The title of the work says that before us: a history of additional classes in French; b a story about the lessons of morality and kindness; into the story of a young hero about his favorite French lessons. Research work "The language of heroes about

I hope no one else has any doubts about how important his goal is for the hero (some of the heroes are ready to kill for their own).

Now let's talk about character. As I said before, cinema is a movement. The hero is the one who moves, the goal is what makes him move. And character is what sets the speed and trajectory of movement.

In the last session, I asked you to try to name a character whose character has changed over the course of the film.

Anakin Skywalker, Kisa Vorobyaninov, Raskolnikov, Andrea from The Devil Wears Prada, Tyler Durden, Plushkin, Monte Cristo, D'Artagnan and many, many others were named.

Let's take Raskolnikov as an example. Indeed, at the beginning of the book (film, series, story) he is a poor student who suffers terribly from the thought - whether he is a trembling creature or has a right. In the finale, he is a convict who is convinced that yes, he is a trembling creature and repents of his delusions in the arms of Sonya Marmeladova. To put it bluntly, there are two differences. But has his character changed?

In general, what is character?

Here is the definition from Wikipedia:

Character (Greek charakter - a distinctive feature) - the structure of persistent, relatively constant mental properties that determine the characteristics of the relationship and behavior of the individual.

I ask you to pay attention to the words of persistent, relatively constant. What are these properties? Let's try to define them without digging too deep into psychology:

1) Energy level (strong - weak)

2) Temperament (speed of reactions, excitability)

3) Introvert-extrovert (behavior in society)

4) Habits (stereotypes of behavior)

The hero already has all these properties as soon as he is born (I mean the light of a movie projector) and all of them remain with him when he leaves for the ZTM.

Raskolnikov was weak. Got stronger? No. I was melancholic. Became sanguine? No. Was an introvert. Became an extrovert? No. Gained or lost any habits? No. Which one came, which one left.

Character is the main thing that distinguishes one hero from another. The viewer recognizes and remembers the hero by his character, and not by his appearance.

If you know the character of your hero, it will be easy for you to build a plot - you just need to erect obstacles between the hero and his goal and see how he, in accordance with the characteristics of his character, will overcome them.

If the character does something that is not in his nature, the viewer will feel that he is being deceived. Or a hero, or an author. If the hero deceives, it is the sacred duty of the author to expose him. Otherwise, the viewer will no longer believe the author. And you need to expose quickly, clearly, rudely and visibly (but not stupidly).

In general, cinema is a crude art. Much more crude than prose, which allows you to devote dozens of pages, for example, to describing the thoughts of the hero. In the depiction of heroes, the rudeness of cinema is manifested as nowhere else.

Why do fans often protest against film adaptations, even successful ones? Because the cinema necessarily simplifies and coarsens the characters, sometimes making each of them the bearer of only one, the most striking feature. And some heroes are thrown out altogether, like Tom Bombadil from The Lord of the Ring.

Sometimes this simplification kills the movie, as in the case of Johnny Mnemonic, when a great novel turned into a mediocre action movie.

More often, on the contrary, simplification makes it possible to create cinema, such as, for example, Pudovkin's Mother.

And the history of the creation of Dr. House? Dr. Lisa Sanders wrote a New York Times column for many years describing diagnosing a patient like investigating a crime. The columns were published as a separate book, and television people bought the rights to create a series based on this book. And for two years they did not know what to do with these rights. Until they finally came up with the hero we all know.

Would you watch a series about diagnosing patients if it didn’t have this hero with his unbearable, but such a bright character? Attention, this was a rhetorical question, not homework!

It is believed that there are two approaches to depicting the character of the hero: Molierovsky and Shakespeare.

Each character of Molière has one dominant feature - Harpagon is stingy, Scapin is a rogue, Tartuffe is a hypocrite and so on. This approach is suitable for genre films. For example, if you are writing an action film, your hero should not, having caught the enemy in the crosshairs, suddenly begin to doubt, like Hamlet.

Shakespeare's heroes are multidimensional: Hamlet is both ambitious and modest and resolute and prone to doubt. Shylock is both stingy and smart and loving to children. Falstaff is both voluptuous and lazy and brave and cowardly.

