia in the 30s of the XIX century.

The composition of the first volume of Dead Souls, similar to Hell, is organized in such a way as to show as fully as possible the negative aspects of the life of all the components of contemporary Russia. The first chapter is a general exposition, followed by five chapters-portraits (chapters 2-6), in which the landlord's Russia is presented, in the 7-10th chapters a collective image of bureaucracy is given, and the last, eleventh chapter is devoted to Chichikov.

These are externally closed, but internally connected links. Outwardly, they are united by the plot of the purchase of "dead souls". Chapter 1 tells about Chichikov's arrival in the provincial town, then a series of his meetings with the landowners is shown sequentially, in the 7th chapter we are talking about the purchase, and in the 8-9th - about the rumors associated with it, in 11 chapter, together with the biography of Chichikov, is informed about his departure from the city. Inner unity is created by the author's reflections on contemporary Russia. This internal, most important from an ideological point of view, the plot allows you to organically fit into the composition of the 1st volume of the poem a large number of non-plot elements (lyrical digressions, plug-in episodes), as well as to include a plug-in "The Tale of captain Kopeikin ".

In accordance with the main idea of \u200b\u200bthe work - to show the path to achieving the spiritual ideal, on the basis of which the writer thinks of the possibility of transforming both the state system of Russia, its social structure, and all social strata and each individual person - the main themes and problems posed in the poem are determined "Dead Souls". Being an opponent of any political and social upheavals, especially revolutionary ones, the Christian writer believes that the negative phenomena that characterize the state of contemporary Russia can be overcome through moral self-improvement not only of the Russian person himself, but also of the entire structure of society and the state. Moreover, such changes, from the point of view of Gogol, should not be external, but internal, that is, we are talking about the fact that all state and social structures, and especially their leaders, in their activities should be guided by moral laws, the postulates of Christian ethics. So, the eternal Russian misfortune - bad roads - can be overcome, according to Gogol, not by changing the bosses or tightening the laws and control over their implementation. For this, it is necessary that each of the participants in this case, first of all the leader, remember that he is responsible not to a higher official, but to God. Gogol called on every Russian person in his place, in his position, to do business as the highest - Heavenly - law commands.

That is why the themes and problems of Gogol's poem turned out to be so wide and all-embracing. In its first volume, the emphasis is placed on all those negative phenomena in the life of the country that need to be corrected. But the main evil for a writer lies not in social problems as such, but in the reason for which they arise: the spiritual impoverishment of the person of his day. That is why the problem of the mortification of the soul becomes central in the first volume of the poem. All other themes and problems of the work are grouped around it. "Be not dead, but living souls!" - urges the writer, convincingly demonstrating the abyss into which one who has lost a living soul falls. But what is meant by this strange oxymoron - "dead soul", which gave the name to the entire work? Of course, not only a purely bureaucratic term used in Russia in the 19th century. Often a "dead soul" is called a person who is mired in worries about vanity. The gallery of landowners and officials, shown in the 1st volume of the poem, reveals such "dead souls" to the reader, since they are all characterized by lack of spirituality, selfish interests, empty wastefulness or avarice absorbing the soul. From this point of view, the “dead souls” shown in the 1st volume can only be opposed by the “living soul” of the people, which appears in the author's lyrical digressions. But, of course, the oxymoron "dead soul" is interpreted by the Christian writer in a religious-philosophical sense. The very word "soul" indicates the immortality of the individual in its Christian understanding. From this point of view, the symbolism of the definition of "dead souls" contains the opposition of the dead (inert, frozen, spiritless) principle and the living (spiritualized, high, light). The peculiarity of Gogol's position lies in the fact that he not only opposes these two principles, but indicates the possibility of awakening the living in the dead. So the poem includes the theme of the resurrection of the soul, the theme of the path to its revival. It is known that Gogol intended to show the path of the revival of two heroes from Volume 1 - Chichikov and Plyushkin. The author dreams of the “dead souls” of Russian reality being reborn, turning into truly “living” souls.

But in the modern world, the mortification of the soul affected literally everyone and was reflected in the most diverse aspects of life. In the poem "Dead Souls" the writer continues and develops the general theme that runs through all of his work: the belittling and decay of man in the ghostly and absurd world of Russian reality. But now it is enriched with an idea of \u200b\u200bwhat is the true, high spirit of Russian life, what it can and should be. This idea permeates the main theme of the poem: the writer's thinking about Russia and its people. The present of Russia is a horrifyingly powerful picture of decay and disintegration, which has affected all strata of society: landlords, officials, even the people.

Gogol demonstrates in an extremely concentrated form “the properties of our Russian breed”. Among them, he especially highlights the vices inherent in the Russian person. Thus, Plyushkin's frugality turns into stinginess, dreaminess and hospitality of Manilov - into an excuse for laziness and sugaryness. The daring and energy of Nozdryov are wonderful qualities, but here they are excessive and aimless, and therefore become a parody of Russian heroism. At the same time, drawing extremely generalized types of Russian landowners, Gogol reveals the theme of landlord Russia, with which the problems of relations between landowners and peasants, the profitability of landowners' economy, and the possibility of its improvement are correlated. At the same time, the writer condemns not serfdom and not the landowners as a class, but how they use their power over the peasants, the wealth of their lands, for the sake of which they generally engage in farming. And here the main topic remains the theme of impoverishment, which is connected not so much with economic or social problems as with the process of the death of the soul.

Gogol does not hide the spiritual squalor of a forced person, humiliated, downtrodden and obedient. Such are the coachman Chichikova Selifan and the footman Petrushka, the girl Pelageya, who does not know where is the right or where is the left, the men thoughtfully discussing whether the wheel of Chichikov's chaise will reach Moscow or Kazan, the stupidly scurrying Uncle Mityai and Uncle Minyay.

It is not for nothing that the "living soul" of the people is visible only in those who have already died, and in this the writer sees a terrible paradox of contemporary reality. The writer shows how the wonderful qualities of the folk character turn into their opposite. The Russian person loves to philosophize, but this often translates into idle talk. His unhurriedness is similar to laziness, gullibility and naivety turn into stupidity, and empty vanity arises from efficiency. “Our land is perishing ... from ourselves,” the writer addresses everyone.

Continuing the theme of denouncing the bureaucratic system of a state mired in corruption and bribery, begun in The Inspector General, Gogol draws a kind of review of “dead souls” and bureaucratic Russia, which is distinguished by idleness and emptiness of existence. The writer speaks about the absence of true culture and morality in his contemporary society. Balls and gossip are the only things that fill people's lives here. All conversations revolve around trifles, these people do not know spiritual needs. Performance about beauty comes down to a discussion of the colors of the material and fashionable styles ("colorful - not colorful"), and a person is assessed, in addition to his property and class status, by the way he blows his nose and ties a tie.

That is why the immoral and dishonest rogue Chichikov finds his way into this society so easily. Together with this hero, another important theme is included in the poem: Russia is embarking on the path of capitalist development and a new "hero of the time" appears in life, who was first shown and appreciated by Gogol - "a scoundrel - an acquirer." For such a person there are no moral and ethical barriers as regards his main goal - his own benefit. At the same time, the writer sees that, in comparison with the inert, dead environment of landowners and officials, this hero looks much more energetic, capable of quick and decisive action, and unlike many of those with whom he encounters, Chichikov is endowed with common sense. But these good qualities cannot bring anything positive into Russian life if the soul of their bearer remains dead, like all other characters in the poem. Practicality, purposefulness in Chichikov turn into cheating. It contains the richest potential opportunities, but without a high goal, without a moral foundation, they cannot be realized, and therefore Chichikov's soul is destroyed.

