Mikhail Zoshchenko: stories and feuilletons of different years. Mikhail zoshchenko - writer, satirist, playwright Mikhail zoshchenko satirical stories

Russian satirical writers in the 1920s were particularly bold and frank in their statements. All of them were the heirs of Russian realism of the 19th century.

The popularity of M. Zoshchenko in the 1920s could be envied by any venerable writer in Russia. But his fate was severe in the future: Zhdanov's criticism, and then - a long oblivion, after which the "discovery" of this remarkable writer for the Russian reader again followed. Zoshchenko began to be mentioned as a writer writing for the entertainment of the public. It is known that many were perplexed when the "Adventures of the Monkey" incurred the wrath of officials from the Soviet culture. But the Bolsheviks had already developed a flair for their antipodes. A. A. Zhdanov, criticizing and destroying Zoshchenko, who ridiculed stupidity and stupidity of Soviet life, against his own will, guessed in him a great artist, representing a danger to the existing system. Zoshchenko not directly, not in the forehead ridiculed cult of Bolshevik ideas, and with a sad smile protested against any violence against a person. It is also known that in his prefaces to the editions of Sentimental Tales, with the proposed misunderstanding and perversion of his work, he wrote: , presumably, will sound for some critics some kind of shrill flute, some kind of sentimental insulting offal.

One of the most significant stories of this book is "What the nightingale sang about." The author himself said about this story that it is "... perhaps the least sentimental of sentimental stories." Or again: “And what in this work of cheerfulness, perhaps, will seem to someone not enough, then this is not true. There is vivacity here. Not over the edge, of course, but there is.

"But" they will laugh at us in three hundred years! Strange, they will say, little people lived. Some, they will say, they had money, passports. Some acts of civil status and square meters of living space ... "

His moral ideals were directed to the future. Zoshchenko acutely felt hardness of human relationships, the vulgarity of his surrounding life. This can be seen from the way he reveals the theme of the human personality in a short story about "true love and genuine awe of feelings", about "absolutely extraordinary love." Tormented by thoughts of a future better life, the writer often doubts and asks the question: “Will it be beautiful?” And then he draws the simplest, most common version of such a future: “Maybe everything will be free, for nothing. For example, they will impose some fur coats or mufflers for free in Gostiny Dvor. Next, the writer proceeds to create the image of the hero. His hero is the simplest person, and his name is ordinary - Vasily Bylinkin. The reader expects that the author will now begin to ridicule his hero, but no, the author seriously tells about Bylinkin's love for Lisa Rundukova. All actions that accelerate the gap between lovers, despite their ridiculousness (the culprit is a chest of drawers not given by the bride's mother) is a serious family drama. Among Russian satirical writers, in general, drama and comedy exist side by side. Zoshchenko, as it were, tells us that, while people like Vasily Bylinkin, to the question: “What is the nightingale singing about?” - they will answer: "He wants to eat, that's why he sings", - we will not see a worthy future. Zoshchenko does not idealize our past either. To be convinced of this, it is enough to read the Blue Book. The writer knows how much vulgar and cruel humanity is behind him, so that he can immediately free himself from this heritage. True fame brought him small humorous stories that he published in various magazines and newspapers - in Literary Week, Izvestia, Ogonyok, Crocodile and many others.

Zoshchenko's humorous stories were included in various of his books. In new combinations, each time they made me look at myself in a new way: sometimes they appeared as a cycle of stories about darkness and ignorance, and sometimes - as stories about small purchasers. Often they were talking about those who were left out of history. But always they were perceived as stories sharply satirical.

Years have passed, changed living conditions our life, but even the absence of those numerous details of everyday life in which the characters of the stories existed did not weaken the power of Zoshchenko's satire. It’s just that earlier the terrible and disgusting details of everyday life were perceived only as a caricature, but today they have acquired the features of a grotesque, phantasmagoria.

Even on the example of several stories, one can determine the objects of the writer's satire. In "Hard Times" the main "hero is a dark, ignorant man, with a wild, primitive idea of \u200b\u200bfreedom and rights. When he is not allowed to bring a horse into the store, which must certainly be tried on a collar, he laments: "Well, it's a little time. A horse in a shop They won't let them in... But just now we were sitting in a beer-house with her - and at least henna. No one said a word. The manager even personally laughed sincerely ... Well, it's a little time.

A related character is found in the story "Point of View". This is Yegorka, who, when asked whether there are many "conscious women", declares that there are "not enough of them at all." Rather, he remembered one: “Yes, and that one knows how ... (Maybe it will end.” The most conscious is a woman who, on the advice of some healer, took six unknown pills and is now dying.

In the story "Capital Thing" the main character, Leshka Konovalov, is a thief posing as an experienced person. [At a meeting in the village, he was considered a worthy candidate for the position of chairman: after all, he had just arrived from the city (“... he rubbed himself in the city for two years”). Everyone takes him for [a kind of "metropolitan thing" - no one knows what he was doing there. However, Leshka's monologue betrays him with his head: “You can talk ... Why not say this when I know everything ... I know the decree or some order and note. Or, for example, the code... I know everything. For two years, maybe I've been rubbing it... Sometimes I sit in a cell, and they run to you. Explain, they say, Lesha, what kind of note and decree is this.

It is interesting that not only Lesha, who spent two years in the Crosses, but also many other heroes of Zoshchenko's stories are in full confidence that they know absolutely everything and can judge everything. Savagery, obscurantism, primitiveness, some kind of militant ignorance- these are their main features.

However, the main object of Zoshchenko's satire was a phenomenon that, from his point of view, represented the greatest danger to society. This blatant, triumphant philistinism. It appears in Zoshchenko's work in such an unattractive form that the reader clearly feels the need for an immediate struggle against this phenomenon. Zoshchenko shows it comprehensively: both from the economic side, and from the point of view of morality, and even from the standpoint of a simple petty-bourgeois philosophy.

The true hero Zoshchenko in all its glory appears before us in the story "The Bridegroom". This is Yegorka Basov, who was overtaken by a big misfortune: his wife died. Yes, not in time! "The time was, of course, hot - here to mow, here to carry, and to collect bread." What words does his wife hear from him before her death? “Well ... thanks, Katerina Vasilievna, you cut me without a knife. Decided to die at the wrong time. Be patient ... until autumn, and die in autumn. As soon as his wife died, Yegorka went to woo another woman. And what, again a misfire! It turns out that this woman is lame, which means that the hostess is defective. And he takes her back, but does not take her home, but throws off her property somewhere halfway. The protagonist of the story is not just a man crushed by poverty and want. This is a man with the psychology of an outright villain. He is completely devoid of elementary human qualities and primitive to the last degree. The features of the tradesman in this image are elevated to a universal scale.

And here is a story on the philosophical theme "Happiness". The hero is asked if there was happiness in his life. Not everyone will be able to answer this question. But Ivan Fomich Testov knows for sure that in his life "there was definitely happiness." What was it? And the fact that Ivan Fomich managed to insert mirror glass in a tavern for a great price and drink the money he received. And not only! He even made "purchases, in addition: he bought a silver ring and warm insoles." The silver ring is clearly a tribute to aesthetics. Apparently, from satiety - it is impossible to drink and eat everything. The hero does not know whether this happiness is great or small, but he is sure what it is - happiness, and he "remembered it for the rest of his life."

In the story "A Rich Life" a handicraft bookbinder wins five thousand on a gold loan. In theory, "happiness" suddenly fell on him, like on Ivan Fomich Testov. But if he fully “enjoyed” the gift of fate, then in this case the money brings discord into the family of the protagonist. There is a quarrel with relatives, the owner himself is afraid to leave the yard - he guards the firewood, and his wife is addicted to playing loto. Nevertheless, the handicraftsman dreams: “Why is this the most ... Will there be a new draw soon? It would be nice for me to win a thousand for good measure ... " Such is the fate limited and petty person- to dream about what will not bring joy anyway, and not even guess why.

Among his heroes, it is easy to meet both ignorant chatterboxes-demagogues who consider themselves the guardians of some ideology, and "art lovers", who, as a rule, demand the return of their money for a ticket, and most importantly, endless, indestructible and all-conquering "terry" philistines. The accuracy and sharpness of each phrase is amazing. “I write about philistinism. Yes, we do not have philistinism as a class, but for the most part I make a collective type. In each of us there are certain traits of a tradesman, and an owner, and a money-grubber. I combine these characteristic, often obscured features in one hero, and then this hero becomes familiar to us and seen somewhere.

Among the literary heroes of the prose of the 1920s, characters in the stories of M. Zoshchenko occupy a special place. An infinite number of small people, often poorly educated, not weighed down by the burden of culture, but who realized themselves as "hegemons" in the new society. M. Zoshchenko insisted on the right to write about "an individual insignificant person." It was the "little people" of the new time, who make up the majority of the country's population, who were enthusiastic about the task of destroying the "bad" old and building the "good" new. Critics did not want to "recognize" a new person in the heroes of M. Zoshchenko. With regard to these characters, they either talked about the anecdotal refraction of the “old”, or about the writer’s conscious emphasis on everything that prevents the Soviet person from becoming “new”. It was sometimes reproached that he brought out not so much "a social type as a primitive thinking and feeling person in general." Among the critics were those who accused Zoshchenko of contempt for "a new man born of the revolution." The hypocrisy of the characters was undeniable. I really did not want to connect them with a new life. The heroes of Zoshchenko are immersed in everyday life.