Is this why most of Moliere's plays have long since disappeared from the stage, while Shakespeare continues to be staged? The reader and viewer of Shakespeare not only follows the development of history, but he also embarks on an exciting journey deep into the character of the hero, gradually learning more and more of his features.

What should be the character of the hero to make this journey really exciting?

BRIGHT. It is foolish to expect great feats and unexpected deeds from an empty place.

DEFINITE. We must understand what the hero wants and why he wants it.

TRUE. Just do not copy the features of people you know. Life is not a screenwriter, it does not need to care about believability. And the screenwriter needs it.

WHOLE. The hero does only what he can do. For example, at one time in American cinema, action heroes did not kill anyone. Even during the last duel with the most evil villain, the villain used to stumble and fall on his own knife.

DIFFICULT. Internal contradiction gives the hero volume (remember Hamlet - probably the most controversial and most popular hero in the world). In order to become a hero, he must overcome this contradiction. Just don't overuse it. If the character's function is to give the hero cartridges, he must silently (or with the words here are the cartridges) give the hero cartridges and immediately fall with a bullet through his head.

The complexity of a character is directly proportional to the importance of the role the character plays in the story.

Even an action movie cannot be built on the fact that a one-cell hero is the strongest and shoots without a miss. He needs to come up with some kind of ficus on the windowsill, love for John Wayne films and friendship with a little girl.

Conversely, if you go too deep into the characters and stories of characters that play a small role, it will turn out funny. This effect was very well ridiculed in one of the Austin Powers episodes, when they showed in detail how the wife and son of one of Dr. Evil's henchmen learn about the death of this very henchman at the hands of the protagonist.

In some script writing primers, they write that in order for a character to be three-dimensional, the screenwriter must describe in detail his appearance, character, and social status.

When I read a ten-page detailed biography of the hero in the "bible" (terms of reference) of a new project, it makes me at least wary. And if at the same time I see that the hero has an uninteresting and unconvincing character, I immediately refuse the project, because I understand that such a technical task does not portend anything but fruitless torment.

In fact, it is not appearance or social status that makes a hero three-dimensional - what difference does it make to a screenwriter whether his heroine is blonde or brunette if he is not the screenwriter of Legally Blonde? In many films, it does not matter to us what kind of trade the hero earns a living. But the character of the hero is the foundation stone of any good script.

The task of the screenwriter is to make this stone precious.

However, the fact that the character of the hero remains unchanged does not mean at all that the hero himself does not change. But what does he change?

Plyushkin was a landowner, became a poor madman, Kisa was an employee of the registry office, became a murderer, D'Artagnan was a poor Gascon, became a field marshal.

All these heroes changed fate.

And that's just about it, oh, we'll talk next time.

A satirical image of the heroes of the fairy tale by M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin “The Tale of How One Man Feeded Two Generals” “Fairy tales are one of the most striking creations of the great Russian satirist M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. reaction to talk about the most acute problems of the era, to show those aspects of reality to which the satirist was irreconcilable. "The story of how one peasant fed two generals is one of Shchedrin's most vivid and memorable tales. In its center are two generals who find themselves on a desert island. Living in St. Petersburg, the generals did not know any difficulties.

They went to the service at the registry office, and this service formed only one skill for them - to wear out - "Please accept the assurance of my perfect respect and devotion. Nevertheless, the generals deserved a pension, and a personal cook, and everything that allowed their old age to be full and serene. Waking up one morning in the middle of the island, they experienced a real shock, because it turned out that without outside help these adult men can neither get their own food nor cook it. Creating images of generals, Saltykov-Shchedrin actively uses the grotesque. A huge discovery for the heroes it becomes that "human food in its original form flies, swims and grows on trees. According to them, “rolls in the same form will be born as they are served in the morning with coffee. The generals’ inability to serve themselves awakens animal instincts: one bites off an order from another and immediately swallows it. The generals can only write reports and read the Moscow Gazette.

They cannot bring any other benefit to society. A fantastic plot helps the satirist to show the heroes of a fairy tale in the most unattractive way. Heroes appear before the reader as stupid, helpless, miserable creatures. The only salvation for them is a simple man. Frightened to death by their position, the generals fall upon him with anger: “Sleep, couch potato! In their opinion, the peasant exists only to serve their general needs. condemns him for humility, for the ability to forget himself for the sake of satisfying the whims of the master.

