The year the small drama theater was founded. State Academic Maly Theater of Russia

In the second half of the 19th century, the Maly Theater had a first-class troupe. The life of this theater reflected the socio-political contradictions of the time. The desire of the leading part of the troupe to maintain the authority of the “second university” and to correspond to a high social purpose ran into a difficult obstacle to overcome - the repertoire. Significant works appeared on stage most often during actors' benefit performances, while the daily playbill consisted of plays by V. Krylov, I. V. Shpazhinsky and others modern writers, who based the plot mainly on the events " love triangle”, relationships in the family, limiting themselves to them, without going through them to social problems.

Ostrovsky's plays, new revivals of The Inspector General and Woe from Wit, and the appearance of heroic-romantic works from the foreign repertoire in the 1870s and 1880s helped the theater maintain the height of social and artistic criteria, correspond to the progressive sentiments of the time, and achieve a serious impact on its contemporaries. In the 1890s, a new decline began, heroic-romantic plays almost disappeared from the repertoire, and the theater “went into conventional picturesqueness and melodramatic colorfulness” (Nemirovich-Danchenko). He also turned out to be creatively unprepared for mastering new dramatic literature: the plays of L. Tolstoy were not performed on his stage in full force, the theater showed no interest in Chekhov at all and staged only his vaudevilles.

There were two directions in the acting art of the Maly Theater - everyday and romantic. The latter developed unevenly, in fits and starts, flaring up during periods of social upsurge and dying out during the years of reaction. Everyday life developed steadily, gravitating towards a critical tendency in its best examples.

The Maly Theater troupe consisted of the brightest acting individuals.

Glikeria Nikolaevna Fedotova(1846--1925) - a student of Shchepkin, she, as a teenager, appeared on stage with her teacher Shchepkin in “Sailor”, with Zhivokini in the vaudeville “Az and Firth”, learning lessons not only of professional skill, but also of the highest acting ethics. At the age of ten, Fedotova entered the Theater School, where she studied first in ballet and then in drama class. At the age of fifteen she made her debut at the Maly Theater in the role of Verochka in P. D. Boborykin’s play “The Child” and in February 1863 she was enrolled in the troupe.

The fledgling talent developed unevenly. The melodramatic repertoire contributed little to his development. In the first years of her work, the actress was often criticized for sentimentality, mannered performance, and “whining acting.” But from the beginning of the 1870s, the true flowering of the actress’s bright and multifaceted talent began.

Fedotova was rare combination intelligence and emotionality, virtuoso skill and sincere feeling. Her stage decisions were unexpected, her performance was bright, she could master all genres and all colors. Possessing excellent stage abilities - beauty, temperament, charm, infectiousness - she quickly took a leading position in the troupe. For forty-two years she played three hundred and twenty-one different roles artistic merit, but if in weak and superficial drama the actress often saved the author and the role, then in classical works revealed an amazing ability to penetrate into the very essence of character, into the author's style and features of the era. Her favorite author was Shakespeare.

She demonstrated brilliant comedic skills in the roles of Beatrice in Much Ado About Nothing and Katarina in The Taming of the Shrew. Together with his partner A: P. Lensky; who played Benedict and Petruchio, they made up a magnificent duet, captivating with the ease of dialogue, humor and a cheerful sense of harmony of Shakespeare's world with its beauty, love, strong and independent people who know how to cheerfully fight for their dignity, for their feelings.

In the tragic roles of Shakespeare, and above all in Cleopatra, Fedotova, in essence, revealed the same theme only through different means. Unlike her predecessors, the actress was not afraid to show the inconsistency of the versatility of her character, and was not afraid to “lower” her image. In her Cleopatra, for example, there was “a mixture of sincerity and deceit, tenderness and irony, generosity and cruelty, timidity and heroism,” as N. Storozhenko wrote after the premiere, and he went through all this main motive image - “her mad love for Anthony.”

In the domestic repertoire, the actress’s love was given to Ostrovsky, in whose plays she played nine roles. Lunacharsky noted that, having excellent abilities for playing Shakespearean roles, Fedotova by her nature was “unusually suitable for portraying Russian women, types close to the people.” Beautiful with typical Russian beauty, the actress had a special stature, inner dignity, and ease characteristic of Russian women.

“Captivating, powerful, cunning, enchantress, dexterous, intelligent, with great humor, passion, cunning,” her Vasilisa Melentyeva experienced a complex drama, which the actress revealed with great strength and depth.

Her Lydia Cheboksarova in “Mad Money” skillfully used her irresistible femininity and charm to achieve selfish goals - primarily wealth, without which she could not imagine “real” life.

At the age of seventeen, Fedotova first played Katerina in The Thunderstorm. The role did not come to her right away; the actress gradually mastered its complexities, enhancing the social resonance, selecting precise colors and everyday details. As a result of many years of careful work, the actress achieved a remarkable result - the image of Katerina became one of the pinnacles of her creativity. This was a very Russian Katerina: “the music of wonderful Russian speech, rhythmic, beautiful,” “gait, gestures, bows, knowledge of the peculiar old Russian etiquette, the manner of behaving in public, wearing a headscarf, answering elders” - all this created a rare authenticity of character, but at the same time, purely Russian sincerity was combined in her with the temperament and passion of classical heroines.

Switching to age roles, Fedotova played Murzavetskaya (“Wolves and Sheep”), the eldest Cheboksarova, Krutitskaya (“There wasn’t a penny, but suddenly it was altyn”).