Zoshchenko's military past (he volunteered for the front at the very beginning of the war, commanded a company, then a battalion, was awarded four times for bravery, was wounded, poisoned by poisonous gases, resulting in heart disease) was partly reflected in the stories of Nazar Ilyich Mr. Sinebryukhov (Great society history).

There is hardly a person who has not read a single work of Mikhail Zoshchenko. In the 1920s and 1930s, he actively collaborated in satirical magazines (Behemoth, Laugher, Cannon, Inspector General, and others). And already then the reputation of the famous satirist was established behind him. Under the pen of Zoshchenko, all the sad aspects of life, instead of the expected sadness or fear, cause laughter. The author himself claimed that in his stories “there is not a drop of fiction. Everything here is the naked truth.”

Nevertheless, despite the resounding success with readers, the work of this writer turned out to be incompatible with the principles of socialist realism. The infamous resolutions of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks of the late forties, along with other writers, journalists, and composers, accused Zoshchenko of being unprincipled and propagating bourgeois bourgeois ideology.

A letter from Mikhail Mikhailovich to Stalin (“I have never been an anti-Soviet person ... I have never been a literary rogue or low person”) remained unanswered. In 1946, he was expelled from the Writers' Union, and for the next ten years not a single book of his was published.

The good name of Zoshchenko was restored only during the Khrushchev "thaw".

How can one explain the unprecedented glory of this satirist?

You should start with the fact that the writer's biography itself had a huge impact on his work. He did a lot. Battalion commander, head of post and telegraph, border guard, regimental adjutant, agent of the criminal investigation department, instructor in rabbit breeding and chicken breeding, shoemaker, assistant accountant. And this is not a complete list of who this person was and what he did before he sat down at the writer's desk.

He saw many people who had to live in an era of great social and political change. He spoke to them in their language, they were his teachers.

Zoshchenko was a conscientious and sensitive person, he was tormented by pain for others, and the writer considered himself called to serve a “poor” (as he later calls him) person. This "poor" person personifies the whole human layer of the then Russia.

The writer made the "poor" man not only the object, but, more importantly, the subject of the narrative. The hero of Zoshchenko's stories was the most ordinary inhabitant, a representative of the urban lower classes, not attached to the heights of national culture, but at the same time brought to the forefront of life by the course of history, suddenly becoming everything from nothing. Zoshchenko became a practical spokesman for the structure of feelings, life principles and mindsets of this social environment. It was her speech that sounded from the pages of Zoshchenko's stories.

These citizens of the new revolutionary Russia quickly mastered the revolutionary phraseology, but never managed to overcome the inertia of their former habits and ideas. It was these “little people”, who make up the majority of the country's population, who were enthusiastic about the task of destroying the bad old, but who did not know how to start building a good new one, or who understood this construction primarily as the satisfaction of their own needs, which had been infringed before the revolution - it was these people who did not stand out in any way became the subject of Zoshchenko's primary attention.

Interest in this new type of hero in literature led, in turn, to the search for an appropriate manner of writing, easily accessible, moreover, “native” to the reader. By syllables reading these stories, the novice reader is absolutely sure that the author is his own.

And the place where the events unfold is so familiar and familiar (bathhouse, tram, communal kitchen, post office, hospital). And the story itself (a fight in a communal apartment because of a "hedgehog" ("Nervous people"), bath problems with paper numbers ("Bath"), which a naked person has "no place to put it straight", a glass cracked at a wake in the story of the same name and tea that “smells like a mop”) is also close to the audience.

Hence - increased attention to the tale, which soon became an indispensable feature of the artist's individual style.

“I never wrote how birds sing in the forest,” Zoshchenko recalled. - I went through formal schooling. New tasks and a new reader forced me to turn to new forms. Not from aesthetic needs, I took those forms with which you see me. The new content dictated to me exactly the form in which it would be most beneficial for me to present the content. Almost all critics who wrote about Zoshchenko noted his fabulous manner, masterfully reproducing the language of the modern street. Here is what Zoshchenko himself wrote in 1929: “They usually think that I am distorting the “beautiful Russian language”, that for the sake of laughter I take words not in the sense that they are given by life, that I deliberately write in broken language in order to make the most venerable woman laugh. the public. It's right. I hardly distort anything. I write in the language that the street now speaks and thinks. I did this not for the sake of curiosities and not in order to more accurately copy our life. I did this in order to fill, at least temporarily, the gap between literature and the street.

Zoshchenko's stories are designed in the spirit of the language and character of the hero on behalf of whom the story is being told. This technique helps to naturally penetrate the inner world of the hero, to show the essence of his nature.

In order to present the central character of Zoshchenko's stories in full growth, it is necessary to compose his portrait from those sometimes small and almost never specially emphasized dashes and strokes that are scattered throughout individual stories. When comparing them, connections are found between seemingly distant works. The big theme of Zoshchenko with his own cross-cutting character is revealed not in any one work, but in the entire work of the satirist, as if in parts.

Here is how, for example, the story of how the familiar narrator Nikolai Ivanovich suffered unfairly was presented (the story "A Regrettable Case").

He took a ticket to the cinema once. Admittedly, he was a little drunk. But after all, one must understand that it was on Saturday, in the afternoon. Nikolai Ivanovich is sitting in the front row and calmly watches a movie. “Only, maybe, he looked at one inscription, suddenly he went to Riga. Therefore, it is very warm in the hall, the audience breathes, and the darkness has a positive effect on the psyche.

Our Nikolai Ivanovich went to Riga, everything is decorous - nobly - does not touch anyone, the screen is not enough with his hands, he does not unscrew the light bulbs, but sits for himself and quietly goes to Riga ... "

The hero also behaves “nobly” further. Even with the cashier who refuses to refund him the money for an unseen film, he is admirably polite. “Another person in Nikolai Ivanovich’s place would have dragged the cashier out of the cash register by the hair and returned his most pure ones. And Nikolai Ivanovich is a quiet and cultured man, he can only shove the cashier once.

And as a result, they took Nikolai Ivanovich to the police station and also fined him three rubles.

The hero of Zoshchenko's stories has quite definite and firm views on life. Confident in the infallibility of his own views and actions, he, getting into a mess, is perplexed and surprised every time. But at the same time, he never allows himself to be openly indignant and indignant: for this he is too passive. That is why Zoshchenko refused to directly oppose the hero's views with his own views and chose a much more complicated and difficult way of exposing the narrator indirectly, by the very way he was portrayed. The attention that he constantly paid to honing the “technique” of writing is indicative: in the conditions of everyday magazine and newspaper work, when you had to write several stories and feuilletons a week and when the topics of most of them were determined by the editorial task, its role increased especially noticeably.

That is why an analysis of the artistic originality of Zoshchenko's work would be incomplete without talking about the main features of this "technique" about individual techniques for achieving a comic effect and the artistic functions of these techniques directly in the text of the works. Of course, the task is not at all to show that Zoshchenko, like many other writers who worked in the field of satire, used the technique of unexpected resolution of the plot situation, and the technique of "beating" the details, and numerous ways to achieve a purely linguistic, sometimes "linguistic" comedy. ... All these tricks, as well as many others, were known long before Zoshchenko.

The peculiarities of Zoshchenko's use of them are, first of all, in the fact that he turned the methods of the comic in general into methods of the comic within his own system, in this case the tale.

The story is, by its very nature, dual. Tale - 1) A method of narration focused on reproducing live, oral speech, imitation of an improvisational story that is born in front of the reader. A tale is always a "foreign" speech, a narrative mask behind which you need to see the face of the author. The plot of Zoshchenko also carries a double burden. From the author's point of view, it is important primarily as a means of revealing characters. From the point of view of the narrator - in itself, as a real incident from life. This is how the episode of visiting the theater in the company of an "aristocrat", and the story with a cracked glass, and the case of an unseen movie are described. The author's point of view is hidden inside the tale. At the same time, the narrator's point of view is deliberately "bumped out". That is why, in terms of their external, “primary” perception, events are depicted each time as a very specific story, of which the hero was a participant or witness, and for the reliability of which, as well as for the veracity of the consecrated, he is ready to vouch.

For all its concreteness, the hero's story almost always acts as a private illustration on a general theme.

“Something, citizens, there are a lot of thieves today. Around the rod indiscriminately. Now you can’t directly find a person from whom nothing was stolen.

They also recently took away my suitcase, before reaching Zhmerinka ... ”this is how the story“ Thieves ”begins. “Yes, citizens, what is happening on the family front? Husbands, after all, uniform labor comes out. Especially those whose, you know, wife is busy with advanced issues.

Just now, you know what a boring story. Come home. I enter the apartment. I knock, for example, on my own door - they don’t open ... ”- this is the beginning of the story“ Husband ”. It is easy to see that there is a general pattern. The story of how the hero was robbed is preceded by discussions about theft in general. The story of a husband who does not know what to do in front of a closed door is preceded by discussions about the situation on the “family front” in general. Each time this narrator tries to elevate a single fact to the rank of widespread and, moreover, from his point of view, completely normal phenomena; By doing this, he immediately seeks to tune the listener (reader) to a very definite perception of the fact. But the futility of such attempts is obvious as one becomes directly acquainted with the events themselves. The listener has a feeling of inconsistency, incommensurability of the general reasoning and the particular case that precede the story, and, as a result of this, a quite definite, negative attitude towards the narrator's claims to the infallibility of judgments.

