Event line. Event sequence of the play Event sequence of the play at the bottom
Revealing facts and events. The events of the play.
An event is a change in the actions of all the characters in the play. After the event, the action begins to develop in a new direction. Each event is the cause of the next, and the effect of the previous one. One event gives rise to another.
Fact - changes the action of a single character or several characters, but does not have the same significant impact that the event has on the entire course of the play.
The identification of facts and events is divided into 2 stages.
The study of the proposed circumstances is the first and most important stage in the analysis of the play; we must examine all the facts and events that subsequently influenced the course and development of the play. This includes an analysis of the whole backstory of the play:
Exploring an era
The era in art that dominated the moment the play was written
The situation, the surrounding characters, temper, way of life, way of life
Careful study of the past of each of the characters
Real heroes
It is necessary to study those events, facts and circumstances in the life of the characters that immediately preceded the beginning of the play, and which served as an impetus for the development of the action.
Major events and their relationship.
An event series is a definition of events in the play itself.
The event, according to the general opinion, is a spokesman for the conflict development of the play, therefore, the main feature that distinguishes the event will be the revealed fact, which in turn causes conflict relations and encourages them to act. This stage of identifying events, their sequence and interaction K.S. Stanislavsky called the beginning of the "systemic study of the play." "Determining events and actions, the actor involuntarily captures more and more broad layers of the proposed circumstances of the life of the play."
But the proposed circumstances alone are not enough and not enough to start the action of the play, because. it is only the environment from which the main action is born.
The initial event is a kind of impetus, an impulse that will give movement to all circumstances, twisting them into a certain knot, into a single and swift action, directing them forward to the desired resolution.
The search for a single, common for all persons who open the action of the play, a conflict fact - will, according to A.M. Polamishev (1), be the definition of the “initial event”. Since, in his opinion, the term “event” itself sets one on the search for something large, large-scale, but often the action of the play begins with a trifle, an insignificant fact, hence its definition as “the first conflict fact”. The “first conflict fact” tells us about some kind of effective incident that creates a conflict situation for all the characters in the play at the level of action (directly psychophysical). But at the initial moment of the beginning of the play, in addition to the action, it is extremely important to take into account other layers: ideological and thematic, philosophical, actant, etc. All these levels cannot be fully involved in the concept of "first conflict fact". The “first conflict fact” is included in the structure of the “initial event”.
The next step in the analysis of the action of the play will be the search for "basic conflict facts." They, as A.M. Polamishev (1), "one should consider those facts that are the cause of the conflicting facts that follow them." HELL. Popov calls the following conflicting fact "the main event". It is “basic” because here (it is here, and not in the “original”), two equivalent, opposing sides collide, and from that moment the plot of the play itself begins.
- A.M. Polamishev - the book "The Mastery of the Director" Ch. effective analysis of the play.
The relationship between these two events (initial and main) gives rise to a certain relationship of actions, which is commonly called the "event series". You can also say this: an event series is a certain, interdependent series of events.
All these events have a different form, volume, meaning, but among them one major event can be singled out - the “central” one. A.M. Polamishev calls it “the main conflict fact”. The central event is the highest point in the development of the action of the play, the peak of the struggle and, naturally, a turning point in the action, after which it moves to the finale, the denouement. In this event, the idea of the author, the whole depth of the conflict underlying the play, is most clearly revealed. Not necessarily this event lies in the middle of the play, often it is closer to the end, because. the action, constantly growing, moves towards its denouement.
The result of this movement is the “final event” (or “the last conflict fact”), it is essentially the denouement of the action, the finale, where the conflict finds its resolution and where the plot itself ends.
But the end of the plot is not yet the end of the play itself. The “final” event is followed by the “main”, which is the main semantic unit of the play. In it, the author fully expresses the idea of the play, his attitude to the events that took place, a kind of summary.
Event line.
All the events listed above are the “main events of the play” on which the action is built and organized, the plot is based on them, but they do not exhaust all the events in the play. An event series usually consists of several dozen events (it is they that make up the plot). Therefore, the next step (after searching for and highlighting the main events) will be to determine all the events of the play, i.e. event line.
To determine the event, Aristotle invented a good method - the "method of exclusion". Subsequently, it was introduced into the directing practice of K.S. Stanislavsky. Its essence is as follows: it is necessary to exclude any action, incident from the play and see if anything has changed "the action of the play. If yes, then this is an event; if not, then this is a fact. "The parts of the events must be so composed that with the rearrangement or removal of one of the parts, the whole would change and upset, because that, the presence or absence of which imperceptibly, is not part of the whole.
