Lidiya Sycheva. against the stream

I invite you, dear readers, to guess the time of writing and the name of the author of the book, which contains the following stories:

1. Two adventurers with a criminal past are trying to involve the head of a small tableware trading company in an adventurous venture to mine gold in the local forests. However, the business that this person is ready to sponsor is in fact a complete fiction. In reality, the funds of a gullible sponsor should be used to print counterfeit money, the production and sale of which is carried out by the adventurers who lead him by the nose.

2. In a provincial hotel, two young “new Russians”, wanting to celebrate a profitable deal, in the confidence that “with money everything is possible,” demand champagne in their room at midnight, alarming the entire neighborhood because of this.

3. The only daughter of a wealthy businessman becomes involved in a sect, whose members engage in debauchery at their secret meetings...

Before us are clearly modern stories taken from some clearly modern detective story. Who could have written it? Marinina? Leonov? Cherkasov? Dontsova? But no! The book, which contains such intriguing and relevant plots for our time, was written... in the second half of the 19th century. True, the name of its author is hardly familiar to those who are familiar with Russian literature exclusively within the school curriculum. We are talking about the duology of P.I. Melnikov-Pechersky “In the forests” and “On the mountains”. Despite the fact that these are two different novels, one of them is a continuation of the other. And the heroes in them are the same. Therefore, I did not greatly sin against the truth by calling this duology a “book”.

But my appeal to P. I. Melnikov-Pechersky’s novels “In the Forests” and “On the Mountains” is not so much due to the fact that the descriptions they contain of the life and morals of the Russian peasantry and merchants of the 19th century strangely turned out to be topical more than a century later. Much more important is that in our time these books can help teachers of secular educational institutions tell schoolchildren and students about Orthodoxy.

I had to face in practice difficulties in teaching students of the Faculty of Religious Studies of a local university (former pedagogical institute) a discipline called “Introduction to Orthodoxy.” It turns out that introducing students to the basics of Orthodoxy is much more difficult than conducting similar classes in Sunday school or theological courses. There you are dealing with listeners who are already churchgoers. Or, at least, positively related to Orthodoxy. But a secular university is a completely different matter. First of all, because the listeners are not always Orthodox. Most often they are non-believers (although they still cannot be called convinced or militant atheists), for whom Orthodoxy, unfortunately, is incomprehensible and alien. And there are students, although they are believers, but not in the Orthodox way. Therefore, those who are hostile to Orthodoxy.

However, that's not all. Since the place of teaching is not a religious educational institution, but the department of religious studies of a secular university, then the teacher of “introduction to Orthodoxy” is bound by certain obligations. He must present his subject exclusively in secular language, without attempts to convert listeners to Orthodoxy, not engage in criticism of other faiths, not impose his beliefs on students, be in civilian clothes... Paradoxically, as a result of all this, the teacher is rejected by Orthodox students as well who would like the classes to be taught by a person of holy orders and in appropriate vestments. Indeed, in fairness, the words of a priest have greater significance among Orthodox listeners than the speeches of the most intelligent and eloquent layman. In addition, for Orthodox Christians, a “neutral” presentation of the foundations of Orthodoxy may seem simply offensive. Deacon A. Kuraev’s thoughts on this matter are fair ( in the first issues of the magazine “Orthodox Conversation for 2001.”) that the vocabulary of a missionary and the language of a church preacher are completely different. But what if the audience is mixed? How can you avoid finding yourself in the position of the elephant - the painter from S. Mikhalkov's fable, who, wanting to please all the critics at once, turned the landscape he painted into a complete mess?

And here we can be helped out by what was effective decades ago, during the times of atheism. I'm talking about our, so to speak, “literary heritage.” About the works of Russian classic writers. It is well known that they clearly reflected the Orthodox views of their authors. Therefore, even when anti-religious propagandists intensively instilled godless ideas in schoolchildren and students, the number of books recommended in the school curriculum still included such deeply Orthodox works as A. S. Pushkin’s novel “The Captain’s Daughter”, stories by N. S. Leskov “The Beast” and “The Unchangeable Ruble”, “The Night Before Christmas” by N.V. Gogol. Atheists still did not dare to raise their hand to the heritage of the Russian classics. And through these works, children brought up in atheism could still learn at least a little about the Orthodox faith... Times have changed. And “militant atheism”, fortunately, is a thing of the past. But the role of the works of Russian Orthodox classic writers in the spiritual and moral education of their readers remains unchanged. In introducing them to the Orthodox faith. And the novels of P. I. Melnikov-Pechersky “In the Forests” and “On the Mountains” belong to just such books.

Let me make a reservation right away: I am not a professional literary critic. I am a neurologist who had and still has to teach the fundamentals of Orthodoxy to schoolchildren, students and adults. The range ranges from Sunday school to the Faculty of Religious Studies. And it is from this point of view that I will talk about the novels of P. I. Melnikov-Pechersky “In the Forests” and “On the Mountains”. It is well known that the doctor’s job is to identify the symptoms of the disease and make a diagnosis, on the basis of which treatment can begin for the patient. And my task will be to identify and list the plot lines of these books that can be used when talking about Orthodoxy. And try to prove that using the example of the novels “In the Woods” and “On the Mountains” one can successfully talk about the Orthodox faith to schoolchildren, students and adults of various beliefs.

First of all, this is possible precisely because we are dealing with novels. Russian classics of the 19th century. Therefore, exclusively “secular” literary works. In addition, even those declared by literary critics of the times of atheism to be “anti-church works” written by an author “alien to religious prejudices” ( see essay by M. P. Eremin in volume 6 op. P. I. Melnikov-Pechersky). To what extent this statement is true, the reader will be able to draw his own conclusion later. For now, I will say that it can become a reliable defense for a teacher who uses the novels of P. Melnikov-Pechersky in his classes. After all, in this case, no one will dare to accuse him of “religious propaganda”...

On top of that, the novels “In the Woods” and “On the Mountains” are books with a very fascinating plot. As they say, there are more than enough adventures in them. Their heroes conduct business in trade, cheat, fall in love, go on pilgrimages, get into all sorts of dangerous troubles... Moreover, everyday problems and passions do not bypass even the monastery walls. Thus, in the last chapters of the novel “In the Woods” a wedding is described with the kidnapping of the bride, which was organized by a mischievous novice of the Old Believer monastery Flenushka. In short, a motley and exciting picture of the lives of many people unfolds before the readers. However, despite the diversity of everyday whirlwind into which the heroes of the novels “In the Woods” and “On the Mountains” are drawn, the deep essence of their lives is still Orthodoxy. And this runs like a red thread throughout the entire narrative. The Orthodox faith motivates the actions of the heroes. It also determines their spiritual quest. Therefore, in order to explain the meaning of the behavior of Patap Chapurin or Flenushka in a given situation, a conversation about Orthodoxy will become simply necessary.

Another positive side of the novels of P. I. Melnikov-Pechersky is that they talk specifically about the Old Believers. Therefore, about something seemingly far from “traditional” Orthodoxy and even alien to it. The theme of the confrontation between the “Old Believers” and the “Nikonians” is quite vivid in both books. However, despite the ritual features, the heroes of the novels “In the Woods” and “On the Mountains” are Orthodox. And the main positive characters of both books (like Patap Maksimych Chapurin) “stick to the old fashioned way” “because beyond the Volga such a custom has long been followed, moreover... friendship and acquaintance with rich merchants were maintained.” And the heroine of the novel “On the Mountains,” Dunya Smolokurova, having gone through a period of spiritual quest, comes to the idea that “the difference between us and the Great Russians is only one external ritual, and the faith of both us and them is the same, and there is no difference between them.” there is no difference." Her husband, Pyotr Samokvasov, draws the same conclusion for himself. Therefore, although the heroes of P.I. Melnikov-Pechersky are Old Believers, for the most part they are by no means hostile to those Orthodox who differ from them not in faith, but only in rituals.

What themes from P. I. Melnikov-Pechersky’s novels “In the Forests” and “On the Mountains” can a modern teacher use when talking about Orthodoxy in a “secular” school or university?

First of all, this is the theme of mercy, mercy towards others. It is known that mercy has been a characteristic feature of Orthodox Russian people since ancient times. This theme is most clearly expressed in the novel “In the Woods” in the story of “orphan Grunya”. The rich peasant Patap Chapurin adopts a girl who was left an orphan after the sudden death of her parents at a fair from cholera. He raises her along with his own daughters. Subsequently, young Grunya, who has not forgotten her short-term orphanhood, of her own free will marries the elderly merchant Zaplatin, feeling sorry for his orphaned children. This amazing story, even in pre-revolutionary times, was included in the anthology of Archpriest G. Dyachenko “The Spark of God,” compiled by him “for reading in a Christian family and school.” This book, first published in 1903 (in our time it has been reprinted several times), was intended “for middle-aged girls.” It contained edifying stories about pious Christian women of different times and peoples. Including the story about the “God-given Soil”. For kids - in a retelling. For older children - in abbreviation.

The theme of family happiness, repeatedly raised by P. Melnikov-Pechersky on the pages of his novels “In the Forests” and “On the Mountains,” is also interesting. Now, when most young families are not strong, this problem is extremely relevant. And it’s worth thinking about why Patap Maksimych Chapurin with the grumpy but kind Aksinya Zakharovna, and Agrafena Petrovna Zaplatina with her middle-aged but beloved and loving husband live in harmony and harmony? This question is best answered in the novel “In the Woods” by young Dunya Smolokurova, expressing her innermost thoughts about her future family life: “I will marry the one I love... Whoever I think I will find, I will marry him, and I will love him forever, until my last breath, - one damp earth will cool my love... But if he stops loving, leaves, replaces him with another - God judge him, and a wife is not a judge for her husband. And even if he stopped loving me, I wouldn’t complain to anyone... But what I’ll do when I’m married, how I’ll live with my husband - I don’t know. I know one thing - where a husband and wife live in love and advice, in kindness and in truth, the Lord Himself lives in that family. He will teach me how to act...” It is impossible not to agree with these words. Indeed, sacrificial love and mutual humility of spouses before each other are the key to the strength of the family. And in such a family, indeed, “the Lord Himself lives.”

However, perhaps the most surprising thing is that the novels “In the Woods” and “On the Mountains” can become a very vivid illustration of the theme of God’s Providence. Let me remind you of the definition of Divine Providence from the “Long Christian Catechism” of St. Philaret: “Divine Providence is the unceasing action of the omnipotence, wisdom and goodness of God, by which God preserves the existence and powers of creatures, directs them to good goals, helps every good, and what arises through removal from good suppresses evil, or corrects it and turns it to good consequences.” When reading the novels “In the Woods” and “On the Mountains,” one notices that their heroes receive from God exactly what they deserve in their deeds. Or what is for them the best solution to their aspirations and problems. The proud and ambitious Patap Chapurin is humbled by the loss of both daughters. Although, to the joy of his lonely old age, a grandson is growing up in the house of this kind and sympathetic man. Thus, the Chapurin family is not stopped after all. On merit, the counterfeiter Stukolov and his friends end up in hard labor. The spiritual quest of Gerasim Chubalov and Dunya Smolokurova ends with the discovery of Truth. The former weak-willed drunkard “Mikeshka the Wolf” is morally reborn and regains his good name, again becoming the respected “Nikifor Zakharych”. Alexey Lokhmatov, who has completely lost his shame and conscience, dies ingloriously, without repentance.

Oddly enough, even in the seemingly sad fate of Nastya Chapurina and Flenushka, the manifestation of God’s providence and mercy for them is obvious. Contrary to the claims of Soviet-era critics, it was not her father’s “spirit of money-grubbing” that ruined Nastya Chapurina. The cause of her death was severe nervous shock. This happened when she realized who Alexei, whom she was so quick to trust, really turned out to be... The subsequent story of Alexei Lokhmatov, who abandoned his family, robbed his wife Marya Gavrilovna, and in the end also discredited the memory of Nastya, clearly demonstrates that if she had remained alive, her family life with Alexei would have been a complete misfortune.

The action of God's Providence is obvious even in such a tragic fate of Flenushka at first glance. Of course, in terms of her lively character and behavior, this “raucous” novice clearly did not “fit” into the world of the monastery where she spent her childhood and youth. “The girl does not look like a blueberry, she does not look at monasticism. Of all the monasteries, she is the most entertaining, the most amusing...” - this is how everyone who knew her characterized Flenushka. Indeed, Flenushka takes monasticism amidst the most severe spiritual struggles. Moreover, she consents to the tonsure only when she finds out that her selflessly beloved Abbess Manefa is her own mother. But it’s worth thinking about whether Flenushka would have been happier “in the world” if she had married Pyotr Samokvasov? Unfortunately, she herself repeatedly gives a negative answer to this question. “A husband should be a wife’s head, but I will never tolerate this. I won’t trample the authorities over myself - I want the power itself...” - Flenushka expresses her thoughts in the girls’ circle. Later, in the dramatic scene of farewell to Samokvasov, she tells him: “you can’t bear the love of a girl like me... Look for yourself, be quieter and more peaceful.” Thus, Flenushka herself understood that in a marriage with Samokvasov there would be no happiness for both of them. She also understood that her escape from the monastery with her beloved would bring suffering, and perhaps death, to her mother, Manefa.

Of course, Flenushka’s path to monasticism is extremely painful. But is it possible to agree with the opinion of the above-mentioned M.P. Eremin that “the fate of Flenushka is the most serious accusation against all Old Believer customs and morals”? Not at all. The mental “withdrawal” of Flenushka-Philagria is caused by the fact that, having lived in the monastery until she was 27 years old (let me remind you that in the perception of people of the 19th century, 50 years of age was already considered senile, therefore, Flenushka was also “middle-aged”) as a novice, all During this time, in her soul she was and remained a laywoman. “Flenushka doesn’t look like a cell attendant, she’s painfully mischievous,” Patap Chapurin says about her. Monastic rules and prayer were alien to her. That is why her path to monasticism turned out to be so difficult. It is no coincidence that, having taken over the management of the monastery, Flenushka established the strictest discipline there. This is her attempt to restore order, first of all, in her own soul. Let us remember the instruction that St. Joseph of Volotsky gives to the monk: “clench your hands, close your eyes and gather your mind.” This is exactly what Flenushka does when she becomes the nun Filagria. She cuts off all possible temptations and memories of her past life. Of course, this is difficult for her. According to the author of the currently republished pre-revolutionary brochure “A Kind Word to the New Novice”, “everyone has to endure and grieve a lot at the time when they begin, so to speak, to transform him from a layman into a monk, especially to accustom him to humility, obedience and cutting off.” of your own will." The monastic life of Flenushka remains “outside” the novel “On the Mountains”. But one can assume that as she goes deeper into it, she will find comfort and joy in it. After all, in the words of St. Seraphim of Sarov, “whether on the advice, or on the authority of others, or in any way you came to the monastery, do not be discouraged: there is a visitation from God.” It is not Abbess Manefa, not Samokvasov who determine the fate of Flenushka, and not even she herself - the Lord Himself chooses for her the best fate for her. No matter how sad it may seem to us at first glance, for Flenushka this is really the best way out. After all, she remains in a familiar environment familiar to her from childhood, with her beloved mother, who, in addition, handed over control of the monastery to her. It is difficult to answer the question: would Flenushka, who lived in the monastery since childhood, have been able to become happy “in the world” or not? Because, according to St. Demetrius of Rostov, the world only “promises gold, but gives gold.”

But this is by no means the end of those plots from the novels of P.I. Melnikov-Pechersky, which can be used for stories about Orthodoxy. In the novel “On the Mountains” there is a wonderful plot, using an example of which a teacher can lead a conversation about modern totalitarian sects hostile to the Orthodox faith. Moreover, without fear of incurring anger from both atheists and sectarians who may be among his listeners or colleagues. After all, we are just talking about the adventures of the novel’s heroine Dunya Smolokurova. And the Khlysty sect described in P.I. Melnikov-Pechersky’s novel “On the Mountains” is by no means “New Age” or “Jehovah’s Witnesses”. For our time, Khlystyism is “a thing of bygone days, a legend of deep antiquity.” However, if we compare the characteristics of modern totalitarian sects given in A. Dvorkin’s fundamental study “Cult Studies” with the description of the Khlysty sect in the novel “On the Mountains,” then they practically coincide. Judge for yourself. Among the signs of totalitarian sects cited in A. Dvorkin’s book (identified by Christian Western sect scholars), the following four factors stand out: the presence of a leader (mentor, guru), the presence of an organization with strict discipline, a method (simple, but accessible only upon joining the sect, which mastered by its leader), as well as an “esoteric gap”. That is, the “secret teaching”, which for the time being is not communicated to beginners. Among other signs of a totalitarian sect cited by A. Dvorkin, they highlight its occult nature and its own terminology, constant control over the consciousness of sectarians. And also their own system of values ​​and morals, which often runs counter to what is accepted in society. Another feature of modern totalitarian sects is their unique method of recruiting new members. In the Moonite sect, it is defined as “love bombing.” A recruiter who lures a person into a sect shows him maximum love and participation. Usually poor, lonely people easily succumb to this. However, the love and participation of the sectarian recruiter serve only as bait for those whom he is trying to capture. And under the bait, as you know, there is always a hook hidden.... And subsequently, the leadership of the sect, without a twinge of conscience, uses for its own purposes the property and the very lives of the people lured into its network. A. Dvorkin very aptly described modern sects as “a faith that kills.”

All this can be perfectly illustrated by the example of Dunya Smolokurova, the heroine of the novel “On the Mountains”. This girl fell into the Khlysty sect in a state of severe depression caused by the imaginary betrayal of her loved one. She was recruited into the sect by the experienced Khlyst “prophetess” Maria Alymova, who played her most sincere participation in Dunya’s fate. By the way, exactly the same “love bombing” took place in the case of her recruitment into the sect of the peasant girl Lukerya, who was downtrodden and intimidated by her stepmother. Dunya’s “mentor” in the sect was Alymova, who recruited her. However, she, in turn, was subordinate to the head of the local Khlyst group (in Khlyst terminology - “ship”), Nikolai Lupovitsky. And he obeyed a sectarian of a higher rank, the “Ararat envoy,” Yegor Denisov. Denisov played the role of a sort of “guru” in Lupovitsky’s “ship”, to whom everyone obeyed unquestioningly. This is a wonderful illustration of the “three-level” membership in totalitarian sects described by A. Dvorkin, where above people who are partly affected by the sect (in our example this includes Dunya), there are its permanent members (Alymova, Nikolai Lupovitsky), led by the highest echelon of the sect ( Egor Denisov, his mentor “Prophet of Ararat Maxim”).