When reading Zoshchenko's stories, it is striking that the narrator, be it an "average person" ("Wonderful Rest"), "a non-party tradesman" ("Husband"). Mostly completely serious. But on the other hand, the contours of the events passed through his consciousness are involuntarily exaggerated, shifted.

So irony, by establishing a distance between the author and the narrator, destroys the illusion of the identity of their views. At the same time, the irony of the plot is each time supplemented by the irony of the language.

In his memoirs about Zoshchenko, K. Chukovsky wrote about the language of the characters in Zoshchenko's stories: “Alogism, tongue-tiedness, clumsiness, impotence of this petty-bourgeois jargon also affects, according to Zoshchenko's observations, in idiotic repetitions of the same catchword, stuck in poor minds. It is necessary, for example, for the Zoshchenko tradesman to tell the readers that one woman was traveling to the city of Novorossiysk, he leads his story as follows: “... and, by the way, in this carriage, among others, there is such a (!) grandmother. Such a young woman with a child.

She has a baby in her arms. Here she is with him. She goes with him to Novorossiysk ... "

The word Novorossiysk is repeated five times, and the word is going (going) - nine times, and the narrator cannot get rid of his poor little thought, which has been stuck in his head for a long time. If Chukovsky, citing Zoshchenko's quote, draws attention to the narrator's tongue-tied tongue, then Stanislav Rassadin believes that a system is visible behind this tongue-tied tongue. Zoshchenko is not at all occupied with stenographic recording of train vocabulary. The hero-narrator needs the recurring phrase about Novorossiysk to the point of stupefaction because why he needs a pole going through an unfamiliar swamp along a narrow path. And the narrator wields this support in the same way as they wield a pole - he repels from it. Pushes forward.

Zoshchenko's character is incapable of conveying his feeling immediately and wholeheartedly. His unsteady thought does not mark time, no, but makes its way forward with great difficulty and uncertainty, stopping for corrections, clarifications and digressions.

All Zoshchenko's works have another amazing feature: they can be used to study the history of our country. Subtly feeling the time, the writer managed to fix not only the problems that worry contemporaries, but also the very spirit of the era.

This, perhaps, explains the difficulty of translating his stories into other languages. The foreign reader is so unprepared for the perception of life described by Zoshchenko that he often evaluates it as a genre of some kind of social fantasy. In fact, how to explain to a person unfamiliar with Russian realities the essence of, say, the story “Case History”. Only a compatriot, who knows firsthand about these problems, is able to understand how a sign "Issue of corpses from 3 to 4" can hang in the emergency room.

CONCLUSION

Following life, following reality in the choice of heroes and the themes of his works, moving away from his noble, officer past and from the literary continuation of this past in his own writings, Zoshchenko purposefully followed the path of a people's writer. At the same time, observing the mass of people newly appeared in public life, he did not idealize this people, but paid tribute to him with his satire. However, he could not stand in the pose of an author - a mentor, depicting and condemning people from the outside, he could not find himself in a lordly position above the people, no matter how he appeared before his eyes. This is how Zoshchenko's true democracy manifested itself. And so there was a need to invent their own form of satire, unprecedented in literature. Zoshchenko's talent and human kindness were brilliantly expressed in this literary discovery, where he, as it were, identified himself, the author, with these people he ridiculed. And now, without separating himself from this people, he received the fullest right to ridicule them, to subject them to his merciless satire.

This approach to denunciation of reality is not new. Here is an excerpt from half a century ago of a brilliant article by the famous film director G. Kozintsev “The Folk Art of Charlie Chaplin” “... only one character in King Lear sees the ripening plague through the imaginary calm of the state. This character is a joke.

What kings, generals, statesmen see about what they see. He is the only person who can speak the truth. He has the right to speak because he tells the truth in jest. He's wearing a jester costume!

Putting on this “suit”, this mask of a comic character, Zoshchenko was able to speak about the “plague”, which he deeply saw and felt around. It is not his fault that he was not heard and understood. The eyes of society were then dimmed by the red color of banners, flags, slogans, and the bravura brass of orchestras clogged their ears ...

Truly, there is no prophet in his own country. But the widespread superficial understanding of his work made it possible for two decades of an open, public life and Zoshchenko's stories, and outwardly prosperous being for him.

This cannot be said about the works of M. Bulgakov and his fate as a writer.

M.A. Bulgakov stands out among the writers, undeservedly forgotten, "forbidden". However, the time that seemed to have previously worked against Bulgakov, dooming him to oblivion, seemed to turn to face him, denoting the rapid growth of literary recognition.

Interest in Bulgakov's work in our time is much higher than in previous years. How can this phenomenon be explained? Probably because the world of formalism, soulless democracy, self-interest, immoral businessmen and careerists is opposed by Bulgakov's world of eternal values: historical truth, creative search, conscience. When in 1925 Bulgakov's story "Fatal Eggs" was published, not the first satirical thing of the writer, one of the critics remarked: "Bulgakov wants to become a satirist of our era."

Now, perhaps, no one will deny that Bulgakov has become a satirist of our era. Yes, and the most outstanding. And this despite the fact that he did not want to become one at all. The era itself made him a satirist. By the nature of his talent, he was a lyricist. Everything he wrote went through his heart. Each image he creates carries his love or hatred, admiration or bitterness, tenderness or regret. When you read Bulgakov's books, you are inevitably infected by these feelings of his. With satire, he only “snarls” at everything that is unkind that was born and multiplied before his eyes, from which he himself had to fight back more than once and that threatened with serious troubles for the people and country. He was disgusted by the bureaucratic forms of managing people and the life of society as a whole, and bureaucracy took deeper roots in all spheres of social life.

He could not stand violence - neither on himself, nor on other people. But over the time of war communism, it was used more and more widely and, first of all, was directed against the breadwinner of the country - the peasant - and against the intelligentsia, whom he considered the best part of the people.

He saw the main misfortune of his "backward country" in lack of culture and ignorance, and both, with the destruction of the intelligentsia, despite the "cultural revolution" and the elimination of illiteracy, did not decrease, but, on the contrary, penetrated into the state apparatus, and into those layers societies, which in all respects were supposed to constitute its intellectual environment.

And he rushed into battle in defense of that “reasonable, kind, eternal” that the best minds and souls of the Russian intelligentsia once sowed and that were now discarded and trampled down in the name of the so-called class interests of the proletariat.

Bulgakov had his own creative interest in these battles. They kindled his fantasy, sharpened the pen. And even the fact that criticism responded to the thin sword of his satire with a club did not deprive him of either humor or courage. But he never entered into such fights out of pure passion, as often happened with satirists and humorists. He was invariably guided by anxiety and pain for the good and eternal that was lost by people and the country on the path that they followed not at all of their own free will. That is why in the tenth year of his work, in the conditions of flourishing Stalinism, his works were banned. But for the same reason, when it was returned to readers six decades later, it turned out that not only were these works not outdated, but they turned out to be more topical than many, many modern works written on the very topic of the day.

Bulgakov's creative world is fantastically rich, diverse, full of all sorts of surprises. Not a single one of his novels, not a single story or play fits into the patterns we are used to.

They are perceived and interpreted by different people in different ways. Every attentive reader has his own Bulgakov. Let anyone who enters Bulgakov's world take at least a small share of his wealth. They are inexhaustible and now, thank God, they are open to everyone.

It is not easy to identify signs of the new, to embody the content of life in memorable artistic images. But is it easier to reveal negative trends, to show not only what we still call remnants of the past by inertia, but also the shortcomings of our own growth? In a word, what has received the figurative name of "acquisitions."

In the hierarchy of modern literary genres and genres, especially if you look at them in a historical perspective, satirical genres have a place somewhere at the bottom. They are assigned the role of a hidden, very modest, close to a gradually disappearing value. How else? There will come a time when only remnants will remain, and then they will not be. What is a satirist to do? Faith is both noble and naive. With this approach, the law of the unity and struggle of opposites is violated, the dialectical position on the negation of negation is forgotten. For internal opposites are a property of the structure of any object or process.

The nature of the connection and interaction between opposites is revealed in its own way by the art of satire.

With the hope of a quick death of satire, apparently, we will have to wait. Satire is an organic property of any great art, and it is immortal. The growth of material well-being, as is known, does not entail an automatic increase in moral dignity. Sometimes the relationship can be reversed. After all, there is a test for poverty, and there is a test for satiety. In our time, conflicts arise that are no less acute than in the 1920s and 1930s, when the struggle was between class opponents.

Today these are not antagonistic contradictions, but the intensity and sharpness of their manifestation is not much less, especially when it comes to the struggle of high morality and intelligence with lack of spirituality, ethical and aesthetic values with vulgarity, covered no longer by polished chiffoniers, but by references to Kafka or surrealism.

Tarasevich Valentina

Among the masters of Soviet satire and humor, a special place belongs to Mikhail Zoshchenko (1895-1958). His works still enjoy the attention of the reader. After the death of the writer, his stories, feuilletons, novellas, comedies were published about twenty times with a circulation of several million copies.