All events are interconnected by a causal mechanism: each event is the cause of the next one and the consequence of the previous one; one event gives rise to another, and so on. This is the main feature of the event series. The main events that we talked about above are parts of the series of events, the most significant parts, while the facts fill the internal space of the play, creating its original composition, its features and atmosphere.
After reading the play by M. Gorky “At the Bottom” and watching the TV show staged by Vl.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko and K.S. Stanislavsky, I decided not to rush to determine the main (main) event, but to start the analysis step by step, starting from the initial event itself .
So, people who live in a rooming house have fallen to the bottom of life, both social and spiritual. You can even say that they are at the bottom of the soul. Among these people, there are those who are quite satisfied with this and they feel like kings here, and there are those who still hope deep in their hearts that they can break out of the bottom. Before us from the very first scenes unfold their relationship and attitude to life. We can immediately understand who and how got here. And in order to determine what kind of event is behind the scenes, let's answer the questions: What do the heroes come with? Why wouldn't the story start? What event had to happen for it to start?
The initial event of the play is that all the characters lose their homes and end up in a rooming house, where further actions unfold. And everyone comes with his "social fall" to the bottom.
Further, they live here, quarrel, make peace, play, drink, eat, sleep day after day, so it would go on forever. But the righteous Luka comes to the rooming house, who, with his sweet speeches, sows hope in the souls of those who have fallen to the bottom of society. The arrival of Luke is the initial event that gives a start: a cross-cutting action, namely, to instill hope in the souls of people to break out from the bottom. There is a counter-through action for this through action: to prevent people from leaving the rooming house. Luke is the carrier of through action, and Satin is counter-through. This struggle begins with the appearance of Luke.
Moving on to the central event, it should be noted that Luke awakens the hope of salvation in several people. Later, he notices that everything depends on what kind of land you sow, there is fertile soil, but there is not. In my opinion, the central event is the death of Anna, whom Luke promised the salvation of the soul after her death. After this event, it was as if everyone believed in the words of Luke, since Anna died without pain. And active action begins to clash the sides and views of Luke and Sateen. An actor, for example, begins to believe more and more in the existence of a hospital. Satin is increasingly diligently convincing the inhabitants of the rooming house that all this is a "sweet lie" and breaks Luke's words about the truth of life.
Culminating event. The resulting fight, which kills Kostylev, ends not only in tragedy, but also in Luka's departure. This is where through and counter-through action clash, and even though Luka leaves, one would think he lost. But in fact, his faith and hope help him not to stay at the bottom. He goes forward and breathes hope, he wants to convey it to people who find themselves at the bottom of social life, at the bottom of the soul, where there are still drops of hope. Sateen remains in his lair, and even his long monologue does not indicate that he really believed in Luke's words.
The final event is the actor's suicide. It shows that he did not put up with life at the bottom and found not the best, but a way out from there. Thus, it turns out that it is possible to escape from the bottom only with the strong faith that Luka lives, or with death, as Anna, Kostylev and the Actor did.
Of great importance in the play is the song, which shows the whole essence of the bottom. Its significance in the construction of the play becomes clear after Satine's final remark, his reaction to the Actor's suicide: "Eh! .. ruined the song .. fool-cancer!". Here the word "song" acquires a double meaning - both literal and broader, as a designation of life, fate, the purpose of a person.
Having analyzed the chain of the entire series of events, one can try to determine the main event that reveals the author's super-task. It seems to me that Maxim Gorky wanted to show the struggle of faith and unbelief of people. Life will be what you believe in and what you hope for. From this follows the main event - this is the departure of Luke.
Conclusion.
Understanding the topic of the main conflict and the series of events, I had a lot of contradictions. Even understanding in theory what is what. It is very difficult to analyze the work to get exactly to the point. I noticed that after thinking about this or that work or film, and highlighting the main events, after a while, returning and rereading it, I realized that these were incorrectly defined events or conflict. Therefore, my work is not a statement, but an attempt to find the really true initial, main and culminating events. For me, the most difficult thing was to understand the difference between the central and the culminating event, because the literature talks only about the main thing. But when discussing with classmates and re-reading the chosen work again and again, you find details and nuances that help to more accurately determine the event.
