It’s the wind, the movement, the tense muscles, the clenched fist on the handle.
The forms of manifestation and character of the inconsistency of the views or worldview of another actor with the author’s ideal in Chekhov’s works are quite different. First of all, these are the cases when the worldview of man and his behavior are in direct contradiction with the author’s idea of the norm of human relations, with its basic ethical principles. In this case, Chekhov is ruthless to his characters. In other cases, this contradiction is not so obvious. The majority of actors fall into this category as they deviate from the ethical norm approved by the author. And it is quite obvious that all the actors of the Chekhov theater are in greater or lesser contradiction with the high authorial ideal, which finds expression in his dream of a future happy life of a free, harmoniously developed man. Chekhov’s innovation as a playwright, as well as Chekhov’s prose writer, was fertilized not only by his strong ties with previous realistic literature, but also by his living connection with modernity, which opened up a real opportunity for him to make a significant new contribution to the development of dramatic art. Chekhov’s innovative dramatic system was prompted not only by the shortcomings of further In 1892, Chekhov, reflecting on modern literature, said in a letter to AS Suvorin: “Remember that writers, whom we call eternal or just beautiful and who intoxicate us, have one common and very important feature: they go somewhere and call you there, and you feel not in your mind, but in your being, that they have a purpose, as in the shadow of Hamlet’s father, which came in vain and disturbed the imagination. real and write life as it is, but the fact that each line is imbued with juice, the creation of purpose, you, in addition to the life that is, feel the life that should be, and it overwhelms you. Chekhov himself, with his characteristic speed and self-criticism, did not count himself among such writers.However, it is difficult to find more precise words to describe the most important feature of Chekhov’s work, in which indeed each line is like juice, imbued with the creation of a lofty goal of human existence. 1 all actors concerned. This general inconsistency appears in various manifestations, generating a variety of shades of the comic from its face, where it is not yet separately merged with the tragic and not at all funny, and ending with an outright farce. As we have seen, the logic of Chekhov’s development as a playwright led him to an increasingly vivid exposure of comedy, the inconsistency of the real life of the characters not only with the ideal approved by the author, but also with the ideas expressed by the characters themselves. The forms of manifestation and nature of the inconsistency of the views or worldview of another actor to the author’s ideal in Chekhov’s works are quite different. First of all, these are the cases when the worldview of man and his behavior are in direct contradiction with the author’s idea of the norm of human relations, with its basic ethical principles. In this case, Chekhov is ruthless to his characters. In other cases, this contradiction is not so obvious. The majority of actors fall into this category as they deviate from the ethical norm approved by the author. And it is quite obvious that all the actors of Chekhov’s theater are in greater or lesser contradiction with the high authorial ideal, which finds expression in his dream of a future happy life of a free, harmoniously developed man. Chekhov’s playwright’s innovation, like that of Chekhov’s prose writer, was fertilized not only by his strong ties with previous realistic literature, but also by his living connection with modernity, which opened up a real opportunity for him to make a significant new contribution to the development of dramatic art. Chekhov’s innovative dramatic system was prompted not only by the shortcomings of the further development of Russian performing arts. It was brought to life by the general situation in Russian society, the public life of the country that stood on the eve of the revolution. The emergence of Chekhov’s theater was possible at the turn of the twentieth century, when the broad masses of the masses matured and strengthened the belief that it is impossible to live further, that requires a radical change in living conditions. This idea, which impregnated Chekhov’s work as a whole, formed the basis of his drama. Of course, when it comes to a comparative analysis of the drama of Chekhov and Gorky, researchers point, on the one hand, to the thematic similarity of the works of both writers, on the other hand – to the stylistic similarity. All this is undoubtedly true and quite significant. It is no coincidence that this feature of his drama was emphasized by Gorky himself, calling his plays scenes. And yet we have to admit that no matter how important all these external features that bring together the dramas of Gorky and Chekhov, they are only a consequence of their more significant commonality. As we have seen, Chekhov was able to subdue all the compositional stylistic features of his theater to