Children of the Arbat: a novel and a series. Review of a work of modern Russian literature

Found an error? Highlight and press CTRL+ENTER

Litvinova V.I. Guidelines for conducting an extracurricular reading lesson: The truth of life in A. Rybakov's novel "Children of the Arbat"

Ministry of Education of the RSFSR Abakan State Pedagogical Institute
Abakan, 1988

Published by decision of the Academic Council of the Abakan State Pedagogical Institute of December 26, 1987.

This issue includes the development of an extracurricular reading lesson based on A. Rybakov's novel "Children of the Arbat", which uses critical articles, letters from readers to the author of the novel, literary studies.

The compiler - teacher of the department of literature Litvinova V. I. - offers the most productive method of analyzing the work, material on the biography of A. Rybakov, outlines the history of the creation of the novel, gives a lesson plan, reveals questions that are especially difficult for students to perceive, indicates literature to help the teacher.

The issue is intended for teachers high school, teachers and students of philological faculties of higher educational institutions.

Reviewers:

1. Toropova L. S. - candidate philological sciences, Associate Professor, Department of Literature.
2. Yakimchuk N. I. - teacher of literature at school N 8 of the city of Abakan.

In A. Rybakov's novel "Heavy Sand" one of the characters reads the inscription on the burial ground: "Everything is forgiven, those who shed innocent blood will never be forgiven." Anatoly Naumovich claims that all his books have been written about this: "Yes, that's what all Russian literature stands on" 1 .

In the summer of 1946 from diary entries the first post-war, the story "Kortik" grew, two years later "Drivers" appeared, thanks to which Rybakov was admitted to the Writers' Union. "Drivers" in 1951 received the Stalin Prize. There were also "The Bronze Bird", "Shot", "Summer in the Sosnyaki", "Heavy Sand", a trilogy about Krosh, "Unknown Soldier" And now "Children of the Arbat". The fate of this novel is especially indicative, it symbolically conveys the restructuring of our consciousness. The appearance of this work aroused great interest and lively discussions among the most diverse social and age groups society. Every day A. N. Rybakov receives dozens of letters from readers (see "Literary Review" for 1987 N 9). The novel is read by students and their parents. Therefore, the discussion of the main problems of "Children of the Arbat" should take place in the senior classes.

To help the teacher, a variant of an extracurricular reading lesson based on the work of A. Rybakov is offered, which uses letters from readers to the author of "Children of the Arbat", his interviews, reviews of critics published in newspapers and magazines. To discuss the novel, it is more convenient to use collective analysis method.

The task of the teacher- to help students in mastering the author's thoughts about the humanistic principles of socialism.

The purpose of the lesson can be formulated in this way to reveal the strengths and weak sides tragic conflict in the social order of the 30s: the establishment of the most humane socialist system and the barbaric destruction of the best builders of the future.

Suggested lesson plan.

I. The history of the creation of the novel.

II. The main conflict of time is in the confrontation between two personalities and their environment.

1. Philosophy of power:

• the role of Stalin in the pre-war period of the development of society;
• penetration into the psychological essence of this person;
• explanation of the reasons for the departure from the Leninist norms of party politics.

2. Sasha Pankratov - a symbol of the youth of the country:

• Sasha's fate is the fate of millions of innocent victims of Stalinism;
• the role of the relationship between the author and the hero in the disclosure ideological content novel;
• the courage of the heroes and their fidelity to duty are evidence of the moral strength of the people.

III. Artistic originality of the novel.

Material for the lesson(Issues for analysis are highlighted in petite).

Curriculum vitae A. N. Rybakov is reported by a teacher or a pre-prepared student.

A. Rybakov grew up in an intelligent family, his mother was fond of music, she sang well. Father - a major engineer, had an excellent home library. On the Arbat, in the house N 51 (the first video salon in Moscow is located there now, and at that time the Ars cinema was located) the author spent his pioneer childhood. He studied at the Moscow Experimental School-Commune named after Lepeshinsky (MOPShKa). Its main contingent was made up of guys who returned from the fronts of the civil war. The author recalls that the school taught the art of collectivism, true friendship, sincerity of relationships. Like Sasha Pankratov, the author himself, a twenty-two-year-old student at the Moscow Institute of Transport Engineers, was repressed and spent three years in Siberia. In the very first days of the war, A. Rybakov went to the front, fought in the 8th Guards Army of General Chuikov as a private. He finished the war with the rank of major, head of the army auto service. Throughout the war years, he kept notes: "Something like a diary: from it (in the town of Reichenbach, in Germany, where he served for another year after the Victory), the outlines of the first part of" Kortik "grew (p. 42).

A. Rybakov began to write at the age of 37 (A. S. Pushkin and V. V. Mayakovsky had already passed away by this age). Now A. N. Rybakov is 76 years old, but he is full creative plans: he wants to create an epic novel about all those who have lived and are living, to give his personal answer to the questions: why was the Victory paid at such a high price? Where are the origins of the tragedy of 1941?

"Children of the Arbat" is the first part of the trilogy, the writer is preparing for publication the second part under the code name "1935 and Others" and the third - "Forty-fourth Year". Answers to these questions require a depth of knowledge of the era, disclosure of the connection historical events certain human qualities.

A. Rybakov fearlessly and courageously undertook to solve an important problem. Everything that has happened in our history and is happening now cannot but excite, since what was conceived by V. I. Lenin was perverted and distorted. The truth described in works of art("Doctor Zhivago" by B. Pasternak, "New appointment" by A. Beck, "White clothes" by V. Dudintsev, "Bison" by D. Granin, "Disappearance" by Y. Trifonov, "Every hour will be justified" by V. Amlinsky, " A golden cloud spent the night" by A. Pristavkin) made its way with difficulty, sometimes for more than twenty years its path to the reader is calculated.

What is the history of the creation of "Children of the Arbat"?(Material can be reported by one of the students).

The novel was intended for the youth of the 60s. A. Rybakov said in one of his interviews: “When I was writing Dirk, I still could not take on such a complex epic thing as a novel about my generation. The time when the strength for such a novel increased coincided with such a socially significant event, like the 20th Party Congress, where Stalin's personality cult was first discussed. The outlines of the novel appeared in the 1940s and 1950s. It was completed twenty years ago." Magazine " New world"In 1966, he promised to soon publish the work of A. Rybakov, but even A. Tvardovsky failed to carry out this event. The "second attempt" of the now magazine "October" in 1978 also failed.

