He wrote about everyday life. Everyday life of medieval Rus' (based on moralizing literature)

The contradictions between the abstractness of the general laws of science (including history) and the concrete life of ordinary people served as the basis for the search for new approaches in historical knowledge. History reflects the general, digressing from particulars, paying attention to the laws and general development trends. There was no place left for a simple person with his specific circumstances and details of life, with the peculiarities of his perception and experience of the world, he was absent. The individualized everyday life of a person, the sphere of his experiences, the concrete historical aspects of his being fell out of sight of historians.

Historians have turned to the study of everyday life as one of the possible ways to resolve the above contradiction. The current situation in history also contributes to this.

Modern historical science is undergoing a deep internal transformation, which manifests itself in a change in intellectual orientations, research paradigms, and the very language of history. The current situation in historical knowledge is increasingly characterized as postmodern. Having survived the “onset of structuralism”, which became the “new scientism” in the 60s, the “linguistic turn” or “semiotic explosion” in the 80s of the twentieth century, historiography could not help but experience the impact of the postmodernist paradigm, which spread its influence to all areas of the humanities. The situation of the crisis, the peak of which Western historical science experienced in the 70s of the XX century, is being experienced by Russian science today.

The concept of “historical reality” itself is also being revised, and with it the historian’s own identity, his professional sovereignty, the criteria for the reliability of the source (the boundaries between fact and fiction are blurred), faith in the possibility of historical knowledge and the desire for objective truth. Trying to resolve the crisis, historians are developing new approaches and new ideas, including turning to the category of “everyday life” as one of the options for overcoming the crisis.

Modern historical science has identified ways to get closer to understanding the historical past through its subject and carrier - the person himself. A comprehensive analysis of the material and social forms of a person's everyday existence - his life microcosm, the stereotypes of his thinking and behavior - is considered as one of the possible approaches in this regard.

In the late 80s - early 90s of the 20th century, following Western and domestic historical science, there was a surge of interest in everyday life. The first works appear, where everyday life is mentioned. A series of articles is published in the almanac "Odysseus", where an attempt is made to theoretically comprehend everyday life. These are articles by G.S. Knabe, A.Ya. Gurevich, G.I. Zvereva. Interests are also the reasoning of S.V. Obolenskaya in the article "Someone Josef Schaefer, a soldier of the Nazi Wehrmacht" about methods of studying the history of everyday life on the example of considering the individual biography of a certain Josef Schaefer. A successful attempt at a comprehensive description of the everyday life of the population in the Weimar Republic is the work of I.Ya. Bisca. Using an extensive and diverse source base, he quite fully described the daily life of various segments of the population of Germany in the Weimar period: socio-economic life, customs, spiritual atmosphere. He gives convincing data, concrete examples, food, clothing, living conditions, etc. If in the articles of G.S. Knabe, A.Ya. Gurevich, G.I. Zvereva gives a theoretical understanding of the concept of "everyday life", then the articles by S.V. Obolenskaya and the monograph by I.Ya. Biska are historical works where the authors try to describe and define what “everyday life” is using specific examples.

The turn of attention of domestic historians to the study of everyday life, which had begun, has decreased in recent years, as there are not enough sources and a serious theoretical understanding of this problem. It should be remembered that one cannot ignore the experience of Western historiography - England, France, Italy and, of course, Germany.

In the 60-70s. 20th century there was an interest in research related to the study of man, and in this regard, German scientists were the first to begin to study the history of everyday life. The slogan was sounded: "From the study of state policy and the analysis of global social structures and processes, let's turn to small worlds of life, to the everyday life of ordinary people." The direction “history of everyday life” (Alltagsgeschichte) or “history from below” (Geschichte von unten) emerged. What is understood and understood by everyday life? How do scholars interpret it?

It makes sense to name the most important German historians of everyday life. The classic in this field, of course, is such a sociological historian as Norbert Elias with his works On the Concept of Everyday Life, On the Process of Civilization, Court Society; Peter Borscheid and his work "Conversations about the history of everyday life". I would definitely like to mention the historian who deals with the issues of modern times - Lutz Neuhammer, who works at the University of Hagen, and very early, already in 1980, in an article in the journal "Historical Didactics" ("Geschichtsdidaktik"), studied the history of everyday life. This article was called Notes on the History of Everyday Life. Known for his other work “Life experience and collective thinking. Practice "Oral History".

And such a historian as Klaus Tenfeld deals with both theoretical and practical issues of the history of everyday life. His theoretical work is called "Difficulties with everyday life" and is a critical discussion of the daily historical current with an excellent bibliography. The publication of Klaus Bergman and Rolf Scherker "History in everyday life - everyday life in history" consists of a number of works of a theoretical nature. Also, the problem of everyday life, both theoretically and practically, is dealt with by Dr. Peukert from Essen, who published a number of theoretical works. One of them is "A New History of Everyday Life and Historical Anthropology". The following works are known: Peter Steinbach "Daily life and the history of the village", Jürgen Kokka "Classes or cultures? Breakthroughs and dead ends in labor history, as well as Martin Broszat's remarks on the work of Jurgen Kokk, and her interesting work on the problems of the history of everyday life in the Third Reich. There is also a generalizing work by J. Kuscinski “History of everyday life of the German people. 16001945" in five volumes.

Such a work as "History in everyday life - everyday life in history" is a collection of works by various authors devoted to everyday life. The following problems are considered: everyday life of workers and servants, architecture as a source of the history of everyday life, historical consciousness in the everyday life of modernity, etc.

It is very important to note that a discussion was held in Berlin (October 3-6, 1984) on the problem of the history of everyday life, which on the final day was called "History from below - history from within". And under this title, under the editorship of Jürgen Kokk, the materials of the discussion were published.

The spokesmen for the latest needs and trends in historical knowledge at the beginning of the 20th century were representatives of the Annales school - these are Mark Blok, Lucien Febvre and, of course, Fernand Braudel. "Annals" in the 30s. 20th century turned to the study of a working man, the subject of their study becomes the "history of the masses" as opposed to the "history of the stars", history visible not "from above", but "from below". The "geography of man", the history of material culture, historical anthropology, social psychology and others, which had previously remained in the shadow of the direction of historical research, were developed.

Mark Blok was concerned with the problem of the contradiction between the inevitable schematism of historical knowledge and the living fabric of the real historical process. His work was aimed at resolving this contradiction. In particular, he emphasized that the focus of the historian's attention should be on a person, and he immediately hurried to correct himself - not a person, but people. In Blok's field of vision are typical, predominantly mass-like phenomena in which repeatability can be detected.