I also realized that the same play can be viewed from different angles, and what event I see as the main one, this is my director's vision of the play. But in my work, I tried not to show my "I", but to get closer to understanding the author and his interpretation of the play.
Bibliography:
1. G.A. Tovstonogov “Mirror of the stage”
3. M.O. Knebel "Poetry of Pedagogy"
4. K.S. Stanislavsky 4 t,
5. Kostelyanets B. "Drama and action"
6. Aristotle. On the art of poetry. M., 1957. P.97.
Dictionary:
Main conflict- this is a sharp, extremely tense struggle of opposing views, in which all participants in the play are involved.
Event series is a definite, interdependent sequence of events.
Source event- This is what the characters in the play come with. Without which, the story would not begin.
Start event- this is the moment from which the through action clearly begins to work.
central event- one that is indispensable. All the participants in the play are drawn into it. After the event is completed, the action begins to develop in a completely new direction. It motivates the participants in the play to action.
Climax event- this is the highest peak of the fight in the through action, in which all the heroes participate. There is a sharp change of movement to the main event.
Final event- this is the last event in which, as it were, the author's diagnosis is made, an assessment of the past history.
Main event- the most recent event of the play, which concludes the "grain" of the super-task; in it, as it were, the idea of \u200b\u200bthe work is “enlightened”; here the fate of the original proposed circumstance is decided - we find out what has become of it, whether it has changed or remained the same
Actual Fact- a fact that reveals the conflict relations of several actors and encourages them to act. In other words, it's an event.
The original suggested circumstance is the environment in which the problem of the play is concentrated, the author's pain; we comprehend it in the process of the development of the play. The initial and leading proposed circumstances of the play are often in conflict with each other, but by no means always.
Leading Proposed Circumstance- it defines the struggle through the through action of the play.
Knebel M. O. "Poetry of Pedagogy". M., 1976, p. 310
G.A. Tovstonogov "Mirror of the stage"
K.S. Stanislavsky 4 t
M.O. Knebel "On what seems to me especially important"
M.O. Knebel "On what seems to me especially important"
B. Kostelyanets "Drama and action"
Aristotle. On the art of poetry. M., 1957. P.97.
What can be seen already in the poster? The hosts of the hostel have a surname, first name and patronymic, and the hostels most often have either a surname (Satin, Bubnov), or a first name (Anna, Nastya), or nicknames - loss of a name (Kvashnya, Actor, Pepel, Baron). The "former" people are still quite young: from 20 (Alyoshka) to 45 years (Bubnov).
In his remarks, Gorky continues the tradition of Chekhov. In the description of the situation in Act 1, there is a contrast: “A cellar that looks like a cave”, all the gloomiest tones, the characters “cough, fuss, growl” in inhuman conditions - and at the end: “The beginning of spring. Morning". Maybe not all is lost? There are not animals here, but people, passions boil here and real life goes on. It is interesting that each hero is engaged in the most characteristic for him: Klesh makes crafts, Kvashnya hosts, Nastya reads, etc. Later in the play, remarks are short and usually only indicate the action or state of the hero. There are only two pauses in act 1: when Kostylev asks Kleshch about his wife and when Pepel asks Kleshch about Anna (moments of awkwardness).
The exposition is until the appearance of Luke in the middle of the 1st act. All the leading themes are outlined here: the past of heroes, talent, work, honor and conscience, dreams and dreams, love and death, illness and suffering, attempts to escape from the "bottom" (in a lowly environment they talk and argue about the high and the eternal). Everyone has their own philosophy, it is expressed not only through dialogues, but also through aphorisms. BUBNOV: 1) The noise of death is not a hindrance, 2) What is the conscience? I'm not rich ..., 3) Who is drunk and smart - two lands in him. SATEEN: 1) You can’t kill twice, 2) Tired of ... all human words ..., 3) There are no better people in the world than thieves, 4) Money is easy for many, but few part with it easily, 5) When work is pleasure, life is good ! When work is a duty, life is slavery.
Each of the characters gradually opens up, speaking on a favorite topic. Kostylev always talks either about his wife, whom he is jealous of, or about money. Tick - about his plans to step over his dying wife and "get out." Ashes are about conscience and dreams. Natasha - about the dying Anna. Satin is about “new words”, about work (he speaks the most, and in his cynical irony one feels the greatest hopelessness, because he seems to be the smartest).
