What comes to the fore in Trifonov's story "The Exchange" when reading it today? The inner world of the personality and its relationship with various aspects of reality according to Y. Trifonov "Exchange" II

The story "Exchange" was written by Trifonov in 1969 and published in the "New World" in the same year in latest issue. She opened the cycle of "Moscow Tales" about actual problems Soviet citizens.

Genre originality

In the foreground in the story are family and everyday problems that expose philosophical questions the meaning of human life. This is a story about a worthy life and death. In addition, Trifonov reveals the psychology of each character, even minor ones. Each of them has their own truth, but the dialogue does not work.

Issues

Trifonov addresses the topic of confrontation between two families. Victor Dmitriev, having married Lena Lukyanova, could not convey to her the values ​​of the Dmitriev family: spiritual sensitivity, gentleness, tact, intelligence. On the other hand, Dmitriev himself, in the words of his sister Laura, “became lukewarm”, that is, he became pragmatic, striving not so much for material wealth as for being left alone.

Trifonov raises in the story important social problems. The modern reader does not understand the problem of the protagonist. soviet man, as if he had no property, and did not have the right to live in a normal apartment with rooms for spouses and a child. And it was completely wild that the mother’s room after death could not be inherited, but would go to the state. So Lena tried to save the property in the only possible way: by exchanging two rooms in a communal apartment for two-room apartment. Another thing is that Ksenia Fedorovna immediately guessed about her fatal illness. It is in this, and not in the exchange itself, that the evil emanating from the insensitive Lena lies.

Plot and composition

The main action takes place on an October afternoon and in the morning. next day. But the reader gets acquainted not only with the whole life of the protagonist, but also learns about the families of the Lukyanovs and Dmitrievs. This Trifonov achieves with the help of retrospection. Main character reflects on the events happening to him and his own actions, remembering the past.

Standing in front of the hero difficult task: to inform the terminally ill mother, who does not know the seriousness of her illness, and her sister that Lena's wife is planning an exchange. In addition, the hero needs to get money for treatment for his sister Laura, with whom her mother lives now. The hero solves both tasks brilliantly, so the former lover offers him money, and by moving to his mother, he supposedly helps his sister leave on a long business trip.

The last page of the story contains the events of six months: there is a move, the mother dies, the hero feels miserable. The narrator adds on his own behalf that Dmitriev's childhood home was demolished, where he was never able to convey family values. So the Lukyanovs defeated the Dmitrievs in a symbolic sense.

Heroes of the story

The protagonist of the story is 37-year-old Dmitriev. He is middle-aged, plump, with an eternal smell of tobacco from his mouth. The hero is proud, he takes the love of his mother, wife, mistress for granted. Dmitriev's life credo is "I got used to it and calmed down." He comes to terms with the fact that his loving wife and mother do not get along.

Dmitriev defends his mother, whom Lena calls a hypocrite. The sister believes that Dmitriev has gone rogue, that is, he betrayed his high spirit and disinterestedness for the sake of the material.

Dmitriev considers peace to be the most valuable thing in life and protects it with all his might. Another value of Dmitriev and his consolation is that he has "everything like everyone else."

Dmitriev is helpless. He cannot write a dissertation, although Lena agrees to help in everything. Especially revealing is the story of Lyovka Bubrik, whom his father-in-law, at the request of Lena, found a good place in GINEGA, where Dmitriev himself eventually went to work. And Lena took all the blame. Everything was revealed when Lena, at Ksenia Fedorovna's birthday, said that it was Dmitriev's decision.

At the end of the story, Dmitriev's mother explains the subtext of the exchange made by the hero: having exchanged true values for momentary gain, he lost his emotional sensitivity.

Dmitriev's wife Lena is smart. She is a specialist in technical translation. Dmitriev considers Lena selfish and callous. According to Dmitriev, Lena notes some spiritual inaccuracy. He throws an accusation in his wife's face that she has a mental defect, underdevelopment of feelings, something subhuman.

Lena knows how to get her way. Wanting to exchange an apartment, she cares not about herself, but about her family.

Dmitriev's father-in-law, Ivan Vasilievich, was a tanner by profession, but he was advancing trade union line. Through his efforts, a telephone was installed in the dacha six months later. He was always on the alert, he did not trust anyone. The father-in-law's speech was full of clericalism, which is why Dmitriev's mother considered him unintelligent.

Tanya is Dmitriev's former mistress, with whom he got together 3 years ago for one summer. She is 34 years old, she looks sickly: thin, pale. Her eyes are big and kind. Tanya is afraid for Dmitriev. After a relationship with him, she stayed with her son Alik: her husband quit his job and left Moscow, because Tanya could no longer live with him. Her husband really loved her. Dmitriev thinks that Tanya would be him best wife, but leaves everything as it is.