The comparative-typological approach is the most important in historical research, but in history the regular emerges through the particular, the individual. Generalization is associated with simplification, straightening, the living fabric of history is much more complex and contradictory, therefore Blok compares the generalized characteristics of a particular historical phenomenon with its variants, shows in an individual manifestation, thereby enriching the study, making it saturated with specific variants. Thus, M. Blok writes that the picture of feudalism is not a collection of signs abstracted from living reality: it is confined to real space and historical time and is based on evidence from numerous sources.

One of Blok's methodological ideas was that the study of a historian does not begin at all with the collection of material, as is often imagined, but with the formulation of a problem, with the development of a preliminary list of questions that the researcher wishes to ask the sources. Not content with the fact that the society of the past, let's say the medieval one, took it into his head to inform about himself through the mouths of chroniclers, philosophers, theologians, the historian, by analyzing the terminology and vocabulary of the surviving written sources, is able to make these monuments say much more. We pose new questions to a foreign culture, which it did not pose to itself, we look for answers to these questions in it, and a foreign culture answers us. During the dialogic meeting of cultures, each of them retains its integrity, but they are mutually enriched. Historical knowledge is such a dialogue of cultures.

The study of everyday life involves the search for fundamental structures in history that determine the order of human actions. This search begins with the historians of the Annales school. M. Blok understood that under the cover of phenomena understood by people, there are hidden layers of a deep social structure, which determines the changes taking place on the surface of social life. The task of the historian is to make the past “let it out,” that is, to say what it did not realize or did not intend to say.

Writing a story in which living people act is the motto of Blok and his followers. Collective psychology attracts their attention also because it expresses the socially determined behavior of people. A new question for historical science at that time was human sensitivity. You can't pretend to understand people without knowing how they felt. Explosions of despair and rage, reckless actions, sudden mental breaks - cause many difficulties for historians who are instinctively inclined to reconstruct the past according to the schemes of the mind. M. Blok and L. Febvre saw their "reserved grounds" in the history of feelings and ways of thinking and enthusiastically developed these topics.

M. Blok has outlines of the theory of "time of great duration", subsequently developed by Fernand Braudel. Representatives of the Annales school are mainly concerned with time of great length, that is, they study the structures of everyday life that change very slowly over time or actually do not change at all. At the same time, the study of such structures is the main task of any historian, since they show the essence of a person's daily existence, the stereotypes of his thinking and behavior that regulate his daily existence.

Direct thematization of the problem of everyday life in historical knowledge, as a rule, is associated with the name of Fernand Braudel. This is quite natural, because the first book of his famous work "Material Economy and Capitalism of the 18th-18th centuries." and is called: "The structures of everyday life: the possible and the impossible." He wrote about how everyday life can be known: “Material life is people and things, things and people. To study things - food, dwellings, clothing, luxury goods, tools, money, plans of villages and cities - in a word, everything that serves a person - this is the only way to experience his daily existence. And the conditions of everyday existence, the cultural and historical context against which a person's life unfolds, his history, have a decisive influence on the actions and behavior of people.

Fernand Braudel wrote about everyday life: “The starting point for me was,” he emphasized, “everyday life - that side of life in which we were involved, without even realizing it, a habit, or even a routine, these thousands of actions taking place and ending as if by themselves, the implementation of which does not require anyone's decision and which occur, in truth, almost without affecting our consciousness. I believe that humanity is more than half immersed in this kind of everyday life. Innumerable actions, inherited, cumulative without any order. Repeating ad infinitum before we came into this world, help us to live - and at the same time subdue us, deciding a lot for us during our existence. Here we are dealing with motives, impulses, stereotypes, methods and methods of action, as well as various types of obligations that force action, which sometimes, and more often than you might think, go back to the most immemorial times.

Further, he writes that this ancient past is merging into modernity and he wanted to see for himself and show others how this past, barely noticeable history - like a compacted mass of ordinary events - over the long centuries of previous history, entered the flesh of the people themselves, for whom experience and the delusions of the past have become commonplace and everyday necessity, eluding the attention of observers.

The works of Fernand Braudel contain philosophical and historical reflections on the routine of material life marked with a sign, on the complex interweaving of various levels of historical reality, on the dialectic of time and space. The reader of his works is faced with three different plans, three levels, in which the same reality is grasped in different ways, its content and spatio-temporal characteristics change. We are talking about fleeting event-political time at the highest level, much more long-term socio-economic processes at a deeper level, and almost timeless natural-geographical processes at the deepest level. Moreover, the distinction between these three levels (in fact, F. Braudel sees several more levels in each of these three) is not an artificial dissection of living reality, but its consideration in different refractions.

In the lowest layers of historical reality, as in the depths of the sea, constancy, stable structures dominate, the main elements of which are man, earth, space. Time passes here so slowly that it seems almost motionless. At the next level - the level of society, civilization, the level that studies socio-economic history, there is a time of medium duration. Finally, the most superficial layer of history: here events alternate like waves in the sea. They are measured by short chronological units - this is a political, diplomatic and similar "event" history.

For F. Braudel, the sphere of his personal interests is an almost immovable history of people in their close relationship with the land on which they walk and which feeds them; the story of man's ever-repeating dialogue with nature, so stubborn as if he were beyond the reach of the damage and blows of time. Until now, one of the problems of historical knowledge remains the attitude towards the assertion that history as a whole can be understood only in comparison with this boundless space of almost immovable reality, in identifying long-term processes and phenomena.

So what is everyday life? How can it be defined? Attempts to give an unambiguous definition were unsuccessful: everyday life is used by some scientists as a collective concept for the manifestation of all forms of private life, while others understand this as the daily repetitive actions of the so-called "gray everyday life" or the sphere of natural non-reflective thinking. German sociologist Norbert Elias noted in 1978 that there is no precise, clear definition of everyday life. The way this concept is used in sociology today includes the most diverse scale of shades, but they still remain unidentified and incomprehensible to us.

N. Elias made an attempt to define the concept of "everyday life". He has long been interested in this topic. Sometimes he himself was ranked among those who dealt with this problem, since in his two works "Court Society" and "On the Process of Civilization" he considered issues that can easily be classified as problems of everyday life. But N. Elias himself did not consider himself a specialist in everyday life and decided to clarify this concept when he was invited to write an article on this topic. Norbert Elias has compiled tentative lists of some of the applications of the concept found in the scientific literature.

Napoleon Bonaparte is the most controversial and interesting figure in French history. The French adore and idolize him as a national hero.

And it does not matter that he lost the Patriotic War of 1812 in Russia, the main thing is that he is Napoleon Bonaparte!

For me personally, he is a favorite figure in French history. I have always had respect for his talent as a commander - the capture of Toulon in 1793, victories in the battles of Arcole or Rivoli.

That is why today I will talk about the daily life of the French during the time of Napoleon Bonaparte.