The plot and the beginning of the development of the action - with the appearance of Luke, who speaks in jokes, sayings, sayings. The future conflict between Ashes and Vasilisa is immediately cleared up. Luke's sympathy, his words about love for people almost immediately stirred up even such skeptics as Bubnov and Baron, reassure Nastya and Anna. It is no coincidence that Act 1 ends with Luke's remark: the further development of the action will be largely connected with him.
About the innovation of Chekhov, who "killed the realism" (of the traditional drama), raising the images to a "spiritualized symbol". This is how the departure of the author of The Seagull from the sharp clash of characters, from the tense plot was determined. Following Chekhov, Gorky sought to convey the unhurried pace of everyday, "eventless" life and highlight in it the "undercurrent" of the characters' inner motives. Only the meaning of this "current" Gorky understood, of course, in his own way. Chekhov has plays of refined moods and experiences. Gorky has a clash of heterogeneous worldviews, the very “fermentation” of thought that Gorky observed in reality. One after another, his dramas appear, many of them are illustratively named "scenes": "The Philistines" (1901), "At the Bottom" (1902), "Summer Residents" (1904), "Children of the Sun" (1905), "Barbarians" ( 1905).
"At the bottom" as a socio-philosophical drama
From the cycle of these works, “At the Bottom” stands out with the depth of thought and the perfection of construction. Staged by the Art Theatre, which was a rare success, the play struck with "non-stage material" - from the life of tramps, cheaters, prostitutes - and despite this, its philosophical richness. A special author's approach to the inhabitants of a dark, dirty rooming house helped to "overcome" the gloomy coloring, the frightening way of life.
The play got its final name on the playbill after Gorky went through the others: Without the Sun, Nochlezhka, Bottom, At the Bottom of Life. Unlike the original ones, which set off the tragic position of the tramps, the latter clearly had ambiguity, was perceived widely: “at the bottom” not only of life, but first of all of the human soul.
Bubnov says about himself and his cohabitants: "...everything faded, one naked man remained." Due to the "abundance of loyalty", the loss of their former position, the heroes of the drama really bypass the particulars and gravitate towards some universal concepts. In this variant, the inner state of the individual visibly emerges. The "Dark Kingdom" made it possible to single out the bitter meaning of existence, imperceptible under normal conditions.
Atmosphere of spiritual separation of people. The role of the polylogue 1 .
characteristic of all literature of the early 20th century. the painful reaction to the fragmented, elemental world in Gorky's drama acquired a rare scale and persuasiveness of embodiment. The author conveyed the stability and limit of mutual alienation of Kostylev's guests in the original form of "polylogue". In Act I, all the characters speak, but each, almost not listening to the others, talks about his own. The author emphasizes the continuity of such "communication". Kvashnya (the play begins with her remark) continues the dispute with Klesh that began behind the scenes. Anna asks to stop what lasts "every God's day." Bubnov interrupts Satina: "I heard it a hundred times."
1 Polylogue is a form of speech organization in drama: as opposed to dialogue and monologue, polylogue is a combination of replicas of all participants in the scene.
In a stream of fragmentary remarks and squabbles, words that have a symbolic sound are set off. Bubnov repeats twice (while doing furrier work): “And the threads are rotten ...” Nastya characterizes the relationship between Vasilisa and Kostylev: “Tie every living person to such a husband ...” Bubnov notices about the situation of Nastya herself: “You are superfluous everywhere” . The phrases spoken on a specific occasion reveal the “subtextual” meaning: the imaginary connections, the superfluity of the unfortunate.
The originality of the internal development of the play
The situation changes with the appearance of Luke. It is with its help that illusory dreams and hopes come to life in the recesses of the souls of the shelters. Acts II and III of the drama make it possible to see in the "naked man" an attraction to another life. But, based on false ideas, it ends only in misfortunes.
Luke's role in this outcome is very significant. A smart, knowledgeable old man indifferently looks at his real surroundings, believes that "people live for a better ... For a hundred years, and maybe more - they live for a better person." Therefore, the delusions of Ash, Natasha, Nastya, the Actor do not touch him. Nevertheless, Gorky did not at all limit what was happening to the influence of Luke.