Mikhail Zoshchenko brought to perfection the manner of the comic tale, which had rich traditions in Russian literature. He created an original style of lyric-ironic narration in the stories of the 20s-30s.

Zoshchenko's humor attracts with its spontaneity, non-triviality.

In his works, Zoshchenko, unlike modern satirical writers, never humiliated his hero, but on the contrary tried to help a person get rid of vices. Zoshchenko's laughter is not laughter for the sake of laughter, but laughter for the sake of moral purification. This is what attracts us to the work of M.M. Zoshchenko.

How does a writer manage to create a comic effect in his works? What tricks does he use?

This work is an attempt to answer these questions, to analyze the linguistic means of comedy.

Thus, goal my work was to identify the role of language means of creating the comic in the stories of Mikhail Zoshchenko.

Download:

Preview:

Regional scientific and practical conference of high school students

"To the world of search, to the world of creativity, to the world of science"

Techniques for creating a comic

in satirical stories

Mikhail Zoshchenko

MOU "Ikeyskaya secondary school"

Tarasevich Valentina.

Supervisor: teacher of Russian language and literature Gapeevtseva E.A.

2013

Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………3

Chapter I. 1.1 Zoshchenko is a master of the comic……………………………………………………….6

1.2 Hero Zoshchenko………………………………………………………………………………….7

Chapter II. Language means of the comic in the works of M. Zoshchenko……………….….7

2.1. Classification of means of verbal comedy………………………………………….………7

2.2. Means of comedy in the works of Zoshchenko…………………………………………….…9

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………...15

List of references………………………………………………………....16

Appendix 1. Survey results…………………………………………….…….17

Appendix 2. Techniques for creating a comic……………………………………….……..18

Introduction

The origins of satire lie in ancient times. Satire can be found in the works of Sanskrit literature, Chinese literature. In ancient Greece, satire reflected intense political struggles.

As a special literary form, satire was first formed among the Romans, where the name itself appears (lat. satira, from satura - a revealing genre in ancient Roman literature of an entertaining and didactic nature, combining prose and poetry).

In Russia, satire appears first in folk oral art (fairy tales, proverbs, guslar songs, folk dramas). Examples of satire are also known in ancient Russian literature (“The Prayer of Daniel the Sharpener”). The aggravation of the social struggle in the 17th century puts forward satire as a powerful denunciatory weapon against the clergy (“Kalyazinskaya Petition”), bribery of judges (“Shemyakin Court”, “The Tale of Ruff Yershovich”), and others. Satire in Russia of the 18th century, as well as in Western Europe , develops within the framework of classicism and takes on a moralizing character (satires by A.D. Kantemir), develops in the form of a fable (V.V. Kapnist, I.I. Khemnitser), a comedy (“Undergrowth” by D.I. Fonvizin, “Yabeda” V.V. Kapnista). Satirical journalism is widely developed (N.I. Novikov, I.A. Krylov and others). Satire reached its peak in the 19th century, in the literature of critical realism. The main direction of Russian social satire of the 19th century was given by A.S. Griboyedov (1795-1829) in the comedy "Woe from Wit" and N.V. Gogol (1809-1852) in the comedy "The Inspector General" and in "Dead Souls", exposing the main foundations of the landlord and bureaucratic Russia. The fables of I.A. are imbued with satirical pathos. Krylov, a few poems and prose works by A.S. Pushkin, poetry M.Yu. Lermontov, N.P. Ogarev, Ukrainian poet T.G. Shevchenko, dramaturgy A.N. Ostrovsky. Russian satirical literature is enriched with new features in the second half of the 19th century in the work of writers - revolutionary democrats: N.A. Nekrasova (1821-1877) (poems "The Moral Man"), N.A. Dobrolyubov, as well as the poets of the 60s, grouped around the satirical magazine Iskra. Inspired by love for the people, high ethical principles, satire was a powerful factor in the development of the Russian liberation movement. Satire reaches unsurpassed political sharpness in the work of the great Russian satirist - the revolutionary democrat M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin (1826-1889), who exposed bourgeois-landlord Russia and bourgeois Europe, the arbitrariness and stupidity of the authorities, the bureaucratic apparatus, the excesses of the feudal lords, etc. (“Gentlemen Golovlevs”, “History of a City”, “Modern Idyll”, “Tales”, etc.). In the 80s, in the era of reactions, satire reaches great strength and depth in the stories of A.P. Chekhov (1860-1904). Revolutionary satire, pursued by censorship, sounds passionately in the pamphlets of M. Gorky (1868-1936), directed against imperialism and bourgeois pseudo-democracy ("American Essays", "My Interviews"), in a stream of satirical leaflets and magazines of 1905-1906, in the feuilletons of the Bolshevik newspaper "Pravda". After the Great October Socialist Revolution, Soviet satire is aimed at fighting the class enemy, bureaucracy, and capitalist remnants in people's minds.

Zoshchenko's humor attracts with its spontaneity, non-triviality.

In his works, Zoshchenko, unlike modern writers - satirists, never humiliated his hero, but on the contrary tried to help a person get rid of vices. Zoshchenko's laughter is not laughter for the sake of laughter, but laughter for the sake of moral purification. This is what attracts us to the work of M.M. Zoshchenko.

How does a writer manage to create a comic effect in his works? What tricks does he use?

This work is an attempt to answer these questions, to analyze the linguistic means of comedy.

Thus, the goal my work was to identify the role of language means of creating the comic in the stories of Mikhail Zoshchenko.

To achieve this goal, it is necessary to solve the following tasks:

To study the language means of the comic.

Analyze the linguistic features of Zoshchenko's stories.

Find out what role the comic means play in the stories of Mikhail Zoshchenko.

Hypothesis our research work:

To create a comic effect, Mikhail Zoshchenko uses special language tools in his stories.

I was inspired to do research on this topic by interest in the work of Mikhail Zoshchenko, in the nature of the comic, simply in new discoveries. In addition, the survey revealed that many of my peers do not know the theory of how to create a comic, find it difficult to name the stories of Mikhail Zoshchenko, although they like to read humorous and satirical literary works. (Annex 1)

Thus, despite relevance themes, it has an undeniable novelty for the students of our school. Novelty of the obtained results lies in the fact that within the framework of a small study, we tried to identify the most striking and frequently used techniques for creating a comic used by Mikhail Zoshchenko in his satirical stories.

Research methods: sociological (survey - questioning, non-survey - analysis of documents, observation, comparison, counting, analysis and synthesis.), theoretical (linguistic, literary criticism). The choice of research methods is optimal, as it corresponds to the specifics of the work.

Chapter I. Zoshchenko - the master of the comic

Mikhail Zoshchenko brought to perfection the manner of the comic tale, which had rich traditions in Russian literature. He created an original style - lyric-ironic narration in the stories of the 20s-30s. and the cycle of "Sentimental Tales".

The work of Mikhail Zoshchenko is an original phenomenon in Russian Soviet literature. The writer, in his own way, saw some characteristic processes of contemporary reality, brought under the blinding light of satire a gallery of characters that gave rise to the common term "Zoshchenko's hero". Being at the origins of Soviet satirical and humorous prose, he acted as the creator of an original comic novel that continued the traditions of Gogol, Leskov, and early Chekhov in new historical conditions. Finally, Zoshchenko created his own, completely unique artistic style.

In developing the original form of his own story, he drew from all these sources, although the Gogol-Chekhov tradition was closest to him.

Zoshchenko would not be himself if it were not for his manner of writing. It was a language unknown to literature, and therefore not having its own spelling language. His language breaks, scooping up and exaggerating all the painting and the improbability of street speech, the swarming of "life torn apart by a storm."

Zoshchenko is endowed with absolute pitch and a brilliant memory. During the years spent in the midst of poor people, he managed to penetrate the secret of their conversational construction, with its characteristic vulgarisms, incorrect grammatical forms and syntactic constructions, managed to adopt the intonation of their speech, their expressions, turns, phrases - he studied this language to the subtlety and already from the first steps in literature he began to use it easily and naturally. In his language, expressions such as “plitoir”, “okromya”, “hresh”, “this”, “in him”, “brunette”, “drunk”, “for biting”, “fuck cry”, “ this poodle", "silent animal", "at the stove", etc.

But Zoshchenko is a writer not only of a comic style, but also of comic situations. Not only his language is comical, but also the place where the story of the next story unfolded: a commemoration, a communal apartment, a hospital - everything is so familiar, its own, everyday habitual. And the story itself: a fight in a communal apartment because of a scarce hedgehog, a scandal at the wake because of a broken glass.

Some turns from the writer's works have remained in Russian literature as aphorisms: "as if suddenly the atmosphere smelled of me", "they will rob me like sticky and throw them away for their kind, for nothing, that their own relatives", "lieutenant wow, but a bastard", " breaks the riots."

Zoshchenko, while writing his stories, laughed himself. So much so that later, when I read stories to my friends, I never laughed. He sat gloomy, gloomy, as if not understanding what he could laugh at. Having laughed while working on the story, he then perceived it with longing and sadness. I took it as the other side of the coin. If you listen carefully to his laughter, it is not difficult to catch that the carefree-joking notes are just a background for the notes of pain and bitterness.