You will say that it was possible to go chronologically and gradually reveal this topic, starting from time immemorial. And I will say that it is boring, and my blog will turn into a French history textbook, and then you will stop reading it. Therefore, I will talk, first of all, about the most interesting and not in order. It's so much more interesting! Is it true?

So how did people live in the time of Napoleon Bonaparte? Let's find out together...

About Sèvres porcelain.

If we talk about French industry, then the advanced production was glassware, pottery and porcelain production.

Porcelain products from the factory in Sevres, near Paris, gained worldwide fame ( famous Sèvres porcelain). This manufactory was transferred from the castle in Vincennes in 1756.

When Napoleon became emperor, the tendencies of classicism began to prevail in the porcelain business. Sevres porcelain began to be decorated with exquisite ornaments, which were most often combined with a colored background.

After the conclusion of the Treaty of Tilsit (1807), a few months later, Napoleon presented the Russian Emperor Alexander I with a magnificent Olympic service (pictured). Sèvres porcelain was also used by Napoleon on the island of Saint Helena.

About workers.

Gradually, industry in France embarked on the rails of machine production. The metric system of measures was introduced. And in 1807, the Commercial Code was created and promulgated.

But, nevertheless, France did not become a leader in the world market, but the wages of workers gradually increased, and mass unemployment was avoided.

In Paris, a worker earned 3-4 francs a day, in the provinces - 1.2-2 francs a day. French workers began to eat meat more often and dress better.

About money.

We all know that now in France they use the currency euro €. But we most often forget about past currencies, maybe we only remember about franc and a strange word "ecu".

Let's correct this and inquire, so to speak, about the old French monetary units.

So, livres, francs, napoleons - what pretty names, right?

Livre was the currency of France until the introduction of the franc in 1799. Do you know that the participants of the Egyptian expedition, which began in 1798, received a salary? Yes, and this is so, only then they called it a salary. So the famous scientists received 500 livres a month, and the ordinary - 50.

And in 1834, coins denominated in livres were withdrawn from circulation.

Franc was originally silver and weighed only 5 grams. This so-called germinal franc introduced into circulation in March 1803, and it remained stable until 1914! (pictured right)

And here napoleondor was a gold coin that was equal to 20 francs and contained 5.8 grams of pure gold. These coins have been minted since 1803.

And the origin of the name is very simple, because the coin had images of Napoleon I, and later Napoleon III. francs) and 1/4 (in 5 francs).

You ask, how louis And ecu?

These coins went out of circulation faster. For example, the louis d'or (French gold coin) was first minted under Louis XIII, and ended its "life" in 1795.

A ecu existed since the 13th century, at first they were gold, then silver, and in the middle of the 19th century they were taken out of circulation. But the name "ecu" remained behind the five-franc coin.

Still, lovers of fiction often met this name on the pages of books by French writers.

About food.

If earlier the main food of the French were bread, wine and cheese, then in the 19th century potato imported from America. Thanks to this, the population is growing, because potatoes are actively planted throughout France, and it brings a large harvest.

Colorfully paints the benefits of potatoes J.J. Menure, a resident of the Isère department (fr. Isère) in southeastern France:

“This culture, freely located, well-groomed, prosperous in my possessions, has brought me many benefits; the potato turned out to be very profitable, it found a use for itself on the table of the owners, workers and servants, it went to food for chickens, turkeys, pigs; it was enough for local residents, and for sale, etc. What abundance, what pleasure!”

Yes, and Napoleon himself preferred all dishes - potatoes fried with onions.

So it is not surprising that the simple potato has become a favorite dish of all the French. Contemporaries write that they were at a dinner party, at which all dishes were prepared exclusively from potatoes. Like this!

About art.

What are the people demanding? Right - "Meal'n'Real!"

We talked about daily bread, or rather potatoes, which took a firm place in the life of the French. Now let's learn about spectacles - about spiritual food.

In general, it must be said that Napoleon Bonaparte actively supported the theater, actors and playwrights. In the fashion, art and architecture of that time, the influence of style is strongly "Empire". Napoleon likes drama theatre.

He spoke about it to the poet Goethe:

“Tragedy should be a school for kings and nations; this is the highest step a poet can reach.”

The patronage of the theater gradually extended to specific actresses who became mistresses of the first persons of the state: Teresa Bourgoin - Minister of the Interior Chaptal, and Mademoiselle Georges - Napoleon himself.

Nevertheless, development of the theater during the Empire is in full swing, dominates there Talma. A talented native of a family of dentists. He received an excellent education and even continued his father's work for some time, playing in his spare time on small stages.

At one fine moment, Talma decided to change his life and graduated from the Royal School of Recitation and Singing in Paris. AND in 1787 successfully debuted on the theater stage "Comedy Francaise" in Voltaire's play Mahomet. Soon he was accepted into the number of shareholders of the theater.

Talma broke the ridiculous centuries-old tradition of the theater, according to which the actors represented the heroes of different eras in the costumes of their time - in wigs and velvet!

AND theatrical "revolutionary" gradually introduced antique, medieval, oriental and renaissance costumes into the theater! ( François Joseph Talma depicted as Nero in the painting by E. Delacroix).

Talma actively advocated the truthfulness of the speech in everything, including diction. His views were formed under the influence of the French and English enlighteners. And from the first days of the Great Revolution, he sought to embody its ideas on stage. This actor headed a troupe of revolutionary-minded actors who left the Comédie Française in 1791. And they founded the Theater of Freedom, Equality and Fraternity, which later became the Theater of the Republic on Richelieu Street.

The "old" theater or the Theater of the Nation staged plays that were objectionable to the authorities. And the revolutionary government closed it, the actors were thrown into prison. But they escaped execution thanks to the fact that one official of the Committee of Public Safety destroyed their papers.

After the fall of Robespierre, the remnants of the troupes of both theaters united, and Talma had to justify himself to the public, speaking out against the revolutionary terror.

These are the bright changes that took place in the theater thanks to talented, caring people.

And it is worth noting that the French did not watch only tragedies! N.M. Karamzin wrote in his Letters from a Russian Traveler about five theaters - the Bolshoi Opera, the French Theatre, the Italian Theatre, the Count of Provence Theater and the Variety.

In conclusion, I will add a couple of interesting facts :

- The years of the Empire include the first experiments in the field photos.

— And, of course, the glory of the national perfumery is huge, and if a Frenchman starts doing this in another country, he will definitely be successful!

France still occupies a prominent place among the perfumers of the world. What is it worth Fragonard Perfume House in the southern city of Grasse. By the way, anyone can visit the historical museum of the factory and see with their own eyes the old equipment of perfumers.

P.S. On this beautiful note, I will end my story about the daily life of the French during the time of Napoleon Bonaparte. And for those who want to know even more details on this topic, I can recommend Andrey Ivanov's fascinating book "The Daily Life of the French under Napoleon".

