Drama A.N. Ostrovsky's "The Thunderstorm" in Russian Criticism. "Thunderstorm" in the assessment of Russian criticism My impression of the drama thunderstorm

Ostrovsky's play has caused many articles and reviews. Among them, the article by N. A. Dobrolyubov "A Ray of Light in the Dark Kingdom" stands out. Why exactly was Katerina called the "ray of light"? Because the instinctive protest of the heroine of "The Storm" was for the critic direct evidence of the doom of the "dark kingdom". "It is known," asserted Dobrolyubov, "that extremes are reflected by extremes and that the strongest protest is the one that finally rises from the bosom of the weakest and most patient." The image of Katerina in the interpretation of the critic acquired a generalizing meaning - as an assertion of that hidden force that cannot but awaken in the natural striving of the people for freedom, as evidence of their irreconcilability to all manifestations of oppression, injustice, to any forms of tyranny.

A few years later, in 1864, an article by another popular critic DI Pisarev, "The Motives of the Russian Drama", appeared. Pisarev tried to substantiate a completely different interpretation of the image of Katerina. In his article, he argued not so much with Ostrovsky as with Dobrolyubov. For Pisarev, Katerina, for all her passion, tenderness, sincerity, which he willingly admits, is still not a "ray of light", primarily because she does not live and act according to the laws of reason. For Pisarev, however, a necessary condition for "a bright phenomenon must be a strong and developed mind; where there is no such property, there can be no light phenomena."

In such statements of the critic-educator, both his strength and his weakness are quite clearly manifested. This is also the source of the direct opposition of Katerina to Pisarev's favorite hero - Bazarov (from Turgenev's novel "Fathers and Sons"). Even the mere fact that Bazarov is a natural scientist who, in particular, is engaged in experiments on frogs, delights the critic: “It is precisely in the frog itself that the salvation and renewal of the Russian people lies. , I am not joking or amusing you with paradoxes. " All Pisarev's sympathies were given to the "Bazarov type", and Katerina was classified by him as "eternal children."

Finally, it is necessary to take into account the assessment of Ostrovsky's drama by Apollo Grigoriev, who saw in "The Thunderstorm" primarily "the poetry of the life of the people," which both Dobrolyubov and Pisarev passed by. A number of scientists have recently been developing this very concept: they are trying to understand the origins of Katerina's character in the context of Russian national culture. However, in fairness, it should be noted that Dostoevsky, who constantly polemicized with Dobrolyubov, in a letter to N.N. Strakhov (April 18, 1869) made an important confession: "... you know, I am convinced that Dobrolyubov is to the right of Grigoriev in his maybe Ostrovsky really didn’t come up with the whole idea about the Dark Kingdom, but Dobrolyubov suggested well and got on good soil. "

For a long time it was generally accepted that after Dobrolyubov, nothing fundamentally new about "The Storm" would be said. However, Ostrovsky's drama is not a "monument"; it lives on today, and today it can interest an inquiring thought of both a schoolchild and an experienced literary critic.

Ostrovsky's play has caused many articles and reviews. Among them, the article by N. A. Dobrolyubov "A ray of light in the dark kingdom" stands out. Why exactly was Katerina called the "ray of light"? Because the instinctive protest of the heroine of The Storm was for the critic direct evidence of the doom of the “dark kingdom”. "It is known," asserted Dobrolyubov, "that extremes are reflected by extremes and that the strongest protest is the one that finally rises from the bosom of the weakest and most patient." The image of Katerina in the interpretation of the critic acquired a generalizing meaning - as an assertion of that hidden force that cannot but awaken in the natural striving of the people for freedom, as evidence of its irreconcilability to all manifestations of oppression, injustice, to any forms of tyranny.

A few years later, in 1864, an article by another well-known critic DI Pisarev “Moti-vy of the Russian drama” appeared. Pisarev tried to substantiate a completely different interpretation of the image of Katerina. In his article, he argued not so much with Ostrovsky as with Dobrolyubov. For Pisarev, Katerina, for all her passion, tenderness, sincerity, which he willingly admits, is still not a "ray of light", primarily because she does not live and act according to the laws of reason. For Pisarev, the necessary condition for “a bright phenomenon must be a strong and developed mind; where this property is absent, there can be no luminous phenomena. "

In such statements of the critic-educator, both his strength and his weakness are quite clearly manifested. This is also the source of the direct opposition of Katerina to Pisarev's favorite hero - Bazarov (from Turgenev's novel "Fathers and Sons"). Even the mere fact that Bazarov is a natural scientist, engaged, in particular, in experiments on frogs, delights the critic: “It is precisely in the frog itself that the salvation and renewal of the Russian people lies. By God, reader, I am not joking and am not amusing you with paradoxes. " All Pisarev's sympathies were given to the “Bazarov type”, and Katerina was classified by him as “eternal children”. Material from the site

Finally, it is necessary to take into account the assessment of Ostrovsky's drama by Apollo Grigoriev, who saw in The Thunderstorm primarily “the poetry of the life of the people,” which both Dobrolyubov and Pisarev passed by. A number of scientists have recently been developing this very concept: they are trying to understand the origins of Katerina's character in the context of Russian national culture. However, in all fairness, it should be noted that Dostoevsky, constantly polemicizing with Dobrolyubov, in a letter to N.N. Strakhov (April 18, 1869) made an important confession: “... you know, I am convinced that Dobrolyubov to the right of Grigoriev in his view of Ostrovsky. Maybe Ostrovsky really did not enter the mind of the whole idea about the Dark Kingdom, but Dobrolyu-bov suggested well and got on good soil. "

For a long time it was considered generally accepted that after Dobrolyubov, nothing fundamentally new about the "Thunder" will be said. However, Ostrovsky's drama is not a "monument"; it lives on today, and today it is capable of arousing the interest of an inquiring thought of both a schoolboy and an experienced literary critic.

Didn't find what you were looking for? Use search

On this page material on topics:

criticism of the image of katerina in the thunderstorm
drama thunderstorm in Russian criticism
article by critic goncharov about Ostrovsky's thunderstorm
thunderstorm ostrovsky review
grigoriev after the thunderstorm ostrovsky synopsis

Opinion about the drama of Ostrovsky "The Thunderstorm"

Not being able, on the occasion of my departure to Moscow, to engage in a detailed examination of the drama of Mr. Ostrovsky "The Thunderstorm", but at the same time, considering for myself a special pleasure to fulfill the instructions of the Academy of Sciences, which she liked to honor me, - I must confine myself a short review of the aforementioned play.