The writer, no less than human disunity, does not accept the naive belief in a miracle. It is the miraculous that Ash and Natasha imagine in a certain “righteous land” of Siberia; an actor - in a marble hospital; Tick - in honest work; Nastya - in love happiness. Luke's speeches had an effect because they fell on the fertile soil of secretly cherished illusions.
The atmosphere of Acts II and III is different, but compared to Act I. There is a pervasive motif of the escape of the inhabitants of the rooming house to some unknown world, a mood of exciting expectation, impatience. Luke advises Ash: “... from here - a march at a pace! - leave! Go away ... "The actor says to Natasha:" I'm leaving, I'm leaving ...<...>You, too, leave ... "Ashes persuades Natasha:" ... we must go to Siberia of our own free will ... Let's go there, well? But then other, bitter words of hopelessness sound. Natasha: "There's nowhere to go." Bubnov once “caught up in time” - he left the crime and forever remained in the circle of drunkards and cheaters. Satin, recalling his past, sternly asserts: "After prison there is no way." And Kleit admits with pain: “There is no shelter<...>...there is nothing". In these replicas of the inhabitants of the rooming house, there is a deceptive liberation from circumstances. The Gorky tramps, by virtue of their rejection, are experiencing this eternal drama for a person with rare nudity.
The circle of existence seems to have closed: from indifference - to an unattainable dream, from it - to real shocks or death. Meanwhile, it is in this state of the heroes that the playwright finds the source of their spiritual fracture.
Significance of Act IV
In the IV act - the former situation. And yet, something completely new is happening - the fermentation of the previously sleepy thoughts of the tramps begins. Nastya and the Actor for the first time angrily denounce their stupid classmates. The Tatar expresses a conviction that was previously alien to him: it is necessary to give the soul a "new law." Tick suddenly calmly tries to recognize the truth. But the main thing is expressed by those who have long believed in nothing and no one.
The baron, confessing that he "never understood anything," thoughtfully remarks: "... after all, for some reason I was born ..." This bewilderment binds everyone. And it strengthens the question “Why was he born?” Satin. Clever, impudent, he correctly regards tramps: "stupid as bricks", "cattle", who know nothing and do not want to know. Therefore, Satin (he is “kind when drunk”) tries to protect the dignity of people, open their possibilities: “Everything is in a person, everything is for a person.” Satin's reasoning is unlikely to be repeated, the life of the unfortunate will not change (the author is far from any embellishment). But the flight of Sateen's thought captivates listeners. For the first time, they suddenly feel like a small part of the big world. The actor therefore does not withstand his doom, cutting off his life.
The strange, not fully realized rapprochement of the “bitter brethren” takes on a new shade with the advent of Bubnov. "Where are the people?" - he shouts and offers to "sing ... all night", "burrow" his fate. That is why Satin responds sharply to the news of the Actor's suicide: "Eh ... ruined the song ... fool."
Philosophical subtext of the play
Gorky's play of the socio-philosophical genre, and with its life specificity, was undoubtedly directed towards universal concepts: alienation and possible contacts of people, imaginary and real overcoming of a humiliating situation, illusions and active thought, sleep and awakening of the soul. The characters of "At the Bottom" only intuitively touched the truth, without getting rid of the feeling of hopelessness. Such a psychological conflict enlarged the philosophical sound of the drama, revealing the general significance (even for the outcasts) and the difficulty of attaining true spiritual values. The combination of the eternal and the momentary, the stability and at the same time the precariousness of habitual ideas, a small stage space (dirty rooming house) and reflections on the big world of mankind allowed the writer to embody complex life problems in an everyday situation.
Russian literature of the XX century. 11 cells Proc. for general education institutions. L.A. Smirnova, O.N. Mikhailov, A.M. Turkov and others; Comp. E.P. Pronin; Ed. V.P. Zhuravlev - 8th ed. - M .: Education - JSC "Moscow textbooks", 2003.
Submitted by readers from Internet sites
Literature online, list of topics by subject, collection of abstracts on literature, homework, questions and answers, essays on literature grade 11, lesson plans
If you have corrections or suggestions for this lesson,
The subject of the image in Gorky's drama "At the Bottom" is the consciousness of people thrown out as a result of deep social processes taking place in Russian society at the turn of the century, to the bottom of life. In order to embody such an object of representation by stage means, he needs to find an appropriate situation, an appropriate conflict, as a result of which the contradictions of the consciousness of the shelters, its strengths and weaknesses would appear. Is social, public conflict suitable for this?