If you have a desire to ask a question, express your opinion or suggest a new topic for an article, feel free to write everything in the comments 😉

Thank you for sharing my articles and videos with your friends on social networks. Click on social icons networks under the article, subscribe to my accounts to learn about the news of the project.

Composition

The novel by Ivan Alexandrovich Goncharov "An Ordinary Story" was one of the first Russian realistic works that tells about the everyday life of ordinary people. The novel depicts pictures of Russian reality in the 40s of the 19th century, typical circumstances of a person's life of that time.
The novel was published in 1847. It tells about the fate of the young provincial Alexander Aduev, who came to St. Petersburg to his uncle. On the pages of the book, an “ordinary story” takes place with him - the transformation of a romantic, pure young man into a prudent and cold businessman.
But from the very beginning, this story is told, as it were, from two sides - from the point of view of Alexander himself and from the point of view of his uncle, Peter Aduev. Already from their first conversation it becomes clear how opposite natures they are. Alexander is characterized by a romantic view of the world, love for all mankind, inexperience and a naive belief in "eternal oaths" and "pledges of love and friendship." He is strange and unaccustomed to the cold and alienated world of the capital, where a huge number of people who are absolutely indifferent to each other coexist in a relatively small space. Even family relations in St. Petersburg are much drier than those to which he was accustomed in his village.
Alexander's exaltation makes his uncle laugh. Aduev Sr. constantly, and even with some pleasure, plays the role of a "tub of cold water" when he moderates Alexander's enthusiasm: either he orders to paste over the walls of his office with poems, or he throws out the "material pledge of love" out the window. Petr Aduev himself is a successful industrialist, a man of a sober, practical mind, who considers any "sentiment" to be superfluous. And at the same time, he understands and appreciates beauty, knows a lot about literature, theatrical art. He opposes Alexander's convictions with his own, and it turns out that they are not deprived of their truth.
Why should he love and respect a person just because this person is his brother or nephew? Why encourage the versification of a young man who clearly has no talent? Wouldn't it be better to show him another way in time? After all, raising Alexander in his own way, Peter Aduev tried to protect him from future disappointments.
Three love stories that Alexander falls into prove this. Each time, the romantic heat of love in him cools more and more, coming into contact with cruel reality. So, any words, actions, deeds of uncle and nephew are, as it were, in constant dialogue. The reader compares, compares these characters, because it is impossible to evaluate one without looking at the other. But it also turns out to be impossible to choose which of them is right?
It would seem that life itself helps Peter Aduev to prove his case to his nephew. After a few months of living in St. Petersburg, nothing remains of Aduev Jr.'s beautiful ideals - they are hopelessly broken. Returning to the village, he writes to his aunt, Peter's wife, a bitter letter, where he sums up his experience, his disappointments. This is a letter from a mature man who has lost many illusions, but who has retained his heart and mind. Alexander learns a cruel but useful lesson.
But is Pyotr Aduev himself happy? Having rationally organized his life, living according to the calculations and firm principles of a cold mind, he tries to subordinate his feelings to this order. Having chosen a lovely young woman as his wife (here it is, a taste for beauty!), He wants to raise her life partner according to his ideal: without “stupid” sensitivity, excessive impulses and unpredictable emotions. But Elizaveta Alexandrovna unexpectedly takes the side of her nephew, feeling a kindred spirit in Alexander. She cannot live without love, all these necessary “excesses”. And when she falls ill, Pyotr Aduev realizes that he cannot help her in any way: she is dear to him, he would give everything, but he has nothing to give. Only love can save her, and Aduev Sr. does not know how to love.
And, as if to further prove the dramatic nature of the situation, Alexander Aduev appears in the epilogue - balding, plump. He, somewhat unexpectedly for the reader, has learned all his uncle's principles and makes a lot of money, even going to marry "for money." When uncle reminds him of his past words. Alexander just laughs. At the moment when Aduev Sr. realizes the collapse of his harmonious life system, Aduev Jr. becomes the embodiment of this system, and not its best version. They sort of switched places.
The trouble, even the tragedy of these heroes, is that they remained the poles of worldviews, they could not achieve harmony, the balance of those positive principles that were in both of them; they lost faith in high truths, because life and the surrounding reality did not need them. And, unfortunately, this is a common story.
The novel made readers think about the sharp moral questions posed by the Russian life of that time. Why did the process of rebirth of a romantically minded young man into a bureaucrat and entrepreneur take place? Is it really necessary, having lost illusions, to get rid of sincere and noble human feelings? These questions are of concern to the reader today. I.A. Goncharov gives us answers to all these questions in his wonderful work

Other writings on this work

“Goncharov's idea was wider. He wanted to strike a blow at modern romanticism in general, but failed to determine the ideological center. Instead of romanticism, he ridiculed the provincial attempts at romanticism ”(based on the novel by Goncharov "Ordinary story" I.A. Goncharov "Loss of Romantic Illusions" (based on the novel "An Ordinary Story") The author and his characters in the novel "An Ordinary Story" The author and his characters in I. A. Goncharov's novel "An Ordinary Story" The main characters of I. Goncharov's novel "Ordinary History". The protagonist of I. Goncharov's novel "An Ordinary Story" Two philosophies of life in the novel by I. A. Goncharov "Ordinary History" Uncle and nephew of Adueva in the novel "An Ordinary Story" How to live? The image of Alexander Aduev. Petersburg and the provinces in I. Goncharov's novel "Ordinary History" Review of the novel by I. A. Goncharov "An Ordinary Story" Reflection of historical changes in Goncharov's novel "Ordinary History" Why is the novel by I.A. Goncharov called "Ordinary History"? Russia in the novel by I. A. Goncharov "Ordinary History" The meaning of the title of the novel by I. Goncharov "Ordinary History". The meaning of the title of the novel by I. A. Goncharov "Ordinary History" Comparative characteristics of the main characters of I. Goncharov's novel "An Ordinary Story" Old and new Russia in the novel by I. A. Goncharov "Ordinary History" Ordinary story of Alexander Aduev Characteristics of the image of Alexander Aduev Comparative characteristics of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov and Alexander Aduev (characteristics of characters in Goncharov's novels) About Goncharov's novel "An Ordinary Story" The plot of Goncharov's novel Goncharov I. A. "An Ordinary Story" Comparative characteristics of the heroes of the novel by I. A. Goncharov "Ordinary History" The history of writing Goncharov's novel "Cliff" Alexander and Pyotr Ivanovich Aduev in the novel "An Ordinary Story" The author and his characters in the novel The meaning of the title of the novel by I. Goncharov The novel "An Ordinary Story" (first criticism, first fame) The image of Alexander Aduev, St. Petersburg and the provinces The hero of the novel "An Ordinary Story"

The problem of everyday life of a person originated in antiquity - in fact, when a person made the first attempts to realize himself and his place in the world around him.