It has already been mentioned that modern sectarians believe that it is their leadership that holds the highest “secrets” of their teaching. This belief is shared by the Khlysts described in the novel “On the Mountains.” It is the desire to know the “intimate secret of spiritual marriage” that keeps Dunya in the sect, who is already beginning to understand its demonic character. Let us remember that Denisov’s attempt to “initiate” her into this supposed “secret” almost ended in disaster for the girl. As for the occult nature of Khlystyism, it is shown quite clearly in the novel “On the Mountains”. Also, just as is customary in modern totalitarian sects, the consciousness of Dunya Smolokurova was subjected to constant control in the Khlysty sect. Alymova, as well as sectarians Varenka and Katenka, Dunya’s peers, under the guise of participating in her fate, challenged her to open conversations. Thus, they monitored the girl’s thoughts and inspired her that she was a “prophetess” and a “chosen good vessel”... However, P.I. Melnikov-Pechersky repeatedly mentions that the participation of the Khlysty in the fate of Dunya was feigned. It was explained solely by the desire to take possession of her capital. Alymova, Lupovitsky and Denisov did not hesitate to talk about this among themselves. Dunya herself did not interest them at all. After all, the same Maria Alymova, whom Dunya selflessly trusted, in order to keep the girl in the sect, gave her to Yegor Denisov to be desecrated...

The so-called “esoteric break” (conscious misinformation of people recruited into the sect), which, fortunately, sobered up and made Dunya, who had completely fallen into delusion, sobered up and made her think twice about it. When recruiting her, Alymova took into account the fact that by her nature she was a contemplative person, prone to dreams. Therefore, in order to lure Dunya into the sect, the Khlyst heresy was presented to her as something exclusively spiritual, bright and attractive. But, having landed in the very nest of sectarians - Lupovitsa, Dunya learned something completely different about the faith that she hastened to accept. And the fact that they were hiding something from her alarmed her. When she heard the Khlyst legends about false Christs, saw the “zeal” of common people, with self-torture and debauchery, she realized that “this is something demonic!... There is deception, lies, cunning, cunning!... And where is the deception, there is no truth there...And there is no truth in their faith.” And the shock Dunya experienced when Yegor Denisov tried to introduce her to the “secret of spiritual marriage” (or, simply put, to abuse her) finally and forever turned her away from the Khlyst heresy. Again, one cannot help but see in this the mercy of God towards this sincerely and deeply believing girl, who came to the sect not consciously, but after being deceived.

In addition to the story of Dunya Smolokurova, other examples from the novel “On the Mountains” can be used when talking about modern totalitarian sects. Talking about the members of the Khlyst “ship”, P. I. Melnikov-Pechersky told the readers their fates. And therefore - the reasons that led them from Orthodoxy to this disgusting sect. Among these reasons is their craving for the “mysterious,” mystical, and insoluble everyday problems. And the hostility towards Orthodoxy that arose for various reasons. Or rather, to something that offended them, people with whom they mistakenly identified the Orthodox faith. For the same reasons, people join sects today. Therefore, here too, P. Melnikov-Pechersky’s book “On the Mountains” remains as relevant as possible.

But the novels “In the Woods” and “On the Mountains” most clearly show the peculiarities of the worldview of a Russian Orthodox person. We are talking about his constant dissatisfaction with everyday, earthly things. About his constant “search for God”, about his spiritual search. Prince N.D. Zhevakhov wrote wonderfully about this in his “Memoirs.” It was precisely because of this that he considered P.I. Melnikov-Pechersky one of the greatest Russian writers. I will quote the words of N.D. Zhevakhov almost in full:

“There were many different writers in Russia, but... only two of them were as brilliant as they were truly Russian writers and, to the shame of Russian readers, they went almost unnoticed. These were Pavel Ivanovich Melnikov and Nikolai Semenovich Leskov. The first of them wrote the story “On the Mountains,” one of the greatest works of Russian literature, a real Russian epic in prose. Here is what the Russian scientist A.V. Storozhenko writes to me about this story:

“Unfortunately, Russian readers poorly appreciated Melnikov’s brilliant work, and criticism... even silenced it, because they focused primarily on works that reflected revolutionary trends... There was and could not be anything revolutionary in P. I. Melnikov’s epic story ; otherwise it wouldn't be epic.

Russian God-seeking found its truest reflection in this story and is represented in the faces, with all the prominence characteristic of the great masters of words. The picture captures all layers of the Russian people: the highest landowner intelligentsia, the middle merchant and bureaucratic circle, and the common people. Gentlemen Lupovitsky, Maria Ivanovna Alymova, a district official with a transparent, faded daughter, a retired soldier, a deacon-beekeeper, various women - all, in their own way, searched for God and ended up in the Khlyst “ship”. The scribe and reader Gerasim Silych tried 8 or 10 “faiths” and came to the conclusion that only selfless love for his brother’s impoverished family could give him moral peace. Dunya Smolokurova was born with impulses towards unearthly regions and, “in order to fly with her heart into the regions in absentia,” as Pushkin put it, and feeling insulted in her pure love for Petya Samokvasov, she succumbed to the influence of Alymova’s whip, but then came to her senses, mainly thanks to a conversation with a simple but believing parish priest, she ran away from the “ship” into the world to become the good wife of the repentant Samokvasov.”

The readers of Melnikov's story reveal the very essence of the Russian soul, and not its revolutionary passions. Having entered the living circle of Russian God-seekers depicted in Melnikov’s story, we can, under his leadership, analyze the motivations for God-seeking in the Russian people.”

To these words we can add the characterization of Russia given by the Orthodox writer-martyr E. Poselyanin. In one of his books, he called Russia “The Great Seeker of God.” The constant spiritual quest of the Russian people is a sign that their souls are alive. This is amazingly said in one of the psalms: “...seek God and your soul will live” ( Ps. 68:33). Only a Russian person can peer into the waters of Svetloyar Lake in the hope of seeing there the golden domes of the temples of the city of Kitezh, invisible to sinners. Or, putting your ear to the ground, try to hear the ringing of its bells. Just like simple peasants, the characters in the novel “In the Woods,” do, looking for a way to the fabulous Kitezh, dreaming of “staying in that city for at least an hour.”

Here is how P.I. Melnikov-Pechersky writes about the dissatisfaction characteristic of Russian people with exclusively earthly affairs and concerns, about their eternal desire to find answers to the spiritual questions that concern them: “At all times, in all directions, there have been many seekers of the right faith in Rus'. In their quest for eternal bliss, they greedily but in vain seek solutions to the questions that arise in their inquisitive minds and trouble their troubled souls. There is nowhere, nowhere and no one to get answers to such questions, and an inquisitive person will spend his whole life looking for them...”

Where do the positive heroes of the novel “On the Mountains” find the Truth that they so long to find? Where, in fact, Orthodox Russian people have found it at all times. In mercy, in love for others. In this regard, the story of one of the characters in the novel “On the Mountains,” the book reader Gerasim Chubalov, is significant. For fifteen years he wandered around the world in search of true faith, but he could not find it. Chubalov’s wanderings ended in “spiritual despair, anger and hatred of people and himself.” But when Gerasim Chubalov, who returned to his homeland, took pity on his impoverished brother and took part in the fate of his family, the Truth that he could not find during 15 years of wandering was revealed to him. It was revealed to him that “God is love.” And “he felt such joy, such high spiritual pleasure, which he could not even imagine until then. It was the active power of love, the mother of all goodness and benefit.” In this regard, an interesting comparison of the fate of Gerasim Chubalov with the fate of a hero similar to him in an earlier story by P. I. Melnikov-Pechersky “Grisha” suggests itself. Gerasim, through humility and love, through serving his neighbors, finds God. And the young cell attendant Grisha from the story of the same name, as a result of his pride and hatred of people, falls more and more into delusion, confident in his own infallibility. Thus, he moves further and further away from the Lord.

Thanks to love and humility, Dunya Smolokurova also receives an answer to her spiritual quest. Initially, this is manifested in trust in the hostile in her eyes (let me remind you that Dunya Smolokurova, like other characters in the novels of P.I. Melnikov-Pechersky, is an Old Believer) “Nikonian” priest Father Prokhor, who warns her about the danger of being among sectarians, and subsequently secretly takes her away from Lupovitsy. Having broken with the Khlysty sect, Dunya does not join the “Great Russian” Church. She remains an Old Believer. However, he overcomes the spiritual barrier that for centuries divided and made enemies of the “Old Believers” and “Nikonians”. And in this she is helped by a feeling of gratitude, respect and love for Father Prokhor, who sacrificed himself for her salvation. And having forgiven her fiancé, Pyotr Samokvasov, and becoming his wife, Dunya finally finds peace of mind.

The stories of Gerasim Chubalov and Dunya Smolokurova are a lesson for all of us, today's Christians. This is a call to remember that “whoever does not love has not known God, because God is love. If we love each other, then God abides in us, and His love is perfect in us" ( 1 John 4:5,12).

I tried to show how relevant and useful the novels of P. I. Melnikov-Pechersky “In the Forests” and “On the Mountains” can be for modern Orthodox readers or those coming to Orthodoxy. And also - analyze those topics that a teacher who talks about Orthodoxy to schoolchildren or students of a secular educational institution can borrow from them. Because these books, despite their often almost adventure-like character, are outstanding works about the Russian people. Orthodox people, deeply religious, striving to live in God and with God. And this desire, this constant “seeking from above,” turns out to be stronger than all earthly passions and concerns in the characters of P. I. Melnikov-Pechersky’s novels. Thanks to this, the novels “In the Forests” and “On the Mountains” can be considered among the best works of Russian classic writers about Orthodox Russia. It is no coincidence that the following epitaph is written on the grave of their author:

“He will live for centuries,
Who wrote “In the Woods” and “On the Mountains”.

It is no coincidence that, while in Siberian exile, the Holy Confessor Luka of Crimea (Voino-Yasenetsky) asked his relatives to send him, along with the works of F. Dostoevsky and N. Leskov, precisely the novels of P. I. Melnikov-Pechersky. After all, they say in the best possible way that in the life of our ancestors the main thing was not earthly, but spiritual wealth - the Orthodox faith. Therefore, it seems that even today the novels of P. I. Melnikov-Pechersky “In the Forests” and “On the Mountains” will be able to help modern people coming to Orthodoxy to know, love and accept it with all their heart and soul.

Novels “In the Forests” and “On the Mountains”: the image of the Old Believers and merchants

A little about creating a duology

The development of the concept of the dilogy is quite fully analyzed in the book by V.F. Sokolova “Novels of P.I. Melnikov-Pechersky “In the Forests” and “On the Mountains”. Creative history" (1981). The way the storylines and the fates of the characters changed was noted in his book, which became the introductory volume to the collected works of the writer, P.S. Usov, who also worked with drafts by P.I. Melnikova. He spoke about the controversy surrounding royalties for novels, cited some reviews, letters, and described in detail Lyakhovo - the estate of P.I.’s wife. Melnikov, where many chapters of the dilogy were written. Lyakhovo became that “shelter of peace, work and inspiration” that P.I. was deprived of. Melnikov's bureaucratic service. The writer worked on the manuscript and rebuilt the house.

In the summer of 1873 he wrote to N.A. Lyubimov, an employee of the Russky Vestnik, from Lyakhov, sending the text of the novel for the August issue of the magazine: “I can’t stay in Moscow for a long time - construction is in full swing, and without me, they’ll probably ruin something. I’m building it forever, at least on my own, because I’m thinking of moving out of this house someday and to my forefathers. Having not lived in the village for 18 years, I now appreciate this beautiful corner with its superb views incomparably more than before. On one side, about 20 versts away, you can see the Volga coast, past which we were traveling on the [nrzb.] steamship; on the other, you can see the entire fair and the railway. There are mountains, valleys, groves, copses and several villages all around. I walk along the alleys of hundred-year-old linden trees, which are dark even at noon, and I keep thinking and rethinking how I will little by little restore the neglected estate and decorate it. In addition to all this, I have the pleasure of learning about the rise in the price of the estate; land next to me was sold worse than ours for 80 rubles. plot. They say that in five years it will reach a hundred. I counted the forest, not all the spruce was there, and the oaks - no matter how they were stolen, up to 3,000 trees still survived. There are no 120-year-old oak trees on the Oka itself and 2 or 3 versts away. I cut oak trees into poles for a house, 6 quarters in diameter, and the oak is strong, healthy - exactly like stone. I am removing flagstone and up to 5,000 pounds of alabaster from my quarries to plaster the house inside and out. I cut down a hundred oak trees for parquet, doors and frames. We haven't started working on the gardens yet - that's ahead. And there are many adventures ahead: on the banks of the Oka, at the end of the fair, my mountain descends in terraces. On these terraces I gave away land for the construction of dachas, which is now in great need, and near the estate 2 versts from the Oka, I am eventually thinking of building barracks for summer housing. Thus, perhaps, I will later organize a Novgorod Lyublino. [...] My wife is delighted with her estate and intends to live in it permanently, I myself agree to this, but on the condition that she travel to Moscow 5 times a year and once or twice to St. Petersburg. We just need to find a good governess for our daughters. Now I’m amazed at myself - how I still haven’t started setting up my corner - in order to motivate me to do this, the ceilings in the old house had to collapse, well then I set to work. Russian man! .

Another letter from N.A. Lyubimov dated July 17, 1873 “I have just settled into my bivouacs. We live in a hut, sleep in barns and in mills - it’s lovely.” “The children are not studying, and the governess has turned into a housekeeper.” “Tomorrow they will bring the boat, and on the very first night I fished on the Oka with a bow (a bunch of a lit splinter tied to the bow of the boat) with a spear and a hook, yesterday I caught crayfish with a drag, in an hour and a half I pulled out three hundred, and small fish, pike perch about an arshin and less, ruff, pike, perch and two burbot. My fighting Sofya Pavlovna carries manure to the fields, and my eldest Mashenka [...] opened a school: 10 boys and 23 girls study with her, her son digs in the garden and draws plans for buildings. My wife feels better, bathes every day, goes to the forest a lot, picks mushrooms and berries with the children, and yesterday I sat down to “Forests.”

In 1874 P.I. Melnikov reported to N.A. Lyubimov says that he sees only a few neighbors and does not go anywhere. “I take care of the house, the garden, I fight drunkenness and theft, I go to the Oka River to swim, I fish, I went hunting with my sons twice - the father turned out to be a much worse hunter than his sons, and I don’t know where they learned it. This is my pastime, quiet, peaceful and humble." With the same letter he sent “Forests” for the August book.

Later, in a letter dated May 24, 1875, written in St. Petersburg, P.I. Melnikov told N.A. Lyubimov, as he gave the novel to the heir to the Russian throne.

The novel “In the Woods” was published in “Russian Bulletin” from 1871 to 1874. The first separate edition was published in Moscow in 1875, the second in St. Petersburg in 1881. The novel “On the Mountains” was published in “Russian Bulletin” from 1875 to 1881. It was published separately in 1881.

During the writer’s lifetime, there were few responses to the duology. The novel was still published in the magazine, and critic V.G. Avseenko dedicated his article “An Artistic Study of Schism” to him, where he called the first part of the dilogy an epic. He correctly noted that the Old Believers as a phenomenon of national life have long been in need of artistic comprehension. Discussing how modern literature depicts people's life and people's character, the critic wrote: “In literature, the habit has become established of approaching the people with preconceived goals, obsessively looking for in them exactly those aspects that the author wants to find in them. The merit of Andrei Pechersky lies in the fact that he entered into a completely free relationship with the life of the people. Its light and dark sides are equally revealed to his observation; he does not impose on the people either fictitious virtues or fictitious vices; his goal, obviously, is to depict popular reality as it is."

We agree with the opinion of V.G. Avseenko that “the real hero of Andrei Pechersky’s poem is not Patap Maksimych, not Alexei, not even the schism, but the Great Russian tribe in general at its modern stage of everyday, cultural development.”

V.G. Avseenko wrote (and this is especially important to note) that the novel dispels the stereotypes that have developed in society in its views on the Old Believers. Confirmation of this can be found in the letter of P.I. himself. Melnikova A.A. Kraevsky dated April 12, 1875, in which the writer asked him to mention in a feuilleton that: “... about “Forests” the Minister of Internal Affairs made the following review during the anniversary on November 10: this essay contributed to the resolution of some important state issues; of course - about the granting of general civil rights to schismatics, about which a commission continues under the chairmanship of Prince Lobanov-Rostovsky, to which the author of “In the Woods” has been invited.” This commission worked for quite a long time, and about the “Note” written by P.I. Melnikov regarding the provision of certain rights and freedoms to Old Believers already had a separate story.

Moving away from stereotypes means getting a completely different, undistorted idea of ​​the Old Believers and the people. However, V.G. Avseenko fully shared the erroneous opinion of P.I. Melnikov, that the Old Believers are not maintained by internal strength, but only by habit; they cannot resist the development of enlightenment; they have become “a stronghold of the old-time way of life, in the hardened forms of which the charm of their great-grandfather’s custom, dear to the people, is preserved.”

The same topic - what the Russian people are and how modern literature portrays them - V.G. Avseenko continued two years later, publishing in the Russky Vestnik an article “Again about nationality and cultural types,” dedicated to the publication of a collection of stories by P.I. Melnikova.