1.2. Hero Zoshchenko

The hero Zoshchenko is a layman, a man with poor morals and a primitive outlook on life. This inhabitant personified the whole human layer of the then Russia. Zoshchenko, in many of his works, tried to emphasize that this layman often spent all his strength on fighting all sorts of petty everyday troubles, instead of actually doing something for the good of society. But the writer did not ridicule the man himself, but the philistine features in him. “I combine these characteristic, often obscured features in one hero, and then the hero becomes familiar to us and seen somewhere,” Zoshchenko wrote.

With his stories, Zoshchenko, as it were, urged not to fight people with philistine traits, but to help them get rid of these traits.

In satirical stories, the characters are less rude and uncouth than in humorous short stories. The author is interested, first of all, in the spiritual world, the system of thinking of an outwardly cultured, but even more disgusting in essence, tradesman.

Chapter II. Language means of the comic in the works of M. Zoshchenko

2.1. Classification of means of speech comedy

All means of the comic can be divided into several groups, among which are the means formed by phonetic means; means formed by lexical means (tropes and the use of vernacular, borrowings, etc.); means formed by morphological means (incorrect use of case forms, gender, etc.); means formed by syntactic means (use of stylistic figures: parallelism, ellipsis, repetitions, gradation, etc.) (Appendix 2)

Phonetic means include, for example, the use of orthoepic irregularities, which helps the authors to give a capacious portrait of the narrator or hero.

Stylistic figures include anaphora, epiphora, parallelism, antithesis, gradation, inversion, rhetorical questions and appeals, polyunion and non-union, silence, etc.

Syntactic means - default, rhetorical questions, gradations, parallelism and antithesis.

Lexical means include all tropes as figurative and expressive means, as well as pun, paradox, irony, alogism.

These are epithets - "words that define an object or action and emphasize in them some characteristic property, quality."

Comparisons - comparison of two phenomena in order to explain one of them with the help of the other.

Metaphors are words or expressions that are used in a figurative sense based on the similarity in some respect of two objects or phenomena.

To create a comic effect, hyperbolas and litotes are often used - figurative expressions containing exorbitant exaggeration (or understatement) of size, strength, value, etc.

Irony also refers to lexical means. Irony - "the use of a word or expression in the reverse sense of the literal for the purpose of ridicule."

In addition, lexical means also include allegory, personification, paraphrase, etc. All of these means are trails.

However, only the tropes do not fully define the lexical means of creating comedy. This should also include the use of colloquial, special (professional), borrowed or dialect vocabulary. The author builds the whole monologue and the whole comic situation on the special vocabulary used by thieves in law, but at the same time it is familiar to most of the population: “no need to shag your grandmother”, “you won’t see a century of freedom”, etc.

To the so-called grammatical, or rather morphological, means, we include cases when the author deliberately incorrectly uses grammatical categories in order to create comedy.

The use of colloquial forms such as evony, theirs, etc. can also be attributed to grammatical means, although in the full sense these are lexico-grammatical means.

Pun [fr. calembour] - a play on words based on deliberate or involuntary ambiguity generated by homonymy or similarity of sound and causing a comic effect, for example: “I am rushing, just like that; // But I’m moving forward, and you’re rushing while sitting” (K. Prutkov)

Alogism (from a - negative prefix and Greek logismos - mind) - 1) denial of logical thinking as a means of achieving truth; irrationalism, mysticism, fideism oppose logic to intuition, faith or revelation - 2) in stylistics, a deliberate violation of logical connections in speech for the purpose of stylistic (including comic) effect.

Paradox, - a, m. (books). - 1. A strange statement, at odds with the generally accepted opinion, as well as an opinion that contradicts (sometimes only at first glance) common sense. Talk in paradoxes. 2. A phenomenon that seems incredible and unexpected, adj. paradoxical.

2.2. Means of comedy in the works of Zoshchenko

Having studied the comic in Zoshchenko's works, we will focus on the most striking, in our opinion, means of the comic, such as pun, alogism, redundancy of speech (tautology, pleonasm), the use of words in an unusual meaning (the use of vernacular forms, the misuse of grammatical forms, the creation an unusual synonymous series, a collision of colloquial, scientific and foreign vocabulary), since they are the most commonly used.

2.2.1. Pun as a means of creating comic

Among the favorite speech means of Zoshchenko the stylist is a pun, a play on words based on homonymy and polysemy of words.

In the “Dictionary of the Russian Language” by S.I. Ozhegov, the following definition is given: “A pun is a joke based on the comic use of words that sound similar, but have different meanings.” In the Dictionary of Foreign Words, edited by I.V. Lekhin and Professor F.N. Petrov we read: "A pun is a play on words based on their sound similarity with a different meaning."

With a pun, laughter arises if in our minds the more general meaning of a word is replaced by its literal meaning. In creating a pun, the main role is played by the ability to find and apply the specific and literal meaning of the word and replace it with the more general and broad meaning that the interlocutor has in mind. This skill requires a certain talent, which Zoshchenko possessed. In order to create puns, he uses the convergence and collision of direct and figurative meanings more often than the convergence and collision of several meanings of a word.

“So you, citizens, are asking me if I was an actor? Well, there was. Played in theaters. Touched this art.

In this example, written out from the story "Actor", the narrator, using the word "touched", uses its figurative, metaphorical meaning, i.e. "I was in touch with the art world." Touching at the same time also has the meaning of incomplete action.

Often in Zoshchenko's puns there is a duality in understanding the meaning.

“I was right at the same point with this family. And he was like a member of the family ”(“ High Society History ”, 1922).

“At least I am an unenlightened person” (“Great History”, 1922).

In the speech of the narrator Zoshchenko, there are numerous cases of replacing the expected word with another, consonant, but far in meaning.

So, instead of the expected "family member" the narrator says a family member, "an unenlightened person" - a person not illuminated, etc.

2.2.2. Alogism as a means of creating comic

The main feature of Zoshchenko's technique for creating verbal comedy is alogism. At the heart of alogism as a stylistic device and a means of creating a comic is the lack of logical expediency in the use of various elements of speech, from speech to grammatical constructions, verbal comic alogism arises as a result of a discrepancy between the logic of the narrator and the logic of the reader.

In Administrative Delight (1927), discord is created by antonyms, for example:

"But the fact that [the pig] wandered in and is clearly disturbing the public disorder."

Disorder and order are words with opposite meanings. In addition to the substitution of the word, the compatibility of the verb to violate with nouns is violated here. According to the norms of the Russian literary language, it is possible to “violate” rules, order or other norms.

"Now let's draw up an act and move the case downhill."

Obviously, in the story "Watchman" (1930) it is meant not downhill (i.e. "down"), but uphill ("forward, improve the situation"). Antonymic substitution in - under creates a comic effect.

Discord and discord also arises due to the use of non-literary forms of the word. For example, in the story "The Bridegroom" (1923):

“And here, my brothers, my woman is dying. Today, let's say, she collapsed, but tomorrow she's worse. It rushes about and brandy, and falls from the stove.

Brandite is the non-literary form of the verb "to rave". In general, it should be noted that there are many non-literary forms in Zoshchenko's stories: brandite instead of "delusion" ("Groom", 1923), starving instead of starving ("Devil's Woman", 1922), lie down instead of lie down ("Deadly Place", 1921), cunning instead of cunning ("A disastrous place"), among other things instead of among other things ("Motherhood and infancy", 1929), I ask instead of ask ("Great World History"), hello instead of hello ("Victoria Kazimirovna"), whole instead of whole ("Great World History") History”), a skeleton instead of a skeleton (“Victoria Kazimirovna”), a teket instead of a flow (“Great History”).

“We lived with him for a whole year just wonderfully.”

“And he goes all in white, like some kind of skeleton.”

"My hands are already mutilated - the blood is flowing, and then he stings."

2.2.3. Redundancy of speech as a means of creating a comic

The speech of the hero of the narrator in Zoshchenko's comic tale contains a lot of superfluous things, it sins with tautology and pleonasms.

Tautology - (Greek tautología, from tautó - the same and lógos - a word), 1) the repetition of the same or similar words, for example, “clearer than clear”, “cries, bursts into tears”. In poetic speech, especially in oral folk art, tautology is used to enhance emotional impact. Tautology is a kind of pleonasm.

Pleonasm - (from the Greek pleonasmós - excess), verbosity, the use of words that are unnecessary not only for semantic completeness, but usually also for stylistic expressiveness. Ranked among the stylistic "figures of addition", but is considered as an extreme, turning into a "defect of style"; the border of this transition is unsteady and is determined by the sense of proportion and the taste of the era. Pleonasm is common in colloquial speech (“I saw it with my own eyes”), where, like other figures of addition, it serves as one of the forms of natural redundancy of speech. The tautological nature of the language of the narrator-hero Zoshchenko can be judged by the following examples:

“In a word, she was a poetic person who could smell flowers and nasturtiums all day long” (“Lady with Flowers”, 1930)

“And I committed a criminal offense” (“Great History”, 1922)

“The old prince, Your Excellency, was killed to death, and the charming Pole Victoria Kazimirovna was dismissed from the estate” (“Great History”, 1922)

“Almost, you bastard, they didn’t strangle by the throat” (“A small incident from a personal life”, 1927)

“And the diver, Comrade Filippov, fell in love with her too much and too much” (“The Story of a Student and a Diver”)

2.2.4. Using words in unusual meanings

Non-literary words create comic effects, and the characters are perceived by readers as uneducated inhabitants. It is the language that gives a picture of the hero's social status. Such a substitution of a standardized literary word form for a non-literary, dialectal one is used by Zoshchenko in order to show that the narrator, who criticizes others for ignorance, is ignorant himself. For example:

“Her boy is a suckling mammal” (“Great History”, 1922)

“I haven’t seen you, son of a bitch, for seven years ... Yes, I have you, brat ...” (“You don’t need to have relatives”)

Often the comparison of Soviet with foreign leads to the inclusion of foreign words and even entire sentences in foreign languages. Particularly impressive in this regard is the alternation of Russian and foreign words and phrases with the same meaning, for example:

“The German kicked his head, they say, beat-dritte, please take it away, what is the conversation about, it’s a pity, or something” (“Product Quality”, 1927).