Indeed, social conflict is presented in the play on several levels. Firstly, this is a conflict between the owners of the rooming house, the Kostylevs, and its inhabitants. It is felt by the characters throughout the play, but it turns out to be static, devoid of dynamics, not developing. This happens because the Kostylevs themselves have not gone that far from the inhabitants of the rooming house in social terms, and relations between them can only create tension, but not become the basis of a dramatic conflict that can “start” drama.
In addition, each of the characters in the past experienced their own social conflict, as a result of which they ended up at the “bottom” of life, in a rooming house.
But these social conflicts are fundamentally taken out of the scene, relegated to the past, and therefore do not become the basis of a dramatic conflict. We see only the result of the social turmoil that so tragically affected people's lives, but not the clashes themselves.
The presence of social tension is already indicated in the title of the play. After all, the very fact of the existence of the “bottom” of life implies the presence of a “rapid stream”, its upper current, to which the characters strive to approach. But even this cannot become the basis of a dramatic conflict - after all, this tension is also devoid of dynamics, all attempts by the characters to escape from the “bottom” turn out to be futile. Even the appearance of the policeman Medvedev does not give impetus to the development of a dramatic conflict.
Perhaps the drama is organized by a traditional love conflict? Indeed, he is present in the play. It is determined by the relationship between Vaska Ash, Kostylev's wife Vasilisa, the owner of the rooming house, and Natasha.
It will be the appearance of Kostylev in the rooming house and the conversation of the roomers, from which it is clear that Kostylev is looking for his wife Vasilisa in the rooming house, who is cheating on him with Vaska Pepel. The plot is a change in the initial situation, entailing the emergence of a conflict. The plot is the appearance of Natasha in the rooming house, for the sake of which Pepel leaves Vasilisa. In the course of the development of the love conflict, it becomes clear that the relationship with Natasha enriches Ash, revives him to a new life.
The culmination, the highest point in the development of the conflict, is fundamentally moved offstage: we do not see exactly how Vasilisa scalds Natasha with boiling water, we only learn about it from the noise and screams offstage and the conversations of the roommates. The murder of Kostylev by Vaska Ash turns out to be a tragic outcome of a love conflict.
Of course, love conflict also becomes a facet of social conflict. He shows that the anti-human conditions of the “bottom” cripple a person and the most exalted feelings, even such as love, lead not to the enrichment of the individual, but to death, mutilation, murder and hard labor. Having thus unleashed a love conflict, Vasilisa emerges from it as a winner, achieves all her goals at once: she takes revenge on her former lover Vaska Peplu and her rival Natasha, gets rid of her unloved husband and becomes the sole owner of the rooming house. There is nothing human left in Vasilisa, and her moral impoverishment shows the enormity of the social conditions in which both the inhabitants of the rooming house and its owners are immersed.
But a love conflict cannot organize a stage action and become the basis of a dramatic conflict, if only because, unfolding before the eyes of the rooming-houses, it does not include them themselves. They are keenly interested in the ups and downs of these relationships, but do not participate in them, remaining only outside spectators. Consequently, a love conflict also does not create the situation that can form the basis of a dramatic conflict.
Let us repeat once again: the subject of depiction in Morky's play is not only and not so much the social contradictions of reality or possible ways of resolving them; he is interested in the consciousness of the overnight stays in all its inconsistency. Such an object of the image is typical for the genre of philosophical drama. Moreover, it also requires non-traditional forms of artistic expression: the traditional external action (event series) gives way to the so-called internal action. Ordinary life is reproduced on the stage, with its petty quarrels between the roommates, one of the characters appears and disappears again, but these circumstances are not the plot-forming ones. Philosophical issues force the playwright to transform the traditional forms of drama: the plot is manifested not only in the actions of the characters, but in their dialogues. It is the conversations of the roommates that determine the development of the dramaturgical conflict: the action is translated by Gorky into an off-event series.
In the exposition, we see people who, in essence, have come to terms with their tragic situation at the “bottom” of life. Everyone, with the exception of Tick, does not think about the possibility of getting out of here, but is only occupied with thoughts about today or, like the Baron, turned to nostalgic memories of the past.