A short article by E. Belov appeared in the magazine “Ancient and New Russia”, who, while making the reservation that he does not undertake to judge the artistic merits of “Forests,” highly appreciated its ethnographic significance. He admired folk songs, descriptions of everyday life, the wealth of geographical terms of folk origin, and dialectisms. This ethnographic side of the dilogy will subsequently be noted and praised by many.

The novel “On the Mountains” was not particularly noticed by critics. An anonymous reviewer from Otechestvennye zapiski spoke about him quite harshly: “Mr. Pechersky, obviously, in his first novel exhausted all the material he had and is now rewriting himself. He still tries to show off documentary and thoroughness, but the results are truly comic. As soon as any common expression is mentioned in the text, Mr. Pechersky immediately explains the meaning of this expression in a footnote, even though the reader does not need it at all. [...] These and similar techniques smack of such cheap, mediocre charlatanism that there can be no talk of artistry.”

The review was written with the biased goal of “breaking” the novel and belittling its artistic merits. At the same time, the author of the article rightly noted the duality of character of those artistic heroes on whose side the writer himself is: while remaining Old Believers, they are overly sympathetic to the dominant church. At the same time, one can hardly agree that P.I. Melnikov thereby sought to serve her. In this regard, the friendly advice of N.A. is also characteristic. Lyubimov, given to the writer in one of his private letters, which can be considered a kind of critical review. An employee of the Russian Messenger expressed the wish that the writer not portray the clergy of the mainstream church too critically and harshly: “Pay attention, dear Pavel Ivanovich, to one circumstance. Two sides are drawn: all the Khlys are described as virtuous people with lofty thoughts, and the Orthodox clergy are a drunkard on a drunkard, a thief on a thief. If only one side was displayed, it wouldn’t matter. And that is a very harsh comparison. Reduce vodka and fraud among Orthodox pastors, abbots and bishops."

P.I. Melnikov remains a little-studied writer for various reasons, one of them is the lack of criticism that would appreciate him (and not just as an ethnographic writer) and would contribute to the popularity of his works. This circumstance was pointed out at the beginning of the 20th century. who highly appreciated the writer A.A. Izmailov: “His novels appeared already when Russian criticism became impoverished. Most critics did not consider anything beyond the external forms and external facts of Melnikov’s story.” A.A. Izmailov, in his critical-biographical essay, substantiated the artistic validity of the writer’s works.

About P.I. Melnikov wrote to O.F. Miller, A.P. Miliukov, A.N. Pypin, S.A. Vengerov, A.M. Skabichevsky, historian and friend of the writer D.I. Ilovaisky. Summing up the critical reviews that appeared in print during the 25 years that have elapsed since the writer’s death, N.A. Savvin stated: “By a strange irony of fate, Melnikov still has not received a detailed - thorough - if not study, then analysis as a fiction writer. None of the critics and literary historians gave a full coverage of the literary physiognomy of the writer, did not find out the meaning of his artistic images, did not put it in general connection with previous literary development, did not indicate the basic techniques of creativity; in most cases, the matter is limited to the most general, most concise description of a talented writer.”

After the death of P.I. Melnikov received negative assessments of his work. For example, he spoke negatively about A.M.’s duology. Skabichevsky: “In these novels there is nothing to look for any artistic merit, as well as psychological truth. The life of the Volga schismatics, which forms the content of these novels, is depicted in them from one external, ethnographic side...” “Melnikov liked to show off his goods, that is, to furnish his material more effectively, embellish it with archaeological rarities, found folk expressions, etc., and indeed the ethnographic picture is very interesting. But what worldview underlies it? To what extent do the author’s own interpretations and combinations explain the depicted life? In this sense, the result of the stories is very small,” writes A.N. Pypin. In giving such assessments, critics, as already noted, casually analyzed the writer’s artistic skill; the harsh tone of their assessments was due to the discrepancy in views on some social phenomena that were then relevant.

To the most complete pre-revolutionary works about P.I. Melnikov should take the book to P.S. Usov “P.I. Melnikov. His life and literary activity”, which opened the collected works of the writer, published in 1897–1898. M.O. Wolf. It is mainly biographical in nature. It published for the first time many documents related to the activities of P.I. Melnikov in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, with his life and work. However, in general, in pre-revolutionary literary criticism, P.I. Melnikov firmly established his reputation as an “ethnographer writer.”

In Soviet times, a number of interesting scientific works dedicated to the writer appeared. The folklore aspect of his work was developed in some detail. A notable contribution to the study of the artistic heritage of P.I. Melnikova contributed by L.M. Lotman, considering his work in the context of the general development of Russian literature of the 19th century, comparing it with the work of the writer’s contemporaries. Among the works of recent years, it is worth highlighting the already mentioned book by V.F. Sokolova, where the sources that served as the basis for a number of storylines in the duology “In the Forests” and “On the Mountains” were analyzed, information about the prototypes of some heroes was identified and summarized, literary characteristics of the main characters were given, and an excursion into the writer’s creative laboratory. He wrote quite interestingly about the creative path of P.I. Melnikova L.A. Anninsky in the book “Three Heretics”. And just a few years ago, a monograph by I.V., published in Arzamas, was published. Kudryashova and Yu.A. Kurdin “Duology “In the Forests” and “On the Mountains” in the context of the work of P.I. Melnikov-Pechersky”, dedicated to the analysis of artistic means used by the writer in his peak works.

Let us dwell in more detail on one of the aspects of studying the dilogy - the depiction of the Old Believer merchants in it.

The image of the Old Believers and the stylistic features of the dilogy

Philologist and philosopher A.F. Losev defined the concept of “artistic style” as “the principle of constructing the work of art itself, taken in all its fullness and thickness, in all its artistic potential.” Moreover, it was emphasized that this construction occurs “on the basis of certain primary impressions of the artist’s life, on the basis of certain of his life orientations, albeit primary, albeit unconscious, even supra-structural, even supra-ideological.” The term “potential” assumes that the work is taken “in its entirety,” “in all its internal and expressive significance, precisely in all its historical specificity.” The terms “integrity”, “historical conditionality”, “depth”, “directly contemplated life of a work of art” and a number of others cannot fully indicate what a work of art is, what it is for us. But all this, all the theoretical and practical power of the work and style, are recorded and combined in the term “potential”. Style is the principle of constructing the potential of a work of art.

This construction proceeds on the basis of various supra-structural and extra-artistic tasks, “primary models”. “Primary model” is introduced instead of the concepts “prototype”, “prototype”, “idea”, which are either too narrow or can cause unnecessary associations. It’s just that the “model” already presupposes something artistically executed, it is a ready-made compositional scheme. The epithet “primary” distinguishes it from the model as a compositional scheme of the work in question. Primary models can be certain types of people, social relations, animals - “the whole world of things that are created by human activity and in turn characterize human life”, any phenomena of material nature, various philosophical theories, etc., images from other literary ( musical, pictorial, etc.) works. As for, for example, the heroes of the duology P.I. Melnikov, then the primary models for their artistic embodiment for the writer were specific people whom he knew to one degree or another, his own writer’s concept of the meaning of existence and purpose of the Old Believers (or, for example, the concept of “shortcomings of the Russian people”, illustrated in the story “Grisha” ), impressions generated by reading anti-Old Believer journalism, etc.

Since the attitude of P.I. Melnikov's attitude towards the Old Believers changed over time, then, of course, the system of visual means and the figurative structure of works about the Old Believers changed. Developing Old Believer themes in his work, he was forced to look for a style that would help reflect a completely special, unknown, closed world, in which sectarian movements developed and emerged in parallel with the traditions of pre-Nikon Orthodoxy. He was forced to look for new approaches to depicting characters, new heroes. The writer wanted to recreate a special image of the Old Believers, which could not be realized in literary words with the help of the already established satirical poetics of the image of the Old Believers. To implement this idea P.I. Melnikov needed a different poetics, a special system of visual means (or, in the words of M.M. Bakhtin, “a different attitude... to language and the ways of operating with language determined by it”), allowing one to adequately embody culture and value guidelines in artistic images (in including the author’s own), the religious and everyday way of life of all social strata represented in the dilogy, and mainly of the Old Believer merchants. The artistic embodiment of the image of the Old Believer Volga region required the work to have different stylistic dominants, different approaches to the system of characters in the dilogy, and special techniques for creating the character of individual heroes.

Working on the duology, P.I. Melnikov set the task “...to depict the life of the Great Russians in areas with different developments, under different conditions of the social system of life, with different beliefs and at different levels of education.” He fulfilled it in full. The ideological and artistic content of the dilogy determined the commonality of the figurative system of his two peak works, means of individual artistic expression, and creative techniques. The organizing principles and stylistic dominants of the dilogy were descriptiveness and life-likeness, which made it possible to most fully realize the task set by the writer in artistic images. A distinctive feature of the principle of life-likeness is that here, unlike the stories (“Poyarkov”, “Grisha”), it does not serve satirical purposes and is not used to discredit specific individuals, as in “Essays on Clericalism”. Descriptiveness in this case presupposes not only a detailed, accurate artistic reproduction of the features of monastery and merchant life, ethnographic features, and regional flavor; it certainly has a noticeable influence on the techniques of creating special human characters.

In the dilogy P.I. Melnikov, various cultural and religious layers coexist without entering into conflict: Khlysty, Christianity, paganism. Pagan images in the novel, taken from folk mythology, are personified (Rattles Thunder, Yar-Hmel, Mother of Cheese Earth, Yarilo). They are capable of interfering in life (“Yarilo walks among people, burning with passion, clouding their heads”). The pagan layer connects the present and the past, still living in the present. P.I. Melnikov, for the first time in Russian literature, showed and described in detail Khlystyism (“On the Mountains”), trying to comprehend the logic of its emergence and existence, the reasons for its attractiveness, without resorting to superficial invective. Khlysty is organically integrated into the general picture of cultural and religious strata depicted in the novels.

Descriptiveness and life-likeness dictate the special use of folk vocabulary, dialectisms, and regionalisms. Sometimes their use is deliberately condensed by the writer. "Dashing people mutilated“, Tanya thinks, not knowing how else to interpret Marya Gavrilovna’s unusual actions and strange speeches, “either they let the wind flow towards her, or they took her trace out of the ground. How to help someone time limit from "madam" evil be sick, unleashed by scoundrels" ("In the Woods"). The use of folk vocabulary and pagan symbols, stylizations contributes to the creation of a special national flavor in the dilogy, helps to convey the originality of the Old Believer world in general and the heroes individually. Dialectal vocabulary and folklore are used both by the characters and in the author’s narration. In both cases, they look organically in the narrative outline. Behind the narrator’s speech style one can discern a certain character, a way of thinking that is close or distant to the heroes of the dilogy. Dialectisms and regionalisms used in the dilogy have already been the subject of a separate study.

It has been noted that the form of narration in the dilogy is sometimes close to skaz (although, of course, both novels are not skaz). This form “is chosen by the author as the most adequately conveying the characteristics of the consciousness of his hero. Both at the verbal level and thematically, the narrative is saturated with folklore elements, which sends the reader to the culture that shaped Melnikov’s hero.” An important feature of the novels is noted here. For the first time in Russian literature, the image of an Old Believer hero is shown against a broad cultural background, with which he is closely and bloodily connected, which concretizes any features of the character. Such a recreation of the Old Believer cultural environment after P.I. Nobody did Melnikov. Old Believers entrepreneurs are depicted, for example, in the novel by D.N. Mamin-Sibiryak "Privalov's millions". However, their religious affiliation is not emphasized through immersion in a specific religious and everyday atmosphere. The material world of the novel and its stylistic features are not aimed at recreating the unique environment of the Ural Old Believers, which, of course, differed from the Volga region. Individual episodes (for example, the description of the prayer room in the Bakharevs' house) do not serve this purpose. Heroes D.N. Mamin-Sibiryak, unlike the heroes of P.I. Melnikov are not endowed with a specific Old Believer worldview; it is generally difficult to recognize Old Believers in them (we are talking here only about the “Privalov Millions” - a work that was written during the life of P.I. Melnikov). The writers had different tasks, different understandings of the role of the commercial and industrial class, and different assessments of it. The approaches of the two writers to the depiction of the Old Believers are noticeably different. However, D.N. Mamin-Sibiryak has convincing artistic images of the Old Believer: take, for example, his story “The Last Branch” (1885), in which, by the way, one can note some of the motifs heard in “Grisha” by P.I. Melnikova.

To reflect the close connection of the Old Believer worldview with the national Russian cultural core, P.I. Melnikov makes extensive use of folklore. Researcher of the writer G.S. Vinogradov noted that the use of folklore works for P.I. Melnikov - “one of the favorite ways of creating artistic images, depicting everyday life, the most favorite compositional technique.” Another researcher, E.A. Antsupova, concludes that in the dilogy of P.I. Melnikov, “we are faced with a complex interaction of various ways of characterizing heroes, and among them the folklore characteristics of images become of great importance. Traditional formulas of folk poetry become one of the methods of socio-psychological analysis." E.A. Antsupova notes the following features and techniques for creating the artistic image of P.I. Melnikov. These are means of folk poetic creativity that actively participate in creating the external appearance of the hero (often stylized). “By using the song formula or the song itself, the movements of the heroes’ souls associated with the feeling of love, as well as more complex human feelings, are conveyed...

To reveal the inner world of the characters and to justify their actions, the technique of superimposing a folklore song type on a psychological image developed by realistic literature, conditioned by the social environment, is also used... Proverbs and sayings become an important factor in the social characteristics of the character. Often a proverb is used to explain or predict the actions of heroes." E.A. Antsupova clearly showed how specific images of folk song poetry are “melted” by P.I. Melnikov in portrait descriptions.

Philologist P.O. wrote about the function of proverbs and sayings in dilogy. Pilashevsky: “For characters, a proverb is a necessary factor in their speech, and the more significant the speech becomes, the more tension of feeling and thought in it, the more emotional excitement, the more often the proverb appears. It determines the goal or stimulus of an action, it also serves as its justification, forms the results of thoughts and feelings, anger, melancholy, displeasure, doubt, ridicule, disdain, unbridled joy: a persistent thought or thought finds a ready-made formula in the rich reserves of age-old folk wisdom.”

The widest use of folklore sends the reader back centuries, to the foundations of the people's worldview, as if recreating the inextricable connection between the past and the present in the dilogy, in the characters of its heroes.

Back at the beginning of the 20th century. critic A.A. Izmailov wrote about the duology of P.I. Melnikova: “...his entire epic is written in a special artistic language. Not only for the conversation of the characters, but also for the description, he took common speech with its touch of melodiousness and a peculiar rhythm. His novels are almost our first experience of stylization.” Stylization, as is known, is a technique of deliberate imitation of the characteristic features of someone else's speech manner in order to achieve a certain artistic goal. The writer needed it to achieve special persuasiveness of the world he recreated in the artistic word, in which the past coexists with the present, Christianity with paganism, in which a special folk element is raging. The technique of stylization is used not only in particular cases (for example, a message to Kerzhenets from the Moscow Society of Old Believers, which is read aloud by Vasily Borisych Manefe in the eighth chapter of the fourth part of the second book of the novel “In the Woods”), but also to characterize each hero, to outline his portrait , his character, way of thinking, worldview. Stylization takes the hero out of everyday life and brings him closer to antiquity. P.I. Melnikov constantly changes different speech masks, which, combined with enormous lexical richness, gives a special uniqueness and flavor to the work.

It is necessary, however, to note that the techniques of stylization, the use of common vocabulary and folklore have not received an unambiguous positive assessment. Critic A.I. Bogdanovich, for example, wrote: “The first thing that catches your eye is Melnikov’s language, sweet and artificial, the way his entire novel is written. One can only marvel at the skill with which the author maintains his pastiche of folk speech over the space of two thousand pages. Either he imitates the tone of the legends, then he writes as if he is composing an epic, then he speaks in broken, semi-church language, constantly being in an enthusiastic mood.” But the article by A.I. Bogdanovich as a whole is rather socially critical in nature; this opinion is not supported by philological analysis, and it can be attributed to the author’s taste preferences.

Descriptiveness as a stylistic dominant subordinates the composition of the dilogy. This is manifested, in particular, in the peculiarities of plot construction. There is no single plot in the dilogy; it seems to break up into several separate storylines. In the first part of the dilogy (“In the Forests”), the main line is Chapurin’s, trying to arrange the fate of his daughters. His trip to search for Vetluga gold seems like a completely unrelated event. Yakim Stukolov is needed to “send” Chapurin there. The mystery of Flenushka’s birth is also connected with him. When Stukolov’s storyline reaches its logical conclusion, the secret of the gold is revealed, he disappears from among the characters in the duology and no longer appears, as if “having done his job.” A special storyline is connected with the appearance of Alexey Lokhmatoy in the Chapurin house. Another love affair ensues. She is supported by Alexey’s constant mystical premonition, associated with his first acquaintance with Patap Chapurin: “From this man is your destruction.” Now appearing in the hero’s mind, now disappearing, this fear ultimately comes true on the last pages of the second novel of the dilogy (“On the Mountains”). A special plot is the relationship between Alexei and Marya Gavrilovna. Another love story and another storyline are based on the history of the relationship between Vasily Borisych and Parasha, Chapurin’s daughter. The monastery world opens up before the reader thanks to Manefa and the same Vasily Borisych.

In the second part of the dilogy, heroes who were previously only mentioned come to the fore: Marko Danilych Smolokurov, Dunya, Pyotr Samokvasov, Gerasim Chubalov. Each of them is associated with separate storylines (including Khlystov’s), developing in parallel. A separate plot in the novel “On the Mountains” is the story of the closure of the monasteries and the fate of Flenushka. In the second part of the dilogy, Chapurin becomes a minor character.