Why did this situation arise? Answering this question, Gogol returns to his constant theme: denunciations of the "vulgarity of a vulgar person." "My heroes are not villains at all," the writer asserts, "but they are" all vulgar, without exception. " The vulgarity, turning into a mortification of the soul, moral savagery, is the main danger for a person. It was not for nothing that Gogol attached such great importance to the inserted "The Tale of Captain Kopeikin", which showed the cruelty and inhumanity of officials of the "highest commission" itself. The Tale is dedicated to the heroic year of 1812 and creates a deep contrast to the soulless and petty world of officials. In this seemingly expanded episode, it is shown that the fate of the captain, who fought for his homeland, crippled and deprived of the opportunity to feed himself, does not bother anyone. The highest Petersburg officials are indifferent to him, which means that necrosis has penetrated everywhere - from the society of district and provincial cities to the top of the state pyramid.

But in the first volume of the poem there is something that opposes this terrible, spiritless, vulgar life. This is the ideal beginning, which must necessarily be in a work called a poem. “The innumerable wealth of the Russian spirit”, “a husband endowed with divine prowess”, “a wonderful Russian girl ... with all the wondrous beauty of a woman’s soul” - all this is still just being pondered, it is supposed to be embodied in subsequent volumes. But even in the first volume, the presence of the ideal is felt - through the author's voice, sounding in lyrical digressions, thanks to which a completely different range of topics and problems enters the poem. The peculiarity of their staging is that only the author can lead a conversation with the reader about literature, culture, art, and rise to the heights of philosophical thought. After all, none of his "vulgar" heroes are interested in these topics, everything lofty and spiritual cannot touch them. Only sometimes there is, as it were, a fusion of the voices of the author and his hero Chichikov, who is to be reborn, and therefore, to address all these issues. But in the 1st volume of the poem, this is only a kind of promise for the future development of the hero, a kind of "author's tip" to him.

Together with the author's voice, the poem includes the most important themes that can be combined into several blocks. The first of them concerns issues related to literature: about the work of writing and different types of artists of the word, the tasks of the writer and his responsibility; about literary heroes and ways of depicting them, among which satire is given the most important place; about the possibility of a new positive hero emerging. The second block covers questions of a philosophical nature, about life and death, youth and old age as different periods of the development of the soul; about the purpose and meaning of life, the purpose of a person. The third block concerns the problem of the historical fate of Russia and its people: it is connected with the theme of the path along which the country is moving, its future, which is thought of ambiguously; with the theme of the people, such as they can and should be; with the theme of the heroism of the Russian man and his limitless possibilities.

These large ideological and thematic layers of the work manifest themselves both in individual lyrical digressions and in cross-cutting motives that run through the entire work. The peculiarity of the poem also lies in the fact that, following Pushkin's traditions, Gogol creates in it the image of the author. It is not just a conventional figure that holds together individual elements, but an integral personality, with its own openly expressed worldview. The author speaks directly with assessments of everything that he is told. At the same time, in lyrical digressions, the author reveals himself in all the diversity of his personality. At the beginning of the sixth chapter, there is a sad, elegiac reflection on the outgoing youth and maturity, on the "loss of living movement" and the coming old age. At the end of this digression, Gogol directly addresses the reader: “Take away with you on the journey, leaving the mild youthful years into severe hardening courage, take with you all human movements, do not leave them on the road, do not pick them up later! Formidable, terrible is the coming old age ahead, and nothing gives back and back! " This is how the theme of spiritual and moral perfection of man sounds again, but it is addressed not only to his contemporaries, but also to himself.

Associated with this are the author's thoughts about the artist's task in the modern world. The lyrical digression at the beginning of Chapter VII speaks of two types of writers. The author is fighting for the establishment of realistic art and a discerning, sober outlook on life, not afraid to highlight all the "mud of little things" in which modern man is mired, even if it dooms the writer to be not accepted by his readers, arouses their hostility. He speaks of the fate of such an "unrecognized writer": "His field is harsh, and he will bitterly feel his loneliness." Another lot is reserved for the writer, who gets away from painful problems. Success and glory awaits him, honor among his compatriots. Comparing the fates of these two writers, the author bitterly speaks of the moral and aesthetic deafness of the "modern court", which does not admit that "a high, enthusiastic laughter deserves to stand next to a high lyrical movement." Later, this lyrical digression became the subject of bitter controversy in the literary controversy that unfolded in the 1840-1850s.

These images of Russian heroes are not reality, but rather Gogol's embodied faith in the Russian man. All of them are among the dead and fugitive "souls", and although they live or have lived in the same world as the rest of the heroes of the poem, they do not belong to the reality in which the action unfolds. Such folk images do not exist on their own, but are only outlined in Chichikov's reflections on the list of peasants bought from Sobakevich. But the whole style and character of this fragment of the text testifies to the fact that we are dealing with the thoughts of the author himself rather than his hero. Here he continues the theme of the heroism of the Russian people, its potentialities. Among those about whom he writes, there are talented craftsmen - Stepan Probka, a carpenter, "a hero that would be suitable for a guard"; brick-maker Milushkin, shoemaker Maxim Telyatnikov. With admiration, the author speaks of the barge haulers replacing the "rampant peaceful life" with "work and sweat"; about the reckless prowess of people like Abram Fyrov, a fugitive peasant who, in spite of the danger, "walks noisily and merrily on the grain pier." But in real life, so much deviated from the ideal, all of them lie in wait for death. And only the living language of the people testifies that their soul has not died, it can and must be reborn. Reflecting on the truly popular language, Gogol notes in a lyrical digression related to the characterization of the nickname given to Plyushkin by a peasant: “There is no word that would be so sweeping, boldly, it would burst out from under the very heart, it would boil and flutter like apt spoken Russian word ".

The time when Gogol conceived and created his works - from 1831 ("Evenings on a Farm near Dikanka") to 1842 (the first volume of "Dead Souls") - coincides with the period that in Russian history is usually called the "Nikolaev reaction". This historical period replaced the era of social upsurge in the 20s of the 19th century, which ended in 1825 with the heroic and tragic uprising of the Decembrists. The society of the period of "Nikolaev reaction" is painfully looking for a new idea of \u200b\u200bits development. The most radical part of Russian society believes that it is necessary to continue the irreconcilable struggle against autocracy and serfdom. In literature, this mood was reflected in the works of A.I. Herzen. Another part of society behaves in a fundamentally apolitical manner, disillusioned with Decembrism, but not having time to develop new positive ideals. This is the life position of the "lost generation", it was remarkably expressed in his work by M.Yu. Lermontov. The third part of Russian society is looking for a national idea in the spiritual development of Russia - in the moral improvement of the people, in approaching Christian truths. Expressing this public mood, Gogol creates the poem "Dead Souls".

The idea of \u200b\u200bthe poem was huge - to comprehend the fate of Russia, its present and future. The theme of the first volume (only it was written from the planned trilogy) can be formulated as follows: an image of the spiritual state of Russian society in the 1840s. The main attention in the first volume is given to showing the past and present of Russia - the life of landowners and officials, who are traditionally considered the color of the nation and the mainstay of the state, but in fact are "nebokopters", and nothing else. The people in the work are presented as dark and undeveloped: it is enough to recall Uncle Mityai and Uncle Minyaya and their stupid advice when divorcing carriages or to mention a serf girl who did not know where left and right were. Primitive creatures are Chichikov's servants - coachman Selifan and footman Petrushka. The idea of \u200b\u200bthe first volume of the poem is to reveal the terrifying lack of spirituality of modern society. Russia is represented as a sleepy, motionless country, but in its depths there is a living soul, which Gogol wants to discover and express in the following volumes of the poem. The author is optimistic about the future of Russia, believes in the creative forces of the nation, which is clearly expressed in several lyrical digressions, especially in the last one - about the bird-three.