However, ideas about everyday life in antiquity and the Middle Ages were predominantly mythological and religious in color.

So, the everyday life of an ancient person is saturated with mythology, and mythology, in turn, is endowed with many features of people's everyday life. The gods are improved people living the same passions, only endowed with greater abilities and opportunities. The gods easily come into contact with people, and people, if necessary, turn to the gods. Good deeds are rewarded right there on earth, and bad deeds are immediately punished. Belief in retribution and fear of punishment form the mysticism of consciousness and, accordingly, the daily existence of a person, manifested both in elementary rituals and in the specifics of perception and comprehension of the surrounding world.

It can be argued that the everyday existence of an ancient person is two-fold: it is conceivable and empirically comprehended, that is, there is a division of being into the sensual-empirical world and the ideal world - the world of ideas. The predominance of one or another ideological attitude had a significant impact on the way of life of a person of antiquity. Everyday life is only beginning to be considered as an area for the manifestation of a person's abilities and capabilities.

It is conceived as an existence focused on self-improvement of the individual, implying the harmonious development of physical, intellectual and spiritual capabilities. At the same time, the material side of life is given a secondary place. One of the highest values ​​of the era of antiquity is moderation, which is manifested in a rather modest lifestyle.

At the same time, the daily life of an individual is not conceived outside of society and is almost completely determined by it. Knowing and fulfilling one's civic obligations is of paramount importance for a polis citizen.

The mystical nature of the everyday life of an ancient person, coupled with a person’s understanding of his unity with the surrounding world, nature and the Cosmos, makes the everyday life of an ancient person sufficiently ordered, giving him a sense of security and confidence.

In the Middle Ages, the world is seen through the prism of God, and religiosity becomes the dominant moment of life, manifesting itself in all spheres of human life. This leads to the formation of a peculiar worldview, in which everyday life appears as a chain of a person's religious experience, while religious rites, commandments, and canons are intertwined in the individual's lifestyle. The whole range of emotions and feelings of a person is religious (faith in God, love for God, hope for salvation, fear of God's wrath, hatred of the devil-tempter, etc.).

Earthly life is saturated with spiritual content, due to which there is a fusion of spiritual and sensual-empirical being. Life provokes a person to commit sinful acts, “throwing” him all sorts of temptations, but it also makes it possible to atone for his sins by moral deeds.

In the Renaissance, ideas about the purpose of a person, about his way of life, undergo significant changes. During this period, both the person and his daily life appear in a new light. A person is presented as a creative person, a co-creator of God, who is able to change himself and his life, who has become less dependent on external circumstances, and much more on his own potential.

The term "everyday" itself appears in the era of the New Age thanks to M. Montaigne, who uses it to designate ordinary, standard, convenient moments of existence for a person, repeating at every moment of an everyday performance. As he rightly remarks, everyday troubles are never small. The will to live is the basis of wisdom. Life is given to us as something that does not depend on us. To dwell on its negative aspects (death, sorrows, illnesses) means to suppress and deny life. The sage must strive to suppress and reject any arguments against life and must say an unconditional yes to life and to all that life is - sorrow, sickness and death.

In the 19th century from an attempt to rationally comprehend everyday life, they move on to considering its irrational component: fears, hopes, deep human needs. Human suffering, according to S. Kierkegaard, is rooted in the constant fear that haunts him at every moment of his life. The one who is mired in sin is afraid of possible punishment, the one who is freed from sin is gnawed by the fear of a new fall into sin. However, man himself chooses his being.

A gloomy, pessimistic view of human life is presented in the works of A. Schopenhauer. The essence of human being is will, a blind onslaught that excites and reveals the universe. Man is driven by an insatiable thirst, accompanied by constant anxiety, want and suffering. According to Schopenhauer, six of the seven days of the week we suffer and lust, and on the seventh we die of boredom. In addition, a person is characterized by a narrow perception of the world around him. He notes that it is human nature to penetrate beyond the boundaries of the universe.

In the XX century. the main object of scientific knowledge is the man himself in his uniqueness and uniqueness. W. Dilthey, M. Heidegger, N. A. Berdyaev and others point to the inconsistency and ambiguity of human nature.

During this period, the “ontological” problematics of human life comes to the fore, and the phenomenological method becomes a special “prism” through which vision, comprehension and cognition of reality, including social reality, are carried out.

The philosophy of life (A. Bergson, W. Dilthey, G. Simmel) focuses on the irrational structures of consciousness in human life, takes into account his nature, instincts, that is, a person returns his right to spontaneity and naturalness. So, A. Bergson writes that of all things we are most sure and best of all know our own existence.

In the works of G. Simmel, there is a negative assessment of everyday life. For him, the routine of everyday life is opposed to an adventure as a period of the highest tension and sharpness of experience, the moment of adventure exists, as it were, independently of everyday life, it is a separate fragment of space-time, where other laws and evaluation criteria apply.

Appeal to everyday life as an independent problem was carried out by E. Husserl within the framework of phenomenology. For him, the vital, everyday world becomes a universe of meanings. The everyday world has an internal orderliness, it has a peculiar cognitive meaning. Thanks to E. Husserl, everyday life acquired in the eyes of philosophers the status of an independent reality of fundamental importance. Everyday life of E. Husserl is distinguished by the simplicity of understanding what is "visible" to him. All people proceed from a natural attitude that unites objects and phenomena, things and living beings, factors of a socio-historical nature. Based on a natural attitude, a person perceives the world as the only true reality. The whole daily life of people is based on a natural attitude. The life world is given directly. This is an area known to all. The life world always refers to the subject. This is his own everyday world. It is subjective and presented in the form of practical goals, life practice.

M. Heidegger made a great contribution to the study of the problems of everyday life. He already categorically separates scientific being from everyday life. Everyday life is an extra-scientific space of its own existence. Everyday life of a person is filled with worries about reproducing oneself in the world as a living being, and not a thinking one. The world of everyday life requires the tireless repetition of the necessary worries (M. Heidegger called it an unworthy level of existence), which suppress the creative impulses of the individual. Heidegger's everyday life is presented in the form of the following modes: "chatter", "ambiguity", "curiosity", "preoccupied dispensation", etc. Thus, for example, "chatter" is presented in the form of empty groundless speech. These modes are far from genuine human, and therefore everyday life has a somewhat negative character, and the everyday world as a whole appears as a world of inauthenticity, groundlessness, loss and publicity. Heidegger notes that a person is constantly accompanied by preoccupation with the present, which turns human life into fearful chores, into the vegetative life of everyday life. This care is aimed at the objects at hand, at the transformation of the world. According to M. Heidegger, a person tries to give up his freedom, to become like everything, which leads to the averaging of individuality. Man no longer belongs to himself, others have taken away his being. However, despite these negative aspects of everyday life, a person constantly strives to stay in cash, to avoid death. He refuses to see death in his daily life, shielding himself from it by life itself.