If the truth of the books of V. Dudintsev, D. Granin, A. Pristavkin and other writers came to people in time, perhaps now there would be fewer people with "blank spots" in the spiritual life of fellow citizens. "Children of the Arbat" was published in 1987 and coincided very well with the time: it is today that the novel is understood deeply and with interest. A. Rybakov himself, in the interview mentioned above, stated: "Certainly, the publication of Children of the Arbat is a sign of the times. If it weren't for March 1985, the readers of this novel would not have" ("Spark", 1987, N 27). Outside the atmosphere of glasnost, Children of the Arbat would be talked about among themselves, in an undertone, but now the authorities in our philosophy, sociology, economics and history are frankly discussing in various audiences, exploring the causes of the current troubles, publishing interesting articles 2 .

The novel had several versions with new storylines, with new characters, with new historical and psychological information, but none of them came out. Several years ago, Anatoly Naumovich, in an interview on the pages of the journal Voprosy Literature, noted that the original plan of the book included seven novels, united by the story of the protagonist, showing different social strata of society. It was supposed to lead the heroes through the 30s pre-war years, the war, the first post-war years, in which there are also many difficult and gloomy aspects of the life of the people. The final years were to be the 50s, linking the past with the XX Congress of the CPSU.

"Children of the Arbat" artistic comprehension experienced by the people, this is a novel about the truth of life, this is the story of seven from a generation of young people of the post-revolutionary and pre-war era. Starting work on the novel, A. Rybakov settled on seven actors ah (Sasha Pankratov, Yura Sharok, Nina and Varya Ivanov, Lena Budyagina, Maxim Kostin, Vadim Marasevich). They all lived in the neighborhood, were friends, shared their innermost thoughts. It seemed that the heroes had to go alone life path. But the year 1934, which ended dramatically with the murder of S. M. Kirov, highlighted the main thing in the characters' characters. The serene youth ended and the unfair reality surrounded the children of the Arbat. Each of them had to make a choice...

What moral values guided by the heroes making their choice?

Young people perceived life according to textbooks and political slogans. At the end of the twenties, according to the author, Stalin did not at all seem to the Arbat children an indisputable authority. The youth of the 1920s was formed incapable of agreeing to compromises under any conditions, incapable of artificially creating an idol for themselves. And this is the beginning of their tragic fate.

They did not notice how blind devotion to one person was formed and strengthened. The struggle for ideals began to cover up cruelty. The previously most selfish others sensed the impending dramatic change and tried to adjust to it.

The era itself gave the heroes the right to choose. In the highest circles there was a struggle that could not be overlooked. The tragic fate befell the old Leninist guard (Ordzhonikidze, Dzerzhinsky, Lunacharsky, Pokrovsky), and without them, the executors of Will (Yagoda, Beria, Yezhov) ruled in an aura of permissiveness.

Meanwhile, time created universal values: honor, friendship, nobility, intolerance to pain. The best metropolitan teachers taught at MOPSHK, the students themselves felt a step above their peers. Everything was perceived as real and sincere - disputes, discussions on sharp political topics, military awards for feats in the civil war. The ability to think, to be responsible for their actions, to think through the options for decisions of the heroes was taught by the social environment, which brought up a moral principle in them.

Life tested each of the seven grown-up heroes with a choice. Sasha could have called Krivoruchko, saving his career, but did not; Vika is free to despise the "informers", but becomes an informant; Yuri Sharok was supposed to work as a legal adviser at the plant, but he chooses a more prestigious occupation. They chose based on the essence of their character: Sasha - strong-willed, Vika has a predatory grip, Sharoq's life force is based on fear of the dictator (p. 40).

Everyone makes a choice. Honest and principled Pankratov chose fidelity to duty, humanity - and became the focus of moral strength. Sharok chooses the power of power, which determines his being, relieves him of any responsibility. Rybakov shows how the divide between human and social morality passes through the soul of each hero.

While working on the novel, A. Rybakov realized that Stalin began to enter more and more authoritatively into the outline of the novel: "I realized more and more clearly that without him - the main figure - the picture of the era would not be recreated in its entirety."

And indeed. J. V. Stalin led our party and state for almost thirty years: During this time, the country overcame many difficulties: it suppressed the counter-revolution, carried out collectivization, created an industry, passed through the Great Patriotic War to victory. People are accustomed to associate the glory of their homeland with the name of Stalin. And, probably, this habit pushes people to turn to the author of "Children of the Arbat" with letters of this kind: "What revolts me most of all is that not only Stalin is shown as a narrow-minded, suspicious person. There are no enemies of Soviet power, according to the novel, Stalin invents them, who then killed the best people countries? In 1939, in Ordzhonikidze, how many people died from sweets, what is it, Stalin did? How did we build socialism, how did we defeat the Nazis? Indeed, in the novel, our people are shown as backward, and Siberians are even stupid (you can’t say otherwise). Let A. Rybakov show Stalin as cruel, who made mistakes, but smart, who was considered by the heads of state "3. There are more categorical letters: "... the Russian people were lucky - Comrade Stalin was found in the Politburo, who managed to bite off the leftists Kamenev - L.V.) their dog heads and make relative pragmatism the official line of the party.

Such statements are possible (let us recall the telecast of the "Vglyad" program dated April 24, 1988) because for a long time the history of our state was presented in an unsaid form: hints, allegory in the coverage of acute social and political problems were considered the norm. We know the woeful story of the play "Dragon" by E. Schwartz, and there the author only dared to say that "the only way to get rid of a dragon is to have your own" (p. 42). A brilliant allegory was used by T. Abuladze, who created the mask of a tyrant in "Repentance". about many government and politicians we didn’t know anything, and only now we barely have time to follow the flow of resuscitating information.

Having become acquainted with some of the documents of the past, for example, memories of the brother of I. T. Tvardovsky ("Youth", 1988, N 4), E. Nosov's reflections "What are we rebuilding?" ("Literaturnaya Gazeta" of April 24 this year), in a letter from diplomat F. Raskolnikov: "The list of your crimes is endless. The list of your victims is endless, there is no way to list them. In the false history of the party, written under your leadership, you robbed the dead, people killed and disgraced by you and appropriated their deeds and merits." ("Spark", 1987, N 26), you begin to understand what a huge price was paid to Stalin's authority.

In the domestic fiction Stalin was introduced and how historical figure, And How literary character for the first time in "Children of the Arbat". This is evidenced by the letters of readers, we will quote one of the many: "... youth, having read tabloid historical novels, is better aware of the merits of Catherine II's favorites than of HIM, Stalin, associates and the "regrettable" deeds of these associates of various calibers and zeal. Older readers, who were brought up by movies like "The Fall of Berlin," are also agitated. (From the mail of the magazine "Friendship of Peoples", p. 260).

The courageous writer, who did not lose faith, managed to show historically accurately the events of the 30s, reveal the essence of the people who led the state, and debunk the trials that took place against honest people. In "Children of the Arbat" the actions of the characters and their thoughts are psychologically substantiated. The author spoke about the era in which depreciated human life when they were shot without trial, but tried after the execution, when personal opinion was regarded as treason. The head of state reasoned: "Death solves all problems. There is no person and there are no problems."