The beginning of the conflict is the appearance of Luke. Outwardly, it does not affect the life of overnight shelters in any way, but in their minds hard work begins. Luka is immediately at the center of their attention, and the entire development of the plot is concentrated on him. In each of the heroes, he sees the bright sides of his personality, finds the key and approach to each of them - and this produces a true revolution in the lives of the heroes. The development of inner action begins at the moment when the characters discover in themselves the ability to dream of a new and better life. It turns out that those bright sides that Luka guessed in each character of Gorky constitute his true essence. It turns out that the prostitute Nastya dreams of beautiful and bright love; An actor, a drunk man, a degenerate alcoholic, recalls his work and seriously thinks about returning to the stage; The “hereditary” thief Vaska Pepel discovers in himself a desire for an honest life, he wants to leave for Siberia and become a strong master there. Dreams reveal the true human essence of Gorky's heroes, their depth and purity. This is how another facet of social conflict manifests itself: the depth of the characters' personalities, their noble aspirations are in blatant contradiction with their current social position. The structure of society is such that a person does not have the opportunity to realize his true essence.
Luka, from the first moment of his appearance in the rooming house, refuses to see swindlers in the rooming houses. “I respect crooks too, in my opinion, not a single flea is bad: everyone is black, everyone jumps ...” - this is how he says, justifying his right to call his new neighbors “honest people” and rejecting Bubnov’s objection: “ It was honest, but the spring before last.” The origins of this position are in the naive anthropologism of Luke, who believes that a person is initially good and only social circumstances make him bad and imperfect.
Luke's position in the drama is very complex, and the author's attitude towards him looks ambiguous. Luke is absolutely disinterested in his preaching and in his desire to awaken in people the best, hidden for the time being sides of their nature, which they did not even suspect: they contrast so strikingly with their position at the very “bottom” of society. Luke sincerely wishes good to his interlocutors, shows real ways to achieve another, better life. And under the influence of his words, the heroes really experience a metamorphosis. The actor stops drinking and saves up money in order to go to a free hospital for alcoholics, not even suspecting that he does not need it: the dream of returning to creativity gives him the strength to overcome his illness, and he stops drinking. Ash subordinates his whole life to the desire to leave with Natasha for Siberia and there to get on his feet, to become a strong master. The dreams of Nastya and Anna, Klesh's wife, are quite illusory, but these dreams also give them the opportunity to feel happier. Nastya imagines herself the heroine of tabloid novels, demonstrating in her dreams about the non-existent Raul or Gaston the feats of self-sacrifice that she is really capable of; the dying Anna, dreaming of the afterlife, even partly escapes from a sense of hopelessness. Only Bubnov and Baron, people who are completely indifferent to others and even to themselves, remain deaf to Luke's words. Luka's position is exposed by a dispute about what truth is, which arose between him and Bubnov and Baron, when he ruthlessly exposes Nastya's groundless dreams of Raul: "Here ... you say - the truth ... She, the truth, is not always for a person’s illness ... you can’t always cure the soul with the truth ... ". In other words, Luke affirms that a comforting lie is life-giving for a person. But is Luke only asserting a lie?
Our literary criticism has long been dominated by the concept that Gorky unequivocally rejects Luke's consolatory sermon. But the writer's position is more difficult.
The author's position is expressed primarily in the development of the plot. After Luke's departure, everything happens in a completely different way, as the heroes expected and what Luke convinced them of. Vaska Pepel will indeed go to Siberia, but not as a free settler, but as a convict accused of killing Kostylev. An actor who has lost faith in his own strength will exactly repeat the fate of the hero of the parable of the righteous land told by Luke. Trusting the hero to tell this plot, Gorky himself will beat him in the fourth act, drawing directly opposite conclusions. Luke, telling a parable about a man who, having lost faith in the existence of a righteous land, strangled himself, believes that a person should not be deprived of hope, albeit an illusory one. Gorky, showing the fate of the Actor, assures the reader and the viewer that it is precisely false hope that can lead a person to a noose. But let us return to the previous question: in what way did Luke deceive the heroes of the play?