This approach is aggravated and developed by pragmatists (C. Pierce, W. James), according to whom consciousness is the experience of a person being in the world. Most of the practical affairs of people are aimed at extracting personal benefits. According to W. James, everyday life is expressed in the elements of the individual's life pragmatics.

In D. Dewey's instrumentalism, the concept of experience, nature and existence is far from idyllic. The world is unstable, and existence is risky and unstable. The actions of living beings are unpredictable, and therefore the maximum responsibility and exertion of spiritual and intellectual forces are required from any person.

Psychoanalysis also pays sufficient attention to the problems of everyday life. So, Z. Freud writes about the neuroses of everyday life, that is, the factors that cause them. Sexuality and aggression, suppressed due to social norms, lead a person to neuroses, which in everyday life manifest themselves in the form of obsessive actions, rituals, slips of the tongue, slips of the tongue, and dreams that are understandable only to the person himself. Z. Freud called this "the psychopathology of everyday life." The stronger a person is forced to suppress his desires, the more protection techniques he uses in everyday life. Freud considers repression, projection, substitution, rationalization, reactive formation, regression, sublimation, denial to be the means by which nervous tension can be extinguished. Culture, according to Freud, gave a lot to a person, but took away the most important thing from him - the ability to satisfy his needs.

According to A. Adler, life cannot be imagined without continuous movement in the direction of growth and development. A person's lifestyle includes a unique combination of traits, behaviors, habits, which, taken together, determine a unique picture of a person's existence. From Adler's point of view, lifestyle is firmly fixed at the age of four or five years and subsequently almost does not lend itself to total changes. This style becomes the main core of behavior in the future. It depends on him which aspects of life we ​​will pay attention to, and which we will ignore. Ultimately, only the person himself is responsible for his lifestyle.

Within the framework of postmodernism, it was shown that the life of a modern person has not become more stable and reliable. During this period, it became especially noticeable that human activity is carried out not so much on the basis of the principle of expediency, but on the randomness of expedient reactions in the context of specific changes. Within the framework of postmodernism (J.-F. Lyotard, J. Baudrillard, J. Bataille), an opinion is defended on the legitimacy of considering everyday life from any position in order to obtain a complete picture. Everyday life is not the subject of philosophical analysis of this direction, capturing only certain moments of human existence. The mosaic nature of the picture of everyday life in postmodernism testifies to the equivalence of the most diverse phenomena of human existence. Human behavior is largely determined by the function of consumption. At the same time, human needs are not the basis for the production of goods, but, on the contrary, the machine of production and consumption produces needs. Outside the system of exchange and consumption, there is neither a subject nor objects. The language of things classifies the world even before it is represented in ordinary language, the paradigmization of objects sets the paradigm of communication, interaction in the market serves as the basic matrix of linguistic interaction. There are no individual needs and desires, desires are produced. All-accessibility and permissiveness dull sensations, and a person can only reproduce ideals, values, etc., pretending that this has not happened yet.

However, there are also positives. A post-modern man is oriented towards communication and goal-setting, that is, the main task of a postmodern man, who is in a chaotic, inappropriate, sometimes dangerous world, is the need to reveal himself at all costs.

Existentialists believe that problems are born in the course of the daily life of each individual. Everyday life is not only a "knurled" existence, repeating stereotypical rituals, but also shocks, disappointments, passions. They exist in the everyday world. Death, shame, fear, love, the search for meaning, being the most important existential problems, are also problems of the existence of the individual. Among existentialists, the most common pessimistic view of everyday life.

So, J.P. Sartre put forward the idea of ​​absolute freedom and absolute loneliness of a person among other people. He believes that it is a person who is responsible for the fundamental project of his life. Any failure and failure is a consequence of a freely chosen path, and it is in vain to look for the guilty. Even if a man finds himself in a war, that war is his, since he could well have avoided it by suicide or desertion.

A. Camus endows everyday life with the following characteristics: absurdity, meaninglessness, disbelief in God and individual immortality, while placing enormous responsibility on the person himself for his life.

A more optimistic point of view was held by E. Fromm, who endowed human life with an unconditional meaning, A. Schweitzer and X. Ortega y Gasset, who wrote that life is cosmic altruism, it exists as a constant movement from the vital Self to the Other. These philosophers preached admiration for life and love for it, altruism as a life principle, emphasizing the brightest sides of human nature. E. Fromm also speaks of two main ways of human existence - possession and being. The principle of possession is a setting for the mastery of material objects, people, one's own Self, ideas and habits. Being is opposed to possession and means genuine involvement in the existing and the embodiment in reality of all one's abilities.

The implementation of the principles of being and possession is observed on the examples of everyday life: conversations, memory, power, faith, love, etc. Signs of possession are inertness, stereotyping, superficiality. E. Fromm refers to the signs of being activity, creativity, interest. The possessive mindset is more characteristic of the modern world. This is due to the existence of private property. Existence is not conceived outside of struggle and suffering, and a person never realizes himself in a perfect way.

The leading representative of hermeneutics, G. G. Gadamer, pays great attention to the life experience of a person. He believes that the natural desire of parents is the desire to pass on their experience to children in the hope of protecting them from their own mistakes. However, life experience is the experience that a person must acquire on his own. We constantly come up with new experiences by refuting old experiences, because they are, first of all, painful and unpleasant experiences that go against our expectations. Nevertheless, true experience prepares a person to realize his own limitations, that is, the limits of human existence. The conviction that everything can be redone, that there is a time for everything, and that everything repeats itself in one way or another, turns out to be just an appearance. Rather, the opposite is true: a living and acting person is constantly convinced by history from his own experience that nothing is repeated. All expectations and plans of finite beings are themselves finite and limited. Genuine experience is thus the experience of one's own historicity.

Historical and philosophical analysis of everyday life allows us to draw the following conclusions regarding the development of problems of everyday life. Firstly, the problem of everyday life is posed quite clearly, but a huge number of definitions does not give a holistic view of the essence of this phenomenon.

Second, most philosophers emphasize the negative aspects of everyday life. Thirdly, within the framework of modern science and in line with such disciplines as sociology, psychology, anthropology, history, etc., the studies of everyday life are primarily related to its applied aspects, while its essential content remains out of sight of most researchers.