What is the purpose of A. Rybakov in such a detailed and consistent study of the psychology of power?

D. Granin wrote in his article "Echoes far and near": "The historical psychology of this social evil has not yet been properly studied: after all, we did not have open trials over the perpetrators of repression ... We did not judge those who used illegal means, imprisoned the innocent. Those processes when the guise of real criminals, the evil of their souls, could* appear (p. 40).

A. Rybakov, using archival materials, historical facts and fiction tries to introduce the reader to the "living and acting" Stalin,

To show how confidence in his own infallibility led him away from the Leninist norms of party and state policy,

To help evaluate the actions of a statesman for future generations, to teach to identify opportunists and mediocrity,

In order not only to confirm, following A. Tvardovsky and Y. Trifonov, what it was, but also to explain HOW IT WAS.

Until now, there are still people who yearn for a solid Stalinist type of leadership, they are sure that being strong is the lot of the elite.

In what work of Russian literature XIX century, this theme of "The real ruler, to whom everything is allowed" has already sounded?

F.M. Dostoevsky in "Crime and Punishment" debunked the idea of ​​"Napoleonism", proved that someone else's greatness cannot exist at the expense of belittling someone's soul. Stalin was an evil genius of unquestioning power, he declared that a financially secure person is not capable of enthusiasm and turns into a layman. Stalin justified suffering, remaining cruel and cynical even in his thoughts: "Only suffering causes the greatest national energy. It can be spent on destruction and on creation. Human suffering comes from God - people have been brought up on this main postulate for centuries. This should be used. Socialism earthly paradise, more attractive than mythical, although for this you also need to go through suffering.But the people must be convinced that their sufferings are temporary, serve the achievement of a great goal, the supreme power is ALL-KNOWING, ALL-KNOWING and ALL-POWERFUL. "

This policy has penetrated into all spheres of human life, the souls of people were covered with rust of blind worship of an idol.

Why was there no force capable of exposing Stalin's unjust cruelty?

In 1934, there were only 17 Soviet authorities. There were still many real enemies who had hardened in the campaign of dispossession and collectivization, leaving no hope of returning the pre-October time to the Socialist-Revolutionaries; the life and working conditions of the builders of the new life were appalling. We learn about this from N. Ostrovsky's novel "How the Steel Was Tempered". The conscious anxiety of the people is reflected in the stories of A.P. Gaidar "Military Secret", "Timur and His Team", "The Fate of the Drummer" - sabotage, sabotage, espionage. This had to be resisted.

The old Bolsheviks tried in vain to restore the Leninist principles of party leadership, they were immediately declared enemies of the people and disappeared without a trace from the arena of struggle.

Remained in power were those for whom the concepts of "dishonest", "bad", "ignoble" had decayed. They were guided by the categories "power", "benefit", "strength", stood next to the strong, forgetting about conscience, friendship, honor. Solts tells them: "I see how you break young lives. I see how you torment and torment. It was about them that Ilyich said:" You live under communism. "What kind of communism are you presenting to them?"

The tragedy of the country stands naked and clear: to fight against Stalin is to fight against the unity of the party (so Kirov also thought). Only those close to Stalin could act. Was it for the good of the motherland? How desperate is the situation? These questions torment Sasha Pankratov, the protagonist of the work, an ardent member of the Komsomol, eager to take his place in the construction of a new life.

Accused of the unsuccessful issue of the wall newspaper.

He was reproached for tactlessness when he criticized the "dead lectures".

They saw an agreement with the "oppositionist", although the honest worker of the NKVD "Berezin perfectly understood that there was no underground at the institute, Sasha Pankratov had nothing to do with Krivoruko, just as Krivoruko had nothing to do with Glinsky's case, Glinsky himself was not connected with Lominadze and no International Lominadze was not going to create. But Yagoda personally criticizes the Lominadze case, and this case, as Berezin understood, stretches further and higher, where, Berezin could only guess. Yagoda was aware of this, and Berezin knew the price well for him ... A terrible and ominous chain. The release of Pankratov can be interpreted as the removal of a link, albeit a tiny one, from the chain. Yagoda will not allow this. And Vyshinsky will not allow it."

How does Sasha perceive the charges brought against him?

Pankratov is close in fate to the author; grew up on the Arbat, studied at MOPSHK. The environment formed a strong character of direct and an honest man, not capable of betraying any ideas, ideals, or friends. He is one of those people who do not bend, but break. Sasha could not comprehend how such a misfortune could happen to him in a free country, but he found the courage in himself both in prison and in exile to remain a man without giving up his ideals: "... he wants to get out of here - yes, but he wants to get out clean and before the party and before the conscience".

Could the almighty Stalin know about the existence of the student Pankratov?

Sasha finds herself in a complex system of state machinery. Uncle Mark implements Stalin's almost unthinkable economic plans, and his nephew is "dirty in politics." The fate of Pankratov is woven into a complex knot of human relations: Sofya Alexandrovna, Varya, the prison librarian - the good beginnings of society; the struggle between good and evil can be traced in the relationship between Lena and Sharok, Berezin and Dyakov. The heroes represent that part of the people from among whom Sasha and those like him could really resist the Despot.

Why didn’t Sasha become embittered, didn’t become indifferent after what he had experienced?

The ideals that shaped Pankratov's views remained unshakable for the Soviet country, and no matter what happened to the hero, they did not change. Vsevolod Sergeevich says to Sasha: "... from the fragments of your faith you are trying to mold another vessel. But it will not work: the fragments are combined only in their former form. Either you return to your faith, or reject it forever." The opponent did not understand the main thing, the "vessel" of moral laws did not break for Pankratov, therefore he comes out of life's trials with honor. He took a place in the ranks next to Dudintsev's F. Dezhkin, Granin's Bison, the heroes of Trifon's Disappearance.

Sasha Pankratov's contemporaries, who shared his fate in the 1930s, write letters to the author thanking him for the truthful depiction of the era: "Thank you for the truth, although it was bitter to read it, I cried, imagining how my father was tormented. And he has been a member of the CPSU since 1905 11 years served in the Alexander Central of Irkutsk as a political prisoner. N. Volokhova. (From the mail of "Friendship of Peoples", p. 263). "Since 1935, our father was subjected to incessant bullying, was suspended from work, deprived of his pension, and since 1937 he innocently disappeared into obscurity and was forgotten for many years. He was rehabilitated posthumously in 1955. The Kasyan family experienced all the consequences of persecution, persecution , hunger, want, moral bullying... Even a schoolboy son, a member of the Komsomol, was forced to answer for the non-existent "sins" of his father. eldest daughter, a Komsomol worker, was expelled from the party, expelled from the fifth year of the institute and innocently repressed. Thank you for your wonderful work. Kasyan R. S. "(From the mail of "Friendship of Peoples", p. 264).