Tatyana and Ksenia Fedorovna are nice to each other. Tatyana pities Dmitriev and loves him, while Dmitriev pities her only for a moment. Dmitriev thinks that this love is forever. Tatyana knows many poems and reads them by heart in a whisper, especially when there is nothing to talk about.

Mother Dmitrieva Ksenia Fedorovna is an intelligent, respected woman. She worked as a senior bibliographer in one of the academic libraries. The mother is so simple-hearted that she does not understand the danger of her illness. She made peace with Lena. Ksenia Fedorovna is "benevolent, compliant, ready to help and takes part." Only Lena does not appreciate this. Ksenia Fedorovna is not inclined to lose heart, she communicates in a joking manner.

Mother loves selflessly to help distant acquaintances and relatives. But Dmitriev understands that the mother is doing this in order to be reputed a good man. For this, Lena called Dmitriev's mother a hypocrite.

Dmitriev's grandfather - keeper family values. Lena called him a well-preserved monster. Grandfather was a lawyer who graduated from St. Petersburg University, in his youth he was in a fortress, was in exile and fled abroad. Grandfather was small and shrunken, his skin was tanned, and his hands were clumsy and disfigured by hard work.

Unlike the daughter, the grandfather does not despise people if they belong to a different circle, and does not condemn anyone. He lives not in the past, but in his short future. It was the grandfather who gave a well-aimed description of Victor: “You are not a bad person. But not amazing either."

Laura, Dmitriev's sister, is middle-aged, with gray-black hair and a tanned forehead. She spends 5 months every year Central Asia. Laura is cunning and perspicacious. She did not come to terms with Lena's attitude towards her mother. Laura is uncompromising: “Her thoughts never bend. Always sticking out and pricking.

Artistic originality

The author uses details instead of lengthy characteristics. For example, the sagging belly of his wife, seen by Dmitriev, speaks of his coldness towards her. Two pillows on the matrimonial bed, one of which, stale, belongs to the husband, indicate that there is no true love between the spouses.

After reading the works of Trifonov, the reader may have the opinion that the author has no ideals. And indeed, in the work "Exchange" the writer does not single out anyone, making only a positive, or only a negative character. All heroes are on an equal footing. Thus, Trifonov shows that he is not "white and black." After all, everything in life is relative.

The mother of the protagonist of the work, Viktor Dmitriev, is mortally ill. Perhaps she has only a few months to live, or maybe even days. All her life she showed in the eyes of the public that there is absolutely no malicious intent or self-interest in her. Meanwhile, a woman with condemnation refers to own son because of his choice of "passion".

The same thing happens with her daughter Laura. A woman with a good "proletarian" education, and from an intelligent family, is herself unhappy in marriage. For her, one consolation is work. After all, it is there that she can realize herself as a person.

Father and grandfather are also mentioned in the work. Men, seeing how their relatives “fight”, often said that it was impossible to live with hatred. However, first Victor's father and then his beloved grandfather die. stays with his mother, but they have no common themes, plans, and even interests. But there is Victor's wife, Lena, whom both her mother and sister Laura hate, because the woman is completely different both in character and in convictions.

Nothing is impossible for Lena. What she plans, she will definitely implement. It would seem very positive quality! But there is also back side medals. She does not always achieve her goals honestly. If a woman is faced with the choice to compromise with her conscience or to step aside, then she will choose the first option. Her desires are always very real, and the arguments are very weighty. Lena always hides behind the fact that she does everything for the sake of her family. She repeats the same to Victor.

Victor is also not a “positive” character in the work. It completely depends on Lena's decisions and her arguments. His spinelessness manifests itself already at the beginning of the work, when the author clarifies that the man renounced his dream because he failed to enter the desired university. Later, he met his future wife, and she said that it was too late to dream about anything. We need to live here and now. And in this, of course, there is some truth, so Victor "obeyed".

But is there love between a married couple? Most likely no. Both characters are comfortable with each other. “blinded” what she needed from Dmitriev, and the man, with his own wife, covers up his own low moral imperfections. She is for him a kind of shield, from other people's comments and condemnations.

And still, in the depths of his soul, Victor sees himself with Tatyana. He knows that she is not capable of betrayal, low deeds, hypocrisy and deceit. Dmitriev appreciates this in her and thinks that he himself is the same. Victor will only then understand how different their levels of spiritual and moral state are. He will understand, but it will be too late to fix something.

In the center of Y. Trifonov's story "Exchange" is the image of two families of Dmitrievs and Lukyanovs, who became related due to the marriage of two representatives of their young generation - Victor and Lena. These two families are, to a certain extent, the opposite of each other.

However, the author does not show their direct confrontation, it is expressed indirectly through numerous comparisons, through collisions and conflicts in the relations of representatives of these families. So, the Dmitrievs are distinguished from the Lukyanovs, first of all, by their ancient roots, the presence of several generations in this surname, which ensures continuity moral values, ethical foundations that have developed in this family. The transmission of these values ​​from generation to generation determines the moral stability of the members of this family. Gradually, these values ​​leave the Dmitriev family and are replaced by others.