It is the socio-philosophical approach that makes it possible to systematize the historical analysis of everyday life, to determine its essence, system-structural content and integrity. We note right away that all the basic concepts that reveal everyday life, its basic foundations, one way or another, in one form or another, are present in historical analysis in disparate versions, in various terms. We have only tried in the historical part to consider the essential, meaningful and integral being of everyday life. Without delving into the analysis of such a complex formation as the concept of life, we emphasize that the appeal to it as to the initial one is dictated not only by philosophical directions such as pragmatism, philosophy of life, fundamental ontology, but also by the semantics of the words of everyday life themselves: for all days of life with its eternal and temporal features.

It is possible to single out the main areas of a person's life: his professional work, activities within the framework of everyday life and the sphere of recreation (unfortunately, often understood only as inactivity). Obviously, the essence of life is movement, activity. It is all the features of social and individual activity in a dialectical relationship that determine the essence of everyday life. But it is clear that the pace and nature of the activity, its effectiveness, success or failure are determined by inclinations, skills and, mainly, abilities (the everyday life of an artist, poet, scientist, musician, etc. varies significantly).

If activity is considered as a fundamental attribute of being from the point of view of self-movement of reality, then in each specific case we will deal with a relatively independent system functioning on the basis of self-regulation and self-government. But this presupposes, of course, not only the existence of methods of activity (capabilities), but also the necessity of sources of movement and activity. These sources are most often (and mainly) determined by contradictions between the subject and the object of activity. The subject can also act as an object of a particular activity. This contradiction boils down to the fact that the subject seeks to master the object or part of it that he needs. These contradictions are defined as needs: the need of an individual, a group of people or society as a whole. It is the needs in various altered, transformed forms (interests, motives, goals, etc.) that bring the subject into action. Self-organization and self-management of the activity of the system presupposes as necessary a sufficiently developed understanding, awareness, adequate knowledge (that is, the presence of consciousness and self-consciousness) of the activity itself, and abilities, and needs, and awareness of consciousness and self-consciousness itself. All this is transformed into adequate and definite ends, organizes the necessary means and enables the subject to foresee the corresponding results.

So, all this allows us to consider everyday life from these four positions (activity, need, consciousness, ability): the defining sphere of everyday life is professional activity; human activity in domestic conditions; recreation as a kind of sphere of activity in which these four elements are freely, spontaneously, intuitively outside of purely practical interests, effortlessly (based on gaming activity), movably combined.

We can draw some conclusion. It follows from the previous analysis that everyday life must be defined based on the concept of life, the essence of which (including everyday life) is hidden in activity, and the content of everyday life (for all days!) Is revealed in a detailed analysis of the specifics of the social and individual characteristics of the identified four elements. The integrity of everyday life is hidden in the harmonization, on the one hand, of all its spheres (professional activity, activities in everyday life and leisure), and on the other hand, within each of the spheres based on the originality of the four identified elements. And, finally, we note that all these four elements have been identified, singled out and are already present in the historical-social-philosophical analysis. The category of life is present among representatives of the philosophy of life (M. Montaigne, A. Schopenhauer, V. Dilthey, E. Husserl); the concept of "activity" is present in the currents of pragmatism, instrumentalism (by C. Pierce, W. James, D. Dewey); the concept of "need" dominates among K. Marx, Z. Freud, postmodernists, etc.; V. Dilthey, G. Simmel, K. Marx and others refer to the concept of “ability”, and, finally, we find consciousness as a synthesizing organ in K. Marx, E. Husserl, representatives of pragmatism and existentialism.

Thus, it is this approach that allows us to define the phenomenon of everyday life as a socio-philosophical category, to reveal the essence, content and integrity of this phenomenon.

Simmel, G. Selected Works. - M., 2006.

Sartre, J.P. Existentialism is humanism // Twilight of the Gods / ed. A. A. Yakovleva. - M., 1990.

Camus, A. A rebellious man / A. Camus // A rebellious man. Philosophy. Policy. Art. - M., 1990.

Task 25. In O. Balzac's story "Gobsek" (written in 1830, final edition - 1835), the hero, an incredibly rich usurer, sets out his view of life:

“What causes delight in Europe is punished in Asia. What is considered a vice in Paris is recognized as a necessity outside the Azores. There is nothing lasting on earth, there are only conventions, and they are different in every climate. For one who, willy-nilly, was applied to all social standards, all your moral rules and beliefs are empty words. Only one single feeling, embedded in us by nature itself, is unshakable: the instinct of self-preservation ... Here, live with me, you will find out that of all earthly blessings, there is only one that is reliable enough to make it worth a man to chase after him. Is this gold. All the forces of mankind are concentrated in gold... As for morals, man is the same everywhere: everywhere there is a struggle between the poor and the rich, everywhere. And it is inevitable. So it’s better to push yourself than to let others push you.”.
Underline in the text the sentences that, in your opinion, most clearly characterize the personality of Gobsek.
Why do you think the author gives his hero the name Gobsek, which means "liver"? What do you think could have made it that way? Write down the main conclusions.

A person devoid of sympathy, the concepts of goodness, alien to compassion in his desire for enrichment, is called a "liver". It is difficult to imagine what exactly could have made him so. A hint, perhaps, in the words of Gobseck himself, that the best teacher of a person is misfortune, only it helps a person learn the value of people and money. Difficulties, misfortunes of his own life and the society surrounding Gobsek, where gold was considered the main measure of everything and the greatest good, made Gobsek a “liver”.

Based on your conclusions, write a short story - the story of Gobsek's life (childhood and youth, travel, meetings with people, historical events, sources of his wealth, etc.), told by himself.
I was born in the family of a poor craftsman in Paris and lost my parents very early. Once on the street, I wanted one thing - to survive. Everything boiled in my soul when I saw the magnificent outfits of aristocrats, gilded carriages rushing along the pavements and forcing you to press against the wall so as not to be crushed. Why is the world so unfair? Then ... the revolution, the ideas of freedom and equality, which turned everyone's head. Needless to say, I joined the Jacobins. And with what delight I received Napoleon! He made the nation proud of himself. Then there was a restoration and everything that had been fought against for so long returned. And again gold ruled the world. They no longer remembered freedom and equality, and I went south, to Marseilles... After many years of deprivation, wandering, dangers, I managed to get rich and learn the main principle of today's life - it is better to crush yourself than to be crushed by others. And here I am in Paris, and those whose carriages once had to shy away come to me asking for money. Do you think I'm happy? Not at all, it confirmed me even more in the opinion that the main thing in life is gold, only it gives power over people.

Task 26. Here are reproductions of two paintings. Both artists wrote works mainly on everyday topics. Consider the illustrations, paying attention to the time they were created. Compare both works. Is there anything in common in the depiction of the characters, the attitude of the authors towards them? Maybe you've noticed something different? Record the results of your observations in a notebook.