“I put on a new blues-tunic” (“Victoria Kazimirovna”)

Or the use of foreign words in a Russian context:

“Not that lorigan, not that rose” (“Product Quality”, 1927).

The use of words in an unusual meaning causes laughter in the reader, the creation of one's own synonymous series, unusual for the reader, serves as a means of creating a comic effect. So, for example, Zoshchenko, violating the normative literary language, creates synonymous series, such as a printed organ - a newspaper ("The Cannibal", 1938), a photographic card - a face - a muzzle - a physiognomy ("Guests", 1926), inclusion in a common network - connection electricity (“The Last Story”), the child is an object - a shibzdik (“Accident”, “Happy Childhood”), front, hind legs - arms, legs (“The Story of a Student and a Diver”), a grandmother is a young woman (“Accident” ).

“Instead of tearing up the printed organ, you would have taken it and declared it to the editor.”

“Later it turned out that he had been blown away by a photographic card, and he went around with flux for three weeks.”

“And, by the way, in this carriage, among others, there is such a grandmother in general. Such a young woman with a child."

"A sort of shibzdik for about ten years, or something, is sitting." ("Happy childhood")

2.2.5. Paradox as a means of creating comic

Paradox - (Greek parádoxos - "contrary to common opinion") - an expression in which the conclusion does not coincide with the premise and does not follow from it, but, on the contrary, contradicts it, giving its unexpected and unusual interpretation (for example, "I will believe what anything, as long as it is completely unbelievable "- O. Wilde). The paradox is characterized by brevity and completeness, bringing it closer to an aphorism, an underlined sharpness of the formulation, bringing it closer to a play on words, a pun, and, finally, an unusual content that contradicts the generally accepted interpretation of this problem, which is affected by the paradox. Example: "All smart people are fools, and only fools are smart." At first glance, such judgments are meaningless, but some meaning can be found in them, it may even seem that some particularly subtle thoughts are encrypted through a paradox. The master of such paradoxes was Mikhail Zoshchenko.

For example: “Yes, wonderful beauty,” said Vasya, looking with some amazement at the peeling plaster of the house. - Indeed, very beautiful ... "

2.2.6. Irony as a means of creating comic

Irony is very close to paradox. Its definition is not difficult. If, in paradox, concepts that exclude each other are combined despite their incompatibility, then in irony, one concept is expressed in words, while another, opposite to it, is implied (but not expressed in words). The positive is expressed in words, but the negative opposite is understood. With this, irony allegorically reveals the shortcomings of the person (or what) they are talking about. It is one of the types of ridicule, and this is what defines its comic.

The fact that the disadvantage is indicated through the dignity opposite to it, this disadvantage is highlighted and emphasized. Irony is especially expressive in oral speech, when a special mocking intonation serves as its means.

It happens that the situation itself makes us understand a word or phrase in a sense that is directly opposite to the well-known. The grandiloquent expression the audience is over when applied to the watchman emphasizes the absurdity and comicality of the described situation: “Here the watchman finished his water, wiped his mouth with his sleeve and closed his eyes, wanting to show that the audience was over” (“Night Incident”)

“I, he says, have now smashed all my ambition into blood.” ("Patient")

2.2.7. Clash of different styles

The speech of the narrator in the works of Zoshchenko is divided into separate lexical units belonging to different styles. The clash of different styles in the same text speaks of a certain person who is illiterate, impudent and funny. At the same time, it is interesting to note that Zoshchenko managed to create stories and novels in which almost incompatible, even mutually exclusive lexical series can exist very close to each other, they can literally coexist in one phrase or character’s remark. This allows the author to freely maneuver the text, provides an opportunity to abruptly, unexpectedly turn the narration in the other direction. For example:

“They make such a lot of noise, and the German is certainly quiet, and as if suddenly the atmosphere smelled of me.” ("Great History")

“Prince Your Excellency only vomited a little, jumped to his feet, shakes my hand, admires.” ("Great History")

"One of these without a hat, a long-maned subject, but not a pop." ("Small case from personal life")

Conclusion

For more than three decades of work in literature, Zoshchenko has come a long and difficult path. On this path there were undoubted successes and even genuine discoveries that put him forward among the greatest masters of Soviet literature. There were equally undoubted miscalculations. Today it is very clearly seen that the heyday of the satirist's work falls on the 20s and 30s. But it is also equally obvious that the best works of Zoshchenko of these seemingly distant years are still close and dear to the reader. Dear because the laughter of the great master of Russian literature today remains our faithful ally in the struggle for a person free from the heavy burden of the past, from self-interest and petty calculation of the acquirer.

In the course of our work, we came to the following conclusions:

The verbal means of creating the comic, namely alogism, stylistic substitutions and displacements, the clash of several styles, often even in one sentence, are quite productive comic means and are based on the principle of emotional and stylistic contrast.

The narrator Zoshchenko is the very subject of satire, he betrays his wretchedness, sometimes naivety, sometimes simplicity, sometimes petty-bourgeoisness, without realizing it himself, as if absolutely involuntarily and therefore incredibly funny.

Zoshchenko's satire is not a call to fight people who have philistine traits, but a call to fight these traits.

Zoshchenko's laughter is laughter through tears.

List of used literature

Aleksandrova, Z.E. Russian synonym dictionary. lang. / Ed. L.A. Cheshko. / Z.E. Alexandrova. - 5th ed., stereotype. M.: Rus.yaz., 1986. 600s.
Zoshchenko M.M. Works: In 5 t.M.: Enlightenment, 1993.
Zoshchenko M.M. Dear citizens: Parodies. Stories. Feuilletons. satirical notes. Letters to a writer. One-act plays. M., 1991. (From the press archive).
Mikhail Zoshchenko. Materials for a creative biography: Book 1 / Ed. ed. ON THE. Groznov. M.: Education, 1997.
Ozhegov, S.I. and Shvedova, N.Yu. Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. / S.I. Ozhegov, N.Yu. Shvedova // Russian Academy of Sciences Instrument of the Russian language; Russian Cultural Foundation. M: Az Ltd., 1992. 960s.
Chukovsky K. From the memories. - Sat. Mikhail Zoshchenko in the memoirs of his contemporaries. M .: Education, pp. 36-37.
www.zoschenko.info
en.wikipedia.org

Annex 1. Survey results

A total of 68 people took part in the survey.

Question number 1.

Yes - 98%.

No - 2%.

Question number 2.

What techniques of creating a comic do you know?

Comparison - 8 people.

Metaphor - 10 people.

Epithets - 10 people.

Hyperbole - 12 people.

Allegory - 2 people.

Mismatch - 3 people.

Surprise - 8 people.

Irony - 21 people.

Question #3

What stories by M. Zoshchenko have you read?

Glass - 24 people. Kalosha - 36 people. Incident on the Volga - 8 people. Stupid story - 12 people. Stories about Lelya and Minka - 11 people. .Meeting - 7 people.

Appendix 2. Techniques for creating a comic

Mikhail Mikhailovich Zoshchenko was born in St. Petersburg in the family of an artist. Childhood impressions - including those of difficult relationships between parents - were subsequently reflected both in Zoshchenko's stories for children (Galoshes and ice cream, Christmas tree, Grandma's gift, No need to lie, etc.), and in his story Before Sunrise (1943). The first literary experiences relate to childhood. In one of his notebooks, he noted that in 1902-1906 he had already tried to write poetry, and in 1907 he wrote the story Coat.

In 1913 Zoshchenko entered the law faculty of St. Petersburg University. By this time, his first surviving stories, Vanity (1914) and Two-kopeck piece (1914), date back. The study was interrupted by the First World War. In 1915, Zoshchenko volunteered for the front, commanded a battalion, and became a Knight of St. George. Literary work did not stop during these years. Zoshchenko tried his hand at short stories, in the epistolary and satirical genres (composing letters to fictitious addressees and epigrams for fellow soldiers). In 1917 he was demobilized due to heart disease that arose after gas poisoning.

MichaelZoshchenko participated in the First World War, and by 1916 he was promoted to the rank of staff captain. He was awarded many orders, including the Order of St. Stanislaus of the 3rd degree, the Order of St. Anna of the 4th degree "For Courage", the Order of St. Anna of the 3rd degree. In 1917, due to heart disease caused by gas poisoning, Zoshchenko was demobilized.