In interactions with the main character, the deep processes of time and the characters of other characters are revealed. Let's pay attention to some of them. How do you think the fate of Yu. Sharok will turn out? He is inherently immoral: he refuses his school friends, defining them in no other way; like "hysterical Nina", "dumb Maxim", talker Vadim". Acting selfishly with Lena, he is already building his future: "Stalin is dissatisfied with Budyagin, and he knows well what" Stalin is dissatisfied "how it ends. The House of the Soviets, a chic apartment - all this is an appearance. "Sharok draws Vika into his agent networks, using blackmail to use her for career purposes, therefore he refuses to study at the higher school of the NKVD, striving for Leningrad, where a new massacre is being prepared and there is an opportunity to excel in performing His life finale is inglorious. This is confirmed by the author himself: "In next book this very Sharok furiously climbs up the stairs, the steps of which are stained with the blood of millions of innocent people. And -gradually self-destructs: it is corroded, decomposed and leads to disaster by its own immorality" (p. 40).

What sentence does the writer pass on Mark Ryazanov?

This is a strong character, a wonderful specialist, an industry commander and a skilled organizer. Ryazanov is a disciplined performer, he firmly believes in the mind and justice of the head of state, in this he is very reminiscent of Onisimov from A. Beck's novel "The New Appointment". Mark saw what was happening on all the roads of the country, but he was sure that “such are the merciless laws of history, such is the law of industrialization. new story. And everything old is collapsing with pain and losses. "He is honest in solving production problems, he is belligerent when energy is needed for his business, remember how he expelled Pyatakov's commission from the construction site. But Ryazanov was favored by Stalin:" When a person is introduced to the Central Committee, not may not know that his nephew has been arrested. The arrested nephew will be Ryazanov's Achilles' heel, will force him to faithfully serve a man who neglected such circumstances. " The novelist passes sentence on him: "... he did not stand up for Sasha. He stepped aside, in fact, to the side" (p. 43).

What is Zida's mysterious past supposed to mean?

In the early stories of A. Rybakov, the elements of mystery and mystery occupied last place V art system. Zida in "Children of the Arbat" is more likely not a tribute to "adventure stories", but an emphasis on serious social phenomenon prewar years. There were many people living "below themselves without feeling the country", hiding from arrest, wandering from homelessness (see Antonov's story "Vaska"). Such people have broken destinies, the woeful philosophy of "tumbleweeds". All this is concentrated in the "pedigree" of Zida.

Can Budyagin be ranked among the Bolshevik guards of Leninist hardening?

This is a man of crystal truth, it is no coincidence that Mark Aleksandrovich guessed in him opposition to Stalin: “Budyagin took upon himself everything: he considered any revolutionary action his action, any mistakes his mistakes, every injustice his own injustice, he possessed the highest courage of a revolutionary: took responsibility for the fate of people plunged into the crucible of social upheaval. People fell side by side, guilty, innocent, but he believed that he was paving the way for a new generation, the true revolution is great not by WHAT it destroys, but by those WHO it creates. "

When Budyagin tells Ryazanov about Sasha: “We are imprisoning Komsomol members!”, He essentially formulates the tragedy of society, Sasha is whole and diehard man- is perceived as a symbol of the youth of the country. It is about the destruction of one's own future. Budyagin understood that his intervention was useless, but he called a real Chekist, vouched and asked to look into Sasha's case.

Finishing the collective analysis of the novel, we can dwell on the concluding questions:

What themes of the novel are revealed most impressively?

History and philosophy of power.

The role of the school community in human life.

Courage Soviet people, the depth of their convictions, fidelity to duty.

Mother's love (can be spent literary parallel with the heroine of F. M. Dostoevsky's novel "Crime and Punishment" Katerina Ivanovna, who, like Sofya Alexandrovna, tried with the dignity of a proud woman to bear injustice, humiliation, fearing to cause

People have false compassion. For the time being, for the time being, their suffering is silent. We read from Rybakov: “Numbly, oppressed by the consciousness of her impotence, she returned home to an empty room, and there, alone and suffering, she offered up prayers to God, whom she had long abandoned, and now she prayed that the spirit of goodness and mercy; omnipresent and all-penetrating, softened the hearts of those who will decide Sasha's fate" and the lines of Dostoevsky's novel that tell about the fate of Katerina Ivanovna come to mind (see Crime and Punishment, collected works in 12 vols., vol. 5, p. 367). Just like the heroine of Dostoevsky, Sofya Alexandrovna once breaks through the dam of long-suffering patience, she ceases to live in hopes for the "strong". Her protest is based not on emotions, but on the realization of the truth of life: "Here's the thing, Mark ... I ask you to never knock on the table with your fist in my house. It's unpleasant for me ... If you really want to knock, knock on your Cabinet against your subordinates. Remember, please. As for the camps, don’t threaten me, I’m not afraid of anything, that’s enough, I was afraid, that’s enough! You don’t imprison everyone, there aren’t enough prisons ... They raised the sword against the innocent, the defenseless, and die from the sword yourself And, when your hour comes, Mark, then you will remember Sasha, think, but it will be too late. You did not protect the innocent. There will be no one to protect you either").

Is it worth it today to resurrect the past, to write about the past?

The answer to this question is contained in the readers' letters, in which one thought is concentrated: "Children of the Arbat" are a vivid manifestation of the overdue moment of truth. After reading it, we understood more clearly and more fully why and how these tragic events, better understood that Stalin himself led and directed the arbitrariness, the destruction of many innocent people. We understood more deeply what motives guided him, how terrible it was.

A true account of those hard days is essential. It is necessary "so that nothing like this could ever happen again, and our children and grandchildren could calmly, proudly bear the names of their fathers. After all, quite recently it was necessary to liquidate the Rashidism in Uzbekistan, the arbitrariness of the" specific princes "in some other republics and areas of the country." (From the mail "Friendship of Peoples", p. 268).

A. Rybakov himself believes that "it is never too late to pronounce and discover the truth. Truth in life and art can cure society" (p. 42).

"Children of the Arbat" is a novel not only about the past, but also about the present. Today, society spends huge amounts of money on the re-creation of mercy, on the destruction of cruelty and indifference. The moral meaning of perestroika is to establish the principle of life according to the laws of conscience. The author himself remained true to these principles. There was a moment in his life: he was offered to publish "Children of the Arbat" abroad, but he declared that the novel was needed first of all by his people. Grateful readers highly appreciated this manifestation of A. N. Rybakov's citizenship.

In classes where the number of "humanities" students predominates, one can dwell on finding out artistic originality novel.