First of all, let me make two remarks that speak in favor of Mr. Ostrovsky's talent and the merit of his writings.

The decline of dramatic poetry in the modern era is beyond doubt. This is a fact familiar to everyone who studies literature. For a long time now, neither in England, nor in Germany, nor in France, there have been such plays that could rightfully stand among the truly elegant works. Getner, in his "Das moderne Drama" (1852), rightly complains about the internal scarcity of dramas written by the poets of the so-called "Young Germany" school. 1 He does not deny the talent in their authors, but admits that their works are far inferior to the models of Schiller and Goethe, 2 just as the last poets stand at the height of artistic creativity, so their followers took the level of mediocrity. This level was not raised by Freytag's drama "Valentine", although the talent of Freytag 3 comes out of the ordinary. The same disappointing phenomenon is seen in French dramas. After V. Hugo, A. Dumas, Scribes 4 and some others, there has been a lull or melodramas are being fabricated. But Scribe, in relation to Moliere, and Hugo with A. Dumas, in relation to Corneille and Racine, 5 - the same as "Young Germany" in relation to Schiller and Goethe: in comedies there is no force of Moliere's comic, in tragedies there is no force of tragedy that glorified Racine and Corneille, although it revolved in the circle of false classical art. The newest attempts of the French to create something original sometimes produce brilliant plays, but not brilliant with the light of true art, but with external effects and external contact with the current news, with the interests of the day (nouvelles du jour). Everywhere melodrama, and nowhere real drama.

The above does not apply to contemporary Russian comedy, or, more precisely, to the plays of Mr. Ostrovsky, since in them the whole of our comedy is solely and inseparably contained. The position of Mr. Ostrovsky is different. Among our most famous comedians, he also took a prominent place. He continues the work of Gogol with dignity. I am not comparing their talents: I am only saying that in a comparatively inferior talent there are aspects that were not shown in much higher talent. Thus, in the plays of Mr. Ostrovsky there is something of their own, special, which carries weight after The Inspector General and The Marriage. And in works of art, as well as in all works of human spiritual activity, this feature, originality is appreciated predominantly. It testifies to the distinctive qualities of talent; it explains the sympathy for the talent of the public - both educated, able to be aware of what it likes, and uneducated, unconsciously perceiving aesthetic pleasure.

The second note is intended to indicate Mr. Ostrovsky's innate inclination towards drama. He entered the literary world with a dramatic play and still has not changed his chosen poetic genre. Other authors try their hand at different kinds, as if to spite their nature. G. Turgenev, for example, tried, in addition to stories and novels, with which he acquired such a loud and quite fair fame, to write also dramas; but if it is possible to recognize the relative dignity and private beauties of his "Provincial", "Freeloader", "Breakfast at the Leader's", 6 then one cannot fail to see that he has gone out of his rut. G. Ostrovsky, on the contrary, did not try to change the dramatic form for lyrics or epic. One of his plays, The Nurse (in The Library for Reading 7), could easily have given a plot to the narrator; however, he was not carried away by this ease. It is clear that drama is his calling. The invariability of the direction often, by itself, regardless of other objects, indicates the internal cost of the direction, and the inability to freely enter the heterogeneous areas of knowledge or creativity all the more perceptibly shows the ability to correctly dispose of in the area to which the author is, so to speak, attributed from birth. Mr. Ostrovsky's specialty is poetic performance of the merchant class. A change in the view of the nature of the phenomena that revealed class differences produced some change in the nature of the performance, so that the author's dramas, written in a short period of time, within ten or twelve years, have already shown several directions.

One of his most brilliant literary debuts, his first comedy, Our People - Numbered, portrays the essence of the merchant class as revealed in family and trade. Consequently, this is a comedy of the mores of a certain class in a certain era, a public comedy, examples of which are given here by Fonvizin, Kapnist, 8 Griboyedov, Gogol. G. Ostrovsky is closely related to the school of the latter; his comedy indicates the dark sides of the merchant's life: in the family - the arbitrary power of the father, from which the wife, children and servants suffer and which knows no other grounds than personal arbitrariness; in trade - misconduct, supplying the sole purpose of making money as soon as possible. But the denouement has a remarkable peculiarity: through it, the comedy turns into a real tragedy, for the family despot and malicious bankrupt reaps what he sowed; in front of the viewer, his punishment is committed, and in the future other punishments are being prepared - for the insensitive daughter from her future children, and for the rogue Podkhalyuzin from his rogue-servant, Tishka.

As if frightened by the dark color of his first play, the author stepped back, and - like Gogol, who painted several ideal faces of the bright side of Russian society in the 2nd volume of Dead Souls, - he also decided to create ideals that were supposed to reconcile the public with that class, in whose life there is so much comic; and the comic is so often resolved by a tragic ending. The desired reconciliation is found in the fundamental, spontaneous properties of a Russian person, mainly one who has not yet been subjected to the action of civilization. The fruit of such an opinion of the author was the plays "Do not sit in your sleigh", "Poverty is not a vice," "Do not live as you want," no matter what the idea behind them is judged. Bright, ideal personalities in them are opposed to such Russian people whose good principles inherent in Russian nature are distorted by civilization. The task of the plays is to give triumph to the first persons over the second, otherwise - to show the superiority of patriarchal life over the life of false education, in which a person has not replaced with anything essential the primitive naivete and natural simplicity that he has lost. This superiority can be expressed as follows: in a simple Russian person who has completely preserved his elemental principles, these principles will once prevail over external rudeness and ignorance, while a person, led along the path of a superficial civilization, involuntarily obeys it and loses sympathy for his fundamental principles.

When criticism, dissatisfied with this direction of Mr. Ostrovsky and suspecting him of Slavophil tendencies, took upon itself the defense of civilization, then the author decided to give justice to the educated class and present its good sides to oppose the bad sides of ignorance. There were two new plays: "Hangover in someone else's feast" and "A profitable place". 10 In the first of them, the ideals from the life of the merchant and the common people are transferred to the life of the enlightened class. Moral heroism is embodied in the person of the teacher and his daughter; on the contrary, the rich merchant turns out to be a tyrant, with all the wild antics of a person who is not illuminated by the light of knowledge. The task of the play is displayed in relief to the readers or spectators. Since the task suggested by the author almost always harms the artistic performance, the comedy "Hangover in Another's Feast" turned out to be unsuccessful in this respect.