In this regard, the image of grandfather Fyodor Nikolayevich is extremely important, since it makes it possible to trace the process of the Dmitriev family losing those qualities, life principles, which their ancestors lived and which distinguished the Dmitrievs' house from others. The grandfather appears in the story as a kind of ancient "monster", since many great things fell to his lot. historical events, but at the same time it remains real historical figure. Grandfather embodies best qualities the houses of the Dmitrievs - intelligence, tact, good breeding, adherence to principles, which once distinguished all representatives of this kind. His daughter, Ksenia Fedorovna, is already somewhat distant from her father: she is distinguished by excessive pride, feigned intelligence, rejection of his life principles (the scene of a dispute with her father about contempt). Appears in it such a feature as "prudence", that is, the desire to look better than you really are. Playing the role of an ideal woman-mother in the story, Ksenia Fedorovna, nevertheless, is not goodie, because it contains negative qualities. With the development of the plot, we learn that Ksenia Fedorovna is not as intelligent and disinterested as she wants to seem.

However, a person is always a combination of negative and positive principles. Despite her shortcomings, Ksenia Fedorovna fully realizes herself as a mother. She is with feeling quivering love treats his only son, pities him, worries about him, perhaps blames himself for his unrealized opportunities (Dmitriev knew how to draw beautifully in his youth, but he did not receive this gift further development). Thus, Victor's mother is the guardian of the spiritual ties of this family, with her love, as it were, she spiritually binds herself to her son. Finally separated, spiritually cut off from his grandfather is Victor, who has only "childish devotion" in relation to his grandfather. Hence the misunderstanding and alienation in their last conversation when Dmitriev wanted to talk about Lena, and grandfather wanted to think about death.

It is no coincidence that with the death of his grandfather, Dmitriev feels cut off from home, family, the loss of family ties. However, the process of Victor's spiritual alienation from his family, which took on an irreversible character after the death of his grandfather, began long ago, from the moment of his marriage to Lena Lukyanova. It is in the twinning of two houses that one should look for the origins of the destruction of the Dmitriev family, since it marked the beginning of quarrels, scandals and disagreements both between families and within them. The Lukyanov family is different both in origin and occupation: they are people of practical acumen, "able to live", in contrast to the impractical, not adapted to life Dmitrievs. Their family is presented much narrower: they do not have a home, that is, a family nest, thus the author, as it were, deprives them of rootedness, support and family ties in this life.

The absence of family ties, in turn, causes the absence of spiritual ties in this family, there is no love, family warmth, human participation. On the contrary, relations in this family bear the imprint of official business, are uncomfortable, not homely. In this regard, two fundamental features of this kind are natural - practicality and incredulity.

The feeling of love is replaced by a sense of duty, it is precisely because of the feeling of his duty to the family that Ivan Vasilyevich financially equips his house, financially provides for his family, for which Vera Lazarevna feels a feeling of canine devotion to him, since she herself "never worked and lived dependent on Ivan Vasilyevich". An absolute copy of their parents is their daughter Lena. She combined the sense of duty taken from her father, responsibility to her family, on the one hand, and Vera Lazarevna's devotion to her husband, family, on the other, and all this is complemented by the practicality that is inherent in the entire Lukyanov family. That is why Lena tries to make a profitable apartment exchange during her mother-in-law's illness, arranges him for a profitable job at GINEGA, thereby betraying her childhood friend Levka Bubrik, who at that time had no job at all.

However, all these "deals" are not immoral for Lena, since for her the concept of benefit is initially moral, because her main life principle is expediency. Lena's practicality reaches the highest degree. This is confirmed by the "mental defect", "mental inaccuracy", "underdevelopment of feelings", which Victor notes in it. And from this follows her tactlessness, first of all, in relation to close people (an apartment exchange started at the wrong time, a quarrel over Lena's transfer of her father's portrait in the Dmitrievs' house). In the house of the Dmitriev-Lukyanovs there is no love, family warmth, daughter Natasha does not see affection, because "the measure parental love"For Lena is an English special school. From here one feels the constant falsehood, insincerity in relations between members of this family.

In Lena's mind, the spiritual is replaced by the material. The proof of this is not only the English special school, but also the fact that the author never mentions any of its spiritual qualities, talents, it all comes down to the material.

At the same time, Lena is much more viable than her husband, she is stronger and more courageous than him morally. And the situation shown by the author of the connection of two families, the merging of spiritual principles and practicality leads to the victory of the latter. Dmitriev turns out to be crushed by his wife as a person, he finally “disappears”, becomes a “henpecked” husband. It should be noted that the story begins at the climax of the hero's life - the fatal illness of the mother, started in connection with this apartment exchange. The author, thus, puts his hero in a situation of choice, since it is in a situation of choice that the moral essence of a person is manifested. As a result, it turns out that Dmitriev is a weak-willed person, constantly making worldly compromises.