Upon returning to Petrograd, Marusya, the Meshchanochka, the Neighbor and other unpublished stories were written, in which the influence of G. Maupassant was felt. In 1918, despite his illness, Zoshchenko volunteered for the Red Army and fought on the fronts of the Civil War until 1919. Returning to Petrograd, he earned his living, as before the war, in various professions: a shoemaker, a carpenter, a carpenter, an actor, an instructor in rabbit breeding, a policeman, a criminal investigation officer, etc. In the humorous Orders on the railway police and criminal supervision written at that time, Art. Ligovo and other unpublished works already feel the style of the future satirist.

In 1919, Mikhail Zoshchenko studied at the Creative Studio, organized by the publishing house World Literature. Chukovsky supervised the classes, highly appreciating Zoshchenko's work. Recalling his stories and parodies written during the period of his studio studies, Chukovsky wrote: “It was strange to see that such a sad person was endowed with this wondrous ability to force his neighbors to laugh.” In addition to prose, during his studies, Zoshchenko wrote articles about the work of Blok, Mayakovsky, Teffi ... In the Studio he met the writers Kaverin, Vs. Ivanov, Lunts, Fedin, Polonskaya, who in 1921 united in the literary group "Serapion Brothers", who advocated the freedom of creativity from political guardianship. Creative communication was facilitated by the life of Zoshchenko and other "serapions" in the famous Petrograd House of Arts, described by O. Forsh in the novel Crazy Ship.

In 1920-1921 Zoshchenko wrote the first stories of those that were subsequently published: Love, War, Old Woman Wrangel, Fish female. The cycle Stories of Nazar Ilyich, Mr. Sinebryukhov (1921-1922) was published as a separate book by the Erato publishing house. This event marked Zoshchenko's transition to professional literary activity. The very first publication made him famous. Phrases from his stories acquired the character of popular expressions: “Why are you disturbing the mess?”; "Second Lieutenant wow, but a bastard"... From 1922 to 1946, his books went through about 100 editions, including collected works in six volumes (1928-1932).

By the mid-1920s, Zoshchenko had become one of the most popular writers. His stories Bath, Aristocrat, Case History, which he himself often read to numerous audiences, were known and loved by all. In a letter to Zoshchenko, Gorky noted: “I don’t know such a ratio of irony and lyricism in literature anywhere.” Chukovsky believed that the center of Zoshchenko's work was the struggle against callousness in human relations.

In the collections of short stories of the 1920s: Humorous Stories (1923), Dear Citizens (1926), Zoshchenko created a new type of hero for Russian literature - a Soviet person who did not receive an education, did not have the skills of spiritual work, did not have cultural baggage, but strived to become full-fledged participant in life, to be equal to "the rest of humanity." The reflection of such a hero produced a strikingly funny impression. The fact that the story was told on behalf of a highly individualized narrator gave literary critics grounds to define Zoshchenko's creative style as "skazovogo". Academician Vinogradov in the study "Zoshchenko's Language" analyzed in detail the writer's narrative techniques, noted the artistic transformation of various speech layers in his vocabulary. Chukovsky noted that Zoshchenko introduced into literature "a new, not yet fully formed, but victoriously spread throughout the country, non-literary speech and began to freely use it as his own speech."

In 1929, known in Soviet history as "the year of the great turning point", Zoshchenko published the book "Letters to a Writer" - a kind of sociological study. It was made up of several dozen letters from the huge reader's mail that the writer received, and his commentary on them. In the preface to the book, Zoshchenko wrote that he wanted to "show a genuine and undisguised life, genuine living people with their desires, taste, thoughts." The book caused bewilderment among many readers, who expected only regular funny stories from Zoshchenko. After its release, Meyerhold was forbidden to stage Zoshchenko's play "Dear Comrade" (1930).

Soviet reality could not but affect the emotional state of the receptive writer prone to depression from childhood. A trip along the White Sea Canal, organized in the 1930s for propaganda purposes for a large group of Soviet writers, made a depressing impression on him. No less difficult was the need for Zoshchenko to write after this trip thatcriminalallegedly re-educatedin Stalin's camps(History of one life, 1934). An attempt to get rid of the oppressed state, to correct his painful psyche was a kind of psychological study - the story "Returned Youth" (1933). The story evoked an interested reaction in the scientific community, unexpected for the writer: the book was discussed at many academic meetings, reviewed in scientific publications; Academician I. Pavlov began to invite Zoshchenko to his famous Wednesdays.

As a continuation of "Returned Youth" was conceived a collection of short stories "The Blue Book" (1935).According to the contentMikhail Zoshchenko considered The Blue Book a novel, defined it as "a brief history of human relations" and wrote that it "is driven not by a short story, but by the philosophical idea that makes it". Stories about the present were interspersed in it with stories set in the past - in different periods of history. Both the present and the past were given in the perception of the typical hero Zoshchenko, who was not burdened with cultural baggage and understood history as a set of everyday episodes.

After the publication of the "Blue Book", which caused devastating reviews in party publications, Mikhail Zoshchenko was actually forbidden to print works that go beyond "positive satire on individual shortcomings." Despite his high writing activity (custom feuilletons for the press, plays, film scripts), his true talent was manifested only in stories for children, which he wrote for the magazines "Chizh" and "Ezh".

In the 1930s, the writer worked on a book that he considered the main one. Work continued during the Patriotic War in Alma-Ata, in evacuation, Zoshchenko could not go to the front due to severe heart disease. The initial chapters of this science fiction study of the subconscious have been published byin 1943in the magazine "October" under the title "Before Sunrise". Zoshchenko studied cases from life that gave impetus to a severe mental illness, from which doctors could not save him. Modern scientists note that the writer anticipated many discoveries of the science of the unconscious for decades.

The magazine publication caused a scandal, and such a flurry of critical abuse was brought down on Zoshchenko that the publication of "Before Sunrise" was interrupted. He sent a letter to Stalin, asking him to familiarize himself with the book "or give an order to check it in more detail than is done by the critics." The answer was another stream of abuse in the press, the book was called "nonsense, needed only by the enemies of our country" (Bolshevik magazine).In 1944-1946 Zoshchenko worked a lot for theaters. Two of his comedies were staged at the Leningrad Drama Theatre, one of which - Canvas Briefcase - withstood 200 performances in a year.

In 1946, after the decision of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks “On the magazines Zvezda and Leningrad”, the party leader of Leningrad Zhdanov recalled the book Before Sunrise in a report, calling it “a disgusting thing”.The decree of 1946, with the rudeness inherent in Soviet ideology, "criticized" Zoshchenko and Akhmatova, led to public persecution and a ban on the publication of their works. The reason was the publication of Zoshchenko's children's story "The Adventures of a Monkey" (1945), in which the authorities saw a hint that monkeys live better than people in the Soviet country. At a writers' meeting, Zoshchenko declared that the honor of an officer and a writer did not allow him to accept the fact that in the resolution of the Central Committee he was called a "coward" and "a bastard of literature." In the future, Zoshchenko also refused to come out with the expected repentance from him and the recognition of "mistakes." In 1954, at a meeting with English students, Zoshchenko again tried to state his attitude to the 1946 resolution, after which the persecution began in a second round.The saddest consequence of the ideological campaign was the exacerbation of mental illness, which did not allow the writer to work fully. His restoration in the Writers' Union after Stalin's death (1953) and the publication of his first book after a long break (1956) brought only temporary relief to his condition.

Zoshchenko the satirist

The first victory of Mikhail Mikhailovich was "The Stories of Nazar Ilyich, Mr. Sinebryukhov" (1921-1922). The loyalty of the hero, the "little man" who had been in the German war, was told ironically, but without malice; the writer, it seems, is rather amused than upset by the humility of Sinebryukhov, who “understands, of course, his rank and position”, and his “boasting”, and what comes out to him from time to time is “a mishap and a regrettable incident”. The case takes place after the February Revolution, the slave in Sinebryukhov still seems justified, but it already acts as an alarming symptom: a revolution has taken place, but the psyche of people remains the same. The narrative is colored by the word of the hero - a tongue-tied person, a simpleton who finds himself in various curious situations. The author's word is folded. The center of artistic vision is moved to the mind of the narrator.

In the context of the main artistic problem of the time, when all writers were solving the question “How to emerge victorious from the constant, exhausting struggle of the artist with the interpreter” (Konstantin Alexandrovich Fedin), Zoshchenko was the winner: the ratio of image and meaning in his satirical stories was extremely harmonious. The main element of the narrative was linguistic comedy, the form of the author's assessment - irony, the genre - the comic tale. This artistic structure has become canonical for Zoshchenko's satirical stories.

The gap between the scale of revolutionary events and the conservatism of the human psyche, which struck Zoshchenko, made the writer especially attentive to that area of life where, as he believed, lofty ideas and epoch-making events are deformed. The writer's phrase, which made a lot of noise, "And we are quietly, and we are little by little, and we are on a par with Russian reality," grew out of a feeling of an alarming gap between the "rapidity of fantasy" and "Russian reality." Without questioning the revolution as an idea, M. Zoshchenko believed, however, that, passing through "Russian reality", the idea encounters on its way obstacles that deform it, rooted in the age-old psychology of yesterday's slave. He created a special - and new - type of hero, where ignorance was fused with readiness for mimicry, natural grasp with aggressiveness, and old instincts and skills were hidden behind the new phraseology. Such stories as "Victim of the Revolution", "Grimace of NEP", "Brake of Westinghouse", "Aristocrat" can serve as a model. The heroes are passive until they understand “what is what and who is not shown to be beaten”, but when it is “shown” they stop at nothing, and their destructive potential is inexhaustible: they mock their own mother, a quarrel over a brush turns into "solid battle" ("Nervous people"), and the pursuit of an innocent person turns into a vicious pursuit ("Terrible Night").