In his new play "The Thunderstorm", Mr. Ostrovsky, in my opinion, returned to the point of initial departure. He did not leave his chosen specialty - the poetic representation of the merchant's life in its most essential manifestations; but he was not embarrassed by the more deliberate posing of the question, nor was he obliged by the desire to expose some dark sides, in which, according to Gogol, the only honest face remains - comic laughter, 11 nor the desire to seek ideals where they have not yet been worked out by historical development. Reality is exactly what it really is: in a mixture of moral and mental ugliness with the beauty of the soul and heart. And in this non-fictional reality, on the one hand, there is exclusive devotion to custom as a holy, immutable dogma, the deification of antiquity, understood only in the form of hatred for everything new, fresh, young; on the other hand, the desire to escape from the stuffy atmosphere of ordinary, ritual life and declare the legitimate action of a life boiling with excess of strength. Liberation is accomplished in different ways, depending on the difference in temperaments and concepts; sometimes it is gross licentiousness, a sharp self-abandonment of family and social ties (as we see in the face of Varvara), sometimes interruption of an even existence, with regret and remorse, with an internal struggle, standing blood and tears (which is what Katerina presents to us) , sometimes there is still an out-of-the-eye devotion to revelry and drunkenness with which the downtrodden (like the son of Kabanikha) takes away his soul. The difference in liberation also determines the difference in the outcome of the drama: in some cases, the clash of hostile forces begins, continues, and ends with laughter; in others, it is a constant thunderstorm, secret or overt. In the play by Mr. Ostrovsky, which bears the name "The Thunderstorms," the action and the catastrophe are tragic, although many passages provoke laughter. Ritual life was brought out by him with severe consequences: it has the meaning of a kind of Greek fate, crushing all insubordination. A faithful keeper of customs, constantly protesting against the movement of life, Kabanikha does not utter a word of reconciliation even over the corpse of his son's wife. And meanwhile, as she inexorably breaks everything that goes against her concepts. Dikoy, due to his willfulness, which serves as an instrument for him, sometimes transgresses customs, although in others he does not allow this, - Dikoy seizes the life of his nephew (Boris), sending him to Kyakhta, and exhausts his restless activity in the incessant battle to the counter and transverse ... The world depicted by Mr. Ostrovsky is a difficult world, and the impression produced by his drama is completely consistent with the nature of what is happening in it. In this moral heaviness, from which the mind and feeling are deplorable, I believe, is the clearest proof of the play's superiority.

In conclusion, I note that the drama "The Thunderstorm" belongs in its direction and in its artistic merit to the dramatic school, which, in my opinion, is the only legal school at the present time, as well as the only legal and only narrative school. I call this school by two names: historical, because it relates to all phenomena in the same way as history relates to the phenomena of a past life, and physiological, because it depicts the functions of moral and spiritual life, as physiology considers the actions of organs. Such a school does not put into life what is not in it, does not inhabit it with unprecedented ideals of good or evil, and, of course, does not look into the future on the grounds that the poet and the prophet are one and the same. The business of poetry is to contemplate what really exists, in this really existing to notice the laws of phenomena, their essence, their idea, and the captured idea to express in its own way, concretely, that is, by encapsulating it in the image created by creativity.

The critical story of The Thunderstorm begins even before its appearance. To argue about the "ray of light in the dark kingdom", it was necessary to open the "Dark kingdom". An article under this title appeared in the July and September issues of Sovremennik for 1859. It was signed by the usual pseudonym of N. A. Dobrolyubov - N. - bov.

The motive for this work was extremely significant. In 1859 Ostrovsky summed up an intermediate result of his literary activity: his two-volume collected works appeared. “We consider it best to apply real criticism to Ostrovsky's works, which consists in reviewing what his works give us,” Dobrolyubov formulates his main theoretical principle. - Real criticism treats the artist's work in the same way as it does to the phenomena of real life: it studies them, trying to determine their own norm, to collect their essential, characteristic features, but not at all fussing over why this oats is not rye, and coal is not a diamond ... ”.

What kind of norm did Dobrolyubov see in Ostrovsky's world? “Public activities are little touched upon in Ostrovsky’s comedies, but Ostrovsky’s extremely full and vividly exposed two kinds of relations to which a person can still apply his soul in our country - family relations and property relations. It is not surprising, therefore, that the plots and the very titles of his plays revolve around the family, the groom, the bride, wealth and poverty.

"The Dark Kingdom" is a world of senseless tyranny and suffering of "our younger brothers", "a world of hidden, quietly sighing sorrow", a world where "outward submission and dull, concentrated grief, reaching the level of complete idiotism and deplorable depersonalization" are combined with "slavish by cunning, the most vile deceit, the most shameless treachery. " Dobrolyubov examines in detail the “anatomy” of this world, its attitude to education and love, his moral convictions such as “than stealing to others, it’s better for me to steal”, “Father's will”, “so that she doesn’t over me, but I swagger as much as your heart desires ", etc.

- "But there is no way out of this darkness?" - the question is asked at the end of the article on behalf of an imaginary reader. “It's sad, it's true; but what to do? We must confess: we did not find a way out of the "dark kingdom" in the works of Ostrovsky, - the critic answers. - Whether to blame the artist for this? Isn't it better to look around you and not turn your demands to life itself, so languidly and monotonously weaving around us ... The way out must be sought in life itself: literature only reproduces life and never gives what is not in reality. " Dobrolyubov's ideas had a great resonance. Dobrolyubov's "Dark Kingdom" was read with enthusiasm, with which perhaps not a single journal article was read then, the great role of Dobrolyubov's article in establishing Ostrovsky's reputation was recognized by his contemporaries. "If you collect everything that was written about me before Dobrolyubov's articles appeared, then at least drop your pen." A rare, very rare in literary history case of absolute mutual understanding between a writer and a critic. Soon each of them will make a response "remark" in the dialogue. Ostrovsky - with a new drama, Dobrolyubov - with an article about it, a kind of continuation of "The Dark Kingdom". In July 1859, just at the time when the publishing of The Dark Kingdom begins in Sovremennik, Ostrovsky begins The Thunderstorm.