Already from the beginning of the story, his model of behavior becomes clear - this is an avoidance of a decision, of responsibility, a desire to preserve the usual order of things at all costs. The result of the choice made by Victor is deplorable - the death of his mother, whom he exchanged for material well-being, for a well-equipped life. But the worst thing is that there is no sense of guilt in Victor, he does not blame himself either for the death of his mother, or for breaking spiritual ties with his family, he puts all the blame on the circumstances that he could not overcome, on the "lunacy" that he did not was able to overcome.

And if earlier, in the plot situation of the story, when Lena started talking about the exchange, Dmitriev was still capable of some kind of struggle with "lukyanization", to protect his life principles, then at the end of the story he himself bitterly admits that he "really nothing need not" that he seeks only peace. From that moment on, Dmitriev begins to quickly "lukyanivatsya", that is, to lose those spiritual qualities, then moral education, which were originally laid in it by the ancestors of the Dmitriev family. Gradually, Victor turns into a cold-blooded, mentally callous person who lives in self-deception, taking everything for granted, and his youthful aspirations and real dreams turn into unattainable dreams. The result of "lukyanization" is the spiritual death of the hero, degradation as a person, loss of family ties.

An important semantic load in the story is the image of Tanya, who is the embodiment of normal human connections, relationships, true love. In her world, there is a completely different system of moral values ​​than in Dmitriev's world, according to which it seems impossible for Tanya to live with an unloved, albeit loving, person. In turn, this man who loves her leaves without making scenes and scandals, without sharing rags and meters, but allowing Tanya to live her life. This is what is real love- the desire for good and happiness to a loved one. It is also important in the image of Tanya that, despite all the misfortunes that befell her, she managed to preserve her inner, spiritual world.

It is thanks to her spiritual fullness, strong moral principles, spiritual strength that she managed to survive in this life, thanks to these qualities she is much stronger and stronger than Dmitriev. The "exchange" carried out by Tanya turned out to be much more honest than the "exchange" of Victor, since it was made not in pursuit of material gain, but in accordance with feelings, at the call of the heart. Thus, Y. Trifonov's exchange is not only a material transaction, but also a spiritual and psychological situation. "You have already exchanged, Vitya.

The exchange took place,” says Dmitriev’s mother, meaning not an exchange of an apartment, but an exchange of the way of life, moral values ​​and life principles of the Dmitriev family for the way of life of the Lukyanov family, that is, “lukianization.” Thus, the exchange from the sphere of everyday, material relations passes into sphere of spiritual relations.In Y. Trifonov's story, the leitmotif is reflections on the decreasing spiritual relations between people, thinning human ties. the main problem personality - the lack of spiritual ties with other people and, above all, with their family.

According to Y. Trifonov, relationships within the family are more dependent on spiritual closeness, on the depth of mutual understanding, and these are very complex and subtle things that require special talent, which the Dmitriev-Lukyanov family is deprived of. Without these qualities, the existence of a family is impossible, only the outer shell remains with absolute internal destruction, spiritual disunity.

Lesson 7 Moral issues

And artistic features

stories by Yu.V. Trifonov "Exchange"

Lesson Objectives: give the concept of "urban" prose, short review its central themes; analysis of Trifonov's story "Exchange".

Methodical methods: lecture; analytical conversation.

During the classes

I. Teacher's word

In the late 60s - 70s, a powerful layer of literature was defined, which began to be called "urban", "intellectual" and even "philosophical" prose. These names are also conditional, especially because they contain a certain opposition to "village" prose, which, it turns out, is devoid of intellectuality and philosophy. But if "village" prose was looking for support in moral traditions, basics folk life, explored the consequences of a person’s break with the earth, with a rural “mode”, then “urban” prose is associated with the educational tradition, sources of opposition to catastrophic processes in social life it seeks in the subjective sphere, in internal resources the man himself, a native city dweller. If in “village” prose the inhabitants of the village and the city are opposed (and this is a traditional opposition for Russian history and culture), and this often constitutes a conflict of works, then urban prose is primarily interested in an urban person with a fairly high educational and cultural level in his problems , a person more associated with "bookish" culture - true or mass culture, than with folklore. The conflict is not associated with the opposition village - city, nature - culture, but is transferred to the sphere of reflection, to the sphere of feelings and problems of a person associated with his existence in modern world.

Whether a person as a person is able to resist circumstances, change them, or the person himself gradually, imperceptibly and irreversibly changes under their influence - these questions are raised in the works of Yuri Trifonov, Yuri Dombrovsky, Daniil Granin, Arkady and Boris Strugatsky, Grigory Gorin and others. Writers often act not only and not so much as storytellers, but as researchers, experimenters, reflecting, doubting, analyzing. "Urban" prose explores the world through the prism of culture, philosophy, religion. Time, history is interpreted as the development, movement of ideas, individual consciousnesses, each of which is significant and unique.