Theoretical material:

Subject- historical and artistic truth about the tragic period in the development of our society.

Problem- to recreate the layers of recent living history - as an integral part of the spiritual and social ecology.

To reveal the relationship between politics and morality - main conflict time.

Idea- through the history of seven very different in character and social status people who survived the 34th year, "to designate the rings of fatal years that tightened the throat of our common destiny"(p. 42).

Plot- at the heart of it - the life of heroes against the backdrop of the construction of socialism in two plans: at will and in captivity. Storylines exist in parallel, not intersecting. "A violent clash of worldviews is taking place on both planes. A dispute of polar ethical attitudes is taking place between people who are outwardly unrelated to each other" (p. 42).

Grouping images- we help to reveal the idea of ​​the work: the characters break up into two opposing oppositions, led by Stalin and Pankratov.

Narrative intonation- "Essaying, it was important for the author to stylize the presentation as a documentary chronicle of time. Therefore, the outline of the narrative includes signs of the appearance of a renewing Moscow (they removed a tram on the Arbat, the Moskva Hotel is being built") and the element of character, in which ambition has acquired monstrous forms: "He retained "Moscow is what every Russian person knows and imagines. Not these high-browed intellectuals sitting in the hall, caring about the culture of Russia, but HE, it was HE and only HE who satisfied the deep Russian feeling of love for Moscow and reverence for Moscow. And therefore Moscow is now HIS city, future Moscow-HIM monument".

The desire for sketchiness allowed the author to combine complex stylistic layers: Moscow and Mozgov, an office in the Kremlin and a forest backwoods. This allowed V. Caverin to note that "the author is a conscientious chronicler who feels neither joy, nor sadness, nor anger." Probably, such a statement by V. Kaverin cannot be fully accepted. Apparently, Rybakov deliberately chose a neutral tone in order to show reality more clearly so that he would not be reproached for bias.

"The more emotions a writer has, the less a reader has them," A. Rybakov believes. And in this he is close to the creative manner of A.P. Chekhov: criticizing one of the novels by Shchepkina-Kugternik, he wrote: "You said:" And she was ready to thank fate, poor girl. "But it was necessary that the reader, after reading , I myself would say poor girl "4 Along with the style of documentary prose, autobiographical accents, the author also uses fiction. Including, for example, the episode with the leader's toothache, A. Rybakov penetrates deeper into psychology, helps to understand the train of thought. a man who "knows the secret of power." The author had a chance to talk with a doctor who treated Stalin, and it would not be difficult to roughly restore the essence of conversations with a patient. But something else is important to Rybakov - why are they taking Lippmann away? Because he was talking to Kirov on the beach. Through this small episode, the author conveys the suspicion and cruelty of the Stalinist character.

General conclusions:"Children of the Arbat" - a work that reveals the main conflict of the 30s, convinces, makes you think, comprehend some facts and phenomena in a new way. The characters of the characters are described with knowledge of life and those situations that occur in the novel.

Let's hope that "Children of the Arbat" will be the beginning of an epic novel.

Literature to help the teacher:

1. Ionin L. When "Children of the Arbat" became grandfathers.//New time - 1987. - 24.VII.
2. Kuchkina O. Whatever it is.//Komsomolskaya Pravda. - 1987. - 14.VII.
3. Latsis A. From the point of view of a contemporary.//Izvestia. - 1987. - 17. VIII.
4. Rishina I. Notches on the heart.//Literary newspaper. - 1987. - 19.VIII.
5. Turkov A. To sail further into the revolution.//Literaturnaya gazeta. - 1987. - 8.VII.
6. A. Rybakov, N. Zheleznova. This, you see, is an act // Literary Review. - 1987. - N 9, p. 38-43.
7. Letters from readers to A. Rybakov about the novel "Children of the Arbat".//Friendship of Peoples. - 1988. - N 2, p. 256-269.

Literature

1. Rybakov A., Zheleznova N. This, you see, is an act. / / Lit. Review. - 1987. - N 9, p. 43) is further cited from this edition with page numbers in parentheses in the text).
2. I. Tvardovsky. Pages of experience//Youth. - 1988. - N 3, p. 10-32.
   N. Rapoport. Memory is also medicine.//Youth. - 1988. - N 4, p. 76-81.
   K. Simonov. Lessons of truth.//Youth. - 1988. - N 4, p. 16-24.
   G. Popov. System and bison.//Science and life - 1988. - N 3, p. 56-64.
3. Letters from readers to A. Rybakov about the novel "Children of the Arbat".//Friendship of Peoples. - 1988. - N 2, p. 257 (hereinafter cited from this edition with the indication "From the mail of the magazine" Friendship of Peoples "with the indication of pages in brackets).
4. A.P. Chekhov in the memoirs of his contemporaries. - M. - 1954, p. 321.

Scanning and recognition by Studio KF, when using a link to the site is required!

IN contemporary literature of our country, the connection with the traditions of literature of the previous decades is clearly manifested. In the field of view of the writers were such problems as the individual and the collective, the formation of a person, understanding the "connection of times" - the present and the past, as well as a number of other problems. In the press there have appeared and continue to appear bitter in their essence works about mass repressions associated with the name of Stalin. Why is the thirties, the most difficult, the most dramatic in the history of our society, still in the center of attention? I think that this is not accidental: we do not want a repetition of such gloomy pages of our history, and also because the problems of that time we in many ways feel as having the most direct relevance to today.

In the wake of "perestroika", Rybakov's novel "Children of the Arbat" aroused great interest. The increased interest in this work is explained by the fact that the writer for the first time in our literature described in detail and truthfully the psychology of Stalin as a statesman, a person who merged ideas about the good of the people and the good of his own. By own meant unlimited power, which mercilessly removed from its path all those who did not agree with the regime. "Children of the Arbat" is a novel about the capital's youth of the thirties, whose youth passed in the atmosphere of Stalin's personality cult. The author talks about how people manifested themselves in difficult trials in different ways. In the novel we see a picture of cruelty and fear; every word spoken against could decide the fate of a person, so everyone was afraid to express their opinion, to support a comrade at a meeting. Today it is easy for us to judge the people of that time, now we know a lot about Stalin, and what it was like for them who lived in the period of total worship of the leader, because for the majority Stalin was at that time more than an icon.

Stalin is a terrible figure. His victims are innumerable. He himself personally knew a very small part, but his whole fault lies in the fact that he was obsessed with the idea of ​​immeasurable power. People for him are only material for reaching the goal. Stalin believed that only suffering evokes the greatest energy. We clearly see those explanations and justifications that allowed him to doom millions of people to suffering and death with a light soul. In his opinion, the people must be forced to make sacrifices for the sake of the future, and this requires a strong government that can inspire fear. This cannibalistic theory only covers up the main thing - the desire for unlimited power.