By genre, Dead Souls can be defined as a novel. On the one hand, this is a social novel, because it raises the question of the fate of Russia, of its social development. On the other hand, this is a novel of everyday life: Gogol describes in detail the lives of heroes - Chichikov, landowners, officials. The reader learns not only the whole story of Pavel Ivanovich, but also the details of his life: what he eats at every post station, how he dresses, what he carries in his suitcase. The author enjoys painting the most expressive object that belongs to the hero - a box with a secret. Chichikov's serfs are also represented - the imperturbable coachman Selifan, a lover of philosophy and alcohol, and the footman Petrushka, who had a strong natural smell and a craving for reading (and he often did not understand the meaning of words).

Gogol describes in detail the structure of life on the estate of each of the five landowners. For example, although Chichikov gets to Korobochka at night, he manages to make out a low wooden manor house, a strong gate. In the room where Pavel Ivanovich was invited, he carefully examined the portraits and pictures, the clock and the mirror on the wall. The writer tells in detail what the breakfast consisted of, which Korobochka treated Chichikov the next morning.

"Dead Souls" can be called a detective novel, because the mysterious activity of Chichikov, who buys up such a strange product as dead souls, is explained only in the last chapter, which contains the life story of the protagonist. Here only the reader understands the whole scam of Chichikov with the Board of Trustees. The work contains features of a "rogue" novel (the clever rogue Chichikov, by hook or by crook, achieves his goal, his deception is revealed at first glance by pure chance). At the same time, Gogol's work can be attributed to an adventurous (adventure) novel, since the hero travels around the Russian province, meets different people, gets into different troubles (drunk Selifan got lost and threw the chaise with the owner into a puddle, Chichikov was almost beaten at Nozdrev, etc.). etc.). As you know, Gogol even titled his novel (under the pressure of censorship) in an adventurous taste: "Dead Souls, or the Adventures of Chichikov."

The author himself determined the genre of his large prose work quite unexpectedly - a poem. The most important artistic feature of Dead Souls is the presence of lyrical digressions, in which the author directly expresses his thoughts about the heroes, their behavior, talks about himself, recalls his childhood, discusses the fate of romantic and satirical writers, expresses his homesickness, etc. etc. These numerous lyrical digressions allow us to agree with the author's definition of the Dead Souls genre. In addition, as noted by literary historians, a poem in the time of Gogol meant not only a lyric-epic work, but also a purely epic one, standing between the novel and the epic.

Some literary scholars classify Dead Souls as an epic by genre. The fact is that the writer conceived a trilogy based on Dante's Divine Comedy. The first volume of "Dead Souls" had to correspond to Dante's "Hell", the second volume - "Purgatory", the third volume - "Paradise". However, Gogol rewrote the second volume several times and in the end burned it just before his death. He never proceeded to write the third volume; the intended content of this volume can be reconstructed in the most general terms from the original sketches. Thus, the writer created only the first part of the planned trilogy, in which he depicted, by his own admission, Russia "from one side", that is, showed "a terrible picture of modern Russian reality" ("Hell").

It seems that Dead Souls cannot be classified as an epic: the work lacks the most important features of this genre. Firstly, the time that Gogol describes does not make it possible to clearly and fully reveal the Russian national character (usually, the epic depicts historical events of national significance - Patriotic wars or other social cataclysms). Secondly, in Dead Souls there are no memorable heroes from the people, that is, Russian society is not fully represented. Thirdly, Gogol wrote a novel about the life of his day, and for an epic depiction, as experience shows, a historical retrospective is needed, which allows one to assess the era fairly objectively.

So, it's obvious that Dead Souls is an extremely complex piece. Genre features make it possible to attribute it to a social and everyday novel, a detective story, and a poem. The first definition seems to be the most preferable (it was used by Belinsky in his article on "Dead Souls"). This genre definition reflects the most important artistic features of the work - its socio-philosophical significance and a wonderful depiction of reality.

The composition of Dead Souls brings the novel closer to a detective story, but to reduce the work to a detective or rogue plot is completely wrong, because the main thing for the author is not Chichikov's clever invention about dead souls, but a detailed depiction and understanding of contemporary Russian life.

Calling Dead Souls a poem, Gogol had in mind the future trilogy. If we talk about a real work, then even numerous lyrical digressions do not make "Dead Souls" a poem in the strict sense of the word, because lyrical digressions are possible both in the novel ("Eugene Onegin" by A.S. Pushkin), and even in the drama (" Irkutsk history ”A.N. Arbuzov). However, in the history of Russian literature, it is customary to preserve the author's definition of the genre (this applies not only to Dead Souls), specifically stipulating the genre originality of the work.

In "Dead Souls" we will not find bright, poetic female images, like Pushkin's Tatyana or Turgenev's Liza Kalitina. Gogol's heroines, for the most part, carry elements of the comic, are objects of the author's satire, and by no means the author's admiration.

The most significant female character in the poem is the landowner Korobochka. Gogol describes the heroine's appearance in a very remarkable way. “A minute later, the hostess came in, an elderly woman, in some kind of sleeping cap, put on hastily, with a flannel around her neck, one of those mothers, small landowners who cry about crop failures, losses and keep their heads a little to one side, and meanwhile are gaining a little little money in variegated bags placed on the drawers of the dressers. "

V. Gippius notes in Korobochka the absence of "any appearance, any face: a flannel on his neck, a cap on his head." "Depersonalizing" the landowner, Gogol emphasizes her typicality, the great prevalence of this type.

The main qualities of Korobochka are thriftiness, frugality, bordering on stinginess. Nothing is lost in the landowner's household: neither night jackets, nor thread skeins, nor a ripped cloak. All this is destined to lie for a long time, and then go to "according to the spiritual will of the grand-sister's niece, along with all the other rubbish."

The box is simple and patriarchal, it lives in the old fashioned way. She calls Chichikov "my father", "father", addresses him to "you". The guest sleeps on huge featherbeds, from which feathers fly; there is an old wall clock in the house, the strange ringing of which reminds Chichikov of the hissing of snakes; Korobochka treats him with simple Russian dishes: pies, pancakes, shanezhkas.

Simplicity and patriarchy coexist in the landowner with extraordinary stupidity, ignorance, timidity and fearfulness. The box is extremely dull, unlike Sobakevich, for a long time she cannot figure out what the essence of Chichikov's request is, and even asks him if he is going to dig out the dead. "Dubin-headed" - Pavel Ivanovich thinks about her, seeing that here his "eloquence" is powerless. With great difficulty, he manages to convince Nastasya Petrovna to sell him dead souls. However, Korobochka immediately tries to negotiate with Chichikov about contracts in order to sell him flour, lard, and bird feathers in the future.

As already noted, Gogol constantly emphasizes the recognition of Korobochka, the widespread occurrence of this type of people in life. “Is it really so great the abyss separating her from her sister, unattainably fenced off by the walls of an aristocratic house, ... yawning over an unfinished book in anticipation of an ingeniously secular visit, where she will have a field to shine with her mind and express her thoughts ... not about what is going on on her estates, confused and upset, ... but about what kind of political coup is being prepared in France, what direction fashionable Catholicism has taken. "

In addition to Korobochka, Gogol introduces readers to the spouses Manilov and Sobakevich, who are, as it were, the continuation of their husbands.

Manilova is a boarding school graduate. She is pretty, "dressed to face", amiable with others. She is not at all involved in the household, although “many different requests could be made”: “Why, for example, is it stupid and useless to cook in the kitchen? Why is the pantry pretty empty? Why is a housekeeper thief? " “But all these subjects are low, and Manilova was well educated,” Gogol remarks ironically. Manilova is dreamy and sentimental, she is just as far from reality as her husband. There is not a drop of common sense in the heroine: she allows her husband to call the children with the ancient Greek names Themistoclus and Alcides, not realizing how comical these names are for Russian life.