Having narrated apples for the generals, the peasant takes one for himself, but sour. He is a great craftsman: “He can make fire and cook food, he knows how to survive on a desert island. This, of course, the author appreciates in his hero. Emphasizing his talents, Shchedrin uses hyperbole: it’s not a problem for a man to cook a handful of soup. , and not without reason the writer calls him "a man. However, all the efforts of the peasant are aimed at the good of the generals. He even covers the bottom of the boat for them with swan down, and Saltykov-Shchedrin cannot agree with such behavior of his. The peasant demonstrates ignorance, the habit of a slave position, lack of self-respect, servile devotion.

“And the peasant began to breed beans, how would he please his generals for the fact that they favored him, the parasite, and did not disdain his peasant labor,” the author writes. The generals are ungrateful: their savior receives a glass of vodka and a nickel of silver for everything But the saddest thing is that he does not demand more. The author says sarcastically about the general's remuneration: "However, they did not forget about the peasant ... In" The Tale of how one peasant fed two generals, Saltykov-Shchedrin showed not just the relationship of individual generals and a peasant - he described in an allegorical form the relationship between power and people in Russia. The satirist contrasted the ruling elite of society with the disenfranchised masses. The book of Shchedrin's fairy tales is a living picture of Russian society torn apart by contradictions. Admire the skill of the satirist, with which he managed to approach the most complex , acute problems of his time and which he showed in miniature paintings.

All of you, dear readers, have definitely come across stories, poems, fanfiction or even entire books in which one or more characters speak in the first person. And all of you at school were probably asked to write essays about the image of a lyrical hero or the author's position in such and such a work. Many schoolchildren, readers or even novice writers, faced with all this, clutch at their heads: what does it all mean and how to deal with it? How to answer the teacher's question correctly? How to respond to first-person narration in the text - is the author writing to himself or not? So we have four terms. Let's try to understand everything in order. AUTHOR. The author is the person who wrote the work and came up with the characters. This person is quite real, just like you, he goes to work / school, lives in an ordinary house in an ordinary city and goes about his daily business. What does he have to do with the characters in his books or poems, even if they speak in the first person? None, he just made them up, unless the header or preface says that such and such a character is autobiographical or even a Mary / Marty Sue. BE CAREFUL: I have repeatedly heard stories from my friends and acquaintances about how children at school are taught to retell texts written in the first person, or to analyze such poems. Unfortunately, even many teachers confuse the author and the character and advise students to start retelling such works with the words “Writer Sidorov went to the forest”, although Sidorov could write his book when he was already over seventy, and the main character is a ninth grade student. Remember: the author and his characters are not the same thing. The author may well write off one of the characters from himself or endow him with a similar biography, character traits, and so on, but by no means every hero who speaks of himself in the first person can be considered autobiographical. And, on the contrary, the alter ego of the author may turn out to be some third-rate character in the third-person narrative. I understand it sounds complicated. How to recognize which characters are autobiographical and which are not? Ask the author himself. Carefully read the header and comments. If you are studying a book at school or college, read the writer's diaries and notes, and much will become clear to you. HERO STORY. An excellent literary device, which is very fond of many writers. Its essence lies in the fact that something or another event is from time to time or constantly covered in the work from the point of view of a certain hero, while the narration is constantly or again from time to time conducted in the first person. Anyone can act as a hero-narrator: one or more characters in the book, some third-party person who, as it were, observes events from the side or tells a story, sometimes even an unborn child, an animal or an inanimate object, which in fantastic works is endowed with the ability to perceive and evaluate what is happening. BE CAREFUL: you should not associate the narrator with the author of the book, consider him Mary / Marty Sue or the bearer of the author's position, unless the author explicitly indicated this. Such a mistake is very common: when I myself once introduced a hero-narrator into the narrative in my school years, some of my readers sincerely decided that I was describing my own impressions and expressing my opinion about events. The opinion of the hero-narrator is his own opinion, and it is not a fact that the author shares or approves it: it can be just a literary experiment or a device to show the reader the features of the thinking and worldview of this character. So, for example, Alexandra Marinina in the book "Death for the sake of death" and Alexander Vargo in his novel "The House in the Ravine" narrate on behalf of maniac-murderers, but it does not follow from this that the authors sympathize with them or share their point of view. And if the author, suppose, composed a story, where the main character, speaking in the first person, is an animal or a thing? CHARACTER. With him, in principle, everything is clear: this is one of the characters in the book. However, even here there are certain difficulties. It happens that in a work readers come across some bright, interesting image, and they immediately begin to believe that this hero is certainly positive, the author likes it or expresses his position. BE CAREFUL: want to know exactly how the author perceives the hero and his role in the story? Ask the author. Some people, after reading a couple of my texts, sincerely decided that Sauron in them is a positive hero and I sympathize with him. There were also those who asked if certain characters in this text were my alter ego. To be honest, my image of Sauron turned out to be quite bright and extraordinary, in principle I am satisfied with the result, but at its core this hero is an outright manipulator and an unscrupulous type with a perverted consciousness. In everyday life, it is better not to communicate with such people. A LYRICAL HERO is a character in a poetic work, through which various thoughts, feelings, and impressions can be conveyed in the text; The story can be told in either the first or third person. The lyrical hero is not identical to the author of the poem; the same rules apply to him as to the character in general or the hero-narrator. BE CAREFUL: yes, a lyrical hero can also be autobiographical and reflect the feelings, thoughts, position and life experience of the author. It may not be. Try to analyze from the point of view of all the above a few texts familiar to you - and you will see how interesting it can look.