How can one not recall Raskolnikov's theory from Dostoevsky's novel "Crime and Punishment" about "the powers that be" and "trembling creatures". In Russia, a whole galaxy of executioners is emerging, where the investigator becomes the main figure. In Children of the Arbat, investigator Dyakov believed "not in real guilt, but in a general version of guilt." He confuses Sasha Pankratov, either plays on his honesty, or intimidates, or promises to be released. After all, that investigator is “good” who, by persuasion, torture, threats of reprisal against loved ones, with anything, will force him to sign a confession of non-existent crimes. With Rybakov, using the example of Sasha's classmate, Yuri Sharok, we see how people become such executioners.

Another work devoted to the theme of Stalinism is Zamyatin's novel "We", created in 1921. The leading theme of the book is dramatic destiny personality in the conditions of a totalitarian social order. The novel is written in the genre of dystopia. Zamyatin, a shipbuilding engineer by profession, knew better than anyone how a mechanism is created in which cogs are needed to create a single whole. But people, society are not just “cogs” in a complex state machine, but living beings who have their own, one and only life. When a person is turned into a "cog", he loses his bright, unique individuality and degrades as a person.

In the novel "We" appears before us possible variant future society, where the dream is shown " the mighty of the world this" about human robots. The “mathematical perfect life” of the United State is unfolding before us. This is a world without love, without soul, without poetry. The “numbered” person, deprived of a name, was inspired that “our lack of freedom” is “our happiness”, and this “happiness” is in the rejection of one’s “I” and dissolution in the impersonal “we”. Intimate life is also regarded as a state duty, carried out according to the "report card of sexual days."

Zamyatin's novel is a warning about a huge danger threatening humanity: the power of machines and the power of the state. The writer predicted many events in the history of our country. But in a society where everything is aimed at suppressing the individual, where the human "I" is ignored, where the sole power is unlimited, a rebellion is possible. The ability and desire to feel, to love, to be free in thoughts and actions push people to fight. But in a person, with the help of an operation, fantasy is removed - the last thing that made it possible to feel like people. Still, the hope remains that human dignity will not die under any regime. Zamyatin believes that building an ideal society is impossible and unnecessary. Life is the pursuit of perfection. And if this ideal is realized, there will be complete stagnation.

Our people survived the bitter lessons of collectivization, and Stalinism, and repressions, and general fear, and stagnation, and rampant crime, which continues now. Works like the novels by A. Rybakov and E. Zamyatin, which have made their way to us from non-existence, will allow us to take a fresh look at the events of history, to comprehend the role of man in them. These works are a warning against refusing to resist if they want to turn human society into "cogs". Books like these bring light to our lives.

I want to write an essay based on the book "Children of the Arbat" by Anatoly Rybakov - my favorite work of modern Russian literature. This novel is autobiographical, in the image of the main character Sasha Pankratov a lot from the fate of the writer himself. Somewhere Rybakov mentioned that Sasha's path is his, Rybakov's, path, only Sasha is better than his prototype. I am concerned about the events that took place in our country in the pre-war period - the "dark spots" of our history. And this is the huge role of literature and the writer Anatoly Rybakov, in particular.

Obviously,

That one of the main tasks of the novel "Children of the Arbat" is to show how the cult of Stalin was established. The action of the novel begins in 1934, when this cult began to turn into something grandiose and exceptional. Stalin in the novel is a historical figure who was able to subjugate millions of people to his will, determine the path of development of a huge country. The writer sought to comprehend the outwardly contradictory logic of the tyrant's actions. Here, for example, the episode with the dentist is one of the most lively in Stalin's scenes. An excellent specialist shows professional pride, having decided to make a lamellar prosthesis for Stalin, despite the fact that the tall patient insists on a clasp prosthesis. Stalin agrees to test the new prosthesis, to vilify it for only one day, as the doctor asks, and admits that the doctor is right. Recognize recognizes and even sets an example of an exemplary attitude to business, but still orders the dentist to be replaced by another and dismissed from the Kremlin hospital. Why? There is no proper fear, unquestioning obedience. He dares to object, but in the environment other people are needed, who do not object, do not reason, blindly devoted. Stalin in Rybakov's novel is deeply lonely. He deliberately puts himself outside of human relations, he does not need friends and relatives, but only executors of his will. Performers who will eventually be replaced by others when they refuse to follow his instructions or think too much of themselves.

After reading the novel “Children of the Arbat”, I understood why and how the tragic events took place in the thirties, I better understood that Stalin himself led and directed the arbitrariness, the destruction of many innocent people, I understood what motives guided him, how terrible it was. He made me think. "Children of the Arbat", I think everyone should read. After all, this book does not just open your eyes to the painful reality of our recent history, it tells the truth about that time. Rybakov wrote a novel about Stalin and Sasha Pankratov, because he saw the main conflict of the time in the confrontation between these two personalities. Pankratov - one of the main non-historical characters of the novel - is really good and fair man who never acts against conscience, he is always driven by a sense of justice. Sasha is a person with a pronounced social temperament. By itself, this temperament can be dangerous. Sharok recalls how, when he was admitted to the Komsomol, Sasha refused to vote for him, curtly throwing: “I don’t believe it.” It is easy to imagine how such people, in the atmosphere of the thirties, threw their “I don’t believe” not only to people like Sharok.

But Sasha has one quality that makes him vulnerable. Morality for him is a human value that stands above all. He cannot, for example, give false evidence against the deputy director of the institute, Krivoruchko, he does not want to cheat, maneuver, pretend, hide thoughts and feelings. Sasha's business arose as a result of his personal independence, which then grew like a snowball. The wall newspaper is already an anti-party leaflet, political sabotage, organized by the group, entrenched in the institute, led by Krivoruchko. As a result, a search, arrest, horror of a shocked mother, prison, interrogations, exile and a long way of the cross along the roads of Siberia. The path of the spiritual formation of the personality, the path of the final elimination of illusions and attempts to gain a new faith. Sasha's ideas about unity as the basis of society, the myth about the justice of the violence of the majority over the minority are scattered. Sasha Pankratov himself, by the will of fate, fell into the minority. Nina Ivanova, Sasha's former classmate, is at first startled by his arrest. The undoubted leader of the class, the school, honest, believing in the ideals by which they all live - how can he be an enemy? The misunderstanding, of course, will soon be sorted out. But they don't "understand". And changes are taking place in Nina’s mind, and now she is already telling Sasha’s mother that, they say, the intensification of the class struggle requires “especially clear positions, and Sasha, unfortunately, sometimes put his own understanding of things and events above the point of view of the team.” It is always possible to find explanations for why the punishing sword fell on another, and to harbor the hope that it will pass you. “He was strong among the strong, they pulled him out of his usual environment, deprived him of the environment in which he existed, and it immediately became clear that he had nothing to rely on, he was nothing in itself,” Sasha Pankratov is tormented in Mozgov. But he persevered because he knew - "even in these wild environment affirm the highest human values. Compassion is one of them." "The human in man has not been killed and will never be killed." Sasha meets this consciousness in December 1934, when the long-awaited mail arrives, where in one of his mother's letters he finds Varia's postscript. The postscript, to which Varya has been going for so long and which Sasha can also understand only after his long journey: “Still ahead, damn it, still ahead! He has Varya, now he knows this for sure. There is Varya, there is a mother, people around, there are his thoughts, his thoughts. Everything that makes a man a man.