Sobakevich's wife is "a very tall lady, in a cap, with ribbons repainted with home paint." Feodulia Ivanovna is somewhat reminiscent of her clumsy, phlegmatic husband: she is calm and imperturbable, her movements resemble those of actresses "representing queens." She keeps straight, "like a palm tree." Sobakevich's wife is not as elegant as Manilova, but she is economical and practical, neat and housewife. Like Korobochka, Feodulia Ivanovna is not preoccupied with "high matters", the Sobakevichs live in the old way, rarely leaving for the city.

“City ladies” are most vividly represented by Gogol in two collective images - a lady “pleasant” (Sofia Ivanovna) and a lady “pleasant in all respects” (Anna Grigorievna).

Anna Grigorievna's manners are simply "amazing": "every movement" comes out "with taste" for her, she loves poetry, sometimes even knows how to "dreamily ... keep her head." And this turns out to be enough for the society to conclude that she is "as if a lady is pleasant in all respects." Sofya Ivanovna does not possess such graceful manners and therefore gets the definition of “simply pleasant”.

The description of these heroines is thoroughly imbued with the author's satire. These ladies observe "secular etiquette", are concerned about "the impeccability of their own reputation", but their conversations are primitive and vulgar. They talk about fashions, dresses, fabrics as significant objects. As N. L. Stepanov notes, "already the very exaggeration, the expansiveness with which ladies talk about insignificant things ... makes a comic impression."

Both ladies love to gossip and gossip. So, having discussed the purchase by Chichikov of the dead peasants, Anna Grigorievna and Sofya Ivanovna come to the conclusion that he, with the help of Nozdryov, wants to take away the governor's daughter. In a short time, these ladies set in motion almost the entire city, having managed to "put such a fog in the eyes of everyone that everyone, and especially the officials, remained stunned for some time."

Gogol stresses the stupidity and absurdity of both heroines, the vulgarity of their occupations and way of life, their impertinence and hypocrisy. Anna Grigorievna and Sofya Ivanovna are happy to speak out against the governor's daughter, condemning her "mannerism" and "immoral behavior." The life of urban ladies, in fact, is as empty and gone as the life of the landowners represented by Gogol.

I would especially like to dwell on the image of the governor's daughter, who awakened poetic dreams in Chichikov. This image is to some extent opposed to all the other heroines of the poem. This young girl was to play a role in the spiritual revival of Chichikov. When Pavel Ivanovich meets her, he not only dreams of the future, but also "gets lost", his usual insight betrays him (a scene at the ball). The face of the governor's daughter is like an Easter egg, in this face there is a light that resists the darkness of life. Chichikov looks at this light, and his soul "is trying to remember the true good, a hint of which is contained in the harmonious beauty of the governor's daughter, but his spiritual resources are too insignificant for this."

In one of his articles, Belinsky notes that “the author of Dead Souls does not speak himself anywhere, he only makes his heroes speak in accordance with their characters. Sensitive Manilov is expressed in the language of a person educated in the philistine taste, and Nozdrev in the language of a historical person. .. "The speech of Gogol's characters is psychologically motivated, conditioned by the characters, the way of life, the type of thinking, the situation.

So, in Manilov, the dominant features are sentimentality, dreaminess, complacency, excessive sensitivity. These qualities are conveyed in his speech, gracefully florid, courteous, "delicate", "lusciously sweet": "observe the delicacy in your actions", "magnetism of the soul", "spiritual pleasure", "such a guy", "the most esteemed and most lovable man "," I do not have the high art of expressing myself "," chance brought me happiness. "

Manilov gravitates towards bookish-sentimental phrases, in the speech of this character we feel a Gogol parody into the language of sentimental stories: "Razin, darling, my mouth, I'll give you this piece." This is how he addresses his wife.

One of the main features of the landowner's speech, according to V. V. Litvinov, is "its vagueness, confusion, uncertainty." Starting the phrase, Manilov seems to fall under the impression of his own words and cannot finish it clearly.

The hero's speech manner is also characteristic. Manilov speaks quietly, insinuatingly, slowly, with a smile, sometimes closing his eyes, "like a cat with a finger slightly tickled behind its ears." At the same time, his expression is made "not only sweet, but even sugary, similar to the mixture that the clever secular doctor has mercilessly sweetened."

In Manilov's speech, his claims to "education" and "culture" are also noticeable. Discussing the sale of dead souls with Pavel Ivanovich, he asks him a pompous and ornate question about the legality of this "enterprise". Manilov is very worried about whether "this negotiation will not be inconsistent with civil regulations and further types of Russia." At the same time, he shows "in all his facial features and in his compressed lips such a deep expression, which, perhaps, has not been seen on a human face, unless in some too clever minister, and even then at the moment of the most puzzling matter." ...

The speech of Korobochka, a simple, patriarchal mother-landowner, is also characteristic in the poem. The box is completely uneducated, ignorant. In her speech, the vernacular constantly slips: "nothing", "theirs," "manenko", "tea", "hot", "you get rid of them."

The box is not only simple and patriarchal, but timid and stupid. All these qualities of the heroine are manifested in her dialogue with Chichikov. Fearing deception, some kind of trick, Korobochka is in no hurry to agree to the sale of dead souls, believing that they may "somehow be needed in the household." And only Chichikov's lie about the conduct of state contracts had an effect on her.

Gogol also depicts Korobochka's inner speech, which conveys the landowner's everyday sharpness, the very trait that helps her to collect "a little bit of money in motley bags." “It would be nice,” Korobochka thought to herself, “if he took flour and cattle from my treasury. We need to cajole him: there is still dough left from yesterday evening, so go to say Fetinje to bake pancakes ... "

Nozdryov's speech in Dead Souls is unusually colorful. As Belinsky noted, "Nozdrev speaks the language of a historical person, a hero of fairs, taverns, drinking bouts, fights and gambling tricks."

The hero's speech is very motley and varied. It contains both "ugly French jargon of an army restaurant style" ("bezeshki", "cliko-matradura", "wineskin", "scandalous"), and expressions of card jargon ("bunchishka" "Break the bank", "play with a doublet"), and the terms of dog breeding ("muzzle", "ribbed", "busty"), and a lot of abusive expressions: "piggy", canal "," you will get a bald devil "," fetuk " , "Beast", "you are a kind of cattle breeder", "Jew", "scoundrel", "I do not like death of such calves."

In his speeches, the hero is prone to "improvisation": often he himself does not know what he can think of in the next minute. So, he tells Chichikov that he drank "seventeen bottles of champagne" at dinner. Showing his guests the estate, he leads them to a pond, where, according to him, there are fish of such size that two people can hardly pull it out. Moreover, Nozdryov's lie has no apparent reason. He lies "for a catchphrase", wanting to amaze others.

Familiarity is peculiar to Nozdryov: with any person he quickly switches to “you”, “affectionately” calls the interlocutor “piggyback”, “cattle breeder”, “fetuk”, “scoundrel”. The landowner is "straightforward": in response to Chichikov's request for dead souls, he tells him that he is a "big swindler" and he should be hung "on the first tree." However, after that, Nozdryov continues his “friendly conversation” with the same “ardor and interest”.

Sobakevich's speech is striking in its simplicity, brevity, accuracy. The landowner lives in solitude and unsociability, he is skeptical in his own way, has a practical mind, a sober view of things. Therefore, in his assessments of those around the landowner is often rude, in his speech there are swear words and expressions. Thus, characterizing city officials, he calls them "crooks" and "Christ-sellers." The governor, but in his opinion, is “the first robber in the world”, the chairman is a “fool”, the prosecutor is a “pig”.