Sections: Literature

The sharper the satire, the higher the ideal of the writer.
M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin

Purpose: to characterize the author's ideal of the satirist M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin by analyzing the system of images of the "Tale ...".

Lesson objectives.

Educational (knowledge system):

learning new things:

• comprehension of the ideological content of the work of M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin “The Tale of How One Man Feeded Two Generals”;
• formation of ideas about the author's position, the author's ideal;
• ways of expressing the attitude of the author to the depicted (humor, irony, satire, grotesque);

repetition of what has been learned:

• literary fairy tale and its difference from folklore,
• ways of creating an artistic image of a character (name, place of service, rank, speech, education, portrait, artistic space, relationships, attitude towards another character, author's attitude).

Educational(skill system):

formation of new skills:

• to argue the attitude towards the characters of the work (generals, peasant) of the author, reader;
• to characterize the author's ideal of a satirist writer;

development of previously acquired skills:

• characterization of heroes and events on the basis of an independent search for literary facts and the author's judgment;
• appropriate and sufficient citation of a literary text;
• expressive reading of fragments of an epic work;
• development of oral monologue speech skills.

Educational(system of value orientations):

• the formation of students' value ideas about the world and man from the standpoint of the author's ideal;
• mastery of students vocabulary that expresses their attitude to moral values.

Equipment: a portrait of the writer, children's drawings of characters, "Dictionary of the Humanities", cards with tasks for students.

During the classes

I. Checking homework.

What signs of a fairy tale as a genre do you know?

What is the difference between a literary fairy tale and a folk tale?

Suggested answer: In a literary fairy tale, the author is a specific person, the fairy-tale style is combined with the clerical and a comic effect is created, hyperbole and grotesque are used to show that there is no ideal and a positive hero, satire, evil irony is used.

Define humor, irony, satire and give examples from your own reading experience.

Suggested answer: Humor - cheerful, kind laughter . Irony is a hidden mockery. Satire - angry, angry laughter.

What artistic features of the depiction of situations and characters in a satirical fairy tale can you name?

Suggested answer: Allegory, irony, sarcasm, hyperbole, grotesque.

What are some ways you know how to create a character?

Suggested answer: Ways of creating an image - portrait, landscape, actions of the hero, his activities, relationships with other characters, the hero's speech, the author's attitude to the character, my attitude.

II. Message about the topic and purpose of the lesson.

Dear Guys! Today we will continue work on “The Tale of How One Man Feeded Two Generals” by M. Saltykov-Shchedrin. We have to characterize the author's ideal: the attitude of the writer to the world and man through the analysis of characters. Let's carefully observe the characters and try to understand the author's intention. Today, two groups of students will work: the first group will have to characterize the generals, the second - the peasant. The children of each group received cards in envelopes with a task that they would have to complete on their own. The groups will present their findings in the form of a full oral response. Each of your performances should not exceed 2 minutes. 5 minutes are allotted for independent work. You must listen attentively to the comrades who are speaking so as not to repeat what has already been said.