Organic criticism. AA Grigoriev's article "After Ostrovsky's" The Thunderstorm "continued the critic's reflections on one of the most beloved and important writers in Russian literature. Grigoriev considered himself, and in many respects justifiably, one of the "discoverers" of Ostrovsky. “Ostrovsky alone, in the present literary epoch, has his own strong, new and at the same time ideal world outlook. "Ostrovsky's new word was neither more nor less like a nationality, in the sense of the word: nationality, national."

In accordance with his concept, Grigoriev highlights in The Thunderstorm the “poetry of the life of the people,” which is most clearly embodied at the end of the third act (the meeting of Boris and Katerina). “You haven’t been to the show yet,” he turns to Turgenev, “but you know this magnificent moment in its poetry - this hitherto unprecedented night of a date in a ravine, all breathing with the proximity of the Volga, all fragrant with the smell of grasses, its wide meadows, all sounding free songs, "funny", secret speeches, all full of charm of passion, cheerful and riotous and no less charm of passion, deep and tragically fatal. After all, it was created as if not an artist, but a whole people created here! "

A similar circle of thoughts, with the same, as in Grigoriev's, high appreciation of the poetic merits of "The Storm" is developed in a large article by M. M. Dostoevsky (brother of F. M. Dostoevsky). The author, however, without naming Grigoriev by name, refers to him at the very beginning.

M. Dostoevsky examines Ostrovsky's previous work in the light of the disputes between “Westernizers” and “Slavophiles” and tries to find a different, third position: “In our opinion, Mr. Ostrovsky in his works is not a Slavophile or a Westerner, but simply an artist, a deep connoisseur of Russian life and the Russian heart ”. In an obvious polemic with Dobrolyubov's "The Dark Kingdom" ("This thought, or if you like it better, the idea of domestic despotism and a dozen other no less humane ideas, perhaps, are hidden in Mr. Ostrovsky's play. But, probably, not they asked him, starting his drama ") M. Dostoevsky sees the central conflict of" The Thunderstorm "not in the collision of Katerina with the inhabitants and customs of the city of Kalinov, but in the internal contradictions of her nature and character:" Katerina alone is dying, but she would have died without despotism. This is a victim of their own purity and their beliefs. " Later in the article, this idea acquires a generalized philosophical character: “The chosen natures have their own fate. Only he is not outside of them: they carry him in their own hearts. "

Is Ostrovsky's world a "dark kingdom" or a kingdom of "poetry of folk life"? "A word for solving his activity": tyranny or nationality?

A year later, N.A. was involved in the dispute about the "Thunderstorm". Dobrolyubov.

“We consider the best way of criticism to present the case itself so that the reader himself, on the basis of the facts presented, can draw his own conclusion ... And we have always been of the opinion that only actual, real criticism can have any meaning for the reader. If there is something in the work, then show us what is in it; it is much better than indulging in thoughts about what is not in it and what should be in it. "

Abstracts from N. A. Dobrolyubov's article "A ray of light in the dark kingdom"

“We want to say that in the foreground is always the general situation of life. He does not punish either the villain or the victim. You see that their position dominates them, and you only blame them for not showing enough energy to get out of this position. And that is why we in no way dare to consider as unnecessary and superfluous those persons of Ostrovsky's plays who do not participate directly in the intrigue. From our point of view, these faces are just as necessary for the play as the main ones: they show us the environment in which the action takes place, draw the position that determines the meaning of the activities of the main characters in the play. "

The Thunderstorm is undoubtedly Ostrovsky's most decisive work; the mutual relations of petty tyranny and speechlessness have been brought to the most tragic consequences in her; and for all that, most of those who have read and seen this play agree that it gives a less grievous and sad impression than other plays by Ostrovsky ... There is something refreshing and encouraging about The Thunderstorm. This "something" is, in our opinion, the background of the play, indicated by us and revealing the precariousness and imminent end of tyranny. Then the very character of Katerina, drawn against this background, also blows on us with a new life, which opens up to us in her very death. The fact is that the character of Katerina, as it is performed in The Storm, is a step forward not only in Ostrovsky's dramatic activities, but also in all of our literature ... Russian life has finally reached the point that virtuous and respectable, but weak and impersonal creatures do not satisfy public consciousness and are recognized as worthless. An urgent need was felt for people, albeit less beautiful, but more active and energetic. "

"Take a good look: you see that Katerina was brought up in concepts that are the same as the concepts of the environment in which she lives and cannot renounce them, without having any theoretical education." This protest is all the more valuable: “It presents a terrible challenge to the tyrannical force, he tells it that it is no longer possible to go further, it is impossible to continue living with violent deadening principles. In Katerina we see a protest against Kabanov's notions of morality, a protest carried through to the end, proclaimed both under domestic torture and over the abyss into which the poor woman threw herself ... this rotten life by all means! "

Dobrolyubov analyzes the replicas of Feklusha, Glasha, Dikiy, Kudryash, Kuligin, etc. The author analyzes the inner state of the heroes of the "dark kingdom". “In addition to them, without asking them, another life has grown, with different principles, and although it is not yet clearly visible, it is already sending bad visions to the dark arbitrariness of tyrants. And Kabanova is very seriously upset by the future of the old order, with which she has outlived a century. She foresees their end, tries to maintain their significance, but already feels that there is no previous respect for them and that they will be abandoned at the first opportunity. "

“We are glad to see Katerina's deliverance - even through death, if it is impossible otherwise. Living in a "dark kingdom" is worse than death. Tikhon, throwing himself at his wife's corpse, pulled out of the water, shouts in self-forgetfulness: “It's good for you, Katya! And why am I left to live in the world and suffer! “With this exclamation the play ends, and it seems to us that nothing could be thought of stronger and more truthful than such an ending. Tikhon's words make the viewer think not about a love affair, but about this whole life, where the living envy the dead. "

The meaning of Dobrolyubov's article is not simply in a thorough and deep analysis of the conflict and the heroes of Ostrovsky's drama. As we have seen, other critics approached a similar understanding even earlier. Dobrolyubov, through the "Groza", tries to see and understand the essential tendencies of Russian life (the article is being written several months before the peasant reform).