The new type was the discovery of Mikhail Zoshchenko. He was often compared with the "little man" of Gogol and Dostoevsky, and later with the hero of Charlie Chaplin. But Zoshchenko's type - the further, the more - deviated from all models. Linguistic comedy, which became an imprint of the absurdity of his hero's consciousness, became a form of his self-disclosure. He no longer considers himself a small person. “You never know what the average person has to do in the world!” - exclaims the hero of the story "Wonderful Rest". A proud attitude to the "cause" - from the demagogy of the era; but Zoshchenko parodies her: “You understand yourself: either you drink a little, then the guests will come, then you need to glue the leg to the sofa ... The wife, too, will sometimes begin to express complaints.” So in the literature of the 1920s, Zoshchenko's satire formed a special, "negative world", as he said, so that he would be "ridiculed and repelled from himself."

Starting from the middle of 1920, Mikhail Zoshchenko published "sentimental stories". Their origins were the story "The Goat" (1922). Then appeared the novels "Apollo and Tamara" (1923), "People" (1924), "Wisdom" (1924), "A Terrible Night" (1925), "What the Nightingale Sang About" (1925), "Merry Adventure" (1926). ) and Lilac Blooms (1929). In the preface to them, Zoshchenko for the first time openly spoke sarcastically about the "planetary missions", heroic pathos and "high ideology" that were expected of him. In a deliberately simple form, he posed the question: how does the death of the human in a person begin, what predetermines it and what can prevent it. This question appeared in the form of a reflective intonation.

The heroes of "sentimental stories" continued to debunk the supposedly passive consciousness. The evolution of Bylinkin (“What the nightingale sang about”), who at the beginning walked in the new city “timidly, looking around and dragging his feet”, and, having received “a strong social position, public service and a salary of the seventh category plus for the load”, turned into a despot and a boor, convinced that the moral passivity of the Zoshchensky hero is still illusory. His activity revealed itself in the rebirth of the spiritual structure: it clearly showed signs of aggressiveness. “I really like,” Gorky wrote in 1926, “that the hero of Zoshchenko’s story “What the Nightingale Sang About” — the former hero of The Overcoat, in any case, a close relative of Akaki, arouses my hatred thanks to the clever irony of the author” .

But, as Korney Ivanovich Chukovsky noted in the late 1920s and early 1930s, another type of hero appears.Zoshchenko- a person who "lost his human appearance", "the righteous" ("Goat", "Terrible Night"). These heroes do not accept the morality of the environment, they have other ethical standards, they would like to live by high morality. But their rebellion ends in failure. However, unlike Chaplin’s “victim” rebellion, which is always fanned with compassion, Zoshchenko’s hero’s rebellion is devoid of tragedy: the personality is faced with the need for spiritual resistance to the mores and ideas of his environment, and the writer’s harsh demands do not forgive her compromise and capitulation.

The appeal to the type of righteous heroes betrayed the eternal uncertainty of the Russian satirist in the self-sufficiency of art and was a kind of attempt to continue Gogol's search for a positive hero, a "living soul". However, it is impossible not to notice: in the "sentimental stories" the writer's artistic world has become bipolar; the harmony of meaning and image was broken, philosophical reflections revealed a preaching intention, the pictorial fabric became less dense. The word fused with the author's mask dominated; it was similar in style to stories; meanwhile, the character (type), stylistically motivating the narrative, has changed: this is an average intellectual. The former mask turned out to be attached to the writer.

http://to-name.ru/index.htm

Mikhail Zoshchenko at a meeting of the Serapion Brothers literary circle.

Zoshchenko and Olesha: a double portrait in the interior of the era

Mikhail Zoshchenko and Yuri Olesha - twothe most popular writer of Soviet Russia in the 1920s, who largely determined the appearance of Russian literature of the 20th century. They were both born into impoverished noble families, experienced phenomenal success and oblivion. They were both broken by power. They also had a choice in common: to exchange their talent for day labor or write something that no one will see.

Mikhail Zoshchenko - the creator of countless stories, plays, screenplays, unimaginably adored by readers. However, the true popularity was given to him by small humorous stories published in a wide variety of magazines and newspapers - in Literary Week, Izvestia, Ogonyok, Krokodile and some others.

Zoshchenko's humorous stories were included in various of his books. In new combinations, each time they made me look at myself in a new way: sometimes they appeared as a cycle of stories about darkness and ignorance, and sometimes as stories about petty acquirers. Often they were talking about those who were left out of history. But always they were perceived as stories sharply satirical.

Russian satirical writers in the 20s were distinguished by their special courage and frankness in their statements. All of them were the heirs of Russian realism of the 19th century. The name of Mikhail Zoshchenko is on a par with such names in Russian literature as A. Tolstoy, Ilya Ilf and Evgeny Petrov, M. Bulgakov, A. Platonov.

The popularity of M. Zoshchenko in the 20s could be envied by any venerable writer in Russia. But his fate was severe in the future: Zhdanov's criticism, and then - a long oblivion, after which the "discovery" of this remarkable writer for the Russian reader again followed. Zoshchenko began to be mentioned as an author writing for the entertainment of the public. We now know well that Zoshchenko was a talented and serious writer of his time. It seems to me that for every reader Zoshchenko reveals his own special facet. It is known that many were perplexed when "The Adventures of a Monkey" incurred the wrath of officials from the Soviet culture. But the Bolsheviks, in my opinion, had already developed a flair for their antipodes. A. A. Zhdanov, criticizing and destroying Zoshchenko, who ridiculed the stupidity and stupidity of Soviet life, against his own will guessed in him a great artist, representing a danger to the existing system. Zoshchenko did not directly, not directly ridicule the cult of Bolshevik ideas, but protested with a sad smile against any violence against a person. It is also known that in his prefaces to the editions of Sentimental Tales, with the proposed misunderstanding and perversion of his work, he wrote: , presumably, will sound for some critics some kind of shrill flute, some kind of sentimental insulting offal. It seems to me that Zoshchenko, speaking in this way, defended himself against future attacks on his work.

One of the most significant, in my opinion, stories of this book is "What the nightingale sang about." The author himself said about this story that it is "... perhaps the least sentimental of sentimental stories." Or else: "And what in this composition of cheerfulness, perhaps, will seem to someone not enough, then this is not true. There is cheerfulness here. Not over the edge, of course, but there is." I believe that such cheerfulness, which the satirist writer offered to the clergy, they could not perceive without irritation. The story "What the nightingale sang about" begins with the words: "But" they will laugh at us in three hundred years! Strange, they will say, little people lived. Some, they will say, they had money, passports. Some acts of civil status and square meters of living space..."

It is clear that the writer with such thoughts dreamed of a world more worthy of man. His moral ideals were directed to the future. It seems to me that Zoshchenko was acutely aware of the hardened nature of human relations, the vulgarity of the life around him. This can be seen from the way he reveals the theme of the human personality in a short story about "true love and genuine awe of feelings", about "absolutely extraordinary love." Tormented by thoughts of a future better life, the writer often doubts and asks himself: "Will it be beautiful?" And then he draws the simplest, most common version of such a future: “Maybe everything will be free, for free. Next, the writer proceeds to create the image of the hero. His hero is the simplest person, and his name is ordinary - Vasily Bylinkin. The reader expects that the author will now begin to ridicule his hero, but no, the author seriously tells about Bylinkin's love for Lisa Rundukova. All actions that accelerate the gap between lovers, despite their ridiculousness (the culprit is a chest of drawers not given by the bride's mother), I think, nevertheless, is a serious family drama. Among Russian satirical writers, in general, drama and comedy exist side by side. Zoshchenko, as it were, tells us that while people like Vasily Bylinkin, to the question: "What is the nightingale singing about?" - they will answer: "He wants to eat, that's why he sings", - we will not see a worthy future. Zoshchenko does not idealize our past either. To be convinced of this, it is enough to read the Blue Book. The writer knows how much vulgar and cruel humanity is behind him, so that he can immediately free himself from this heritage. But I believe that the combined efforts of satirical writers of the 1920s and 1930s, in particular those whom I named at the beginning of my work, significantly brought our society closer to a more dignified life.

The same thing happened with the heroes of Zoshchenko's stories: to the modern reader, they may seem unreal, completely invented. However, Zoshchenko, with his keen sense of justice and hatred for the militant philistinism, never departed from the real vision of the world. Who is the satirical hero Zoshchenko? What is its place in modern society? Who is the object of mockery, contemptuous laughter?

So, using the example of some of his narratives, one can establish the themes of the writer's satire. In "Hard Times" the main character is a dense, uneducated person, with a frantic, primordial judgment about freedom and rights. When he is forbidden to bring a horse into the store, which by all means needs to try on the collar, he complains: “Well, it’s a little time. I even personally laughed sincerely ... Well, it’s a little time.