A special role in the dilogy is played by extra-plot elements - author's digressions, descriptions, inserted episodes. The plot of the dilogy is not dynamic, which is due to its stylistic dominants, which is, in principle, characteristic of works with sociocultural issues, one of which is the dilogy of P.I. Melnikova. Authorial and plot digressions are required in order to recreate and comprehend the picture of the cultural uniqueness of the Volga region, as if made up of many scraps and therefore unique. The role of extra-plot elements can be illustrated by the example of one of the heroines of the novel “In the Woods” - the healer Yegorikha. To show and describe half-pagan and half-Christian beliefs, P.I. Melnikov introduces this character into the novel. But this appearance is preceded by the author’s digression, dedicated to the Christian-pagan ideas of the people in general (the beginning of the eighth chapter of the second part of the first book of the novel). Yegorikha herself uses both Christian and pagan ideologemes (“Today, on Quiet Day, the Mother of Cheese Earth is quiet and kind”). Yegorikha also reveals to us a special material world, represented by the popular names of herbs: gulena, apple of Sodom, Peter's cross, Adam's head, chamber, overcomer, etc. The semantic load carried by the image of Yegorikha, her niche in the cultural palette, is summarized by a separate author’s a digression about the surviving pagan rituals in conspiracies, about the character of the Russian people.

The introduction of this or that character is often accompanied by the author’s digressions, in which the reader is told the history of his family, the characteristics of his social status, and the characteristics of the region where the hero was born or lives. With such a digression, for example, the 16th chapter of the fourth part of the second book of the novel “In the Woods” begins. Before describing the meeting and conflict between Chapurin and priest Sushila (Rodion Kharisamenov), P.I. Melnikov devotes several pages to talk about the village of Sviblovo, where the priest lives, about him and the history of the appearance of his surname, about the situation of the Old Believers in the vicinity of Sviblovo and Sushila’s relationship with them. These author's digressions further and in detail characterize the hero, making him a special literary type of clergy. Before introducing Chapurin to the reader, P.I. Melnikov talks about the Upper Trans-Volga region (book 1, part 1, chapter 1 of the novel “In the Forests”). The author’s digression also retells the biography of Karp Alekseich Morkovkin, which is not directly related to the plot (book 2, part 3, chapter 5 of the novel “In the Woods”). A separate chapter is devoted to the history of the Volga hermitages (“In the Forests”, book 1, part 2, chapter 1) - from their origin to the middle of the 19th century. The history of the family of Marko Danilych Smolokurov is presented in a separate author’s digression (“On the Mountains,” book 1, part 1, chapter 2), and it is preceded by another digression from the plot, a more general one, devoted to the history, geography, and economics of “Mountains.” - the area where the entire novel will take place.

Having identified special stylistic dominants, trying to leave aside the revealing tasks of the work, the writer discovers more and more new aspects of Old Believer life, known to him earlier, noted in the “Report on the modern state of the schism...”, but not used in small genre forms. Even in the “Report...” the places revered by the Old Believers as saints, the “Ofen language”, and the activities of the Old Believers were described, and only a quarter of a century later the writer began to use them, “dissolving” them in the artistic space of the dilogy.

So, in order to draw a convincing artistic image of the Old Believers with its popular understanding of religion, P.I. Melnikov tried to create a special style that refers the reader to the culture of the environment from which the hero came. The stylistic dominants of the dilogy work to recreate the unique image of the Old Believers in its inextricable connection with the people's worldview, the image of the Old Believer Volga region with its culture, economy, and other features. The Old Believers are represented by diverse characters; they are shown in a multifaceted and unschematic way. The duality of some characters is due to the writer’s ambiguous attitude towards the Old Believers. Artistic concept by P.I. Melnikov’s goal was to recreate the Volga Old Believers in all the diversity of human types, as well as to show its doom, the need to reunite with the “Great Russian Church” (as the heroes of the dilogy call it) and the ability in this case to positively influence society. The originality of the Old Believers in the dilogy was also expressed in the character system, the features of which will be discussed below.

The artistic means of the dilogy, its style, and the system of characters reveal the world of the Old Believers and the writer’s special attitude towards it.

P.I. Melnikov not only discovered and showed a positive character in the Old Believer environment - he showed it as a national ideal, immersed in the religious and everyday atmosphere of the Old Believers, becoming akin to it. The writer primarily thought of Patap Chapurin and Manefa as such an ideal. Their opposition would be wrong. Personifying the worldly and spiritual, Chapurin and Manefa at the same time symbolize their unity: they are blood brother and sister. They are different sides of the same coin.

Perhaps the only condition for the hero, personifying the national ideal, was in the dilogy his demonstration in one form or another of rejection of the church-hierarchical system of the modern Old Believers, a negative attitude towards attempts to strengthen it.

Chapurin, for example, constantly sneers at the hermits, at the current events in the Old Believers (“Some bishops, the dog knows them, were consecrated! We could have at least a simple priest and a runaway, and we would be happy with that [...] With a runaway it’s not as an example more common... First of all, he’s drunk without waking up: whether you want to weave a rope out of him, or chip wood chips... Another thing is that he has more fear, more obedience...” (“In the Woods”) If Chapurin denounces church disorder , Manefa, on the contrary, is a worldly way of life, including a merchant’s, in its relation to the church. “It’s not like the monasteries - they will sell Christ the King of Heaven for a bucket of wine!.. [...] I’ve been living with them for a long time, madam, I know them better than you, loafers... Why do they hold on to ancient piety?.. For the sake of salvation?.. How could it not be so!.. Because of profit, because of only one worldly, everyday benefit” (“In Lesakh"). When it comes to fundamental participation and the arrangement of current hierarchical affairs, Manefa moves away and strives to take a neutral position. Apart from her own monastery, she seems to care about nothing else. She strives to remain outside of active participation in Old Believer life. In the novel “In the Woods” (book 1, part 2, chapter 9) there is an episode when Vasily Borisych, who arrived at the monastery, reads to Manefa the charter of the Vladimir Archdiocese, to which all other Old Believer dioceses in Russia must obey. “It’s not a bad thing,” Manefa responds, but immediately asks not to inform Moscow of his consent. Also in the second book of the novel (Part 4, Chapter 8), when the question of the attitude towards Archbishop Anthony, the head of the Russian Old Believers, is being resolved at the monastery, Manefa will not join any of the disputing parties. “Let’s wait some time... Let’s see how the newly installed archbishop will behave...”

Sometimes the author’s voice joins the opinions of the characters, and the style takes on an ironic and journalistic overtones. P.I. Melnikov does not always manage to maintain authorial detachment, expressing his own attitude towards the Old Believers: “Schismatics do not have the opportunity to save their parents in this way - bells, vestments and loud protodeacons are forbidden to them. How can they, dear ones, save daddy’s soul?.. Well, they save her from eternal torment with caviar and balyks, sacrificing everything that is for the needs of the bottomless monastic stomakh... Send sturgeon and stellate sturgeon to the skit’s fathers and mothers generously - daddy will undoubtedly receive it in merciful forgiveness for all deceptions. After all, the elders and elders are masters of praying to God: just give me money and send food, they will beg any sinner from hell” (“In the Woods”). The irony of Chapurin, Manefa, and a number of other heroes is consonant with the irony of the author. The heroes begin to look at the Old Believers from his point of view.

The author's point of view sometimes manifests itself at the lexical level in the speech of the characters. For example, in the novel “In the Woods” the following phrase comes from the lips of Vasily Borisych: “After all, he and Gromov were the first instigators Austrian". The word “Austrianism,” meanwhile, could not be used by an Old Believer, especially in a dialogue with a clergyman (in this case, with Manefa). It reflects the point of view of opponents of the Old Believer Belokrinitsa hierarchy, to which Chapurin, Manefa, and Vasily Borisych belong, and has a negative connotation, emphasizing contempt for the “Belokrinitsa”. Behind this word there is a special worldview concept that is alien to the Old Believers. Another similar example, when at the lexical level the author’s point of view is manifested in the hero’s remark, is associated with Manefa. “At least this one Austrian kvass take... What kind of a man became a bishop!” - she exclaims.

Feature of the duology P.I. Melnikov in the conflict-free combination of contradictions. This is expressed at the level of artistic characters and even entire cultural layers, also shown in the dilogy. It has been correctly noted that “both the characters of the heroes and the image of Russian culture as a whole are filled with contrasts in Melnikov’s depiction; the author accurately depicts these incompatibilities and avoids understanding them.” This approach to the artistic embodiment of the image of an Old Believer is due to the principle of depicting a positive hero in a dilogy (demonstration of a break with the Old Believer environment) and the principles that had developed by the mid-1860s. the views of the writer himself on the historical mission of the Old Believers. He already believed that “... the schismatic environment, despite its religious errors, has many good sides in itself, which every truly Russian person cannot but wish for himself and all his Orthodox brothers.” He also believed that “the education of the Old Believers will introduce new elements into our lives, or, better to say, old ones, forgotten by us due to the influx of Western concepts and customs, which are not akin to either the Russian land or the Russian soul.” P.I. Melnikov’s goal was to show in the dilogy what is valuable in the Old Believers - special types of people whose worldview is not clouded by the “influx of Western concepts.” However, the mechanism by which the Old Believers would “introduce new elements into our lives,” so necessary, in the writer’s opinion, seemed to him quite naive. The heroes of the dilogy stubbornly seek the “true faith” and overcome many difficult obstacles along the way. But, as already mentioned, a positive result of the search is possible only when the Old Believers unite with the “Great Russian Church,” which, according to the writer, owns the fullness of religious truth.

In the “Note” mentioned more than once to the Minister of Internal Affairs P.A. Valuev P.I. Melnikov asserted: “But I still see the main stronghold of the future of Russia in the Old Believers, who will not be schismatics...”. Therefore, introducing a positive hero who consciously strives “to join the schism,” justifying the “schism,” would mean erecting a barrier between the Old Belief and the “Great Russian Church.” Such a hero could not be “a stronghold of the future of Russia.” Such a hero could only be negative, caricatured, which would emphasize the lack of prospects for his entire ideology. The writer sought to show that his best heroes are Old Believers, but at the same time “not schismatics.” Hence such duality in their characters and attraction to the “Great Russian Church,” expressed either as a statement (Chapurin), or arising as a result of a long and complex search (Chubalov).

In the novel “On the Mountains,” Chapurin, in a dialogue with Kolyshkin, comes to the point that he recognizes the dominant church as more correct. But despite all this, he remains an Old Believer, as they say, “to the core.” There is no explanation for this combination of contradictions in the dilogy. They coexist without conflict.

However, the duality of the hero in the duology can be different. If the character of Patap Chapurin combines ironic mockery of the Old Believers and an inextricable affiliation with it, then in the character of Yakim Stukolov his ascetic religiosity is completely combined with criminal activity, without coming into conflict. Religiosity and the ability to deceive while conducting commercial business are the traits of Marko Danilych Smolokurov. The same Vasily Borisych, on the one hand, appears as a “great book reader” who “knew ancient books like the back of his hand,” and on the other hand, as an ordinary womanizer. Manefa, for all his religiosity, has a different attitude towards rich merchants and “grey-footed men” and considers deception acceptable, supporting the legend of a charter that supposedly assigns land to monasteries (“And there are white lies... The people are dark, fickle - it’s impossible without that” ).

The combination of opposites is not found in P.I. Melnikov's psychological understanding, it is shown as natural and is not a subject of reflection, is not comprehended either by the author or by the characters themselves. The heroes of novels are little inclined to self-esteem and introspection. At the same time, those pages of the dilogy where the author talks about the emotional experiences of the characters, their mood, convince of a subtle mastery of the skill of psychological analysis. The writer resorts to such means as mutual characteristics, reflections of the characters, he uses a special selection of details of the portrait, setting (indirect psychologism), stylization, imitation of the language and structure of oral poetry. But psychologism as a stylistic dominant would require from the author a different construction of the plot, composition, the removal of static episodes and detailed detail from the narrative, other laws of organization of the material world of the dilogy, working to reflect the inner world of the heroes, would require turning to special techniques for depicting characters, their emotions and changes taking place in their souls. Psychologism, in contrast to descriptiveness as a stylistic dominant, would not allow solving P.I. Melnikov's task was to “depict the life of the Great Russians...”. In our opinion, this is also the reason that forces the writer to leave aside the explanation of the mechanism for combining opposites in the characters’ characters.

Literary critic and church writer L.M. Bagretsov correctly noted that P.I. Melnikov is “a writer with some bias towards the schism. His types, taken outside of relation to the schism, with rare exceptions, represent integral, completely seasoned characters. But as soon as the same persons become schismatics, they, too, with rare exceptions, become confused, contradictory, inconsistent, some of them can be divided directly into several independent types. The reason for this probably lies in the fact that the author depicted the religious life of the Old Believers either objectively - as he observed it in reality and as artistic logic told him, or - biasedly, making his heroes exponents their views on the split." This is precisely one of the difficulties of studying the writer’s work: in order to present each type as more or less integral, it is necessary to accurately distinguish in advance what belongs to P.I. Melnikov as an artist and what should be attributed, as L.M. put it. Bagretsov, “about his party convictions.” L.M. Bagretsov did not, however, attempt to conduct such an analysis.

Earlier, back in 1881, an anonymous critic of Otechestvennye zapiski wrote about the same thing with caustic irony: “As the reader probably knows, our so-called Old Believers appear in Mr. Pechersky’s novels, and so Mr. Pechersky began to think about whatever it takes to prove the superiority of the “Great Russian” Church over the Old Believers. It's in the novel! Mr. Pechersky dealt with this matter very simply: he forces all his favorites to renounce their former old faith and pronounce panegyrics of the “Great Russian” church.” Further, the critic illustrated his idea with specific examples and summed up: “Indeed, forcing people to strangle themselves - fortunately, paper will endure everything - trample on their beliefs, ridicule their own, false or true, but dear to the heart cult - all this, perhaps, is decent in some dungeon, but indecent in literature."

So, the depiction of positive heroes and their inner being is determined by the principle of creating a “bifurcated” character. On the one hand, the hero belongs to the Old Believer environment, has an Old Believer worldview, which is manifested in his attitude to raising children, to work, to housekeeping, and to religious life. On the other hand, he constantly expresses either critical or mocking (invective) judgments about the Old Believers, without internal psychological and seemingly natural contrition, thereby seeming to distance himself from the Old Believers. P.I. Melnikov empathizes with such an Old Believer hero who, being the bearer of the old and persistent Russian worldview, can break with the Old Believer environment (Chubalov, Dunya Smolokurova, having a wedding in a Edinoverie church) or does not feel himself completely and completely belonging to it. At the very least, he must resist dead religious dogma and be open to feeling (Flenushka). Invective remarks, mutual characteristics of characters expressing their value systems, go back to the techniques of journalism. In this case, what M.M. wrote about takes place. Bakhtin in his work “The Author and the Hero in Aesthetic Activity”: “When the hero and the author coincide or find themselves next to each other in the face of a common value or against each other as enemies, the aesthetic event ends and the ethical one begins (pamphlet, manifesto, indictment, a word of praise and gratitude, scolding, self-report-confession, etc.).”

A.N. Pypin also noted that in the dilogy “some characters are successfully drawn, for example, the pious burning Smolokurov, the schismatic old women, etc.; but “positive” types are usually unnatural.” He criticized the writer not even for the dual character of the main characters, but rather for, in his opinion, excessively endowing them with the features of ancient Russian patriarchy, which may seem unconvincing and unnatural, a thing of the past. But be that as it may, the positive heroes of the dilogy are always distinguished by patriarchy.

Having determined the writer’s main approaches to the artistic depiction of the main characters (combination of contradictions, versatility of character, demonstration of rejection of the church-hierarchical system of modern Old Believers, close connection between the hero and the cultural environment), we can move on to analyzing the system of characters in the dilogy, highlighting a special type in it - “masters” "

“Russian master” in the character system of the duology “In the Forests” and “On the Mountains”

In the second half of the 1860s. the writer changed the concept of depicting the people. Earlier, in his stories and tales “Grandmother’s Tales” and “Old Years”, the peasantry appeared in him as a voiceless mass of people lacking initiative. This, according to the correct remark of L.M. Lotman, “a historically passive force, entirely dependent on the internal political state of the state, on government orders.” Now, working on novels, P.I. Melnikov, in any case, finds proactive, original characters among the people and among the Old Believers in particular. Folklore sources, Old Believer legends and lives, excursions into the history of Old Believer regions, author’s digressions, and finally, the characters of the main characters created by the writer serve to reveal this originality. “The idea of ​​the originality of folk life, which penetrated into the work of Melnikov-Pechersky, the appearance in his works of bright, individual characters of the Volga peasants and the approach he developed to the life of ordinary people as a historical being had an impact on the genre nature of his narrative. From an essay, a short story and a story, the writer moved on to a novel and then a series of novels,” notes L.M. Lotman.

In the above quote, the definition of Melnik’s heroes as “peasants” is not entirely accurate. These are merchants close to the peasantry, to the “peasant”. The choice of this social group was of a fundamental nature for the writer. For him, the solution to the problem of Russia's development was connected precisely with the Russian merchants, who had not lost their national roots.

For the first time, an analysis of the system of characters in the novels of P.I. Melnikov and made an attempt to classify them in his work “Raskolnik types in the fictional works of P.I. Melnikov-Pechersky" L.M. Bagretsov in 1904. He also determined the peculiarity of the author’s approach to the problems of novels: to understand religious phenomena without tearing them out of the chain of everyday phenomena of people’s life, to understand them in connection with various conditions of people’s life - economic, social, family and others. Indeed, they are shown in the dilogy in the closest intertwining and interconnection.

It is hardly possible to define complete, specific, unconditional criteria for classifying the characters in the duology “In the Forests” and “On the Mountains.” This is difficult not only because both novels have about two hundred characters. This is difficult, in our opinion, because P.I. Melnikov showed very diverse, multifaceted, contradictory characters. Therefore, L.M.’s attempt was doomed to failure in advance. Bagretsov “sort” Melnikov’s heroes into three groups depending on their attitude to the Old Believers. The first group is random “representatives of the schism” (that is, people associated with the Old Believers only by origin or some other third-party considerations, for example, mercantile ones). Patap Chapurin ended up in this group, and only because, being a “satirist of the monasteries,” he did not want to leave the “old faith” out of trade interests. L.M. Bagretsov did not take into account that Chapurin himself does not focus on the dependence of his trade on belonging to the Old Believers. The author speaks about this for him, introducing Chapurin (“And Patap Maksimych was splitting up because such a custom had long been carried out beyond the Volga, he did not have to lag behind people. At the same time, his friendship and acquaintance with rich merchants were maintained by the split, credit from the schism there was more...", etc.). A similar characteristic is given by Chapurina and Manefa. But Chapurin is connected with the Old Believers by stronger ties than trade interests. And these connections, rooted in the hero’s Domostroevsky worldview, were skillfully shown by P.I. Melnikov.