"A ray of light ...", like "The Dark Kingdom", also ends with a question highlighted by Dobrolyubov in persistent italics: "... is it really the Russian living nature expressed in Katerina, is it really the Russian environment - in everything around it, is it really the need for the emerging movement of Russian life affected in the sense of the play, how is it understood by us? " The best of critical works have enormous aftereffects. In them, the text is read with such depth and time is expressed with such force that, like the works of art themselves, they become monuments of the era, already inseparable from it. Dobrolyubov's "dilogy" (two linked works) about Ostrovsk is one of the highest achievements of Russian criticism of the 19th century. It really sets the trend in the interpretation of the "Thunderstorm", which still exists today.

But next to the Dobrolyubovskaya line, another, "Grigorievskaya" line took shape. In one case, The Thunderstorm was read as a harsh social drama, in the other - as a lofty poetic tragedy.

More than four years have passed. "The Thunderstorm" was staged less and less. In 1864 it was held three times at the Maly Theater and six at the Alexandrinsky Theater, in 1865 three more times in Moscow and never once in St. Petersburg. And suddenly DI Pisarev. "Motives of the Russian Drama"

There are also two polemical objects in Motives of the Russian Drama: Katerina and Dobrolyubov. Pisarev constructs his analysis of The Storm as a consistent refutation of Dobrolyubov's view. Pisarev fully agrees with the first part of Dobrolyubov's dilogy about Ostrovsky: “Based on the dramatic works of Ostrovsky, Dobrolyubov showed us in the Russian family that“ dark kingdom ”in which mental abilities wither and the fresh forces of our young generations are depleted ... "And while patriotic daydreaming will turn a blind eye to them, until then we will constantly have to remind the reading society of Dobrolyubov's true and lively ideas about our family life." But he resolutely refuses to consider the heroine of The Storm as a “ray of light”: “This article was a mistake on the part of Dobrolyubov; he was carried away by sympathy for Katerina's character and took her personality for a bright phenomenon. "

Like Dobrolyubov, Pisarev proceeds from the principles of "real criticism", without questioning either the aesthetic consistency of the drama or the typical character of the heroine: "Reading The Thunderstorm or watching it on stage, you will never doubt that Katerina should have to act in reality exactly as she does in the drama. " But the assessment of her actions, her relationship with the world is fundamentally different from Dobrolyubov's. “The whole life of Katerina,” according to Pisarev, “consists of constant internal contradictions; she rushes from one extreme to another every minute; today she regrets what she did yesterday, and yet she herself does not know what she will do tomorrow; at every step she confuses her own life and the lives of other people; finally, having confused everything that was at her fingertips, she cuts the tight knots with the most stupid means, suicide, and even such a suicide that is completely unexpected for her. "

Pisarev speaks of "a lot of nonsense" committed by "the Russian Ophelia and quite clearly opposes to her" the lonely personality of the Russian progressist "," a whole type who has already found expression in literature and who is called either Bazarov or Lopukhov. " (Heroes of the works of I.S.Turgenev and N.G. Chernyshevsky, commoners, inclined to revolutionary ideas, supporters of the overthrow of the existing system).

Dobrolyubov, on the eve of the peasant reform, optimistically pinned his hopes on the strong character of Katerina. Four years later, Pisarev, already on this side of the historical border, sees: the revolution has failed; the hopes that the people would decide their own destiny were not justified. We need a different way, we need to look for a way out of the historical impasse. “Our social or national life does not need at all strong characters, which she has enough for her eyes, but only and exclusively in consciousness alone ... We need exclusively people of knowledge, that is, knowledge must be assimilated by those iron characters with which our national Dobrolyubov's life, evaluating Katerina from only one side, concentrated all his attention as a critic only on the spontaneously rebellious side of her nature; Pisarev was struck exclusively by the darkness of Katerina, the antediluvianness of her social consciousness, her peculiar social "oblomovism", political bad manners. "