The actor accuses him of not leaving the address of the free clinic. All the heroes agree that Luke instilled false hope in their souls. Ho, after all, he did not promise to bring them out of the "bottom" of life - he simply gave them hope that there is a way out and that it was not ordered for them. That self-confidence that woke up in the minds of the roommates turned out to be too fragile and lifeless, and with the disappearance of the hero who was able to wake her up, it immediately died out. The point is the weakness of the heroes, their inability and unwillingness to do at least a little in order to resist the ruthless social circumstances that doom them to the Kostylevs' rooming house. Therefore, he addresses the main accusation not to Luke, but to the heroes who are not able to find the strength in themselves to oppose their will to reality. Thus, Gorky manages to reveal one of the characteristic features of the Russian national character: dissatisfaction with reality, a sharply critical attitude towards it and a complete unwillingness to do anything to change this reality. That is why Luka finds such a warm response from the roomers: after all, he explains the failures of their lives by external circumstances and is not at all inclined to blame the heroes themselves for the failed life. And the thought of trying to somehow change these circumstances does not occur to either Luka or his flock. Therefore, the heroes experience the loss of Luke so dramatically: the hope awakened in their souls cannot find inner support in their characters; they will always need external support, even from a person as helpless in a practical sense as Luka, who is “unpatched”.
Luka is the ideologist of passive consciousness, which is so unacceptable to Gorky.
According to the writer, a passive ideology can only reconcile the hero with his current situation and will not induce him to try to change this situation, as happened with Nastya, Anna, the Actor, who, after the disappearance of Luka, lost all hope and gained inner strength for its realization - and laid the blame for this not on himself, but on Luke. But who could object to this hero, who could oppose at least something to his passive ideology? There was no such hero in the rooming house. The bottom line is that the “bottom” cannot develop a different ideological position, which is why the ideas of Luke are so close to its inhabitants. But his sermon gave impetus to a certain antithesis, to the emergence of a new position in life. Satin became its spokesman.
He is well aware that his state of mind is a reaction to the words of Luke:
“Yes, it was he, the old yeast, who fermented our roommates ... Old man? He is clever!.. The old man is not a charlatan! What is truth? Man is the truth! He understood this... you - no!.. He... acted on me like acid on an old and dirty coin...”.
And his famous monologue about a person, in which he affirms the need for respect, but not pity, and considers pity as a humiliation, affirms a different position in life. However, this is only the beginning, only the very first step towards the formation of an active consciousness capable of changing social circumstances, of resisting them, and not a simple desire to isolate themselves from them and try to get around them, as Luke insisted.
The tragic finale of the drama (the actor's suicide) also raises the question of the genre nature of the play "At the Bottom".
Do we have reason to consider "At the Bottom" as a tragedy? Indeed, in this case, we will have to define the Actor as a hero-ideologist and consider his conflict with society as ideological, because the hero-ideologist affirms his ideology by death. Tragic death is the last and often the only opportunity not to bow before the opposing force and to approve ideas.
It seems not. His death is an act of despair and disbelief in one's own strength and rebirth. Among the heroes of the “bottom” there are no obvious ideologists who oppose reality. Moreover, their own situation is not comprehended by them as tragic and hopeless. They have not yet reached that level of consciousness when a tragic worldview of life is possible, because it involves a conscious opposition to social or other circumstances.
Gorky obviously does not find such a hero in Kostylev's rooming house, at the "bottom" of his life. Therefore, it would be more logical to consider “At the Bottom” as a socio-philosophical and social drama.
Reflecting on the genre nature of the play, one must turn to its conflict, show what collisions are at the center of the playwright's attention, which becomes the main subject of the image. In our case, the subject of Gorky's research is the social conditions of Russian reality at the turn of the century and their reflection in the minds of the characters. At the same time, the main, main subject of the image is precisely the consciousness of the overnight stays and the aspects of the Russian national character that manifested themselves in it.
Gorky is trying to determine what are the social circumstances that influenced the characters of the characters. To do this, he shows the background of the characters, which becomes clear to the viewer from the dialogues of the characters. Ho, it is more important for him to show those social circumstances, the circumstances of the “bottom”, in which the heroes now find themselves. It is this position of theirs that equates the former aristocrat Baron with the cheater Bubnov and the thief Vaska Pepel and forms common features of consciousness for all: rejection of reality and at the same time a passive attitude towards it.
Inside Russian realism since the 40s. XIX century, with the emergence of the “natural school” and the Gogol trend in literature, a direction is revealed that characterizes the pathos of social criticism in relation to reality. It is this direction, which is represented, for example, by the names of Gogol, Nekrasov, Chernyshevsky, Dobrolyubov, Pisarev, that was called critical realism. Gorky in the drama "At the Bottom" continues these traditions, which is manifested in his critical attitude to the social aspects of life and, in many respects, to the heroes who are immersed in this life and shaped by it.