The second group, according to L.M. Bagretsov, true “zealots of ancient piety,” “those whose souls merged with the schism and are unthinkable outside of it.” These are Manefa and some mainly female characters.

The third group included “transitional types” - Old Believers, although they do not have an organic connection with the environment from which they came, but are interested and have become so accustomed to it that they give the impression of “true zealots.” Here L.M. Bagretsov included Yakim Stukolov and Vasily Borisych, although Patap Chapurin can also be added to them with good reason and with such general criteria.

Among the characters in the dilogy P.I. Melnikov, it is not difficult to single out one large group, based on the social affiliation of the heroes - merchants. But before us is a special merchant class, with a special, Domostroevsky worldview, deeply rooted in religion. It seems to us that Domostroev’s definition of “owner” (“householder”) is more suitable for this category of Melnikov’s heroes, which implies not only engaging in entrepreneurship, but also a special way of family and household relations. According to V.I. Dalyu, “master” is the owner and manager, the head of the family. In this case, this concept is semantically richer than “entrepreneur”, “merchant”, where there is no semantic connection with the concept of family. In addition, the concept of “master” in the Old Believer environment is associated with a person’s obligatory and deep religiosity.

The object of artistic depiction in the dilogy was a specific Old Believer worldview, which manifests itself in the actions, activities, and thoughts of the heroes. If the writer had avoided this task, the images of his merchants would have been incomplete. But P.I. It was extremely important for Melnikov to convincingly show this social layer, since the depiction of the merchant environment was for the writer connected with the question of the driving forces of Russia. The problem of the people (and the image of a person from the people) outgrows P.I. Melnikov “into the problem of implementing the class self-determination of the Old Believers as an exponent of future economic transformations, due to which the specific unit of artistic measurement for the writer was not the serf peasant, as, for example, with Turgenev or Grigorovich, but the state peasant, a rich schismatic, a thousand-man.” “Not exactly a merchant, not exactly a man,” as the writer himself defined the type of central characters, the “owners.” It’s not for nothing that Patap Chapurin, while visiting Kolyshkin, makes the following remark: “Our business is a peasant’s, maybe we won’t freeze,” insisting that they prepare an overnight stay for him in the gazebo. To create the effect of authenticity, the writer, we repeat, required immersion in everyday life, in the creation of a special material world, special stylistic searches with the inclusion of folklore elements, so that the hero acted in a dilogy against the background and in close connection with the culture that shaped him. Thus, there is no reason to separate Melnikov’s merchants from the Old Believers, relying on their negative statements about the spiritual state of the confession.

A psychological portrait of the Old Believer owner-contemporary was given by the publicist V.P. Ryabushinsky in the article “The Fate of the Russian Master”. His article is not a scientific economic work; psychological characteristics are taken as criteria for correlating people into different groups, which allows them to be applied to a literary work that is not alien to the principles of psychologism as a literary concept. Secondly, the comments of V.P. Ryabushinsky are preferable because they were proposed by an Old Believer, a native of a merchant family. This allows us to study such a specific phenomenon as the Old Believers, as if from within itself, extracting a scale of assessments from the Old Believer worldview, staying in the Old Believer hierarchy of values. The article “The Fate of the Russian Master” was written in the 20th century, after the 1917 revolution in Russia, but the author shows precisely the pre-revolutionary merchant class. To the objection that there is a noticeable time distance between the merchants of the first two decades of the 20th century and the middle of the 19th century, one can answer that, given the increased conservatism of the Old Believer environment, the observations of V.P. Ryabushinsky is quite applicable to the merchant class of the mid-19th century, especially since a number of his fundamental judgments relate directly to this period of time.

Patap Chapurin- type of owner. “Two circumstances are characteristic of old Russian merchant families. Firstly, their peasant origin, Secondly, deep religiosity their founders. Indeed, if there are no merchant families from the clergy, burghers, officials, nobles, single-lords, and all our eminent merchants are from the peasants, then equally all the data indicate that the ancestors belonged precisely to those village families who were particularly zealous to faith; many of them are Old Believers” (emphasized by V.P. Ryabushinsky).

The classic type of owner is preserved in the person of the “economic Great Russian peasant.” “Whoever knows this persistent money-grubber, tight-fisted, firm, persistent in work, savvy, dexterous, often very gifted, but at the same time overwhelmed by great spiritual pride, will understand that it is not always easy for him to bow his intelligent, but stubborn and temptation-ridden head to the commandments Christ."

Before us is an almost ready-made psychological portrait of Patap Chapurin. He is quick-tempered, he is tempted by the Vetluga gold, but at the same time he is enterprising and dexterous, persistent, appreciates people for their working qualities. As for peasant origin, as already mentioned, for P.I. For Melnikov, it was important to show a hero who came from a peasant environment, from the “men”. Comments by V.P. Ryabushinsky confirm the artistic accuracy of the author’s description given to P.I. Chapurin. Melnikov: “Patap Maksimych was a true Great Russian, a pious man, zealous for the faith of his fathers, but a great vain talker; but as soon as it disperses, it goes wild, and is not averse to blasphemy.” The same struggle between the religious and the earthly is noted here, which is pointed out by the writer and the Old Believer publicist. A certain duality of Chapurin’s character was outlined by P.I. Melnikov very accurately, and some of his sarcastic remarks addressed to the hermits only emphasize that Patap Maksimych “does not come from blasphemy away," without crossing out his personal piety and "jealousy for the faith of the fathers." The image of Chapurin is convincing, but only until Chapurin begins to sneer at the Old Believers in general or does not undertake to assert the rightness of the dominant church, as in the dialogue with Kolyshkin in the finale novel "On the Mountains" In these cases, he clearly obeys the will of the author.

Some researchers believe that the dual image of Chapurin is a consequence of the ambiguous attitude of P.I. himself. Melnikov to the Old Believers: “Creating the image of his positive hero with an orientation towards the Nizhny Novgorod Old Believer Pyotr Yegorych Bugrov, Melnikov-Pechersky endows him with that duality in relation to the Old Believer monasteries, which he himself was distinguished by.” P.I. Melnikov spoke about Bugrov in his “Report on the current state of the schism in the Nizhny Novgorod province,” where, however, he did not point out the ambivalent attitude of his prototype towards the Old Belief. P.E. Bugrov is devoid of duality and in the essay by V.I. Dahl (“Grandfather Bugrov”). V.F. draws attention to this. Sokolova: “Reading the manuscript of Melnikov’s Report and Dahl’s essay “Grandfather Bugrov,” one cannot grasp Bugrov’s ambivalence in relation to the Old Believers. His attitude towards his fellow believers and monasteries is devoid of the irony and mockery that Melnikov often displays.”

M.N. Starikova believes that the genre of the essay did not give V.I. I will give the opportunity to develop the image of the “grandfather”, and the writer, moreover, did not set out to show the duality of Bugrov. We find these arguments not entirely convincing. IN AND. Dahl draws Bugrov in accordance with the traditions of the “essay school,” where the documentary authenticity of the image is important. If the real Bugrov had been characterized by religious duality, the essayist could have shown it in a few strokes. The essay genre wouldn't hurt. The documentary authenticity of the image is not the dominant feature of P.I.’s individual style. Melnikova. And therefore, he has a natural right, when creating the image of Chapurin, to deviate from the real prototype (P.E. Bugrova) due to certain artistic goals. The task of P.I. Melnikov was to show a patriarchal family, an Old Believer merchant with a patriarchal worldview, but not an Old Believer orthodox. Where these features do not fit together, the image of Chapurin becomes contradictory, and the effect of the duality of his nature arises. This duality is appropriate as a feature of Chapurin’s artistic character, as long as it does not violate psychological persuasiveness.

The Old Believers were aware of the high role of the personality of the “owner”, who is not an owner, but a person responsible for his wealth, for the destinies of other people before God. The Old Believer could not be sure of salvation, but he realized that he could earn it through deeds. Selfless work in organizing an industrial or commercial business was regarded as preparation for personal salvation. Zeal for “good work” in the entrepreneurial field was explained by the fact that the business itself represented the fulfillment of Christian duty. The success of a business became meaningful only when its results were used in the service of the Church - the community of Christians. A diligent organizer, aware of his duties to God, doing much for the glory of God, was close to salvation. This is exactly how Patap Chapurin is shown. He perceives his wealth as a gift from above, from God. This is revealed, for example, in the episode with the adopted girl Grunya (“In the Woods”). Taking in an orphaned child, Chapurin is motivated not only by kindness and pity, but also by religious motives. He understands well what orphan tears are, and remembers what John Chrysostom said about them. Great wealth comes at his disposal as a reward for a noble deed. “And the blessing of God rested on the good man and on his whole house: in the seven years that Grunya lived under his roof, his wealth increased by seven, from a wealthy peasant he became the first rich man in the entire Volga region.” The author's commentary emphasizes and confirms the judgments of Patap Chapurin himself: “and I keep this in my thoughts: whatever God gave us, he gave everything for her, for the dove.” And further, in a conversation with his wife Aksinya Zakharovna: “The property that we have acquired is not mine and not theirs: God sent it for Grunya’s sake.” Chapurin bequeaths everything he has acquired to be divided equally between his three daughters. An adopted daughter or his own - it makes no difference to him. Chapurin's faith is the faith of concrete deeds, and not a set of dogmas.

Chapurin tells Alexey Lokhmatoy that happiness and wealth are a consequence of fulfilling Christian commandments, who asks to be allowed to go to his parents for Easter.

“My dad and mom were always ordered to be at their party. Parental will, Patap Maksimych.

“So it is, so,” said Patap Maksimych. - Not a word about that. “Honor your father and your mother” is the Lord’s word!.. I praise you for honoring your parents... For this the Lord will reward you with happiness and wealth.”

Judgments about wealth often coexist with references to the authority of sacred and patristic books. In a conversation with the same Alexey Lokhmaty, whom his ruined father sent to Chapurin to be hired as a worker, Patap Maksimych recalls the book of Job. “...Remember Iev often in his rot. Yes... He had everything, lost everything, but did not complain about God; That's why God gave him more than before. So it’s your job - don’t grumble at God, don’t spare your hands, and work with God, the Lord will not leave you - he will send you more than before.”

Prayer, work, fulfillment of moral requirements - all this allows you to properly manage wealth and not waste it in vain. This is Chapurin’s basic life principle. “Pray, work, don’t forget the poor more and more. This is most pleasing to God...” - he punishes Grune. He is convinced that a person’s actions are more important than the faith that he professes, but at the same time he does not want to abandon the Old Belief. “How is it, godfather, you speak about them so disrespectfully (about the monastery mothers. - V.B.) and is always ready to abuse them, but you yourself adhere to their faith?..” asks Kolyshkin. Chapurin replies: “A man is born in what he will die in... Changing your faith is not changing your shirt...” It is noted that Bugrov argues in exactly the same way in V.I.’s essay. Dalia.

So, the ideal of the Old Believer entrepreneur P.I., which has developed over decades. Melnikov managed to embody Patap Maksimych Chapurin in the image of his hero with great artistic and psychological persuasiveness. Peasant origin, deep religiosity manifested in everyday life, in relation to work, material support from monasteries, and the Domostroev hierarchy in the family do not allow him to be separated from the Old Believers. To say that Chapurin is connected with the Old Belief only because it is beneficial for his trade affairs means to significantly impoverish the understanding of his image.

Kolyshkin. Another of the “owners”, on whose side the sympathies of the author of the dilogy are, is Sergei Andreich Kolyshkin, a retired mining official, steamboat operator, and friend of Chapurin. “Sergei Andreich was so fond of the common people that there was no arrogance, no conceit, no pride in him...” He is strict with the workers, but they are eager to serve him. Where he is, there is laughter and fun, where he left is “a gloom for everyone.” Kolyshkin also has a special attitude towards wealth. “Another, having acquired wealth, will swell like dough in a dough... don’t come close: he walks like a crane, looks like a trump card and doesn’t want to know anyone except his own rich brother. Sergei Andreich was not like that... Even if the very last fireman came to him at lunchtime, honor would be his place, even if the governor were sitting here. Kolyshkin’s friends said: why does he do this, he offends good people, putting them at the same table with all sorts of blacks and small things. “We are far from God,” Sergei Andreich would answer. “You don’t have to deal with the Lord through the dust of the earth, but with Him, the Light, at the heavenly table some beggar sits higher than kings...” In Kolyshkin’s reasoning, the concept of “wealth” correlates directly with the religious requirement not to look at faces. As V.P. notes Ryabushinsky, the real owner, “did not feel himself either in everyday life or spiritually different from the workers of his factory.” We observe this psychological feature in the examples of Kolyshkin and Chapurin. Chapurin does not feel a long distance between himself and his best employees. He is even ready to entrust the latter with the management of all affairs in his absence (the late Silantyich and Alexey Lokhmaty mentioned in the novel “In the Woods”).

As was customary in Old Believer families, Kolyshkin was taught to read and write by his parents, homely craftsmen of the Ural mining factories. The boy was very smart. “He’s not eleven years old, but the boy has acquired all the wisdom of Kerzhak.” The master drew attention to him and sent him to study in St. Petersburg. Over time, thanks to hard work, Chapurin’s advice, and parental money (Sergei Andreich’s father and mother, following an ancient custom preserved by the Old Believers, retired to a monastery in their old age, where they died), Kolyshkin started his own steamship. He broke with the Old Believers, but the Old Believer’s attitude towards money and business helped him out. “His comrades in the gold business were all tavern heroes who had filled their pockets by getting people drunk with a mixture of vodka, water and dope... Sergei Andreich’s heart was not in these people, he began to look for a good time and get away from them... Raskolnichya the blood spoke... It is known that in all the times of wine farming, not a single schismatic (and there are many rich people among them) desecrated his hands with the profits from popular corruption. There was one... but the Old Believers considered him a leper.”

Zaletov. Another “master” in the dilogy is the Kazan merchant Gavrila Markelych Zaletov. No one handled settlements with workers more honestly than him; “Gavrila Markelych never came to the factory to shortchange a poor man.” He donated more than anyone else for the chapel, gilded the vestments on the icons, distributed alms to the poor every Saturday, and “every Sunday, every holiday” sent rolls of bread to the prison. P.I. Melnikov emphasizes the purely religious nature of his charity, his alms. Domostroy also prescribed giving alms to prisoners, looking into “trouble and suffering”, “all their needs” (prisoners) (Chapter 9). The traditions of Chapurin, Kolyshkin, Zaletov in the novel “On the Mountains” are continued by “merchants of a new type”, of a different generation, the Merkulovs and Vedeneevs.

Surmin. The episodic character of the novel “On the Mountains”, Ermilo Matveich Surmin, an icon painter who lives at the Komarovsky monastery, can be included in the group of “owners”. The essence of the relationship in his family is expressed by the writer with the help of a popular saying. Surmin has a large, but “conscientious, loving family” in which “there is always peace and shelter, peace and harmony, and God’s grace.” Only Surmin, a jack of all trades, alone knew how to stuff hoops throughout Komarov, paint icons, update or rewrite books, fish out a samovar, and repair shoes. His house and workshop were built based on the discreet architecture of hermitage buildings. “Ermilo Matveich held his family lovingly and menacingly, and ruled the household wisely,” sums up P.I. Melnikov, making the final touch to the image of his character.

For the most part, merchant families of the dilogy are distinguished by house-building orders in the family. Quotes from Domostroy are used by Anisya Terentyevna in a dispute with Daria Sergeevna about the upbringing of Dunya Smolokurova (“On the Mountains”). Domostroevsky relations also leave an imprint on the relationship between a man and a woman in the family. Here is how they are characterized using the example of Zaletov: “In family life, Gavrila Markelych was the householder of the old Russian covenant. He loved his wife, he loved his children in his own way. He always seemed cold towards them, he was even harsh for no reason at all, that’s how you live well. “The boss is the boss of everything,” he used to say, “my wife and children: I want their dear one, I want to nail them into a coffin.” Gavrila Markelych’s will was the law; he considered the slightest manifestation of his will in children to be disobedience, disrespect, entailing quick and severe punishment.”

The attitude of Patap Chapurin towards his family is similar. In his family there is a Domostroevsky hierarchy of relations between men and women. Sometimes Chapurin is rude to his wife: “Old people said not out of the wind: “A woman is like a bag: what you put in it, that’s what she carries.” And because you are a woman, it means you didn’t get it with your mind...” Aksinya Zakharovna, Chapurin’s wife, obeys him in everything, throws herself at his feet with a bow to beg for something. In a situation when her daughter Parasha and Vasily Borisych announce to Chapurin that they have secretly gotten married, she leaves it to her husband to decide their fate, and she herself avoids it. “As you know, breadwinner,” Aksinya Zakharovna said pitifully. “You are the head of the house - both you and I...” Flenushka, it would seem, the most freedom-loving of all the female heroines of the dilogy, also thinks in the same Domostroevsky way: “A husband should be a wife’s head, sir, but I will never tolerate this in my life...”. In these words she feels a premonition of her own fate.

The upbringing of children in an Old Believer merchant family is primarily religious. Education was conducted from liturgical books, at home or in monasteries.

Smolokurov (“On the Mountains”) says about Duna: “It’s not a good idea to take him to Moscow for a pension. [...] Nowadays this institution has even become like the merchants of the Old Believers, but I don’t agree with that... Because it’s just corruption! There she will learn to babble in different languages, play music, dance, and how to form fingers in prayer, and forget to cross her forehead with her hand... I have seen many of these, I don’t want my Dunya to be even a little bit like them. We need to teach her everything that follows ancient piety, and handicrafts too...” As a matter of fact, here he sets out Domostroy’s requirements for raising a girl: first of all, the foundations of Christian doctrine and women’s craft (handicrafts) (Domostroy, Chapter 19).