It is characteristic that Sobakevich is also capable of a big, inspired speech if the subject of the conversation is interesting to him. So, talking about gastronomy, he discovers knowledge of German and French diets, "hunger cure". Sobakevich's speech becomes emotional, imaginative, and vivid when he discusses the merits of dead peasants. “Another swindler will deceive you, sell you rubbish, not souls; and I have that vigorous nut "," I will lay my head, if you find such a man somewhere "," Maxim Telyatnikov, a shoemaker: what pricks with an awl, then boots, that boots, then thank you. " Describing his "product", the landowner himself is carried away by his own speech, acquires "lynx" and "the gift of speech."

Gogol also depicts Sobakevich's inner speech, his thoughts. Thus, noting Chichikov's "stubbornness", the landowner remarks to himself: "You cannot beat him, he is stubborn!"

The last of the landowners to appear in the poem is Plyushkin. This is an old curmudgeon, suspicious and wary, always dissatisfied with something. Chichikov's visit itself makes him mad. Not in the least ashamed of Pavel Ivanovich, Plyushkin declares to him that "there is little use to visit." At the beginning of Chichikov's visit, the landowner talks to him with caution and irritation. Plyushkin does not know what the guest's intentions are, and, just in case, warns Chichikov's "possible inclinations", remembering about the beggar-nephew.

However, in the middle of the conversation, the situation changes dramatically. Plyushkin understands what the essence of Chichikov's request is, and comes into indescribable delight. All his intonations change. Irritation gives way to frank joy, wariness - to confidential intonations. Plyushkin, who saw no use at a party, calls Chichikov "priest" and "benefactor." Touched, the landowner recalls the "gentlemen" and "saints".

However, Plyushkin does not stay in such complacency for long. Not finding clean paper for making a deed, he again turns into a grumpy, grumpy curmudgeon. All his anger he brings down on the courtyards. Many abusive expressions appear in his speech: "what a face", "fool", "fool", "robber", "swindler", "canal", "devils will bother you", "thieves", "shameless parasites". Present in the lexicon of the landowner and vernacular: "bout", "boogers", "hefty kush", "tea", "ehwa", "stuffed", "uzho".

Gogol presents us with Plyushkin's inner speech, exposing the suspicion and distrust of the landowner. Chichikov's generosity seems incredible to Plyushkin, and he thinks to himself: "After all, the devil only knows, maybe he is just a braggart, like all these little bastards: he will lie, lie to talk and get some tea, and then he will leave!"

Chichikov's speech, like Manilov's, is unusually elegant, florid, full of book turns: "an insignificant worm of this world", "I had the honor to cover your two." Pavel Ivanovich possesses "excellent manners", he can support any conversation - about a horse farm, and about dogs, and about judges' tricks, and about a billiard game, and about making hot wine. He speaks especially well about virtue, "even with tears in his eyes." Chichikov's conversational manner is also characteristic: "He spoke neither loudly nor softly, but absolutely as he should."

It is worth noting the special maneuverability and mobility of the hero's speech. Communicating with people, Pavel Ivanovich skillfully adapts to each of the interlocutors. With Manilov, he speaks floridly, significantly, uses "vague periphrases and sensitive maxims." “Indeed, what have I not tolerated? like a barge amid fierce waves ... What persecutions, what persecutions I did not experience, what grief I didn’t taste, but because I observed the truth, that I was pure in my conscience, that I gave my hand to a helpless widow and a wretched orphan! .. Here he even wiped away a tear that had rolled out with his handkerchief.

With Korobochka, Chichikov becomes a kind patriarchal landowner. "All the will of God, mother!" - Pavel Ivanovich thoughtfully declares in response to the landowner's complaints about the numerous deaths among the peasants. However, realizing very soon how stupid and ignorant Korobochka is, he no longer stands on ceremony with her: “Yes, perish and roundabout your whole village”, “like some kind of mongrel, without saying a bad word, lying in the hay: and she herself does not eat, and does not give to others. "

In the chapter about Korobochka, Chichikov's inner speech first appears. Chichikov's thoughts here convey his dissatisfaction with the situation, irritation, but at the same time the impudence, rudeness of the hero: “Well, the woman seems to be strong-minded!”, “Eck her, what a club-headed! ... Go get along with her! you threw it into sweat, you damned old woman! "

Chichikov speaks with Nozdrev simply and concisely, "trying to get on a familiar foot." He perfectly understands that there is no need for thoughtful phrases and colorful epithets. However, the conversation with the landowner does not lead to anything: instead of a successful deal, Chichikov is drawn into a scandal, which ends only thanks to the appearance of the police captain.

With Sobakevich, Chichikov at first adheres to his usual manner of conversation. Then he somewhat reduces his "eloquence". Moreover, in the intonations of Pavel Ivanovich, while observing all external decencies, impatience and irritation are felt. So, wishing to convince Sobakevich of the complete uselessness of the subject of bargaining, Chichikov declares: “It’s strange for me: it seems that some kind of theatrical performance or comedy is taking place between us, otherwise I cannot explain to myself ... You seem to be a rather smart person, you know information of education ".

The same feeling of irritation is present in the thoughts of the hero. Here already Pavel Ivanovich is not ashamed of "more definite" statements, frank abuse. "What is he really, - thought to himself Chichikov, - for a fool, or what, does he take me?" In another place we read: "Well, damn him," thought Chichikov to himself, "I'll add half a dollar to him, for a dog, for nuts!"

In a conversation with Plyushkin, Chichikov returns to his usual amiability and pompous statements. Pavel Ivanovich declares to the landowner that "having heard enough about his economy and the rare management of estates, he considered it a duty to get to know each other and bring his own respect." He calls Plyushkin "a respectable, kind old man." Pavel Ivanovich maintains this tone throughout his conversation with the landowner.

In his thoughts, Chichikov rejects "all ceremonies", his inner speech is far from bookishness and is rather primitive. Plyushkin is unfriendly, inhospitable towards Pavel Ivanovich. The landowner does not invite him to dinner, arguing that his kitchen is "low, very nasty, and the chimney has completely collapsed, you start to heat it, and you start a fire." “There it is! Chichikov thought to himself. “It's good that I grabbed a cheesecake from Sobakevich and a piece of a side of lamb.” Asking Plyushkin about the sale of runaway souls, Pavel Ivanovich first refers to his friend, although he buys them for himself. "No, we won't let our friend smell this," Chichikov said to himself ... "Here one can clearly feel the hero's joy from a successful" deal. "

Thus, the originality of the genre of this lyric-epic work lies in the combination of the epic and lyrical (in lyrical digressions) beginning, features of a travel novel and a review novel, (a through hero). In addition, it reveals the features of the genre that Gogol himself singled out in his work: "A textbook of literature" and called it "a lesser kind of epic." In contrast to the novel, such works are narrative, not about individual characters, but about a people or a part of it, which is quite applicable to a poem; "Dead Souls". It is inherent in a truly epic - the breadth of scope and grandeur of a plan that goes far beyond the history of the purchase by a certain swindler of revision dead souls.

A heroic people to match the Russian landscapes of that land, "that does not like to joke, but evenly scattered about half the world, and go count miles until it hits your eyes." In the final, 11th chapter, the lyrical and philosophical meditation on Russia and the vocation of the writer, whose "chapter was overshadowed by a formidable cloud heavy with the coming rains", is replaced by a road motif - one of the central ones in the poem. It is connected with the main theme - the path intended for Russia and the people. In Gogol's system, movement, path, road are always interrelated concepts: this is evidence of life, development, opposing inertia and death. It is no coincidence that all the biographies of the peasants who personify the best that the people have are united by this very motive. "Tea, all the provinces went with an ax in his belt ... Somewhere now your fast legs are carrying you? .. These and nicknamed it is clear that good runners." It should be noted that the ability to move is also characteristic of Chichikov, a hero who, according to the author's plan, was to be purified and transformed into a positive character.