In The Thunderstorm, Ostrovsky shows the life of a Russian merchant family and the position of a woman in it. The character of Katerina was formed in a simple merchant family, where love reigned and her daughter was given complete freedom. She acquired and retained all the beautiful features of the Russian character. This is a pure, open soul who cannot lie. “I don’t know how to deceive; I can’t hide anything, ”she says to Varvara. In religion, Katerina found the highest truth and beauty. Her striving for the beautiful, the good was expressed in prayers. Coming out [...]
The dramatic events of the play by A.N. Ostrovsky's "Thunderstorm" is set in the city of Kalinov. This town is located on the picturesque bank of the Volga, from the high steep of which the immense Russian expanses and boundless distances open to the eyes. “The view is extraordinary! Beauty! The soul rejoices, ”the local self-taught mechanic Kuligin admires. Pictures of endless distances, echoed in a lyric song. Among the flat valley ", which he hums, are of great importance for conveying the feeling of the immense possibilities of the Russian [...]
Katerina Varvara Personality Sincere, sociable, kind, honest, pious, but superstitious. Delicate, soft, at the same time, determined. Rough, cheerful, but taciturn: "... I don't like to talk a lot." Determined, can fight back. Temperament Passionate, freedom-loving, bold, impetuous and unpredictable. She says about herself, "I was born so hot!". Freedom-loving, intelligent, calculating, courageous and rebellious, she is not afraid of either parental or heavenly punishment. Education, [...]
"The Thunderstorm" was published in 1859 (on the eve of the revolutionary situation in Russia, in the "pre-storm" era). Its historicism lies in the conflict itself, the irreconcilable contradictions reflected in the play. She meets the spirit of the times. "Thunderstorm" is the idyll of the "dark kingdom". Petty tyranny and speechlessness are brought to the limit in her. A real heroine from the folk environment appears in the play, and it is the description of her character that is given the main attention, and the world of the city of Kalinov and the conflict itself are described in a more generalized way. "Their life […]
A strong and deep impression was made by Alexander Ostrovsky's "Thunderstorm" on his contemporaries. Many critics were inspired by this work. However, even in our time it has not ceased to be interesting and topical. Raised into the category of classical drama, it still awakens interest. The arbitrariness of the "older" generation lasts for many years, but some event must take place that could break the patriarchal tyranny. Such an event turns out to be the protest and death of Katerina, which awakened others as well [...]
The play by Alexander Nikolaevich Ostrovsky "The Thunderstorm" is historical for us, as it shows the life of the bourgeoisie. The Thunderstorm was written in 1859. It is the only work of the cycle "Nights on the Volga" conceived but not realized by the writer. The main theme of the work is a description of the conflict that arose between two generations. The Kabanikha family is typical. The merchants cling to their old morals, not wanting to understand the younger generation. And since the young do not want to follow traditions, they are suppressed. I'm sure, […]
Whole, honest, sincere, she is not capable of lies and falsehood, therefore, in a cruel world where wild and wild boars reign, her life is so tragic. Katerina's protest against the despotism of Kabanikha is a struggle of the light, pure, human against the darkness, lies and cruelty of the “dark kingdom”. No wonder Ostrovsky, who paid great attention to the selection of the names and surnames of the characters, gave such a name to the heroine of "Storms": translated from Greek "Ekaterina" means "eternally pure." Katerina is a poetic nature. IN […]
Let's start with Katerina. In the play "The Thunderstorm" this lady is the main character. What are the problems of this work? Problems are the main question that the author asks in his creation. So the question here is who will win? The dark kingdom, which is represented by the bureaucrats of the county town, or the light beginning, which is represented by our heroine. Katerina is pure in soul, she has a gentle, sensitive, loving heart. The heroine herself is deeply hostile to this dark swamp, but does not fully realize it. Katerina was born [...]
In "The Thunderstorm" Ostrovsky, operating with an insignificant number of characters, was able to reveal several problems at once. First, it is, of course, a social conflict, a clash of "fathers" and "children", their points of view (and if we resort to generalization, then two historical eras). The older generation, actively expressing their opinion, belong to Kabanova and Dikoy, to the younger - Katerina, Tikhon, Varvara, Kudryash and Boris. Kabanova is sure that order in the house, control over everything that happens in it is the guarantee of a correct life. Correct [...]
A conflict is a clash of two or more parties that do not coincide in views, attitudes. There are several conflicts in Ostrovsky's play "The Thunderstorm", but how to decide which one is the main one? In the era of sociologism in literary criticism, it was believed that social conflict was the most important in the play. Of course, if you see in the image of Katerina a reflection of the spontaneous protest of the masses against the shackling conditions of the “dark kingdom” and perceive the death of Katerina as a result of her collision with her mother-in-law, you should [...]
Katerina is the main character in Ostrovsky's drama The Thunderstorm, Tikhon's wife, Kabanikha's daughter-in-law. The main idea of the work is the conflict of this girl with the "dark kingdom", the kingdom of tyrants, despots and ignoramuses. You can find out why this conflict arose and why the end of the drama is so tragic by understanding Katerina's ideas about life. The author showed the origins of the character of the heroine. From the words of Katerina, we learn about her childhood and adolescence. Here is drawn an ideal version of patriarchal relations and the patriarchal world in general: “I lived, not about [...]
In general, the history of creation and the idea of the play "The Thunderstorm" are very interesting. For some time, there was an assumption that this work was based on real events that occurred in the Russian city of Kostroma in 1859. “In the early morning of November 10, 1859, the Kostroma petty bourgeoisie Alexandra Pavlovna Klykova disappeared from her home and either threw herself into the Volga, or was strangled and thrown there. The investigation revealed a dull drama played out in an unsociable family living with narrow commercial interests: [...]
In the drama "The Thunderstorm" Ostrovsky created a very complex psychologically image - the image of Katerina Kabanova. This young woman disposes of the viewer with her huge, pure soul, childish sincerity and kindness. But she lives in the musty atmosphere of the "dark kingdom" of merchant customs. Ostrovsky managed to create a light and poetic image of a Russian woman from the people. The main plot line of the play is the tragic conflict between the living, feeling soul of Katerina and the dead way of life of the “dark kingdom”. Honest and [...]
Alexander Nikolaevich Ostrovsky was endowed with a great talent as a playwright. He is deservedly considered the founder of the Russian national theater. His plays, varied in themes, glorified Russian literature. Ostrovsky's work was democratic in nature. He created plays in which hatred of the autocratic serf regime was manifested. The writer called for the protection of the oppressed and humiliated citizens of Russia, he longed for social change. The great merit of Ostrovsky is that he discovered the enlightened [...]
Alexander Nikolaevich Ostrovsky was called "Columbus of Zamoskvorechye", a district of Moscow where people from the merchant class lived. He showed what a tense, dramatic life goes on behind high fences, what Shakespearean passions boil at times in the souls of representatives of the so-called "common class" - merchants, shopkeepers, small employees. The patriarchal laws of the world receding into the past seem unshakable, but a warm heart lives by its own laws - the laws of love and goodness. Heroes of the play "Poverty is not a vice" [...]
The love story of the clerk Mitya and Lyuba Tortsova unfolds against the backdrop of the life of a merchant's house. Ostrovsky once again delighted his fans with a wonderful knowledge of the world and surprisingly bright language. Unlike the early plays, this comedy contains not only the soulless Korshunov manufacturer and the proud of his wealth and strength Gordey Tortsov. They are opposed by simple and sincere people, who are dear to the hearts of the native people - the kind and loving Mitya and the squandered drunkard Lyubim Tortsov, who remained, despite his fall, [...]
The focus of the writers of the 19th century is a man with a rich spiritual life, a changeable inner world. The new hero reflects the state of the personality in the era of social transformations. The authors also do not ignore the complex conditionality of the development of the human psyche by the external material situation. The main feature of the depiction of the world of heroes of Russian literature is psychologism. , that is, the ability to show the change in the hero's soul. In the center of different works we see "superfluous [...]
The drama takes place in the Volga town of Bryakhimov. And in it, as elsewhere, cruel rules reign. The society here is the same as in other cities. The main character of the play, Larisa Ogudalova, is a dowry. The Ogudalov family is not rich, but thanks to the perseverance of Kharita Ignatievna, it leads the acquaintance with the mighty of this world. Mother inspires Larissa that, although she does not have a dowry, she should marry a rich groom. And Larisa for the time being accepts these rules of the game, naively hoping that love and wealth [...]
A special hero in Ostrovsky's world, adjoining the type of a poor official with a sense of his own dignity, is Yuliy Kapitonovich Karandyshev. At the same time, pride in him is hypertrophied so much that it becomes a substitute for other feelings. Larisa for him is not just a beloved girl, she is also a "prize" that gives him the opportunity to triumph over Paratov, a chic and rich rival. At the same time, Karandyshev feels like a benefactor who marries a homeless woman, partly compromised by relations [...]
Reading some literary works, you not only follow the plot with interest, but also completely immerse yourself in the described era, dissolve in the narration. This is exactly the story of V. Astafiev "A horse with a pink mane". In many ways, this effect is achieved due to the fact that the author was able to convey a kind of colorful speech of the characters. The story takes place in a remote Siberian village, so there are many outdated and colloquial words in the characters' speech. The speech of Katerina Petrovna, grandmother, is especially rich in them. Being [...]