III. Characteristics of the generals.

Card number 1. Character names.

What are the names of the generals?

Suggested answer: Generals do not have names, thus the author emphasizes the typicality of their images, the absence of individual qualities.

Card number 2. Location of the characters.

Where did the generals serve? Read the required passage.

Look up the meaning of the word “registration” in the dictionary.

How does the narrator feel about such “registries”?

Expected answer: “The generals served all their lives in some kind of registry ...” The word “registration” in the dictionary means ... The author does not accidentally use the definition “some” with the word registry in order to generalize such institutions, emphasize typicality, refers to similar establishments ironically.

Card number 3. Chin of characters.

Why is it not indicated why the heroes received the rank of general?

Where and by whom else did one of the generals serve? name an artistic device)

Supposed answer: The author does not say why the generals received the rank, the personal qualities of the heroes are also not indicated, only the rank is indicated. But we understand that a rank is not given for inactivity, which means that it was received by the generals under someone's patronage, since they themselves could not deserve such a high rank. One of the generals was a calligraphy teacher at the school of military cantonists, i.e. in a school for soldiers' children, which should indicate the low intellectual level of the hero, the other "was smarter." And where has it been seen that the general was engaged in such activities ?! Thus, the author satirically portrays the generals.

Card number 4. Character speech.

What expressions do generals use in speech? Read the snippets.

What is the peculiarity of their pronunciation of words?

How does the speech characterize the characters?

Expected answer: “Accept the assurance of my perfect respect and devotion” - clericalism, the generals use an official business style in speech, which characterizes their limitations, the habit of using “s” at the end of words is an expression of respect.

Card number 5. character education.

What is the education level of the generals? Explain your conclusion.

What reader's impressions about the generals arise from the analysis of the author's device?

Supposed answer: The generals do not know the sides of the horizon, for them “rolls will be born in the same form as they are served with coffee in the morning” - this hyperbole helps to convey the worthlessness, lack of education of the generals. The author portrays them satirically .

Card number 6. Character portrait.

What is the peculiarity of the appearance of generals?

What substantive details in the description of the generals does the author highlight and why?

How do you feel about generals based on an analysis of their appearance?

Suggested answer: “Fed, white and cheerful,” says the narrator, “but no faces—thus, a generalization is used. The generals are “in nightgowns, and they have orders hanging around their necks”, the order is perceived as part of the body, the grotesque is used. The portrait is satirical, evokes a feeling of dislike for the characters.

Card number 7. Artistic space.

What is remarkable about the island on which the generals fall?

Supposed answer: The author moves the action to a desert island so that the generals can show themselves, prove themselves in actions, it’s not for nothing that there is a lot of food, water on the island - it is idealized, it is a paradise, but paradise, first of all, for the stomach, the island is fantastic, abundance, reigning here is conveyed with the help of hyperbole. The generals are inactive, white-handed, they could not prove themselves.

Card number 8. Character behavior.

What actions do the generals perform on the island? For what purpose?

How does the behavior of the generals characterize them?

Suggested answer: The generals are trying to climb a tree - but... alas! Inaction, helplessness, the habit that others do everything for them, the author denounces their vulgarity, neboktoptelstvo, the meaninglessness of such an existence.

Card number 9. Character relationships.

What is the relationship of the generals at the beginning of the tale?

How is their relationship changing and why?

Please provide a relevant quote.

What associations, analogies do you have when analyzing the behavior of generals (what do they look like at the moment of attacking each other)? (name the artistic technique used)

Suggested Answer: As soon as the generals feel very hungry, their deference vanishes. Officials lose their human appearance and, like predators, pounce on each other. “Suddenly, both generals looked at each other: an ominous fire shone in their eyes, their teeth chattered, a dull growl flew out of their chests. They began to slowly crawl towards each other and in the blink of an eye went berserk. Shreds flew, there was a screech and a gasp; the general, who was a teacher of calligraphy, bit off an order from his comrade and immediately swallowed it.” The frenzy of the generals is conveyed by the author with the help of the grotesque.