That is why the two most important themes of the author's reflections - the theme of Russia and the theme of the road - merge in the lyrical digression that concludes the first volume of the poem. "Russia-troika", "all inspired by God," appears in him as a vision of the author, who seeks to understand the meaning of its movement; “Rus, where are you rushing? Give an answer. Doesn't give an answer. " But in that lofty lyrical pathos that permeates these concluding lines, the writer's belief resounds that the answer will be found and the soul of the people will appear alive and beautiful.

There is not a single heroine in the poem who represents true virtue. The spirituality of the image of the governor's daughter was only outlined by Gogol. The rest of the heroines are described by the author satirically, with irony and sarcasm.

4. Mildon V.I. City in the "Inspector" // N.V. Gogol and Theater: The Third Gogol Readings. M., 2004.148p.

5 ... Gogol N.V. Stories. Dramatic works. - L., 1983 .-- 285 p.

6. Gogol N.V. Complete works: In 14 volumes - M .; L. 1939.

7. Bednov A. The great Russian writer N.V. Gogol. - Arch., 1952 .-- 147 p.

8. Voropaev V.A. N.V. Gogol: life and work. - M., 1998 .-- 126 p.

9. Gukovsky G.A. Gogol's realism. - M.-L., 1959 .-- 530 p.

10. Zolotussky I.P. Monologue with variations. - M., 1980 .-- 364 p.

11. Kartashova I.V. Gogol and romanticism. - Kalinin, 1975.

Mann Yu.V. On the concept of play as an artistic image // Mann Yu.V. Dialectics of the artistic image. M., 1987.S. 142-144

15. "Dead Souls" by Gogol: poetics; polemic in literary criticism.

"Dead Souls" is a work in which, according to Belinsky, all of Russia appeared.

The plot and composition of "Dead Souls" are conditioned by the subject of the image - Gogol's desire to comprehend Russian life, the character of the Russian person, the fate of Russia. We are talking about a fundamental change in the subject of the image in comparison with the literature of the 20-30s: the artist's attention is transferred from the image of an individual person to the portrait of society. In other words, the romance aspect of the genre content (the depiction of the private life of an individual) is replaced by the moral aspect (the portrait of society at the non-heroic moment of its development). Therefore, Gogol is looking for a plot that would make it possible to cover the widest possible coverage of reality. Such an opportunity was opened by the plot of the journey: "Pushkin found that the plot of Dead Souls was good for me," said Gogol, "that it gives complete freedom to travel with the hero all over Russia and bring out a multitude of the most diverse characters." Therefore, the motive of movement, road, path turns out to be the leitmotif of the poem. This motif receives a completely different meaning in the famous lyrical digression of the eleventh chapter: the road with the rushing chaise turns into the path along which Russia flies, "and, looking sideways, other peoples and states look back and give it a path." This leitmotif contains the unknown paths of Russian national development:

"Russia, where are you rushing, give me an answer? Doesn't give an answer", offering an antithesis to the ways of other peoples: "What twisted, deaf, narrow, impassable roads that mankind chose to drive far to the side ..." hero ("but for all that, his road was difficult ..."), and the author's creative path: "And for a long time it was determined for me by the wonderful power to go hand in hand with my strange heroes ...".

The plot of the trip gives Gogol the opportunity to create a gallery of images of landowners. At the same time, the composition looks very rational: the exposition of the travel plot is given in the first chapter (Chichikova meets officials and some landowners, receives invitations from them), then five chapters follow, in which the landowners "sit", and Chichikov travels from chapter to chapter, buying up dead souls. Gogol in Dead Souls, as in The Inspector General, creates an absurd artistic world in which people lose their human essence, turn into a parody of the possibilities inherent in them by nature. In an effort to find in the characters signs of mortification, the loss of spirituality (of the soul), Gogol resorts to the use of subject and everyday detail. Each landowner is surrounded by many objects that can characterize him. Details associated with certain characters not only live autonomously, but also "add up" in a kind of motives. The images of the landowners whom Chichikov visits are presented in the poem in contrast, since they carry various vices. One after another, each spiritually insignificant than the previous one, the owners of the estates follow in the work: Manilov, Korobochka, Nozdrev, Sobakevich, Plyushkin. If Manilov is sentimental and sugary to the point of cloying, Sobakevich is straightforward and rude. Their views on life are polar: for Manilov, everyone around them is beautiful, for Sobakevich - robbers and swindlers. Manilov does not show real concern for the welfare of the peasants, for the welfare of the family; he entrusted all management to the rogue clerk, who ruins both the peasants and the landlord. But Sobakevich is a strong owner, ready for any scam for profit.

Korobochka's soullessness manifests itself in petty hoarding; the only thing that worries her is the prices for hemp, honey; "Would not be cheap" even when selling dead souls. Korobochka reminds Sobakevich of stinginess, a passion for profit, although the stupidity of the "clubhead" brings these qualities to the comic limit. "Accumulators", Sobakevich and Korobochka, are opposed by "wasteful" - Nozdrev and Plyushkin. Nozdryov is a desperate bastard and a bootie, a devastator and ruiner of the economy. His energy has become a scandalous bustle, aimless and destructive.

If Nozdryov let his whole fortune go down the wind, then Plyushkin turned his into one appearance. The last trait to which a mortification of the soul can lead a person, Gogol shows by the example of Plyushkin, whose image completes the gallery of landowners. This hero is no longer so much ridiculous as scary and pathetic, since, unlike the previous characters, he loses not only spirituality, but also his human appearance. Chichikov, seeing him, wonders for a long time whether it is a man or a woman, and finally decides that this is a housekeeper. And yet he is a landowner, the owner of more than a thousand souls and huge storerooms.

True, in these pantries bread rots, flour turns to stone, cloth and canvases - to dust. A no less terrible picture appears in the man's house, where everything is covered with dust and cobwebs, and in the corner of the room “heaps of things that are coarser and unworthy to lie on tables are piled up. What exactly was in this

heap, it was difficult to decide ", just as it was difficult to" get to the bottom of what was concocted ... the dressing gown "of the owner. How did it happen that a rich, educated person, a nobleman, turned into a "hole in humanity"? To answer this question. Gogol refers to the hero's past. (He writes about the rest of the landowners as about already formed types.) The writer very accurately traces the degradation of man, and the reader understands that man is not born a monster, but becomes one. So this soul could live! But Gogol notes that over time, a person submits himself to the laws prevailing in society and betrays the ideals of youth.

All Gogol landowners are bright, individual, memorable characters. But with all their external diversity, the essence remains unchanged: possessing living souls, they themselves have long turned into dead souls. We do not see the true movements of a living soul neither in an empty dreamer, nor in a strong-willed hostess, nor in a "cheerful boor", nor in a landlord-fist, like a bear. All this is just an appearance with a complete lack of spiritual content, which is why these heroes are funny.

Gogol shows the reason for the mortification of the human soul by the example of the formation of the character of the protagonist - Chichikov. A bleak childhood, devoid of parental love and affection, service and the example of bribe-taking officials - these factors formed a scoundrel, who is like everyone around him.