Sasha Pankratov, with his twisted fate, makes me feel pain for the whole generation of young people, whose fates were also broken by Stalin's repressions. A. Rybakov's novel gave me food for thought about the time, history, psychology of society, the fate of the generation that is in the center of the writer's attention. The author taught us these two lessons - the lesson of history and the lesson of morality. The main idea of ​​the novel is to live in such a way that history and morality are inseparable.

After reading Anatoly Rybakov's novel "Children of the Arbat", I realized that only the truth brings up courageous, loyal and honest people. And this is the main moral lesson that follows for me from the book of Anatoly Rybakov.

| Print |

The novel "Children of the Arbat" is Anatoly Rybakov's reflection on the fate of his generation. The novel was written in the "dark" times, but arrived in time for the "light".

The novel is autobiographical, in the image of the main character Sasha Pankratov there are many realities of the fate of the writer himself. Once Rybakov mentioned that Sasha's path is his, Rybakov's, path, only Sasha is better than his prototype.

The writer boldly, fearlessly took up the question: what is the role of I. V. Stalin in everything that was happening in our country.

Obviously, one of the main tasks of the novel "Children of the Arbat" is to show how the cult of Stalin was established. And the success of the novel lies in the fact that this task itself was set by the writer correctly, because it was from 1934, when the action of "Children of the Arbat" unfolded, that this cult began to turn into something grandiose and exceptional.

Stalin in the novel is a historical figure who was able to subjugate millions of people to his will, determine the path of development of a huge country. The writer sought to comprehend the outwardly contradictory logic of the tyrant's actions. Here, for example, the episode with the dentist is one of the most lively in Stalin's scenes. An excellent specialist shows professionalism, he offered to make a lamellar prosthesis for Stalin, despite the fact that the tall patient insisted on something else. Stalin agreed to test the new prosthesis, to wear it for only one day, as the doctor asked, and admitted that the doctor was right. He recognized it and even set it as an example of an exemplary attitude to business, but nevertheless ordered the dentist to be replaced by another and fired from the Kremlin hospital.

Why? There is no due fear, no unquestioning obedience. I dared to object, but in the environment we need other people who do not object, do not reason, blindly devoted.

Stalin in Rybakov's novel is deeply lonely. He consciously places himself outside of human relations. Stalin does not need friends and relatives. We need executors of his will. Performers who will eventually be replaced by others when they refuse to follow his instructions or think too much of themselves.

The novel "Children of the Arbat" showed how tragic events took place in the thirties; made it possible to realize that Stalin himself led and directed the arbitrariness, the destruction of many innocent people. Showed me how scary it was.

This book not only opens their eyes to the painful reality of our recent history - it does not allow them to be diverted from this reality any longer; stirs the soul, telling the truth about the Stalin era. People should know the true state of affairs in those thirties.

And then sometimes you hear remarks: "Stalin would be now ...", "But under Stalin ..." But do they want to be exiled and shot?

Rybakov wrote a novel about two main characters: about Stalin and about Sasha Pankratov, because he saw the main conflict of the time in the confrontation between these two personalities.

Young people who grew up in Moscow's Arbat lanes and entered the age of responsibility by the mid-thirties were brought up on the same idea - with what joyful hope they enter the world. Youth is shown warmly, sincerely: Sasha Pankratov and his entourage. Pankratov is one of the main non-historical characters of the novel - a truly good and honest person who never acts against his conscience, he is always driven by a sense of justice.

Sasha is a person with a pronounced social temperament. By itself, this temperament can take dangerous forms. Sharok recalls how Sasha refused to vote for him when he was admitted to the Komsomol, briefly saying: "I don't believe it." It is easy to imagine how such people in the atmosphere of the thirties gave up their "I don't believe" not only to people like Sharok. But Sasha has one quality that makes him vulnerable. Morality for him is a human value that stands above all. He cannot, for example, bear false witness against the deputy director of the institute, Krivoruchko. He has a choice: Sasha can betray Krivoruchko, saying what they demand about him, and thereby save his fate. But he does not want to cheat, maneuver, pretend, hide thoughts and feelings.

After all, Sasha is a strong-willed, highly moral person, a truly Russian intellectual. This Noble act Sasha can be called a feat.

Sasha's business arose as a result of his personal independence, which then grew like a snowball. The wall newspaper is already an anti-party leaflet, a political sabotage organized by a group entrenched in the institute, headed by Krivoruchko. As a result - a search, an arrest, the horror of a shocked mother, a prison, interrogations, exile and a long way of the cross along the roads of Siberia.

path spirit
the initial formation of a personality, the path to the final elimination of illusions and attempts to gain a new faith. Sasha's ideas about a single opinion as the basis of society are scattered. The myth of the justice of the violence of the majority over the minority is scattered. Sasha Pankratov himself, by the will of fate, fell into the minority.

In "Children of the Arbat", Nina Ivanova, Sasha Pankratov's former classmate, is at first stunned by Sasha's arrest. The undoubted leader of the class, the school, honest, believing in the ideals by which they all live - how can he be an enemy? The misunderstanding, of course, will soon be sorted out. But they don't "understand". And changes are taking place in Nina's mind, and now she is already telling Sasha's mother that, they say, the intensification of the class struggle requires "special clarity of positions, and Sasha, unfortunately, sometimes put his own understanding of things and events above the point of view of the collective." You can always find explanations for why the punishing sword fell on another, and cherish the hope that it will not touch you.

“He was strong among the strong, they pulled him out of his usual environment, deprived him of the environment in which he existed, and it immediately became clear that he had nothing to rely on, he was nothing in itself,” Sasha Pankratov, really strong and remaining, in spite of everything, until the end of the novel a strong man.

By the end of the novel, we know one thing - Sasha survived, and not least because he knew - "even in these wild conditions, the highest human values ​​\u200b\u200bare affirmed. Compassion is one of them." "The human in man has not been killed and will never be killed." Sasha meets this consciousness in December 1934, when the long-awaited mail arrives, where in one of his mother's letters he finds Varia's postscript. The postscript to which Varya has been going for so long and which Sasha can also understand only after his long journey: “Everything is still ahead, damn it, everything is still ahead! He has Varya, now he knows it for sure. There is Varya, there is a mother, people around, there are his thoughts, his thoughts. Everything that makes a man a Man.