Card number 10. The attitude of the generals towards the peasant.

How did the generals react to their find, man?

Find quotes and explain their meaning.

What thought came to the generals at the sight of various provisions?

Find a quote and explain the attitude of the generals towards the peasant.

Why do the generals tie the peasant?

How did the generals “thank” the peasant?

Express your attitude to the generals.

Suggested answer: “A man got up: he sees that the generals are strict. I wanted to give them a shot, but they just froze, clinging to him. The peasant is the salvation of the generals, he is the one whom they can dispose of as their own property, he is their salvation. But as soon as, thanks to the diligence and skill of the peasant, various provisions appeared, instead of gratitude, the generals scornfully say: “Shouldn’t you give the parasite a piece?” The word "parasite" expresses irony here: who is the true parasite? But the main “gratitude” is ahead: the generals tie the peasant so that he does not run away. There is cruelty, rudeness, violence of generals over those who obey them.

What kind of image appears before us in the face of the generals?

IV. Characteristics of a man.

Card number 1. Character `s name.

What is the man's name?

What are your reader's thoughts on this?

Card number 2. Character portrait.

What does a man look like?

Why is he called in the work "the biggest man"?

Why is a man introduced into the system of images?

What properties are endowed with a man in fairy tales?

Suggested answer: The author calls his character "the biggest man" because this is the person who can do everything, is capable of any work, strong, powerful, dexterous (this is how a man is always presented in Russian folk tales). The peasant was introduced into the system of images not by chance: he is opposed to inactive and useless generals.

Card number 3. Character behavior.

What can a man do?

How does he do the job he takes on?

Do you like all the actions of a man?

Explain the reasons for your relationship with the man.

Suggested answer: The man knows how to do everything, he does the work quickly and conscientiously. The author admires his dexterity, diligence, hyperbole helps to convey the ingenuity, invention of the people.

Card number 4. The relation of the peasant to the generals.

How does a man feel about generals?

Why does a man obey the generals? Please provide a relevant quote.

What did the “man” do to help the generals out of trouble and bring them home?

What qualities of character did he show?

Suggested answer: A man resignedly obeys the generals. Chin turns out to be enough to push the man around. “The generals looked at these peasant efforts, and their hearts played merrily. They have already forgotten that yesterday they almost died of hunger, and they thought: “This is how good it is to be generals - you won’t get lost anywhere!” A man builds a ship, showing resourcefulness and ingenuity.

Card number 5. Character speech

How does a man's speech characterize him?

Suggested answer: The peasant's speech reflects the age-old habit of the Russian people - to meekly please the master.

V. Generalization.

For which characters does Saltykov-Shchedrin use humor, irony, and for whom does he use satire? Why?

How does the man in the fairy tale of Saltykov-Shchedrin differ from the folklore character?

What in the behavior of a man causes admiration, and what - condemnation of the author?

What is the meaning of the finale of “The Tale…”?

VI. Summing up the results of the analytical conversation.

The generalization of the teacher: “The Tale ...” is built on allegory, ridicules the vices of the contemporary author of society, denounces the stupidity and unsuitability for life of generals, humility, slavish humility of a man who can do everything. These are issues of national importance, the well-being of Russia depends on the attitude towards these vices of state power.

Why did Saltykov-Shchedrin deliberately use the word “story” in the title of the tale?

Teacher generalization: Using fairy tales, fiction and hyperbole, the writer creates an unusual situation that captivates us readers. But he skillfully intertwines fantasy and reality in order to study the essence of the relationship between those in power and the people, the immorality of the authorities and the servility of the peasant. Thus, through the reflection of vices, the pain of the satirist for the quick-witted, hard-working Russian people is manifested.

Let's turn to the epigraph of our lesson. M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin wrote: “The sharper the satire, the higher the ideal of the writer.” How do you understand his words?

Teacher generalization : Saltykov-Shchedrin believed that satire should not destroy, but create, and the writer should explore life more fully in order to understand how to arrange it better.

What moral values ​​does the satirist Saltykov-Shchedrin affirm?

VII. Homework.

Write an essay describing one of the heroes (group 1 - characterization of a man, group 2 - characterization of generals).