reveal the worldview of the protagonists in the same general basis, which allowed to show the deep conflict of man with the whole system of modern life in its everyday life. Thus, he not only opened the transfer to the stage of life of its natural course, but also showed how to rise from it to the great, philosophical, ideological issues concerning the basis of human social events. This feature of Chekhov’s theater formed the basis of Gorky’s drama. Thus, in Gorky’s theater there is a dramatic struggle of actors, rejected by Chekhov. But this struggle resurrects on a new basis, which includes Chekhov’s question of the unsuitability of the bourgeois system. Gorky’s revival as a playwright was an antagonistic struggle, therefore, a return to the principles of drama by Griboyedov, Turgenev, and Ostrovsky, but on a new basis, largely prepared by Chekhov. This means that Gorky’s drama marked a new step in the development of https://123helpme.me/write-my-lab-report/ dramatic art, qualitatively different from both pre-Chekhov and Chekhov drama. Both Gorky and Chekhov in the pre-revolutionary situation created works imbued with romantic hopes for the future restoration of life. Gorky was close to Chekhov’s desire to awaken in people the belief that it is impossible to live like this, Chekhov’s focus on the future, joyful anticipation of the storm that he wants, that is approaching. Chekhov had a powerful influence on moodogo Gorky with his achievements, full of denial of the existing system and dreams of another, worthy of human life. As for the theme of the coming storm, then, apparently, their roles have changed. The very figure of Gorky, a recognized petrel of the revolution, was for Chekhov a kind of sign of the times, a living testimony that Russia was on the eve of a revolutionary storm.
Eugene Malanyuk. Ukraine in poetic perception
Modern Ukraine lacks E. Malaniuk. The powerful mind and exceptionally perceptive intuition, which he was endowed with some desperate persistence, were aimed at understanding Ukraine – its past and present
He was an aristocrat of spirit, and therefore could not accept the backwardness of the Motherland. To help her get out of dishonor, he did everything a man of his size could do – delving into history, finding and showing the main causes of trouble. He diagnosed a disease that undermined the national organism – “Little Russia”. He warned that during the years of statehood (he believed in it anyway) this problem would remain the most important for “statesmen”. The forecast turned out to be accurate. E. Malaniuk’s first collection was called “Stiletto and Stylos”. ” A stiletto is a symbol of struggle, a symbol of action … It is wind, movement, tense muscles, a fist clenched on the handle. Stylus is a world of art and beauty … it is a world of admiration for sinful beauty … ”. The name of the collection is extremely deep. Yesterday’s soldier of the Ukrainian People’s Republic puts down a triangular blade – a stiletto and picks up a peaceful pen – a stylus (a pointed stick, which was used by ancient poets and chroniclers). It is not only the opposition: Stiletto Stylus triangular blade chronicler’s pen symbol of the struggle for statehood Decorate Ukraine = Hellas steppe historical past tragedy of statelessness Dream reality ground for neo-romanticism This is the worldview of Yevhen Malanyuk, who became a duke with his nation, because he sought to burn the slavish tear of the Little Russian with the heat of iron words and show the world that he is a real Ukrainian. This is the opposition. On the one hand: Tyukhtiy-khokhol, who, though stupid, but cunning, Makitru bends only in the wind, He thinks with his stomach and snores in a group. And on the other: The grandson of a chubby chumak. Sichovyk pale great-grandson, I fell in love in the loud ages, I fell in love with the state. The poet changed the sword of a soldier for the statehood of Ukraine to a pen. But the peaceful stylus in his hands becomes a stiletto. The whole collection is a life program of Yevhen Malanyuk. You will understand what the heart was beating. What boundaries did this vision see, Why was my stylus a stylus, And a stylus was a stylus. Thus, the poet emphasizes that the struggle has not stopped, it continues, the weapon becomes the word. The word “infinity” in poetry “Stiletto or stylus? I didn’t understand …” applies equally to “beauty shores” and “wind-swollen horizon”. The lyrical hero organically combines in his soul two, at first glance incompatible, worlds, which, without losing their specific characteristics, are mutually enriched in a new capacity. E. Malanyuk proceeded from a corresponding understanding of the originality of Ukrainian literature, forced to realize his talent in an unfavorable for the creative national environment. He had to pave the way for the independence and statehood of Ukraine, perform many non-literary functions, because there was always a lack of nationally conscious professionals, but at the same time remain an artist, write his works according to the laws of beauty … Such a problem has never been faced by writers of historically defined nations (English, French, Swedish, Russian, etc.).