But he turned out to be more greedy in the pursuit of acquisitions than Korobochka, callous Sobakevich and more insolent than Nozdryov in the means of enrichment. In the final chapter, which complements Chichikov's biography, his final exposure takes place as a clever predator, acquirer and entrepreneur of the bourgeois warehouse, a civilized scoundrel, master of life. But Chichikov, differing from the landowners in enterprise, is also a "dead" soul. The "shining joy" of life is beyond him. The happiness of the "decent person" Chichikov is based on money. Calculation drove all human feelings out of him and made him a "dead" soul.

Gogol shows the emergence of a new person in Russian life, who has neither a noble family, nor a title, nor an estate, but who, at the cost of his own efforts, thanks to his intelligence and resourcefulness, is trying to make a fortune for himself. His ideal is a penny; marriage is seen by him as a good deal. His addictions and tastes are purely material. Having quickly guessed a person, he knows how to approach everyone in a special way, subtly calculating his moves. Internal versatility, elusiveness is also emphasized by his appearance, described by Gogol in vague features: "The gentleman sat in the chaise, neither too fat, nor too thin, it cannot be said that he was old, but not so that he was too young." Gogol was able to discern individual features of the emerging type in contemporary society and brought them together in the image of Chichikov. The city officials of NN are even more impersonal than the landlords. Their deadness is shown in the scene of the ball: people are not visible, everywhere there are muslins, satins, muslin, headdresses, tailcoats, uniforms, shoulders, necks, ribbons. All the interest in life is focused on gossip, gossip, petty vanity, envy. They differ from each other only in the size of the bribe; all idlers, they have no interests, they are also "dead" souls.

But behind the "dead" souls of Chichikov, officials and landowners, Gogol saw the living souls of the peasants, the strength of the national character. In the words of A. I. Herzen, in Gogol's poem appear "behind dead souls - living souls." The talent of the people is revealed in the dexterity of the coachman Mikheev, the shoemaker Telyatnikov, the bricklayer Milushkin, the carpenter Stepan Probka. The strength and acuteness of the people's mind was reflected in the briskness and accuracy of the Russian word, the depth and integrity of the Russian feeling - in the sincerity of the Russian song, the breadth and generosity of the soul - in the brightness and unrestrained joy of folk holidays. The boundless dependence on the usurpatory power of the landowners, who doom the peasants to forced, exhausting labor, to hopeless ignorance, gives rise to stupid Mityaev and Minyaev, the downtrodden Proshek and Pelagia, who do not know “where is right, where is left. Gogol sees how high and good qualities are distorted in the kingdom of "dead" souls, how peasants perish, driven to despair, rushing into any risky business, just to get out of serfdom.

Not finding the truth from the supreme power, Captain Kopeikin, helping himself, becomes the chieftain of the robbers. The Tale of Captain Kopeikin reminds the authorities of the threat of a revolutionary uprising in Russia.

Feudal death destroys good inclinations in a person, destroys the people. Against the background of the majestic, endless expanses of Russia, the real pictures of Russian life seem especially bitter. Having outlined Russia in the poem "from one side" in its negative essence, in "stunning pictures

triumphant evil and suffering hatred ", Gogol once again convinces that in his time" it is impossible otherwise to direct society or even the entire generation to the beautiful, until you show the full depth of its real abomination. "

Controversy in Russian criticism around Gogol's "Dead Souls".

Konstantin Aksakov was justly considered “the foremost fighter of Slavophilism” (S.A. Vengerov). His contemporaries remembered his youthful friendship with Belinsky in Stankevich's circle and then a sharp break with him. A particularly violent clash between them occurred in 1842 over Dead Souls.

K. Aksakov wrote a brochure for the release of "Dead Souls"how many words about Gogol's poem "The Adventures of Chichikov, or Mertgood souls ”(1842).Belinsky, who also responded (in Otechestvennye zapiski) to Gogol's work, then wrote a bewildering review of Aksakov's brochure. Aksakov replied to Belinsky in the article "An Explanation of Gogol's Poem" The Adventures of Chichikov, or Dead Souls "(" Muscovite "). Belinsky, in turn, wrote a merciless analysis of Aksakov's answer in an article entitled "Explanation for an explanation about Gogol's poem" The Adventures of Chichikov, or Dead Souls. "

Glossing the significance of realism and satire in Gogol's work, Aksakov focused on the subtext of the work, its genre designation as a "poem", on the writer's prophetic statements. Aksakov built a whole concept in which, in essence, Gogol was declared the Homer of Russian society, and the pathos of his work was seen not in the denial of existing reality, but in its assertion.

Homeric epos in the subsequent history of European literature lost its important features and became smaller, "condescended to novels and, finally, to the extreme degree of its humiliation, to the French story." And suddenly, Aksakov continues, there is an epic with all the depth and simple grandeur, like the ancients - is Gogol's "poem". The same deeply penetrating and all-seeing epic gaze, the same all-embracing epic contemplation. In vain then, in the polemic, Aksakov argued that he did not have a direct comparison of Gogol to Homer, Kuleshov believes.

Aksakov pointed to the inner property of Gogol's own talent, striving to combine all impressions of Russian life into harmonious pictures. We know that Gogol had such a subjective aspiration and, abstractly speaking, Slavophil criticism correctly pointed to it. But this observation was immediately devalued by them completely, since such "unity" or such "epic harmony" of Gogol's talent were called upon in their eyes to destroy Gogol the realist. Epicity killed the satirist in Gogol - the denouncer of life. Aksakov is ready to look for "human movements" in Korobochka, Manilov, Sobakevich and thereby ennoble them as temporarily lost people. The carriers of the Russian substance were primitive serfs, Selifan and Petrushka. Belinsky ridiculed all these exaggerations and attempts to liken the heroes of Dead Souls to the heroes of Homer. According to the logic set by the Aksakovs themselves, Belinsky sarcastically drew the obvious parallels between the heroes: “If so, then, of course, why shouldn't Chichikov be the Achilles of the Russian Iliad, Sobakevich - Ajax frantic (especially during lunch), Manilov - Alexander Paris, Plyushkin - Nestor, Selifan - Automedon, the police chief, father and benefactor of the city - Agamemnon, and the quarter with a pleasant blush and lacquered boots - Hermes? .. ".

Belinsky, who saw the main thing in Gogol, that is, a realist, indeed, before the release of Dead Souls and even, more precisely, before the polemic with K. Aksakov, did not ask the question of Gogol's "duality" and left in the shadow the writer's preaching habits

To make the comparison between Gogol and Homer not look too odious, Aksakov invented a similarity between them "in the act of creation." At the same time, he put Shakespeare on an equal footing with them. But what is an "act of creation", an "act of creation"? This is a contrived, purely a priori category, the purpose of which is to confuse the issue. Who will measure this act and how? Belinsky suggested returning to the category of content: it is the content that should be the source material when comparing one poet with another. But it has already been proven that Gogol has nothing in common with Homer in terms of content.

Belinsky, however, insisted that before us is not the apotheosis of Russian life, but its denunciation, we are dealing with a modern novel, not an epic ... Aksakov tried to deprive Gogol's work of social and satirical significance. Belinsky caught this well and strongly disputed it. Belinsky was alarmed by lyrical passages in Dead Souls

It seems that already in the controversy about Dead Souls (1842), which ridiculed the "minority", the privileged elite, Belinsky tried to grasp the popular point of view from which Gogol administered his judgment.