General: Everyday scenes from the life of the third estate are depicted. We see the disposition of the artists towards their characters and their knowledge of the subject.
Miscellaneous: Chardin depicted in his paintings calm intimate scenes full of love, light and peace. In Mülle, we see endless fatigue, hopelessness and resignation to a difficult fate.

Task 27. Read the fragments of the literary portrait of the famous writer of the 19th century. (author of the essay - K. Paustovsky). In the text, the writer's name is replaced by the letter N.
What writer did K. Paustovsky talk about? For an answer, you can use the text of § 6 of the textbook, which gives literary portraits of writers. Underline the phrases in the text that, from your point of view, allow you to accurately determine the name of the writer.

The stories and poems of N, the colonial correspondent, who himself stood under bullets and talked with the soldiers, and did not disdain the society of the colonial intelligentsia, were understandable and illustrative for wide literary circles.
About everyday life and work in the colonies, about the people of this world - English officials, soldiers and officers who create an empire far away from native farms and cities lying under the blessed sky of old England, N. narrated. He and writers close to him in general direction glorified the empire as a great Mother, never tired of dispatching new and new generations of her sons for the distant seas.
Children from different countries read the "Jungle Books" of this writer. His talent was inexhaustible, his language was precise and rich, his fiction was full of plausibility. All these properties are enough to be a genius, to belong to humanity.

About Joseph Rudyard Kipling.

Task 28. The French artist E. Delacroix traveled extensively in the countries of the East. He was fascinated by the opportunity to portray vivid exotic scenes that excited the imagination.
Come up with a few "oriental" stories that you think might be of interest to the artist. Write down the stories or their titles.

The death of the Persian king Darius, Shahsey-Wahsey among the Shiites with self-torture to the point of blood, bride kidnapping, horse racing among nomadic peoples, falconry, hunting with cheetahs, armed Bedouins on camels.

Name the Delacroix paintings shown on p. 29-30.
1. "Algerian women in their chambers", 1834;
2. "Lion hunting in Morocco", 1854;
3. "Moroccan saddling a horse", 1855.

Try to find albums with reproductions of this artist's works. Compare the names you give with the real ones. Write down the names of other paintings by Delacroix about the East that interest you.
"Cleopatra and the Peasant", 1834, "Massacre on Chios", 1824, "Death of Sardanapal" 1827, "Fight of the Gyaur with the Pasha", 1827, "Fight of the Arabian Horses", 1860, " Fanatics of Tangier" 1837-1838

Task 29. Contemporaries rightly considered Daumier's caricatures to be illustrations of Balzac's works.

Consider a few of these works: "The Little Clerk", "Robert Maker - Stock Player", "The Legislative Womb", "Moonlight Action", "Representatives of Justice", "The Lawyer".
Make captions under the paintings (use quotes from Balzac's text for this). Write the names of the characters and the titles of the works of Balzac, illustrations for which could be the works of Daumier.

Task 30. Artists of different eras sometimes turned to the same plot, but interpreted it differently.

Consider in the 7th grade textbook reproductions of the famous painting by David "The Oath of the Horatii", created in the Age of Enlightenment. What do you think, could this story be of interest to a romantic artist who lived in the 1930s and 1940s? 19th century? What would the piece look like? Describe it.
The plot could be of interest to romantics. They strove to depict heroes at the moments of the highest tension of spiritual and physical forces, when the inner spiritual world of a person is exposed, showing his essence. The product could look the same. You can replace the costumes, bringing them closer to the present.

Task 31. At the end of the 60s. 19th century Impressionists broke into the artistic life of Europe, defending new views on art.

In the book of L. Volynsky "The Green Tree of Life" there is a short story about how once K. Monet, as always in the open air, painted a picture. For a moment the sun hid behind a cloud, and the artist stopped working. At that moment, G. Courbet found him, wondering why he was not working. “Waiting for the sun,” Monet replied. "You could paint a background landscape for now," Courbet shrugged.
What do you think the impressionist Monet answered him? Write down the possible answers.
1. Monet's paintings are permeated with light, they are bright, sparkling, joyful - "for space you need light."
2. Probably waiting for inspiration - "I don't have enough light."

Before you are two female portraits. Considering them, pay attention to the composition of the work, details, features of the image. Put under the illustrations the dates of creation of the works: 1779 or 1871.

What features of the portraits that you noticed allowed you to complete this task correctly?
By dress and writing style. "Portrait of the Duchess de Beaufort" Gainsborough - 1779 "Portrait of Jeanne Samary" Renoir - 1871 Gainsborough's portraits were made mainly to order. In a sophisticated manner, coldly detached aristocrats were portrayed. Renoir, on the other hand, portrayed ordinary French women, young cheerful and spontaneous, full of life and charm. The technique of painting is also different.

Task 32. The discoveries of the Impressionists paved the way for the Post-Impressionists - painters who sought to capture their own unique vision of the world with maximum expressiveness.

Paul Gauguin's painting "Tahitian Pastorals" was created by the artist in 1893 during his stay in Polynesia. Try to write a story about the content of the picture (what happens on the canvas, how Gauguin relates to the world captured on canvas).
Considering civilization a disease, Gauguin gravitated towards exotic places, sought to merge with nature. This was reflected in his paintings, which depicted the life of the Polynesians, simple and measured. Emphasized the simplicity and manner of writing. On planar canvases, static and color-contrasting compositions were depicted, deeply emotional and at the same time decorative.

Examine and compare two still lifes. Each work tells about the time when it was created. Do these works have something in common?
The still lifes depict simple everyday things and unpretentious fruits. Both still lifes are distinguished by the simplicity and conciseness of the composition.

Have you noticed a difference in the image of the objects? What is she in?
Klas reproduces objects in detail, strictly maintains perspective and chiaroscuro, uses soft tones. Cezanne presents us with a picture as if from different points of view, using a clear outline to emphasize the volume of the subject, and bright saturated colors. The crumpled tablecloth does not look as soft as Klas's, but rather plays the role of a background and sharpens the composition.

Think up and write down an imaginary conversation between the Dutch artist P. Klas and the French painter P. Cezanne, in which they would talk about their still lifes. What would they praise each other for? What would these two masters of still life criticize?
K .: "I used light, air and a single tone to express the unity of the objective world and the environment."
S .: “My method is hatred for a fantastic image. I write only the truth and I want to hit Paris with a carrot and an apple."
K .: “It seems to me that you are not detailed enough and depict objects incorrectly.”
S.: “An artist should not be too scrupulous, or too sincere, or too dependent on nature; the artist is more or less the master of his model, and above all of his means of expression.
K .: “But I like your work with color, I also consider this the most important element of painting.”
S.: “Color is the point where our brain touches the universe.”
*note. When compiling the dialogue, Cezanne's quotes were used.