Children are obliged to obey their father's will (Domostroy, chapter 22). Alexey Lokhmaty does not discuss his father’s decision when he tells him to go to Chapurin as an employee. Parents themselves find suitors for their daughters, and they get married, also fulfilling their father’s will, often not according to their own, but solely according to their choice (however, the dilogy shows an alternative to this Domostroevsky prescription “wedding by passing”, a kind of national tradition). It is possible that there is a significant age difference between the spouses. The dilogy shows and contrasts two similar marriages. Patap Chapurin's adopted daughter Grunya marries Ivan Grigorievich Zaplatin. This is a happy, successful marriage. Here, in addition to monetary interest, the spouses are driven by love, the desire to raise and raise children (Zaplatin is a widower). Another unsuccessful marriage is the marriage of Marya Gavrilovna Zaletova with Makar Tikhonych Maslyanikov. Gavrila Markelych Zaletov agrees to give his daughter, betrothed to Maslyanikov’s son, to him only because he does not want to lose a rich dowry and a steamship as a gift for his father-in-law.

Maslyanikov’s act is the personification of the negative side of the Domostroev order in the family, when the moral component is forgotten. Marya Gavrilovna’s life turned out to be broken: “she sat in seclusion for eight years and never left the house.” Maslyanikov’s son died under unclear circumstances; perhaps he committed suicide.

The merchant's tyranny is shown in the system of antitheses. On the one hand, this story about the marriage of Maslyanikov and Zaletova is contrasted with the happy marriage of Grunya and Zaplatin, also based on Domostroy, on the other hand, as an immoral act and devoid of a spiritual principle, concern for one’s neighbor, it is contrasted with the special, ascetic and dead piety of Maslyanikov himself, whose “calluses... have grown on the folds of his front index fingers from bowing to the ground.”

At the same time, speaking about Domostroevsky education, it is difficult to disagree with the remark of A.N. Pypin, who drew attention to the fact that this upbringing, in fact, is described by fairly general, “vague features.” P.I. Melnikov tells with great enthusiasm how mothers Cleopatra and Izmaragda fought over the “Austrian priesthood”, talks about the hypocrisy of the hermits who, according to Chapurin, hoard gold in chests, about the dreary life of the hermitage (Flenushka’s stories about how the abbess forced her to read boring “Prologue” “at the weddings” and how the book was stolen, and how the abbess needs to leave from prayer, the squirrels sing “Hussar” instead of the boring stichera), etc. All this is summarized by Chapurin’s formula “in monasteries there is always sin with salvation They live like neighbors."

In such an environment, it is really difficult to get an education in the spirit of “indigenous Russian life.” The image of Russian patriarchy, which the Old Believers personify, comes from P.I. Melnikov in parallel with a satirical attitude towards the latter. The writer defends and idealizes patriarchy, but denies the Old Believers as a dying phenomenon. However, as a result, the image of the Old Believers “doubles”, combining opposite features that it is not clear how they get along together.

It is not clear, for example, how, having received a Domostroevsky-skete upbringing, Nastya suddenly, for no apparent reason, goes into an impermissible rapprochement with Alexey, Parasha - with Vasily Borisych, Matryona Maksimovna (the future mother of Manef) - with Yakim Stukolov (you can put in this row and Flenushka). The author does not explain this in any way. Yar-Khmel, a pagan symbol of passion and fullness of life, opposed to ascetic ideology, suddenly overturns the entire Domostroy.

It is also characteristic that “freedom of morals” is characteristic mainly of positive heroines, and it no longer introduces a negative connotation into their image. Formally, the satirical principle of opposition is observed: the behavior of the heroines does not correspond to the requirements of religious doctrine. But in this case P.I. Melnikov did not strive for a satirical effect. It is more important for him to show living human passion, the ability to love and respond to love, contrasting this with useless asceticism. In 1860 P.I. Melnikov wrote about Katerina from “The Thunderstorm” by A.N. Ostrovsky: “It seems to us that if Katerina had directly thrown herself into the arms of Boris and, with passionate babble on her lips, pressed him to her, the scene would have been incomparably more natural and the image of Katerina would have been much more graceful and perhaps even more moral(emphasis mine. - V.B.). Then she would have presented herself as having fallen in self-forgetfulness, in the intoxication of passion, then her very repentance during the thunderstorm would have been clearer and more striking.” Such are the heroines of P.I. Melnikova. By allowing them to “fall into self-forgetfulness,” the writer strives (no matter how paradoxical it may seem) to make them more moral. He approaches Domostroy selectively, dwelling on the requirements of running a household and raising children, but does not go deeper and does not analyze the real methods of their implementation (giving a child to a monastery, where hypocrisy reigns), indicating only the presence of Domostroy’s worldview in the minds of the heroes.

Chubalov. In his dilogy P.I. Melnikov looked for positive heroes in the Old Believer environment as the most resistant to the perception of innovations, religious and everyday, alien to the national ideal. Everything cut off from the national soil is doomed to moral decline. As already mentioned, other Melnikov heroes strive to strengthen the patriarchal foundations of life. Views of P.I. Melnikov are close to the views of A.N. Ostrovsky, who showed how in the era of the onset of new economic relations, folk, patriarchal morality dies. The positive Domostroevsky householder turns into a despot and tyrant.

A special type of owner is Gerasim Silych Chubalov. In one of his early articles (“Notes on the Nizhny Novgorod Province,” 1851), P.I. Melnikov spoke about the “old-timers” - Old Believers who collected ancient manuscripts and books, highly appreciating their services in preserving the handwritten cultural heritage of pre-Nikon Rus. “Now in a rare monastery you will find an old handwritten book - all this was sold out long ago by the former monks. The spread of schism during the reign of Peter I was especially disastrous for monastic libraries, when superstitions bought books consecrated by antiquity from monasteries for good money; according to the establishment of the states, the monks took whole cartloads of old books and icons from the monasteries, and sometimes exchanged them for fish, for bread, for cloth... Stories about this almost a hundred years later passed from mouth to mouth, and I myself happened to hear about it in some Russian monasteries. And you would go, at the Nizhny Novgorod fair or in Moscow, to a scribe, to a dealer in old printed and ancient written books - what monasteries, what churches you will not read in the notes on the leaves of such books, which have been sold from hand to hand for a hundred and fifty years. In the schismatic monasteries of the Nizhny Novgorod region, I rummaged through all the libraries, and everything that I found remarkable in them was all from monasteries and church book depositories.” The reverent attitude towards the ancient book will be emphasized in “Essays on Priesthood”, and then many years later it will receive an artistic refraction in the image of the “old man” Gerasim Chubalov from the novel “On the Mountains”. In the 13th chapter of the second part of the novel, we encounter the same denunciation of “our ancestors,” who, under Peter I, with childish enthusiasm, rushed “into the whirlpool of a new life” and began to look contemptuously at everything ancient, “grandfather’s.” The consequence of this, concludes P.I. Melnikov, there was a thoughtless waste of ancient objects and books. “Some of these frivolously squandered remnants of antiquity fell into the hands of the Old Believers and were thus saved for future science, for the future of art, from the destruction mercilessly prepared for them by the frivolity of the apes of the nobles.” Gerasim Chubalov is just such a bookseller, in whose shop at the fair “you won’t read what monasteries, what churches.” Introducing his hero into the novel, P.I. Melnikov accompanies his image with his reasoning, written in a journalistic style, about a criminally careless attitude towards ancient books, about the need to support the “old people” and not interfere with them. At the same time, in the novel there is no longer a reservation that the Old Believers destroyed old books that contradicted their religious views, which is contained in “Notes on the Nizhny Novgorod Province,” there are no labels and characteristics such as “superstitions.”

The theme of spiritual quest was heard in the second book of the dilogy (“On the Mountains”). Chapurin, Vasily Borisych, Alexey Lokhmaty, Manefa do not experience any wavering of faith. Kolyshkin moves away from the Old Believers, but the author does not explain how and why this happened. The heroes of the novel “On the Mountains,” Dunya Smolokurova and Gerasim Chubalov, on the contrary, search for “true faith” painfully and go to extremes in their search. Dunya ends up in the Khlyst sect, and Gerasim Chubalov, who has changed several religions, recognizes the only correct thing as blind nonsense - a belief that denies icons, the priesthood, and even the very possibility of saving the soul in the bosom of the church.

Religious quests are due to the natural inquisitiveness of the heroes; this is a national trait of the people. Both Dunya and Gerasim ask questions under the influence of the books they read.

At first, the image of Gerasim Chubalov bears some resemblance to the image of Grisha from Melnikov’s story of the same name. Only Chubalov is not as sketchy as Grisha. He is introduced into the narrative by the characteristic P.I. Melnikov's method - through a detailed excursion into the hero's past, the history of his family. But, like Grisha, Chubalov finds a spiritual mentor who radically changes his life. The village bookkeeper gives Chubalov books, which has a decisive influence on the development of the hero’s personality. Chubalov and Grisha are approximately the same age at the time of their escape from their parents' house. Both heroes are characterized by religious asceticism, which “dries up” the living impulses of the soul and the desire for good deeds. The motive of escaping from family and wandering is also inherent in the storyline of Gerasim Chubalov. The difference is that he leaves home only because of the desire to “know the true faith” without committing a crime.

The result of Chubalov’s spiritual quest is sad. “Hitherto he lived by his mind alone, his heart was silent, Gerasim never had any attachments. He sought truth to satisfy the inquisitiveness of his mind, but he did not seek love and goodness coming from the heart, and never even thought about them. He was a dry ascetic, everything human was alien to him, love never illuminated his hardened heart, which is why anger built its nest in him.”

Grisha is also a type of hero “with a hardened heart.” In the artistic world of P.I. Melnikov's religious asceticism is directly related to spiritual devastation. The story “Grisha” leads to this thought and ends. In the novel “On the Mountains,” the writer shows that the opposite movement is possible. Gerasim Chubalov frees himself from ascetic dogmas. He returns home with wealth, with cartloads of ancient books and, touched by his brother’s poverty, feeling compassion for him and his family, he realizes the gospel truth: “God is love.” He spent fifteen years searching for her. “I was looking for Vera, I ran around, I wandered all over the free world, but today I found her at home...”.

P.I. Melnikov speaks out in the novel (as in the story “Grisha”) against the denial of life in the name of blind asceticism. The basis of any faith is good deeds and love for people. Patap Chapurin and Gerasim Chubalov express this conviction to P.I. Melnikova. And Fr. adheres to exactly the same principles. Prokhor is a kind of antipode to priest Sushila, a positive hero from the non-Old Believer clergy.

The state of mind of Gerasim Chubalov, who returned home, is conveyed using metaphors, where the word “heart” is present with verbs of movement or state. If earlier “love did not illuminate his hardened heart,” now something completely different is happening to Chubalov: “he looked around at the hut he knew from childhood, his heart sank even more,” “the half-naked children completely melted Gerasim’s heart,” “Gerasim’s heart turned.” The mental upheaval taking place with Chubalov is also shown through his internal monologue.

The main truth of life (“You want mercy, mercy, O Lord, and not a black cassock, not renunciation of people, not a curse on the world you created!”) does not, however, negate Chubalov’s Domostroevsky worldview, it is even completely consistent with it, and dominates his actions and Chubalov's intentions. Raising his brother’s family, he strictly, in a businesslike manner, calculates income and expenses, not forgetting about the little things (Domostroy, chapter 30). He instructs children to learn to read and write, but in such a way that this does not come at the expense of their father’s work and the acquisition of any craft. The daughter-in-law is instructed not to fall into despair and to trust in God. Labor and faith are for Chubalov, as for Chapurin, the key to wealth. “Work hard, Gavrilushka,” Chubalov instructs his nephew, “but don’t spoil him, in time you will be as rich as Marko Danilych.” At the same time, Chubalov does not feel any envy of Smolokurov’s wealth.

In the merchant world, Chubalov occupies a special niche, becoming an “old man.” The difference between him and the other “owners” is only in the specifics of trade, the amount of available capital, and a special biography.

Smolokurov Patap Chapurin is close in his selfless love for his daughter Dunya. And he is the owner of the Domostroevsky type, which is manifested in solving issues of Dunya’s upbringing, in relationships with loved ones, in the principles of providing his daughter with a dowry. Domostroy, for example, prescribed that a dowry for daughters should be saved gradually, storing it in a separate chest, and not buying everything at once when the time came to give the daughter in marriage (Chapter 20). This is exactly what Smolokurov does. But he, unlike Chapurin, is an example of how patriarchal orders and Domostroy’s requirements for fair trade are being shaken, which are reduced from many private instructions to a short formula: “every person should live by blessed labor and righteous means” (Domostroy, ch. 25 ).

One of the episodes illustrating the crisis of patriarchal orders is the relationship between Smolokurov and Chubalov. In the antique shop, for example, we see that these are two people who think alike when the conversation between them is about old books or the merits of icons. Both understand their meaning, their real value. Icons and books are dear to Smolokurov, who knows the Psalter and Lives very well. Chapurin is equally sensitive to antique objects. A reverent attitude toward an old and soulful book reveals them to be Old Believers. But when it comes to bargaining, to money, Smolokurov puts Chubalov on the brink of ruin, fully aware of this. In trade, a different principle is important for him: “A merchant, like a Sagittarius, is waiting for a mistake... A matchmaker is a matchmaker, a brother is a brother, and money is not relatives... If I miss an opportunity to warm up at the expense of my neighbor, they will call me a fool.” Smolokurov acts according to the same formula when planning a scam with seal oil. The new type of commercial relations and the new passage of time do not yet have a significant impact on the family life of the “owners”. However, the sudden blow and death of Smolokurov sound like an extra warning: those who break away from the patristic principles of house-building, management, and trade, striving for profit by any means, easily risk becoming a victim of the same “predators.”

Manefa. It should be noted that thriftiness is also inherent in Manefa, a heroine who seems to be far from everything worldly. Meanwhile, V.P. Ryabushinsky points to the possibility of a rare combination of “saint” and “master” - a type of people for whom worldly goods have no meaning and who at the same time are good organizers of work, thrifty, businesslike, hard-working. “The first abbots of the old northern Russian monasteries were an example of this combination.” Manefa is an example of such a rare combination. Characteristics of V.P. Ryabushinsky emphasizes some of the nuances of her character, conceived by P.I. Melnikov, reveals his national characteristics. It is important to keep in mind that Manefa’s thriftiness is not just one individual trait, but a character trait enshrined and approved in the Orthodox tradition, which the abbot of a monastery can and should have.

Manefa’s spiritual authority is visible in her acquaintance with Vasily Borisych, whom she “looked at like a queen,” at the council on the issue of recognition of the Belokrinitsky church hierarchy, in relations with mothers, and in many other episodes. She has a firm, even harsh hand, a stern will (“I won’t look at the fact that they are old ladies of the cathedral: I’ll put them both in the chapel to bow and at the meal... I’ll lock them in the closet!..”). But managing a monastery involves not only maintaining order, observing the rules and discipline, but also various economic “trifles”.

“And what about the ham, mother? - asked the treasurer. - Throw the dogs or send them back? If only the worldly orphans could receive some money, then word would spread about the monastery.

The same thriftiness is visible in the order regarding candles in the episode described a few lines above the above quote. There is no place in the monastery that would remain outside the master's sight of Manefa.

“Did they freeze cockroaches in the barn?

They froze out, mother, they froze out. “We just decided yesterday,” answered Mother Sofia.

Has Pestravka calved?

Mother brought a heifer, and Chernogubka brought a bull.

And Chernogubka? Hm! Now what do we have, sixteen pregnant women? - asked Manefa" (“In the Woods”).

Further questions continue: was there a lot of butter, did they buy boots for the workers? Using a similar technique - mothers' answers to Manefa's questions - P.I. Melnikov also shows the practical acumen of his heroine in the eighth chapter of the second part of the first book of the novel “In the Forests” (“Are the gardens dry?” “Did they carry manure to the ridges?” “Are the log houses ready for seedlings?”). Housekeeping orders alternate with questions: from beekeeping to gardening.

Manefa’s thriftiness is manifested in a conversation with Marya Gavrilovna (“In the Woods,” book 1, part 2, chapter 12). Manefa advises her how to enroll as a merchant, which guild is better, and talks about the high cost of recruitment receipts. However, Marya Gavrilovna refuses to bless “announce capital, start steamships, look for a clerk”: “Vanity!.. God will bless you for a good deed...”. Refusal to bless does not mean condemnation. The point is a combination of the heavenly and the earthly; Manefa needs to distance himself from participation in worldly affairs and not take any, even the slightest, part in them. In addition, she is well aware that entrepreneurship and “good deeds” often go separately.

Manefa treats the management of the monastery as the management of a family. She speaks about this in another dialogue with Marya Gavrilovna: “After all, is it really an easy matter to rule a monastery? I have a family, you know what it’s like: almost a hundred people - think of everything, have everything to drink, have food to eat, keep order, and look after everyone. No, it’s not easy to hold the boss...”

P.I. Melnikov showed Manefa not only as a person who, due to religious beliefs, had withdrawn from everything worldly, but also as a “Russian master.” This helped to make her image multifaceted, to show her complex character and the best national traits inherent in her.