Sasha Pankratov, with his shattered fate, evokes deep sympathy and even pain for the entire generation of young people, whose fates were also broken by Stalin's repressions. There are two lessons in the novel - the lesson of history and the lesson of morality. That's why the main idea novel - one must live in such a way that history and morality are inseparable. No that's not historical narrative which is read with peace of mind. And the pain and passion of the book is not only in the past, but also in the present days. The writer told the truth about the time of his youth, the truth that we must know so that the obscurantism of that time does not happen again.

). He took a long pause so as not to jump to conclusions.

On the one hand, it is clear that it is difficult to film Children of the Arbat. Rybakov's language is "loose" and his discourses are lengthy, not even in pages, but in chapters.

But on the other...

Rybakov sought to recreate the atmosphere of fear and hopelessness that prevailed in the 1930s and 1940s. And he succeeded: the novel "Children of the Arbat" is difficult, and the events described in it are terrible. Nowadays, if you film it “word for word”, it will be hard to watch: every evening (serials are usually watched in the evenings), the viewer will have a spoiled mood and, after watching a couple of episodes, he will switch the channel. You can’t shoot like that - “it won’t work”. Not cinematic. Therefore, the director faced the opposite task: to “cheer up” the series, fill it with cute pleasant little things, place accents so that the viewer is not very scared and does not run away. And - what is important - to interest the female audience, because the novel, although written in a detached way, still speaks the language of a man.

Many unpleasant scenes are omitted or smoothed out, filmed from an unusual angle, jokes are added to the dialogues, and reflections that are inappropriate in the film are removed. Many episodes and whole events were invented from scratch (fragments of the Tunguska meteorite passing through the entire series and Sasha's meeting with Varya, especially absent in the novel). Starting at some point, the film is so overflowing with these notions that it seems not to be an adaptation, but an independent work. Many of them are really finds of the director (the same fragments). But there are also strange ones.

In a word, the creators tried their best to diversify and dramatize the plot. But it turned out too much "too".

The role of Stalin is too distorted and at times reduced. In the novel, almost a third of the text is devoted to him, this is a full-fledged, if not his main character: entire chapters are devoted to his reflections, he is the cause of all those misfortunes through which the rest of the characters go through the meat grinder. In the novel, He (that's right, with a capital letter) is the leader, thinks in peoples and generations, He above everyone, any person at his appearance, goosebumps run down the skin from horror. This is reflected even in the title of one of the parts of the trilogy - "Fear": this is the very fear in which Stalin kept the whole country and which determines the fate of the heroes. In the series, Stalin is an ordinary, but very powerful person: he (with a small letter) constantly talks with food in his mouth (and this is even annoying: somehow this chewing is presented too deliberately), he is engaged in purely “human” affairs. I was especially struck by the scene where Stalin flirts with Valya: flirting with a girl who serves him food, by no means combines with leaderism. In the novel, absolutely everyone is afraid of Stalin; in the film, they treat him with emphatic respect, some even familiarly (the same Valya).

Despite the abundance female characters, “Children of the Arbat” is a frankly masculine novel. The main generators of events are Sasha and Stalin. The role of women is sharply strengthened in the series. The emphasis is shifted towards the relationship between Sasha and Vari.

Tsyganov is too restrained, Khamatova is too eccentric. In general, many female characters are eccentric.

Everything is way too digital. A film about the 30s and 40s - it seems to me that it made sense to somehow reflect this fact in the shooting method or apply some kind of filter, there are many ways. But no: a deaf figure. The light shines too correctly: it is clear that this is not natural lighting, but Jupiter. It is too noticeable that the actresses are wearing wigs. Cosmetics are too conspicuous.

The characters are too "functional". Individual details are too visible, which are assigned the function of showing something. For example, for six months of sitting in prison, Sasha grew a beard - we attach a beard to the actor. But if you sit in prison for six months, you won’t get off with one beard: your skin will turn pale, you will walk differently, the expression on your face should somehow change from the thoughts that crush a person there. Here the hero comes out of prison the same as he entered, only with a beard, even the hairstyle, in my opinion, has remained the same. Another example: Lena Budyagina decides to have an abortion by some barbaric method - she keeps her legs in boiling water and mustard. Well, the legs should be red after that, blisters should appear! And she has them so - rosy. And there are many such moments: on the faces, in the posture, in the gait of the characters, the events that happen to them are not reflected, only the functional details of the appearance change.

Strange, it seems to me, the choice of an actor for the role of Kostya. Kostya in the novel is a cheeky, self-confident type. In the series, he is played by the intelligent Yuri Kolokolnikov.

Casting is generally fun. In life, Irina Leonova (Lena Budyagina) is the wife of Evgeny Tsyganov (Sasha Pankratov). Evgenia Simonova (Sofya Alexandrovna) is the wife of director Andrey Eshpay, Zoya Kaidanovskaya (Vika Marasevich) is Simonova's daughter, and Alexei Zakharov (Maxim Kostin) is her (Kaidanovskaya) husband.

The closer to the end, the more the series deviates from the novel and the more it resembles a fantasy on a given theme. Entire ones disappear storylines, in their place new, artificially grafted branches grow.

- In the novel, Varya, realizing that she can’t get to Sasha, and in order to protect herself from attacks, she nevertheless marries her boss. In the series, the viewer (spectators) was sorry and only indicated this possibility.

- In the novel, Sasha and Varya cannot meet in any way; they see each other regularly on the show.

- With the outbreak of war, Sharok simply disappears in the novel, dissolving somewhere abroad. In the series, he is killed. Apparently, indulging the viewer's desire to take revenge on the scoundrel, the creators wanted to show that a cruel fate befell not only positive, but also negative heroes.

- A scene was invented with the involvement of Lena Budyagina to the front as an interpreter. In the novel, she disappears without a trace in the camps.

- The most serious change is a completely distorted ending: in the novel, Varya dies, and Sasha, not seeing the point of living on, decides to fight the advancing fascists in a suicidal battle; in the series, the Nazis spectacularly shoot them both in the truck. That is, Sasha and Varya would like to live on, but they were "not given."

In general, the series gives the impression of a rehearsal, a run of material before the "main" show. It is perceived not as a long multifaceted film, but as a series, with all the shortcomings inherent in the series.

The series changed the attitude towards the novel itself. Now I understand that his popularity is largely due to the fact that he appeared at the right time. If he appeared right now, he would not have produced the effect of an exploding bomb: this topic has already “gone” somewhat.