II. Analytical conversation

What are the roots of such an approach to man, to personality in Russian literature?

(In many ways, this is a continuation of the traditions of Dostoevsky, who explored the life of ideas, the life of a person is not the limit of possibilities, and raised the question of “the boundaries of man.”)

What do you know about Yu. V. Trifonov?

(One of the most prominent authors of "urban" prose is Yuri Valentinovich Trifonov (1925-1981). In Soviet time he was not an outspoken dissident, but was a "stranger" to Soviet literature. Critics reproached him for writing "not about" that his works are completely gloomy, that he is completely immersed in everyday life. Trifonov wrote about himself: “I write about death (“Exchange”) - they tell me that I write about life, I write about love (“Another farewell” - they say that it is also about life; I write about the breakup of a family (“Preliminary results ”- again I hear about life; I write about a person’s struggle with mortal grief (“Another life” - they again talk about life.)

Why do you think the writer was reproached for being immersed in everyday life? Is it true?

What is the role of "everyday life" in the story "Exchange"?

(The very title of the story "Exchange", first of all, reveals the everyday, everyday situation of the hero - the situation of exchanging an apartment. Indeed, the life of urban families, their everyday problems occupy significant place in the story. But this is only the first, superficial layer of the story. Life - the conditions for the existence of heroes. The seeming routine, familiarity, generality of this way of life is deceptive. In fact, the test of everyday life is no less difficult and dangerous than the tests that fall on a person in acute, critical situations. It is dangerous that a person changes under the influence of everyday life gradually, imperceptibly for himself, everyday life provokes a person without internal support, a core for actions that the person himself is then horrified by.)

What are the main events of the plot

What is the nature of the composition of the story?

(The composition gradually reveals the process of the hero’s moral betrayal. The sister and mother believed “that he had quietly betrayed them”, “he had gone sloppy”. The hero is gradually dressed for one compromise after another, as if by force, due to circumstances, retreats from his conscience: in relation to work, to a beloved woman, to a friend, to his family, and, finally, to his mother. At the same time, Victor "was tormented, amazed, racked his brains, but then he got used to it. He got used to it because he saw that everyone had the same thing, and everyone is accustomed to. And he calmed down on the truth that there is nothing in life more wise and valuable than peace, and it must be protected with all your might. " Habit, calmness are the reasons for readiness to compromise.)

How Trifonov expands the scope of the narrative, moves from description privacy to generalizations?

(The word invented by Victor's sister, Laura, - "to be lukewarm" - is already a generalization that very accurately conveys the essence of changes in a person. These changes concern not only one hero. On the way to the dacha, remembering the past of his family, Dmitriev delays the meeting with his mother, delays the unpleasant and a treacherous conversation about the exchange. It seems to him that he must "think about something important, the last. "Everything has changed on the other side. Everything has been 'looked.' Every year something changed in detail, but when fourteen years passed, it turned out that everything went wrong - completely and hopelessly. The second time the word was already given without quotes, as an established concept. The hero thinks about these changes in much the same way as he thought about his family life: maybe it's not so bad? And if this happens with everything, even with the shore, with the river and with the grass, then maybe this is natural and it should be so? "No one, except the hero himself, can answer these questions. And it is more convenient for him to answer: yes, that's how it should be - and calm down.)

What is the difference between the Dmitriev and Lukyanov family clans?

(Unlike the two life positions, two systems of values, spiritual and domestic, is the conflict of the story. The main bearer of the Dmitrievs' values ​​is his grandfather, Fedor Nikolaevich. He is an old lawyer, with a revolutionary past: "he sat in a fortress, exiled, fled abroad, worked in Switzerland, in Belgium, was acquainted with Vera Zasulich." Dmitriev recalls that "the old man was a stranger to any Lukian-likeness, he simply did not understand many things." He could not understand how to "know how to live", like Dmitriev's father-in-law, Lukyanov, therefore, in the eyes of the Lukyanov clan, Fedor Nikolaevich is a monster who does not understand anything in modern life.)

What is the meaning of the title of the story?

(Life changes only outwardly, but people remain the same. Let us recall what Bulgakov's Woland says about this: “only the housing problem spoiled them.” “ Housing problem"becomes a test for the hero Trifonov, a test that he cannot stand and breaks down. Grandfather says: “Ksenia and I expected that something different would come out of you. Nothing terrible happened, of course. You are not a bad person. But not amazing either."

“Lukyanization” destroys the hero not only morally, but also physically: after the exchange and the death of his mother, Dmitriev had a hypertensive crisis, and he lay at home in strict bed rest for three weeks. The hero becomes different: the thing is not an old man, but already elderly, with limp cheeks, an uncle.