To summarize, we can once again recall the heroes of “Privalov’s Millions” - the work that is closest in time to the dilogy. But those heroes are Old Believers nominatively. D.N. Mamin-Sibiryak did not set out to describe the Ural factory owners as a special type of Old Believers entrepreneurs; To solve his artistic problem, he did not need to study ethnographic features, Ural folklore, or deep immersion in everyday life. The peculiarities of the Old Believer worldview do not appear in any way in the thinking of Sergei Privalov or Vasily Bakharev. At P.I. For Melnikov, it’s the other way around. The actions of the heroes, united by us into one group of “Russian masters,” are dictated by the Old Believer concept of attitude to work, to business, based on Domostroevsky principles. Work is perceived as a soul-saving activity, as a duty to God, the “owners” are proactive, conscientious, responsible, convinced of the need to use part of the funds for alms, for the religious community to which they belong. Donations for monasteries are mentioned quite often in the dilogy. Old Believer moral and ethical principles, however, are not idealized; they pass the tough test of time, which is not easy to resist. The dilogy shows the weakening of these principles (Smolokurov, Alexey Lokhmaty). The danger of blindly following religious instructions, their distorted interpretation, and the absolutization of asceticism are shown (Maslyanikov, Chubalov). The images of the “owners”, despite the peculiarities of P.I.’s personal view. Melnikov’s views on the Old Believers (what L.M. Bagretsov called “partisanship,” calling for it to be taken into account when analyzing works) are written artistically convincingly thanks to the writer’s deep penetration into the particular psychology of the characters, the ability to convey the Old Believer worldview, and excellent knowledge of everyday life. The fact that the heroes of P.I. Melnikov are shown as bearers of the Old Believer worldview, does not allow us to accept the classification of L.M. Bagretsov (random representatives of the “schism”, to which Chapurin is classified, adherents of ancient piety, transitional types (Old Believers “out of habit”).

Other types of Old Believers in the dilogy

The character is important P.I. Melnikov not as a participant in the plot action, but rather as a means for revealing artistic content, for recreating and revealing not only individual character, but a broader, significant, integral image - the image of the people, nation, population of the Volga region. Let us illustrate this idea based on the storyline associated with the search for gold and Stukolov’s visit to Chapurin (“In the Woods,” book 1, part 1, chapter 12).

Snezhkovs. This is a type of Old Believers, opposite to some extent to Chapurin. P.I. Melnikov called them in one of his memos “schismatics with fawn gloves” (or “quasi-educated schismatics”). The glove became the defining sign of this category of people from the urban Old Believers. Their distinctive feature, as the writer strives to show, is their disdain for patriarchal customs, legends and rituals, which entails the “adopting” of “foreign” customs. “Strict religious rules did not bother them. They did not believe that there was a lot of sin in foreign clothes, in clubs, theaters, and masquerades...” Snezhkov the son even allows himself to smoke. The Snezhkovs’ justification formula conceals an attitude towards the outside world that is alien to Chapurin: “... it is impossible for our merchant brother, especially the young ones, to observe the old customs... And what a sin... If only the soul were pure and holy.” Such a position causes sharp rejection by Chapurin and is regarded as irreligion. Chapurin is ridiculed and bewildered by Snezhkov's father's story that he sent his children to a boarding school. Here Chapurin sees another violation of the Domostroevsky commandments of education. The description of Snezhkov’s son’s clothing (a smart short-skirted frock coat, a vest with a watch chain, “linen... of snow-white purity”) emphasizes that both he and his father belong to a completely different type of Old Believers. In the portrait description of Snezhkov Jr. P.I. Melnikov also mentions the glove. It should be noted that when Alexey Lokhmaty becomes a precocious rich man and puts Chapurin in a difficult financial situation, then gloves appear in the description of his clothes. “He was dressed up like he was in a picture. Putting his hat on the table and carelessly throwing down his gloves, with clumsy swagger, he approached Patap Maksimych.”

In the dialogue between Chapurin and Snezhkov, the author contrasts the urban (civilizational principle) and the rural (folk, patriarchal). “After all, we are gray men, unpolished, not accustomed to the city order... Our business is forestry, we live with wolves and bears,” Patap Chapurin seems to apologize (using the word “man” again), at the same time making it clear how far away his family is from the Snezhkov family. These are different worlds. Chapurin himself mocked those who elevated the number of buttons on a caftan to an article of faith; he did not even see heresy in shaving a beard (although the latter is strange for an Old Believer). But everything that the Snezhkovs consider acceptable is close to a violation of the ethical prohibitions that are mandatory for Chapurin. And therefore the Snezhkovs receive a decisive refusal in their matchmaking to his daughter Nastya.

Chapurin sneers at the Snezhkovs, while Stukolov’s characterizations are permeated with the open pathos of invective. The Snezhkovs are leaving. Soon, Chapurin also leaves with Stukolov in search of gold. In this case, the plot action unfolds backwards for some time, going into the past. The author's long excursion-retreat is devoted to the history of Manefa, her life before accepting monasticism, and her relationship with Stukolov.

On the road, Chapurin meets many people. This is Stukolova's comrade Dyukov, Uncle Onufriy - the owner of the foresters' artel, then Artemy - the artel's guide, Silanty, the abbot of the Krasnoyarsk monastery, Abbot Mikhail and his brethren, Father Spiridonius, and finally Kolyshkin. Everyone except Kolyshkin will no longer appear on the pages of the duology when the storyline related to the search for gold ends. However, this kaleidoscope of secondary and tertiary persons (if they are defined in this way by the degree of participation in the overall plot) is necessary for the writer for a complete, artistically accurate portrayal of the population of the Volga region. The author's digression in the 15th chapter (“In the Forests,” part 1, book 1) introduces the peculiarities of artel logging, the history, economy, and characteristics of the region. Then the relationships in the artel are described. The guide Artemy turns out to be an expert in Razin's songs and ancient legends. Further, the road leads travelers to a special world - the Krasnoyarsk monastery.

The description of the journey to the lake, in the waters of which the city of Kitezh disappeared, also includes many episodic characters necessary to recreate a complete picture of the Old Believer population of the region. On this journey, another love affair begins (Vasily Borisych and Parasha). The characters replace each other: the Ulanger old-timer, the former nobleman Elder Joseph, the old man reading the “Kitezh Chronicler”, nameless characters, the wanderer Bartholomew, whom “the executioner kissed on the forehead with an iron”, Arkady’s mother and finally Marko Danilych Smolokurov and Dunya - the central characters of the second novel , "On the Mountains".

Episodic characters are unique and individual, sometimes they are not directly related to the main storyline, lead the narrative aside, and provoke numerous authorial digressions. Episodic heroes P.I. Melnikov is nuanced by the characteristics of the main characters. They are sometimes depicted in detail, using seemingly redundant details. At the same time, many of them have a special speech face, a special manner of behavior. The author of the dilogy uses folklore means to create and individualize episodic characters.

Yakim Stukolov. One of the most controversial heroes of the dilogy is Stukolov. This is due not only to the role of the adventurer assigned to him, but also to the peculiarities of the selection of material to create his image. These are, firstly, Old Believer legends and real facts about the “search for the bishopric” in Egypt, on the Euphrates and the Opon kingdom (Japan). In the mouth of Stukolov, in his stylized monologue, all these legends and stories about wanderings are united. The fate of Stukolov, on the one hand, is the fate of many Old Believers-ascetics, convinced that somewhere in distant countries there live bishops who have not betrayed the “ancient piety.” On the other hand, the image of Stukolov was based on rumors that appeared in print about the search for gold by the Old Believer Bishop Sophrony. Stukolov conveys them as actual facts. And he himself acts as Sophronius’ envoy. The selection of material was influenced by the commitment of P.I. Melnikov to the use of unverified rumors, which appeared in “Essays on Clericalism.” Here this approach to the material was “melted” into artistic quality and affected the creation of the image of Stukolov. In general, all his asceticism may seem to be a pretense, the story of his travels may seem like a fiction (perhaps even against the author’s wishes). In general, it is impossible to understand whether this is true or made up by Stukolov, whether he attributes to himself the exploits of the Old Believer ascetics who were looking for pious bishops, or whether he really experienced and endured all the trials he talks about. If P.I. Melnikov wanted to show in the image of Yakim Stukolov a man woven from contradictions; he should, in our opinion, reveal their struggle in the hero’s consciousness, in his reflection. This is not the case. The absence of internal reflection when combining opposite qualities of character lies in his peculiarity as the hero of the dilogy.

Vasily Borisych. The image of Vasily is based on a specific prototype, and at the same time it is a stereotypical figure - a caricatured type of Old Believer, taken from numerous anti-Old Believer writings written with the aim of discrediting specific individuals. You can remember the image of Fr. Ioann Yastrebov from “Essays on Priesthood” by P.I. himself. Melnikova. In him, as shown above, two features are sharpened: piety (and, as a result, special weight and honor in the Old Believer environment) and weakness for the female sex. Vasily Borisych is the same. Concluding the novel “On the Mountains,” the writer mentions that Vasily Borisych broke with the Old Believers. However, this did not do him any good. The image of the Old Believer scribbler did not acquire any positive qualities, which is a violation of the ideological canon of anti-Old Believer journalism; a formal transition from one religion to another does not mean a person’s spiritual rebirth.

As a representative of the Orthodox Old Believers, Vasily Borisych speaks sarcastically about the Old Believers and Old Belief in general. Initially, he is introduced into the plot outline of the dilogy as an Old Believer apologist, an active supporter of the Archdiocese of Moscow and All Rus' (Belokrinitsky hierarchy) and it is in this capacity that he passes through the pages of the entire dilogy. The author especially emphasizes his weakness for “sinful female talk” and that everyday impracticality and laziness that are not characteristic of Patap Chapurin. Of course, this is no “master”. “Having found himself among working people, the red-tongued Rogozhsky Vitya felt himself alien to them, a completely superfluous person. And melancholy overwhelmed him, such melancholy that he could at least put his hands on himself” (“On the Mountains”).

In the novel “In the Woods” there is an episode when Vasily Borisych tells Chapurin about his trip to Belaya Krinitsa (book 1, part 3, chapter 9). It is based on the anonymous article “How we went for peace to Belaya Krinitsa” from the “Russian Messenger” for 1864 (No. 3), which was not previously noted by researchers of P.I. Melnikova. Its author is Vasily Borisov - the prototype of Vasily Borisych - a former Old Believer who joined the “Great Russian Church”. In "Russian Messenger" he talked about the trip with obvious rejection of the Old Believers. This story was transferred by P.I. Melnikov in the novel, put it into the mouth of the hero, who does not yet think of breaking away from the Old Believers; on the contrary, he represents a type of active figure.

Certain episodes of the article from the Russian Messenger are easily recognizable in the story of Vasily Borisych. As an example, just compare the two passages.

How we went for peace to Belaya Krinitsa // Russian Bulletin. 1864. No. 3. P. 63 :

“...Suddenly a pale and worried Father Pavel comes to us. “You,” he says, “need to get out of here as quickly as possible: they have come for you from the mandate (the footnote below explains that this is an Austrian police official, like a police officer in Russia. - V.B.) Two hayduks are demanding that you be extradited. “They say you have two Russian didaskals who have come to teach you how to cook myrrh. What should we do with you now? I don't know! They stand at the porch and don’t leave a single step! Where should we take you? There’s nowhere to hide, if they go looking, they’ll find them.” I was dumbfounded, and Zhikharev, without thinking for a long time, grabbed someone’s white coat with a hat, ran out of the meal, in one minute jumped over the fence that was almost nearby, and disappeared somewhere in the garden. Meanwhile, I stand neither alive nor dead.

Well,” Father Pavel told me, “now you have only one remedy, before you enter here, we will put a kamilavka and a hood on you, then, probably, they will not recognize you, they will mistake you for our brother; that's the end of it...

But how will it be possible to take off the monastic dress after that? - I asked in a voice trembling with fear.

No, you’ll have to get a haircut,” Father Pavel answered seriously, this is obviously a calling for you from above, from God himself; Otherwise, the monastic dress on you will have to be burned.

“This is the situation! - I thought and almost, for fear’s sake, did not dare to become a monk; but thank you, one of the brethren remembered the gate through which one could go into the garden and which was completely forgotten in a hurry. And so, instead of a robe, they put on me the same zipun that my resourceful comrade had put on, and escorted me to the gate. After walking a few steps, I saw a dilapidated gazebo, from which someone was calling me in a cautious voice. It turned out that my clever comrade had disappeared there; I also directed my steps towards him.”

P. I. Melnikov, story by Vasily Borisych (“In the Woods”) : “...we are sitting in the cellar, talking with the fathers there. Suddenly Father Pavel comes in saying that he has found the Metropolitan, but there is no face on him... “Trouble,” he says, they are looking for you, the mandator of the Haiduks sent them, they are standing at the porch, not moving a step. And the mandator, in their way, is like our policeman, and the haiduks are like sotskie, only more terrible... I sat down, well, I think the hour of God’s will has come - now the music is on my feet and to Moscow... Zhikharev was bolder than me , and besides, he’s drunk, even though he’s Passionate, kicks the floor in his teeth, and, not to say a bad word, swings out the window... He just grunted, jumped off, and, getting up, it didn’t hurt so much that he went to the monastery garden... And they have a garden huge and dense - it won’t be long before you find a person in that garden. But I don’t have the courage, I can’t move from the spot, my legs are like whips, they’ve completely collapsed... I looked out the window - from the ground high - you’ll kill yourself... It’s only possible for a drunk to jump like Zhikharev, because the Lord has his own way to show mercy to every drunkard, if only he piously abides in the holy faith, he assigns an angel for safety and protection [...] Father Paul pleases: Since the haiduks, he says, have not risen, put on a hood and a kamilavka, they will think - the local monk, they will not recognize. ..” - “And then what? - I ask Father Pavel, trembling with fear, - after all, I say, monasticism is not removed, after that you will have to get a haircut...” Well? answers Father Pavel, “that won’t be the case, tomorrow we will clothe you in the image of an angel...” What to do here? choose: music for your feet or a hood for your head... And the haiduks are already in the hallway. There is a noise there, the fathers persuade them, and they rush into the cellar by force... I made up my mind... Well, I think: “Thy will be done, O Lord...” And I was just about to take up the kamilavka, but the cellarer’s father remembered - God grant him good health and save his soul, - he remembered that they had made a loophole into the garden from the cellar closet... Me there; and the loophole is narrow, even though I’m skinny, they forced me through, they tore off my whole caftan, it hurt my hands and my face [...] I’m in the garden. I’ll hide, I think, somewhere far away, in the very thicket... Lo and behold, there’s a crumbling barn standing there, and from there someone in a cautious, quiet voice calls me, calling me by name... I look, and it’s Zhikharev, my comrade: and hops jumped off him... I climbed up to him... “Here, brother,” I tell him, what are the consequences, and in Moscow they said that there is freedom here...” - “Yes, yes,” says Zhikharev, - I need to get out of here as quickly as possible, and the main reason, I hurt myself badly, is the window, blow it like a mountain, high, and under the window the devil managed to pile them with bricks. .."".

It is easy to see how P.I. Melnikov elaborates on what is stated in the article “How we went for peace to Belaya Krinitsa,” adding details aimed at creating a comic effect. Zhikharev gets drunk in the monastery precisely during Holy Week (the rapprochement of contrasts), and under the window through which he jumps, “the devil managed” to lay bricks on the monks. The reasoning of Vasily Borisych (seemingly a serious scribbler) is ridiculous that “The Lord, in His mercy, assigns an angel to every drunkard, if only he piously abides in the holy faith.” These are the fabrications of P.I. Melnikov, attributed to the Old Believer hero. There is an anecdotal situation when it is necessary to burn the monastic robe on Vasily Borisych. It is also characteristic that the story of the Rogozhsky ambassador is full of vernacular (anbarishka, floors in your teeth, blow him with a mountain), the teller suddenly begins to express himself in thieves' jargon (music to his feet). Moreover, this expression, characteristic of the lower classes of society, is contrasted with religious vocabulary denoting the acceptance of monasticism (the same convergence of contrasts): “music on the feet or a hood on the head.” The reworking of the article from the Russian Messenger consisted not only of finding additional comic details, but of giving the syntax a colloquial character. This story had the goal of showing the Old Believer’s worldview and attitude towards religious subjects in a satirical manner.

The image of Vasily Borisych, on the one hand, expresses the attitude of P.I. Melnikov to the church leaders of his contemporary Old Believers, which, in the writer’s opinion, was doomed to inevitable extinction. On the other hand, in this image the writer embodied qualities that were unusual for those “masters” with whom he associated the development of the country, which makes Vasily Borisych in common with Stukolov. P.I. Melnikov uses techniques for creating comic, anecdotal situations, relies on unverified information, on anti-Old Believer journalism, when he needs to show a hero he does not like.

Alexey Lokhmaty. The character’s character and the crisis of his worldview are conveyed by P.I. Melnikov, in particular, through the vocabulary used by the hero. The changes taking place in the hero’s life also determine his speech personality. One example is Alexey Lokhmaty, who wanted to become a merchant, at any cost to make capital. It is noted how the author's attitude towards Alexei changes as he climbs up the social ladder, resulting in a separation from his parents' foundations. It is noted how proverbs and sayings disappear from Alexei’s speech as he takes Marya Gavrilovna’s capital into his hands. But their place is taken by a different vocabulary, still alien to Alexey, not fully understood or assimilated by him.

While success has not yet come to him, Alexey follows the advice to listen to how merchants talk to each other, so as not to seem like a black sheep among them. Little by little he turns into a money-grubber, and P.I. Melnikov saturates his speech with a special, distorted vocabulary, reflecting the moral decline of the hero, his “exorbitant arrogance of his precocious wealth.”

“This drink is the most interesting, “chikolat,” he said casually to Chapurin. - How to eat a delicacy! Try it, most respected!.. The most excellent taste, I will report to you... The very best - a la vanilla. It seems they don’t cook it here. Try [...] Yes, try it. There is nothing sinful in this chicolat.”

“Shenpansky,” said Alexey and collapsed on the sofa” (“In the Woods”).

“For mercy, most respected Mr. Chapurin, how is it possible to forget your bread and salt?.. In those days, I was also among the peasantry, I didn’t have any avantage behind me, but I can’t forget that...” (“On the Mountains” ).