Belinsky highly appreciated the work of Gogol for the fact that it was "snatched from the cache of people's life" and imbued with "a nervous, blood love for the fertile seed of Russian life" ("Chichikov's Adventures, or Dead Souls"). This fertile seed was, of course, the people, Gogol loved him, in the struggle for his interests he painted disgusting types of landowners and officials. Gogol understood the task of his "poem" as nationwide, in spite of his realistic method, his satire. He believed that he was drawing Russian people in general and, following the negative images of the landowners, would draw positive ones. On this line, there was a discrepancy between Belinsky and Gogol. Even praising at first the lyrical pathos in Dead Souls as an expression of the "blissful national self-consciousness" in itself, Belinsky then withdrew his praises in the course of the polemic, seeing in this lyricism something quite different: Gogol's promises in the following parts of Dead Souls to idealize Russia, i.e. e. refusal to judge social evil. This meant a complete perversion of the very idea of \u200b\u200bnationality.

Gogol's mistake, according to Belinsky, was not that he had a desire to positively portray the Russian person, but I that he was looking for him in the wrong place, among the possessing classes. The critic seemed to be saying to the writers: manage to be popular, and you will be national.

Features of the poetics of "Dead Souls"

From the very beginning, Dead Souls were conceived on an all-Russian, nation-wide scale. "I began to write Dead Souls," Gogol informed Pushkin on October 7, 1835. -<...> In this novel I would like to show at least from one side all of Russia. "Much later, in a letter to Zhukovsky in 1848, Gogol explained the idea of \u200b\u200bhis creation: and the bad in the Russian man, and the property of our Russian nature would have been revealed before us better. "

The embodiment of such a grandiose plan also required appropriate artistic means. In his article "What finally is the essence of Russian poetry and what is its peculiarity" (1846) Gogol pointed out three sources of originality from which Russian poets should draw inspiration. These are folk songs, proverbs and the word of church pastors. It is safe to say that these same sources are of paramount importance for Gogol's own aesthetics. It is impossible to understand “Dead Souls” without taking into account the folklore tradition and, first of all, the proverbial elements that permeate the entire fabric of the poem.

The character of Manilov - a landowner “without enthusiasm”, an empty dreamer - is “explained” through the proverb: “God alone could have said what Manilov’s character was. There is a kind of people known by the name: people are so-so, neither this nor that, neither in the city of Bogdan, nor in the village of Selifan, according to the proverb. " The bearish nature of Sobakevich, who had a "strong and marvelous image", in whose household everything was "stubborn, without hesitation, in some kind of strong and awkward order", finds its final definition in the proverbial formula: "Ek gave you God ! Certainly, as they say, it is cut out wrong, but tightly sewn ... "

The characters of the episodic characters of the poem are sometimes completely exhausted by proverbs or proverbial expressions. “Maxim Telyatnikov, shoemaker: what stabs with an awl, then boots, that boots, then thanks, and at least into the mouth of the intoxicated.” Assessor Drobyazhkin was "lascivious like a cat ..." Wed: "Luscious like a cat, but cowardly like a hare" (Collection 4291 of an ancient Russian proverb. Printed at the Imperial Moscow University in 1770. Mizhuev was one of those people who , it seems, they will never agree to "dance on someone else's tune," but it will always end with that, Nu will go "to dance as best as possible to someone else's tune, in a word, they will start with a smooth stitch, and finish with a bastard."

Gogol loved to express his cherished thoughts in proverbs. The idea of \u200b\u200b"The Inspector General", as we know, was formulated by him in the epigraph-proverb: "There is no reason to blame the mirror if the face is crooked." In the surviving chapters of the second volume of “Dead Souls”, the proverb “Love us black, and everyone will love us white” is of great importance for understanding the author's intention. "It is known," said Gogol, "that if you manage to close a speech with a cleverly tidy proverb, then you will suddenly explain it to the people, no matter how much it is beyond their concept."

Introducing proverbs into the artistic situation of Dead Souls, Gogol creatively uses the meaning they contain. In the tenth chapter, the postmaster, having made the assumption that Chichikov was "none other than Captain Kopeikin," publicly admitted that the saying is perfectly true: "The Russian man is strong in hindsight." "The root Russian virtue" - the back, "reckless", "Russian mind - back mind. The Russian mind is a grasping mind "( Knyazev V... A collection of selected proverbs, sayings, sayings and jokes. L., 1924. other characters of the poem are endowed with a repentant mind in abundance, but first of all Pavel Ivanovich Chichikov himself.

Gogol had his own special attitude to this proverb. Usually it is used in the sense of "caught on, but late," and the strength of the hindsight is regarded as a vice or defect. In the Explanatory Dictionary of Vladimir Dahl, we find: "The Rusak is strong with his back (hind mind)", "Clever, but with the backward", "He is quick-witted with hindsight." In his own "Proverbs of the Russian People" we read: "Everyone is smart: who first, who afterwards", "You cannot correct things with your hind mind", "If only I had that mind in advance that comes afterwards." But Gogol also knew another interpretation of this saying. So, Snegirev saw in it an expression of the mentality characteristic of the Russian people: "That a Russian can catch his mind and come to his senses even after a mistake, this is what his proverb says:" Russian is strong in hindsight "; Snegirev I . Russians in their proverbs. Reasoning and research on Russian proverbs and sayings. Book. 2. M., 1832. “This is how Russian proverbs proper express the mentality characteristic of the people, the way of judgment, the peculiarity of the view<...> Their root basis is the centuries-old, hereditary experience, this hind mind, with which the Russian is strong ... ”Snegirev I. Russian folk proverbs and parables. M., 1995 / Reprint reproduction of the edition of 1848. S. XV. Note that the deep meaning of this folk wisdom was felt not only in the era of Gogol. Our contemporary L. Leonov wrote: “No, the proverb about our fortress in hindsight speaks not of slow-wittedness, - once again it indicates how difficult it is to take into account in full all the contradictions and insidious circumstances arising in the vastness of the vast territories beyond the eye”.

Gogol showed constant interest in the works of Snegirev, which helped him to better understand the essence of the national spirit. For example, in the article "What finally is the essence of Russian poetry ..." - this kind of aesthetic manifesto of Gogol - Krylov's nationality is explained by the special nationally distinctive mentality of the great fabulist. In the fable, writes Gogol, Krylov “knew how to become a folk poet. This is our strong Russian head, the very mind that is akin to the mind of our proverbs, the very mind with which a Russian person is strong, the mind of conclusions, the so-called back mind.

Gogol's article on Russian poetry was necessary for him, as he himself admitted in a letter to Pletnev in 1846, "in explaining the elements of the Russian man." In Gogol's reflections on the fate of his native people, their present and historical future, "the hind mind or mind of final conclusions, which is predominantly endowed in front of others by a Russian person" is that fundamental "property of Russian nature" that distinguishes Russians from other peoples. With this property of the national mind, which is akin to the mind of folk proverbs, “who were able to draw such great conclusions from their poor, insignificant time<...> and who only speak about what huge conclusions can be drawn by today's Russian people from the current wide time, in which the results of all centuries are drawn, "Gogol connects the high destiny of Russia.

When the witty guesses and clever assumptions of officials about who Chichikov is (here there is a "millionaire", and a "maker of counterfeit banknotes", and Captain Kopeikin), come to the ridiculous - Chichikov is declared to be Napoleon in disguise, - the author seems to take under his protection their heroes. “And in the world annals of mankind there are many whole centuries, which, it would seem, have been deleted and destroyed as unnecessary. Many delusions have been committed in the world, which, it would seem, even a child would not have done now. " The principle of opposing "ours" and "aliens", clearly perceptible from the first to the last page of Dead Souls, is maintained by the author in the opposition of the Russian hind mind to the mistakes and delusions of all mankind. The possibilities inherent in this proverbial "property of the Russian mind were to be revealed, according to Gogol, in the subsequent volumes of the poem.

The ideological and compositional role of this proverb in Gogol's idea helps to understand the meaning of the "Tale of Captain Kopeikin". Until now, no satisfactory explanation has been given for this "inserted novella", without which, however, Gogol could not imagine a poem.