The terminally ill mother says to Dmitriev: “You have already exchanged, Vitya. The exchange took place... It was a very long time ago. And it always happens, every day, so don't be surprised, Vitya. And don't get angry. It's just so imperceptible…”

At the end of the story is a list of legal documents required for the exchange. Their dry, businesslike, official language emphasizes the tragedy of what happened. Phrases about a favorable decision regarding the exchange and about the death of Xenia Feodorovna stand side by side. The exchange of values ​​took place.)

Homework (by groups):

Present the work of young poets of the 60s: A. Voznesensky, R. Rozhdestvensky, E. Yevtushenko, B. Akhmadulina.

Material for the lesson-seminar on the story "Exchange"

1. Yuri Trifonov recalled how in the 60s the story “Eternal Themes” was returned to him from the editorial office of Novy Mir because the editor of the magazine (A. T. Tvardovsky) “was deeply convinced that eternal themes there is a lot of some other literature - maybe also necessary, but in some way irresponsible and, as it were, lower in rank than the literature that he edited.

What does "eternal themes" mean in literature?

Are there "eternal themes" in the story "Exchange"? What are they?

Are the themes of the "Exchange" "inferior in rank" compared to the heroic-patriotic themes?

2. “The hero of Trifonov is, like the writer himself, an urban, intelligent man who survived the Stalin era with difficulty, and even tragically. If he himself did not sit, was not in the Gulag, so almost by accident he put someone there, if he is alive, then he does not know whether to rejoice at this circumstance or be upset. At the same time, all these people, more or less, are sincerely inclined to analyze both their past and present, and for this very reason they hardly fit, if not do not fit at all, into the reality surrounding them, into such insincere Soviet society" ( S. Zalygin).

Is the characteristic given by S. Zalygin suitable for the heroes of the story "Exchange"?

Do the heroes have a pronounced attitude towards the Gulag?

Which of the characters in the story is most prone to "analysis" of both their past and their present? What are the implications of this analysis?

3. “Life for Trifonov is not a threat to morality, but the sphere of its manifestation. Leading his heroes through the test of everyday life, the test of everyday life, he reveals the not always perceptible connection between everyday everyday life and the high, ideal, exposes layer by layer the whole multi-component nature of a person, the whole complexity of influences. environment» (A. G. Bocharov, G. A. Belaya).

How is life depicted in the story "Exchange"?

Does Trifonov lead his heroes "through the ordeal of everyday life, the ordeal of everyday life"? How is this test present in the story?

What in "Exchange" represents the high, the ideal? Is there a connection between the everyday life depicted in the story and the high, ideal?

4. Literary critics A. G. Bocharov and G. A. Belaya write about Trifonov: “He looks at people, at their everyday life not haughtily, not from the heavenly distances of abstraction, but with understanding and sympathy. But at the same time, humanistically demanding, he does not forgive those “trifles” that usually disappear with a generalized enthusiastic look at a person.

Is there really no generalized enthusiastic attitude in Trifonov's view of the heroes of the story? What "little things" in the behavior and characters of the characters does the writer describe? What is his attitude to these "little things"?

5. Literary critic V. G. Vozdvizhensky writes about the story “The Exchange”: “Convincingly, visibly, with the full measure of the author’s condemnation, the writer traces how ordinary “micro-concessions”, “micro-agreements”, “micro-offences”, gradually accumulating, can ultimately lead to to the loss of the truly human in a person, for nothing arises suddenly, from scratch.

What kind of "micro-concessions", "micro-agreements", "micro-misdemeanors" of his character does the writer depict? How is the “full measure of condemnation” of these “microdeeds” manifested?

What is the meaning of adding the part "micro" to the words "concession", "agreement", "misconduct"? Is it possible to use them to characterize the behavior of the hero of the story without her?

Identify the main stages in creating a picture of the loss of "truly human in a person" in the story "Exchange".

6. "Yu. Trifonov, one might say, is chasing not a positive hero, but a positive ideal and, accordingly, denounces not so much obviously “negative characters”, but rather the qualities of a person’s soul that prevent the complete victory of the human” (V. T. Vozdvizhensky).

Try to divide the heroes of the "Exchange" into positive and negative. Did you succeed?

How does the moment of conviction manifest itself? negative characters in the author's story?

7. S. Zalygin notes: “Yes, Trifonov was a classic writer of everyday life ... I don’t know another such meticulous urban writer. There were already enough village writers at that time, but urban ... he was then the only one like that.

What does "everyday writing" mean in literature? What is characteristic of such literature?

Why does the story "Exchange" not go beyond pure "everyday writing"?

Is the definition of "urban" in relation to Yuri Trifonov only an indication of the location of his work, or something more?