The combination of colloquial vocabulary and distorted barbarisms (“hosha” - “avantazhu”, “in this chicolate”) subtly conveys the hero’s desire and inability to enter the “high society”. He strives to resemble a noble person in manners, in clothing, in speech. Speech characteristics are evidence of Alexey’s strong connection with the past. It is clear that true nobility, like the ability to be a master, lies not in words or manners, but in deeds. The contrast between word and deed characterizes Alexei’s spiritual decline, caused by the craving for acquisitiveness. P.I. Melnikov managed to satirically sharpen the image of a hero who has broken away from his fatherly roots, faith and commandments, and his merchant failure. The dilogy shows not only the writing skills and observation skills of P.I. Melnikov, but his ability to use the rich lexical arsenal of the Russian language.

Alexey, in essence, is the same adventurer as Stukolov. He makes money without violating the legal law, but violating the moral law. Of course, faith turns for Alexei into a set of ridiculous rules. This is how he sets them out in a conversation with Kolyshkin (to whom Chapurin reveals his own creed) and his English guest: “... First of all, pray with two fingers, the second thing is not to go to church, the third thing is not to smoke tobacco and don't smell. What else?... Yes... that means don’t scrape your beards, don’t trim your mustache... It’s also not good to walk around in a German dress.” Not only did he not grasp the meaning of these regulations, but he was also confused in the concepts of “rite,” “rule,” and “canons.”

The long monologue of Tryphon Shaggy in a conversation with Nikifor Zakharych (the brother of Chapurin’s wife) in the novel “On the Mountains” (book 2, chapter 6) sounds like a verdict on Alexei. Having become rich, he did not even consider it necessary to take care of his sister, brothers, and father, whom he did not want to let onto the threshold of his “palace.” The spiritual fall of the hero is preceded by a break with the patriarchal tradition: “he got married without parental blessing” - Tryphon Shaggy drops these words for a reason. Nikifor Zakharych sums up Tryphon’s story about Alexei: “He was always dissolute, he always knew how to pay for good with evil.” In general, the theme of the “fathers” of the Old Believers and the “children” of the Old Believers in the novel is the subject of a separate study.

Alexey could have been a good owner, but he could not stand the test of wealth. The bitter thought that money divides people can be heard in the monologue of Trifon Shaggy: “A big ship has a long voyage, but what are we?.. Therefore, by the very nature of friendship and friendship, I don’t get to be with Patap Maksimych, but bow to him and curry favor in every possible way.” Don't want" . But in the same monologue there is a conviction that with real faith a radical rebirth of a person is possible, no matter how he falls, that with real faith one can endure all trials. This is Nikifor Zakharych, a drunkard whom Chapurin kept with him out of compassion. “You were a good-for-nothing person, and bad things happened to you,” Tryphon tells him. - And now, as I hear, there are few smart, good people like you in the world. And if the power of the Lord departs from anyone, there is now an enemy. And as soon as he wields his cursed power over any person, be he the kindest, the best, he will become the most evil and notorious enemy of all that is good.” Note that this spiritual rebirth of the hero, which the writer, in fact, only mentions in the novel “On the Mountains,” takes place without a break with the Old Believers, without repentance for belonging to it.

Thus, the “owners” of P.I. Melnikova are not just businesslike people with money, their life and business are based on a religious attitude towards wealth, and this religiosity is not a set of rules, but a special moral code, serving the good principle of being, wherever a person is.

Tags: “Russian Messenger”, Leonid Bagretsov, style dominants, Russian master, national ideal, artistic depiction of the Old Believers

Bochenkov V.V. P.I. Melnikov (Andrey Pechersky): worldview, creativity, Old Believers. - Rzhev: Margarit, 2008. - 348 pages with illustrations.

This book was created before our eyes. My comrades and I are celebrating someone’s birthday or discussing “ways to save the Fatherland” over a cup of tea, while Vitya is nearby at the computer typing on the keyboard. We are going to the cinema, Vitya is going to the Lenin Library. We are going to an “action” (cultural or social), and our comrade is going to the “cell”, to the archives. I completely drifted away from the team.

For nine years, no less, this whole story continued. And here is the result. A beautiful volume, decorated with floral and floral patterns - the cover design uses elements of the publisher's binding of the first complete edition of the works Melnikov-Pechersky. I wonder what our Vitya wrote here? Everything was against him: journalistic work, our gatherings, an unsettled life, the state’s disregard for science, especially this kind of Russian-humanitarian science. That is, the book was written not thanks to, but in spite of. Against the stream. With some even challenging “public” fashion.

However, for friends he is Vitya, and for the literary community he is Viktor Vyacheslavovich Bochenkov, Candidate of Philological Sciences. And the book, by the way, as you might guess, grew out of a dissertation, whose modest limits did not fit the huge volume of “shoveled” literature, everything that was read and thought about on the topic. And, opening the publication, it was interesting to see: had our comrade fallen into scientificism, gone into subjectivism, rushed to present bold hypotheses that were not supported by facts? Or maybe, to bring the book closer to the format of the “Life of Remarkable People” series, he fairly fictionalized the narrative? For ease of reading and attracting readers. Moreover, Viktor Bochenkov began with prose while studying at the Literary Institute, and his successes along this path were even awarded a laureate for the best story.

But the book about Melnikov-Pechersky was written in the most traditional genre - scientific work. True, the love of literature, the taste for words cannot be hidden: this monograph meets the highest requirements for books of this kind (scientific apparatus, references, citation, argumentation, etc.), but still this is a living narrative, “the author’s investigation,” and therefore the reader will not encounter here dead words from the vocabulary of “literary scholars of recent times.” There is no arrogance here, no scientific swagger, no sticking out of oneself and one’s “concepts” (as a rule, very poor), no complex verbal constructions designed to demonstrate the author’s “learning”, but in fact clearly demonstrating the inability to write simply about the simple and complex. The author manages to maintain the energy of the word and interest in the subject throughout the entire book (22 printed pages!), and this, of course, is transmitted to the reader.

The main content of the monograph consists of 13 self-sufficient essays-chapters (“To serve the Tsar and Russia is to serve God: P.I. Melnikov is a monarchist”, “Should we sympathize with the “self-burners”? The role of the tragic and the motive of the “repentant sinner” in works denouncing the Old Believers” and etc.). However, the completeness of each essay does not interfere with the integral perception of the book, in which the life, worldview, and work of Melnikov-Pechersky are presented, perhaps for the first time, with such exhaustive completeness. This major writer of the 19th century can hardly be called the “favorite” of our philological researchers. “Advanced” science, as it happened in Rus', often had a liberal tint. Melnikov was a convinced and sincere monarchist, and towards the end of his life he came to the idea that the Old Believers could be a reliable support for the throne. As for Soviet science, Melnikov was not entirely at home here either - a close analysis of his work inevitably led to religious issues, which was not at all welcomed at the time of the atheistic state. So the researchers limited themselves to the “system of images”, “the problem of poetics”, “peculiarities of vocabulary”, “extended syntactic positions in syntax” and other, frankly speaking, little things - a complete image of the writer did not emerge in these fragmentary topics.

But Melnikov-Pechersky waited for his real researcher! By the way, this story contains a plot for a “philological novel” - how and why Viktor Bochenkov turned to the writer’s Old Believer epic, how it changed his own life, etc. But let’s leave this twist for other reviewers. Let's just say that with great interest we read essays about how the official for special assignments of the Ministry of Internal Affairs P.I. Melnikov began his career as a “persecutor” of Old Believers, how he “collected material” for his future books, compiling, in modern terms, analytical notes, how he edited the newspaper “Russian Diary” (wonderful name!), with what reverence and respected Moscow, the Kremlin...

However, not only Moscow of that time, but also the portrait of Russia in the second half of the 19th century did not go unnoticed by the author. A special highlight of the book are the essays that expand the perception of the stated topic. For example, a story about the creative fate of the perfect now forgotten writer Fyodor Livanov. Like Melnikov-Pechersky, he created his works based on the material of the Old Believers. Livanov did not disdain “borrowing” from other people’s novels, and his literary path and scandalous fame very much remind us of some of the modern “writer’s stars”! The reading is very instructive. And the essay about the underground Old Believer printing houses in the Kaluga region is, in fact, a detective chapter in domestic book publishing. First revealed to us, like the creative path of Fyodor Livanov, by the conscientious researcher Viktor Bochenkov.

Of course, any honest review of a book involves criticism of the author. We would venture to assume that significant comments will not appear soon. Because a discerning critic needs to know about as much about the subject of research as the author knows. But today, Viktor Bochenkov’s book is the absolute pinnacle in the study of the life and work of Melnikov-Pechersky. Of course, there will be additions, “touches to the portrait”, and the discovery of new archival documents. But he, “our Vitya,” did the fundamental work. (Although we did our best to interfere with this, and often said: “Stop doing nonsense, who needs it!”).

There is another powerful theme in this monograph in which the author will be difficult to surpass. Literary erudition is one thing, but a thorough knowledge of the history of the Old Believers is quite another. Meanwhile, Viktor Bochenkov prepared for publication documents on the history of the Russian Orthodox Old Believer Church of the 19th-20th centuries. for the magazine “In Time It...” (4 issues). And of course, "historicism" his approach to the life and work of Melnikov-Pechersky is obvious. And in the monograph itself the image of the “Old Believers archipelago” emerges before the reader. He may be even more attractive than the image of Melnikov-Pechersky. The author of the duology “In the Forests” and “On the Mountains” was an intelligent man, a statesman, and constantly (like us at our gatherings) thought about the fate of the Fatherland, in which issues of the church and religiosity, power and social order were paramount. Melnikov-Pechersky believed that over time, with the development of education, the Old Believers would join the official church. Error? Maybe. But the fact that “I see the main stronghold of the future of Russia in the Old Believers” is perhaps not such a misconception of the writer? In our fluid era, when “opinions”, party preferences, principles and beliefs change so easily, when they increasingly say that the church should “modernize” in order to be “closer to the people”, we still want some fundamentality of ideas, deeds and actions. Yes, of course, the split is a tragic page in the history of our country. But who knows, if it weren’t for this Old Believer tenacity in standing up for the Old Orthodox faith, perhaps our united church would have “modernized” at an even greater speed (following the example of the Catholic Church)?

Of course, these issues are not discussed in the monograph, but our author’s book not only informs, but also makes you think (which is rare even for scientific publications). Therefore, we thank the author for his work: it is a good job! It will be useful to everyone who is interested in Russian literature and Russian history... Let's also hope that the hardworking author will deign to have a friendly feast with his comrades - now “our Vitya” has a really good reason for this!

Pavel Ivanovich Melnikov (Andrei Pechersky) is an outstanding Russian writer of the 19th century, who clearly reflected the life and character of the Russian people in his works.
Although critics often classify him as a “second tier” of national classics, his novels “In the Woods” and “On the Mountains” enjoy continued popularity among readers.
He was called both an ethnographer writer and an official on schism issues who accidentally fell into literature, and a deep expert on the history of Russia and the Russian church schism.

As the critic L. Anninsky wrote: “Pechersky’s novels are a unique and at the same time universally significant experience of Russian national self-knowledge. And therefore they transcend the boundaries of their historical time, transcend the boundaries of the author’s worldview, transcend the boundaries of museum local history and break into the vastness of popular reading, to which there is no end in sight.”

Pavel Ivanovich Melnikov was born in 1818 in Nizhny Novgorod. In 1834, he entered Kazan University at the Faculty of Literature, which he graduated at the age of eighteen. After graduating from the university, he was left at the faculty to prepare for a professorship, but for too free behavior he was sent to Perm (in 1838), where he entered the service as a teacher of history and statistics. He devoted his time not only to teaching, but also to studying the Ural region, and became acquainted with the life of the Russian people.

While traveling around the province, he wrote “Travel Notes,” which appeared in print at the end of 1839.
Returning to Nizhny Novgorod, Melnikov deals primarily with Russian history, studies the archives of the Archaeographic Commission, and talks with experts on the Russian schism.
In 1849, Melnikov met V.I. Dahl, who settled in Nizhny Novgorod. Dahl advised Melnikov to take the pseudonym Andrei Pechersky, since the writer lived on Pecherskaya Street, in Andreev’s house. Under the influence of Dahl, Melnikov sent the story “The Krasilnikovs” that he had previously written to the magazine “Moskovityanin”.
A special place in the life of Melnikov-Pechersky was occupied by the study of the schism, both book study and direct observation of the life of schismatics whom he encountered during his trips around Russia. For a long time he was a government official dealing with the problems of the split.
At first, the schism and the Old Believers interested Melnikov as a state, political and social problem. He even suggested that if Napoleon, instead of turning the Kremlin cathedrals into stables, had announced the restoration of the old faith and old way of life in Russia, the war of 1812 would have taken a completely different course.

In 1852-1853 he led a statistical expedition to study the Nizhny Novgorod province. Melnikov-Pechersky collected enormous vital material and became the greatest expert on contemporary folk life and language.
Gradually, Melnikov-Pechersky’s interest in the Old Believers turned from the interest of a government official into the interest of a historian and writer.

Melnikov-Pechersky became most famous for his dilogy “In the Forests” and “On the Mountains,” published in the “Russian Bulletin” in 1871-1875. (novel “In the Woods”) and in 1875-1881. (novel “On the Mountains”). The writer began work on the novel “In the Woods” in 1968.

As the researcher of Melnikov-Pechersky’s creativity V.F. writes. Sokolov: “From the pages of the epic, the readers see both old Rus' with its ancient traditions and customs, with handicrafts and Old Believer hermitages, and Russia of the 19th century at the moment of a historical turning point in the life of the people, the transition from patriarchal life to industrial capitalism.”

The novel “On the Mountains” was written as a continuation of the novel “In the Woods”. Many plot lines established in the first novel find their resolution in the second. The novel widely covers the life of the Old Believer merchants and peasants, talks about the fall of schismatic monasteries and the gradual destruction of the centuries-old Old Believer system of life.

Melnikov-Pechersky brilliantly mastered the skill of oral storytelling and the language spoken by the heroes of his novels is very close to oral folk speech.
The vocabulary of Melnikov-Pechersky's novels is amazingly diverse - these are national vocabulary, folk-poetic vocabulary, Old Believer vocabulary and dialectisms. The vocabulary of the novels contains both outdated words, jargon and vernacular. The use of these words by the author is always subordinated to an artistic task. For the novels “On the Mountains” and “In the Forests,” the writer made extensive use of a variety of dialectisms that he himself collected during his trips around Russia.
The author makes the most extensive use of proper lexical and ethnographic dialectisms, often introducing them into the speech of the characters and the author’s speech. The minimum number of phonemic dialectisms indicates the high linguistic skill of the writer.

The author also uses dialecticisms - phraseological units (God's mercy, forest boyar, spotted wing, pie with prayer, etc.). He also includes them in the characters' speech and in the author's speech.
Melnikov-Pechersky in his novel uses dialectisms of various thematic groups. The most widely represented are everyday vocabulary, vocabulary related to fishing and vocabulary naming objects and phenomena of the surrounding nature.
Along with dialectisms recorded only in the Volga region, he introduces into his novels vocabulary of wide territorial distribution (bors, gamza, golitsa, combing, belly, etc.).

Melnikov-Pechersky widely introduces dialectisms into the author's speech, uses them in descriptions of the landscape, author's openings, lyrical digressions, and in the author's narration associated with the characters. In the language of characters, dialectisms are used to characterize the characters and individualize their language. It is interesting that in the speech of the educated merchants Merkulov and Vedeneev, dialectisms are less common than in the speech of other heroes of the novel.
The main way of introducing dialect words into the text of a work of art is the author's footnotes. The author often accompanies dialectisms with detailed explanations. As a rule, Melnikov-Pechersky’s interpretations turn out to be more thorough and detailed than those given in dictionaries.

Reviews

Alpha! Honey, good morning!

Thank you so much for Melnikov-Pechersky! Truly a wonderful author. From his works one can study the history of the Russian people, their character, views and unshakable “word of the merchant” -)).
Will I creak a little more?
I have formed a library. Something was acquired, deleted, etc. Now my interlocutors are those authors who are my favorite. And among them is Melnikov-Pechersky. And from time to time we have long conversations with him.

Just great! Thank you, Alpha Omega!

Happy spring troubles to you!

In a good mood from communicating with you,
Erna

Agreement on the use of site materials

We ask you to use the works published on , exclusively for personal purposes. Publishing materials on other sites is prohibited.
This work (and all others) is available for download completely free of charge. You can mentally thank its author and the site team.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Similar documents

The idea of ​​your novel. The plot of the novel "Crime and Punishment", the features of its structure. Three stages of Dostoevsky's work. The answer to the main question of the novel. The idea of ​​love for people and the idea of ​​contempt for them. The idea of ​​a two-part concept and its reflection in the title.

presentation, added 02/12/2015


A motley mixture of typologically and genre-diverse elements, united by the creator of this monument of folk literature through a connecting narrative frame. The connection between Naguib Mahfouz's novel "Nights of a Thousand Nights" and the tales of "The 1000 and One Nights".

abstract, added 07/06/2015


Information about the film adaptation of the novel "Pride and Prejudice". History of previous film adaptations of this novel. A short biography of Jane Austen, her work, the creation of the novel "Pride and Prejudice". Critical analysis of the film, actors, awards received.

abstract, added 12/24/2009


Revealing the psychologism of the novel by F.M. Dostoevsky "Crime and Punishment". The artistic originality of the novel, the world of the heroes, the psychological appearance of St. Petersburg, the “spiritual path” of the heroes of the novel. Raskolnikov's mental state since the inception of the theory.

abstract, added 07/18/2008


A study of the factors that influenced the writing of the historical novel "Gone with the Wind" by the American writer Margaret Mitchell. Characteristics of the characters in the novel. Prototypes and names of characters in the work. Study of the ideological and artistic content of the novel.

abstract, added 12/03/2014


Modernism as an era of aesthetic experiments. The fate of the novel in the context of aesthetic searches in the 19th - early 20th centuries. Symbolist novel as the implementation of experiments with style. Aesthetic and philosophical views of V. Wolf. Poetics of the novel "Waves".

thesis, added 07/20/2015


The history of writing the novel, its problems and motivic structure. The development of plot lines and their relationship with the main idea of ​​the novel, the system of images and the role of dreams. The conceptual triad of house-city-space, features of its application in a literary work.

course work, added 04/10/2016