Study Note for Students

Isaac Levitan. Evening. Golden Plyos (1889)

The incredible controversy around the play by A. Ostrovsky "The Thunderstorm" began during the life of the playwright. These are five articles:

N. Dobrolyubov "A Ray of Light in the Dark Kingdom" (1860);
D. Pisarev "Motives of the Russian Drama" (1864);
M. Antonovich "Misses" (1864);
A. Grigoriev “After Ostrovsky's“ Thunderstorm ”. Letters to IS Turgenev "(1860);
M. Dostoevsky “The Thunderstorm”. A drama in five acts by A. N. Ostrovsky ”(1860).

Let's look at the points of view expressed by critics.

N. A. Dobrolyubov

The Thunderstorm is undoubtedly Ostrovsky's most decisive work; the mutual relations of tyranny and speechlessness have been brought to the most tragic consequences in her; and for all that, most of those who have read and seen this play agree that it gives a less grievous and sad impression than other plays by Ostrovsky (not to mention, of course, his sketches of a purely comic nature). There is even something refreshing and encouraging about The Thunderstorm. This "something" is, in our opinion, the background of the play, indicated by us and revealing the instability and imminent end of tyranny. Then the very character of Katerina, drawn against this background, also blows on us with a new life, which opens up to us in her very death.

The fact is that the character of Katerina, as it is performed in The Storm, is a step forward not only in Ostrovsky's dramatic activities, but also in all of our literature. It corresponds to the new phase of our people's life, it has long demanded its implementation in literature, our best writers have been circling around it; but they could only understand its necessity and could not comprehend and feel its essence; Ostrovsky managed to do this.<...>

First of all, you are struck by the extraordinary originality of this character. There is nothing external, alien in him, but everything comes out somehow from within him; every impression is processed in him and then organically fuses with him. We see this, for example, in Katerina's simple-minded story about her childhood and about life in her mother's house. It turns out that her upbringing and young life did not give her anything: her mother's house was the same as that of the Kabanovs - they went to church, sewed gold on velvet, listened to the stories of pilgrims, dined, walked in the garden, again talked with the pilgrims and We prayed ourselves ... After listening to Katerina's story, Varvara, her husband's sister, remarks with surprise: "Why, we have the same thing." But the difference is determined by Katerina very quickly in five words: "Yes, everything here seems to be out of bondage!" And further conversation shows that in all this appearance, which is so commonplace everywhere in our country, Katerina knew how to find her own special meaning, to apply it to her needs and aspirations, until the heavy hand of Kabanikha lay on her. Katerina does not at all belong to violent characters, never happy, loving to destroy at all costs. On the contrary, this character is predominantly creative, loving, ideal. That is why she tries to comprehend and refine everything in her imagination; the mood in which, according to the poet, -

The whole world is a noble dream
Before him cleansed and washed, -

this mood to the last extreme does not leave Katerina.<...>

In the position of Katerina, we see that, on the contrary, all the "ideas" instilled in her since childhood, all the principles of the environment - revolt vs her natural tendencies and actions. The terrible struggle, to which the young woman is condemned, takes place in every word, in every movement of the drama, and this is where the whole importance of the introductory persons for whom Ostrovsky is so reproached appears. Take a good look: you see that Katerina was brought up in concepts that are the same as the concepts of the environment in which she lives, and she cannot renounce them without having any theoretical education. The stories of the wanderers and the suggestions of her household, although she reworked her in her own way, could not help but leave an ugly mark in her soul: indeed, we see in the play that Katerina, having lost her rainbow dreams and ideal, lofty aspirations, kept one thing from her upbringing. strong feeling - fear some dark forces, something unknown, which she could neither explain to herself well, nor reject. She fears for every thought, for the simplest feeling she expects herself to be punished; it seems to her that the storm will kill her, because she is a sinner; the picture of fiery hell on the church wall seems to her already a harbinger of her eternal torment ... And everything around her supports and develops this fear in her: The Feklushi go to Kabanikha to talk about the last times; Dikoy insists that a thunderstorm is sent to us as a punishment, so that we feel; a lady who has come, instilling fear in everyone in the city, is shown several times in order to shout over Katerina in an ominous voice: "Everything will burn in the fire in the inextinguishable."<...>

In Katerina's monologues, it is clear that even now she has nothing formulated; she is guided to the end by her nature, and not by given decisions, because for decisions she would have to have logical, solid foundations, and yet all the principles that were given to her for theoretical reasoning are decisively opposed to her natural inclinations. That is why she not only does not take heroic poses and does not utter sayings proving the firmness of character, but even on the contrary - she appears in the form of a weak woman who does not know how to resist her instincts, and tries justify the heroism that manifests itself in her actions. She decided to die, but she is frightened by the thought that this is a sin, and she seems to be trying to prove to us and to herself that she can be forgiven, since it is very hard for her. She would like to enjoy life and love; but she knows that this is a crime, and therefore she says to justify her: "Well, it doesn't matter, I have ruined my soul!" She does not complain about anyone, she does not blame anyone, and nothing of the kind comes to her mind; on the contrary, she is to blame for everyone, she even asks Boris whether he is angry with her, whether he curses ... There is neither malice, nor contempt in her, nothing that usually adorns disappointed heroes who leave the world on their own accord. But she cannot live any longer, cannot, and that is all; from the fullness of her heart she says: “I am already worn out ... How long will I still suffer? Why should I live now - well, what for? I don't need anything, nothing is sweet to me, and the light of God is not sweet! - and death does not come. You call her, but she doesn't come. Whatever I see, whatever I hear, only here (pointing to the heart) painfully". At the thought of the grave it becomes easier for her - calmness seems to be poured into her soul. “So quiet, so good ... And I don’t even want to think about life ... To live again? .. No, no, don’t ... not good. And people are disgusting to me, and the house is disgusting to me, and the walls are disgusting! I won't go there! No, no, I will not go ... You come to them - they go, they say, "but what do I need it for? .." And the thought of the bitterness of life, which one will have to endure, torments Katerina so much that it plunges her into some kind of then a semi-hot state. At the last moment, all the horrors of the house are especially vividly flashed in her imagination. She cries out: "But they will catch me and bring me home by force! .. Hurry, hurry ..." And the matter is over: she will no longer be a victim of a soulless mother-in-law, she will no longer languish locked up with her spineless and disgusting husband. She is released! ..