8. Yu. Trifonov said: “Well, what is life? Dry cleaners, hairdressers... Yes, it's called everyday life. But also family life- also life ... And the birth of a person, and the death of old people, and illness, and weddings - also life. And the relationship of friends at work, love, quarrels, jealousy, envy - all this is also life. But that's what life is all about!"

Is life really presented in the story “Exchange” exactly as Trifonov himself writes about it?

How are “love, quarrels, jealousy, envy”, etc., presented and what role do they play in the story?

For the sake of what is life depicted in the story "Exchange"?

9. Critic S. Kostyrko believes that in the case of Yuri Trifonov "we are faced with the development of an image that is directly opposite to the conditions of censorship." The critic recalls the “characteristic” for the writer beginning of the story “Exchange” and notes: “The writer begins, as it were, with a private social and everyday fact and builds, develops his image in such a way that eternal themes for art clearly appear through the specifics ... In other words, from limitedness of a concrete fact, phenomenon - to the boundlessness of its meanings, to the freedom of its artistic comprehension».

What is the beginning of the story "The Exchange"? Why in this beginning we are talking about a private social fact?

Do the “eternal themes for art” appear through the image placed in the center of the narrative? What "eternal" themes does the writer associate with "exchange"?

What is the “boundlessness of meanings” of the fact of exchange manifested in?

10. American writer John Updike wrote in 1978 about Yury Trifonov's Moscow Tales: “Trifonov's typical hero considers himself a failure, and the surrounding society does not dissuade him from this. This communist society makes itself felt through the bonds of rules and interdependence, allowing for maneuverability within certain limited limits, and has an effect of “chest tightness” and “unbearable anxious itching” ... Trifonov’s heroes and heroines draw courage not from officially proclaimed hope, but from bestial vitality person."

What is the reason for the representation of some of the characters in the story about themselves as losers?

What is the society that surrounds the heroes of the story "The Exchange"? Does this society of heroes bind "by bonds of rules and interdependence"? How is it shown in the story?

How does the “bestial vitality of man” manifest itself in the characters of the story “The Exchange”?

11. Literary critic N. Kolesnikova (USA) noted that “Trifonov looks at his heroes from the inside rather than from the outside ... refuses to pass an open sentence on them, but simply portrays the heroes as they are, leaving the reader to draw conclusions ... Dignity Trifonov's stories in that they show the complexity of human nature, without dividing people into good or bad, altruists or egoists, smart or stupid.

How is Y. Trifonov's portrayal of the heroes "rather from the inside than from the outside" manifested in the text?

Is it fair to say that the writer refuses to pronounce open judgment on his characters? Do the characters in The Exchange do anything worthy of being judged?

Does The Exchange really show the "complexity" of human nature without dividing people into "good or bad"?

12. Literary critic A. I. Ovcharenko writes about one category of heroes of Yuri Trifonov: “... they are assertive, tenacious, resourceful, unceremonious in the means of achieving the goal. And merciless. Talent, conscience, honor, principles - everything, both their own and someone else's, will be given by them for good luck, most often turning into material and spiritual comfort.

Are there among the heroes of "The Exchange" those that the critic writes about? What is their role in the story?

Which of the heroes of Yuri Trifonov's story is most interested in "material and spiritual comfort"? What is the idea of ​​the heroes of the story about this and that comfort?

13. Yuri Trifonov stated: “I do not agree with those critics who wrote that in the“ Moscow ”tales you can’t see author's position... The author's assessment can be expressed through the plot, dialogues, intonations. One important circumstance must be kept in mind. It is hardly necessary to explain to readers that selfishness, greed, hypocrisy are bad qualities.

How is the attitude of the writer to the characters and phenomena expressed in the story "The Exchange" "through the plot, dialogues, intonations"?

How are the explanations that “selfishness, greed, hypocrisy are bad qualities” manifested in the “Exchange”?

14. Critic L. Denis wrote about the stories of Yuri Trifonov: “The language is free, unconstrained, the author tries to reproduce oral speech, without hesitation, uses argotism where necessary. But everything is not limited to this. We can say that in this writer there is something from Dostoevsky: the extreme internal complexity of the characters, the difficulty with which they try to understand themselves, make decisions. Thus, we come across extremely long paragraphs, self-twisting phrases; the difficulty of being is partly transmitted through the external difficulty of writing.

What is the role of oral speech in the story?

Are there often "extremely long paragraphs" in "self-twisting phrases" in Trifonov's works? What does the critic's phrase mean that the difficulty of being of the characters in the story is "transmitted through the external difficulty of writing"?

At the heart of Yuri Trifonov's story "Exchange" is the desire of the protagonist, a typical Moscow intellectual Viktor Georgievich Dmitriev, to make an exchange of housing, to improve his own housing situation. For this, he needs to settle with a hopelessly ill mother, who is aware of her imminent death. The son convinces her that he is terribly eager to live with her in order to take better care of her. However, the mother realizes that he is primarily concerned not with her, but with the apartment, and that he is in a hurry with the exchange because of fear.

After her death, lose her room. Material interest replaced Dmitriev's feeling of filial love. And it’s not for nothing that at the end of the work the mother declares to her son that she was once going to live together with him, but not now, because: “You have already exchanged, Vitya. The exchange has taken place ... It was a very long time ago. And it always happens, every day, so don't be surprised, Vitya. And don't get angry. It's just so imperceptible.." Dmitriev, a decent man from the start, little by little, under the influence of his wife's selfishness, and his own personal egoism, changed his moral positions to philistine well-being. And yet, having managed to move in with his mother right before her death, her death, perhaps a little caused by a hasty exchange, is depressing: "After the death of Ksenia Fedorovna, Dmitriev had a hypertensive crisis, and he lay at home for three weeks in strict bed rest" . Then he strongly passed and seemed as if "not yet an old man, but already elderly." What is the reason for Dmitriev's ethical fall?

In the story, his grandfather is presented to us as an old revolutionary, who tells Victor "You are not a bad person. But not amazing either." Dmitriev has no lofty idea that inspires his life, there is no passion for any business. No, what turns out to be this case very important, and willpower. Dmitriev cannot resist the pressure of his wife Lena, who is striving to obtain life's blessings at any cost. At times he protests, makes scandals, but only to clear his conscience, because almost always, in the end, he capitulates and does as Lena wants. Dmitriev's wife has long prioritized her own prosperity. And she knows that her husband will be an obedient tool in achieving her goals: "... She spoke as if everything was predetermined and as if it was clear to him, Dmitriev, that everything was predetermined, and they understand each other without words." Regarding people like Lena, Trifonov said in an interview with critic A. Bocharov: "Egoism is in humanity that it is most difficult to defeat." And at the same time, the writer is far from sure whether it is possible in principle to completely defeat human egoism, or whether it would not be more reasonable to try to introduce it into some kind of moral limits, to set certain boundaries for it. For example, such: the desire of each person to satisfy their own needs is legitimate and fair as long as it does not harm other people. After all, egoism is one of the most powerful factors in the development of man and society, and this cannot be ignored. Let us recall that Nikolai Gavrilovich Chernyshevsky wrote about "reasonable egoism" with sympathy and almost as an ideal of behavior in his novel What Is To Be Done? The trouble, however, is that it is very difficult to real life find the line that separates "reasonable egoism" from "unreasonable". Trifonov emphasized in the interview mentioned above: "Egoism disappears wherever an idea arises." Dmitriev and Lena do not have such an idea, so selfishness becomes their only moral value. But those who oppose them do not have this idea either - Ksenia Fedorovna, Victor Laura's sister, cousin the protagonist Marina ... And it is no coincidence that in a conversation with another critic, L. Anninsky, the writer objected to him: "You pretended that I idolize the Dmitrievs (meaning all representatives of this family, except for Viktor Georgievich) idolize, and I sneer at them" . The Dmitrievs, unlike the Lena family, the Lukyanovs, are not very adapted to life, they do not know how to benefit for themselves either at work or at home. They do not know how and do not want to live at the expense of others. However, Dmitriev's mother and his relatives are by no means ideal people. They are characterized by one very disturbing vice of Trifonov - intolerance (it is no coincidence that this is how the writer called his novel about the People's Will Zhelyabov - "Intolerance").

Ksenia Fedorovna calls Lena a bourgeois, and she calls her a hypocrite. In fact, Dmitriev's mother is hardly fair to consider a hypocrite, but the inability to accept and understand people with different behavioral attitudes makes her difficult to communicate, and this type of people is not viable in the long run. Dmitriev's grandfather was still inspired by the revolutionary idea. For subsequent generations, it has greatly faded due to comparison with the post-revolutionary reality, which is very far from ideal. And Trifonov understands that in the late 60s, when "Exchange" was written, this idea was already dead, and the Dmitrievs did not have any new one. This is the tragedy of the situation. On the one hand, the purchasers of the Lukyanovs, who know how to work well (which Lena is valued at work, is emphasized in the story), know how to equip life, but they don’t think about anything other than that. On the other hand, the Dmitrievs, who still retain the inertia of intellectual decency, but with time are losing it more and more, not supported by the idea.

Viktor Georgievich has already "become a fool", and probably this process was accelerated by Nadezhda, who is counting on the fact that the main character's conscience will be resurrected. Still, in my opinion, the death of his mother caused some kind of moral shock in the hero, with which, apparently, Dmitriev's malaise was also connected. But still, the chances of his spiritual revival are very small. And it is not without reason that in the last lines of this story the author reports that he learned the whole story from Viktor Georgievich, who now seems to be a sick man, crushed by life. The exchange of moral values ​​took place in his soul, led to a sad result. Reverse exchange for the hero is almost impossible.