It is sad, bitter such a liberation; but what to do when there is no other way out. It's good that the poor woman found the determination to even take this terrible way out. This is the strength of her character, which is why the "Thunderstorm" makes a refreshing impression on us, as we said above.<...>

D. A. Pisarev

Ostrovsky's drama The Thunderstorm caused a critical article from Dobrolyubov under the title A Ray of Light in the Dark Kingdom. This article was a mistake on the part of Dobrolyubov; he was carried away by sympathy for Katerina's character and took her personality for a bright phenomenon. A detailed analysis of this character will show our readers that Dobrolyubov's view in this case is incorrect and that not a single bright phenomenon can neither arise nor develop in the "dark kingdom" of the patriarchal Russian family, brought to the stage in Ostrovsky's drama.<...>

Dobrolyubov would ask himself: how could this bright image have formed? To answer this question for himself, he would have traced Katerina's life from childhood, especially since Ostrovsky gives some materials on this; he would have seen that education and life could not give Katerina either a strong character or a developed mind; then he would once again look at those facts in which one attractive side caught his eye, and then the whole personality of Katerina would appear to him in a completely different light.<...>

Katerina's whole life consists of constant internal contradictions; she rushes from one extreme to another every minute; today she regrets what she did yesterday, and yet she herself does not know what she will do tomorrow; at every step she confuses her own life and the lives of other people; finally, confusing everything that was at her fingertips, she cuts the tight knots with the most stupid means, suicide, and even such a suicide that is completely unexpected for herself.<...>

M. A. Antonovich

G. Pisarev decided to correct Dobrolyubov, as Mr. Zaitsev Sechenov, and to expose his mistakes, to which he counts one of the best and most profound articles in his "A Ray of Light in the Dark Kingdom", written about the "Thunderstorm" by Mr. Ostrovsky. Mr. Pisarev is striving to flood his phrases and common passages with muddy water at this instructive, deeply felt and thoughtful article.<...>

G. Pisarev fancied that Dobrolyubov imagined Katerina as a woman with a developed mind and a developed character, who supposedly decided to protest only as a result of the education and development of the mind, therefore, as if she was called a "ray of light." Having imposed his own fantasy on Dobrolyubov in this way, Mr. Pisarev began to refute it as if it belonged to Dobrolyubov. How is it possible, Mr. Pisarev reasoned to himself, to call Katerina a bright ray when she is a simple, undeveloped woman; how could she protest against tyranny, when her upbringing did not develop her mind, when she did not know the natural sciences at all, which, according to the great historian Buckle, are necessary for progress, did not have such realistic ideas as, for example, Mr. Pisarev himself , was even infected with prejudice, was afraid of thunder and the picture of hellfire painted on the walls of the gallery. This means, Mr. Pisarev concluded, that Dobrolyubov is mistaken and is a champion of art for art when he calls Katerina a Protestant and a ray of light. Amazing proof!

Is that how you, Mr. Pisarev, are attentive to Dobrolyubov, and is this how you understand what you want to refute? Where did you find that, as if Dobrolyubov sees Katerina as a woman with a developed mind, as if her protest follows from some definite concepts and conscious theoretical principles, for the understanding of which the development of the mind is really required? We have already seen above that, in Dobrolyubov's view, Katerina's protest was of such a nature that it did not require any development of the mind, or knowledge of natural sciences and Buckle, or an understanding of electricity, or freedom from prejudice, or reading the articles of Mr. Pisarev; it was an immediate protest, so to speak, an instinctive protest, a protest of an integral normal nature in its primitive form, as it emerged by itself without any means of artificial education.<...>

Thus, all this fanfare of Mr. Pisarev is, in essence, very pitiful. It turns out that he did not understand Dobrolyubov, reinterpreted his thought and, on the basis of his misunderstanding, accused him of unprecedented mistakes and non-existent contradictions ...

A. A. Grigoriev

The impression strong, deep and mainly positively general was produced not by the second act of the drama, which, although with some difficulty, can still be drawn to the punishing and accusatory kind of literature, but by the end of the third, in which (at the end) there is absolutely nothing There is nothing else but the poetry of folk life - boldly, widely and freely captured by the artist in one of its most essential moments, which do not allow not only exposure, but even criticism and analysis: this is how this moment is captured and conveyed poetically, directly. You have not been to the show yet, but you know this moment, magnificent in its bold poetry - this hitherto unprecedented night of a date in a ravine, all breathing closeness of the Volga, all fragrant with the smell of grasses of its wide meadows, all sounding free songs, "funny", secret speeches , all full of the charm of a merry and riotous passion and no less charm of a deep and tragically fatal passion. After all, it was created as if it was not an artist, but a whole people who created here! And this was precisely what was most strongly felt in the work by the masses, and moreover by the masses in St. Petersburg, if only in Moscow - a complex, heterogeneous mass - felt with all the inevitable (although much less contrary to usual) falsehood, with all the frightening sharpness of the Alexandrian execution ...

M. M. Dostoevsky

Katerina alone is dying, but she would have died without despotism. it a victim of your own purity and your beliefs. <...>Katerina's life is broken and without suicide. Whether she will live, whether she will be tonsured as a nun, whether she will lay hands on herself - the result is one in relation to her state of mind, but completely different in relation to the impression. G. Ostrovsky wanted her to perform this last act of her life with full consciousness and reach him through meditation. The idea is beautiful, even more reinforcing the colors, so poetically generously spent on this character. But, many will say and say already, does not such a suicide contradict her religious beliefs? Of course it contradicts, completely contradicts, but this trait is essential in the character of Katerina. The fact is that, due to her highly lively temperament, she cannot get along in the narrow sphere of her convictions. She fell in love, fully conscious of the whole sin of her love, and yet she nevertheless fell in love, whatever happens later; Then she repent of seeing Boris, but she herself ran to say goodbye to him. In exactly the same way, she decides to commit suicide, because she does not have enough strength to endure despair. She is a woman of high poetic impulses, but at the same time she is very weak. This intransigence of beliefs and frequent betrayal of them constitute the whole tragedy of the character we are examining.