Fedotova, like Shchepkin, remained an “eternal student” in art. Each of her roles was distinguished by “passionate and deeply meaningful acting” (Storozhenko), for the actress knew how to combine accurate analysis with the ability to relive the fate of her heroine at each performance. Forced to leave the stage due to illness, she remained in the thick of theatrical events. Frequent guests in her house were young actors, whom she helped prepare for their roles. Fedotova showed a particularly keen interest in the new, young. She was one of those masters who not only welcomed the emergence of new trends in the Society of Art and Literature, but also contributed to their approval. By at will she took Active participation in the work of the Society, studied acting with its participants, “tried to direct our work along the internal line,” as Stanislavsky later wrote. She was, as it were, a connecting thread between two eras in art - Shchepkin and Stanislavsky.

In 1924, in connection with the centenary of the Maly Theater, Fedotova was awarded the title of People's Artist of the Republic, although in Soviet times she no longer performed on stage.

Olga Osipovna Sadovskaya(1849--1919) - one of the brightest representatives of the Sadovsky dynasty. The wife of the wonderful actor of the Maly Theater M. P. Sadovsky, the son of P. M. Sadovsky, the daughter of an opera singer and popular performer folk songs I. L. Lazareva and Sadovskaya were students of the “Artistic Circle”.

She was perfectly prepared for artistic activity.

However, she did not intend to become an artist until, at the request of the Maly Theater actor N. E. Vilde, she replaced a sick actress in the Artistic Circle play “In Someone Else’s Feast.” It was December 30, 1867. On the same day and in the same performance she made her debut future husband M. P. Sadovsky. He played Andrei, she played his mother.

Her next role was the young heroine Dunya in the comedy “Don’t Get in Your Sleigh.” After the performance, critics wrote about the artist’s great success and noted her “simplicity of manner” and “sincere sincerity.”

However, the gifted debutante was attracted to age-related roles, and she willingly took on them, although at first she also performed in young roles. She was especially successful with Varvara in “The Thunderstorm” and Evgenia in “On a Busy Place,” which she prepared under the direction of Ostrovsky. But success did not stop her persistent pursuit of age-related roles, and in the end the actress achieved that everyone, including critics, recognized her creative law to "old women".

And when in 1870 Sadovskaya made her debut at the Maly Theater - and she performed with M. Sadovsky at P. Sadovsky’s benefit performance in the play “Don’t Get in Your Own Sleigh” - she chose the role in the role that would become the main one in her creativity: played the “elderly girl” Arina Fedotovna. This debut took place not at the suggestion of the directorate, but at the insistence of the beneficiary, and was not successful. The Maly Theater did not invite Sadovskaya; she returned to the “Artistic Circle” to her various roles not only in drama, but also in operetta, where she also had great success. She stayed in the “Artistic Circle” for another nine years.

In 1879, Sadovskaya, on the advice of Ostrovsky, again made her debut at the Maly Theater. For three debut performances, she chose three roles of Ostrovsky - Evgenia, Varvara and Pulcheria Andreevna (“ old friend better than the new two"). All debuts were a remarkable success. And for two years Sadovskaya played at the Maly Theater, without being a member of the troupe and without receiving a salary. During this time she performed in sixteen plays and played sixty-three performances. Only in 1881 she was enrolled in the troupe.

Sadovskaya led the entire Russian repertoire of the Maly Theater; she played several hundred roles, without having an understudy in any of them. She played forty roles in Ostrovsky's plays. In some plays she played two or even three roles - for example, in “The Thunderstorm” she played Varvara, Feklusha and Kabanikha.

Regardless of the size of the role, Sadovskaya created a complex and vibrant character, in which much was expressed, in addition to the text, in the actress’s facial expressions. Anfusa Tikhonovna in “Wolves and Sheep” does not utter a single coherent phrase, she speaks mainly in interjections, but in Sadovskaya’s performance it was an unusually capacious character, in which Anfusa’s past, her attitude to everything that happens and Kun’s name day are to blame. Playing the tongue-tied Anfusa, the actress and my role remained a great master of words, because only Great master could find many shades of meaning in the endless “so what”, “where else”.

The word was the actress’s main means of expression, and she mastered it perfectly. She could express everything in words. Essentially, her game consisted of her sitting down facing the audience and talking. She supported her speech with facial expressions and mean gestures. Therefore, she did not like darkness on stage and always demanded full light on herself, even if the action took place at night. She understood the truth on stage primarily as the truth of human character; everything else only got in the way. Sadovskaya’s very word was visible. Contemporaries claimed that listening to the actress without seeing her, they could easily imagine her at every moment of the role.

She knew how to convey everything in words. But she also possessed the great magic of stage silence, which for her was always a continuation of the word. She knew how to listen to her partner very well. From silence and speech, naturally flowing into one another, a continuous process of movement of the image was born.

Sadovskaya did not like makeup or wigs; she played with her face and her hair. If a wig appeared on her head, it was not the actress who put it on, but the heroine, and her own hair was always visible from under the wig. The actress’s face changed depending on the headdress and how the scarf was tied. But these were all minor details. The main thing was the word and facial expressions. Her simple face transformed beyond recognition from role to role. It could be kind, soft and harsh, strict; cheerful and sorrowful, smart and stupid, good-natured, open and cunning. It expressed character. It expressed the slightest shades of feelings.

Rarely resorting to means of external characterization, Sadovskaya nevertheless knew how to be plastically expressive. Playing, for example, Julitta in The Forest, a hanger-on and a spy who is hated by everyone in the house, the actress found a special, “sniffing” gait.

At the same time, she played Kabanikha, almost without resorting to gestures, she moved very little, but in her gaze, in her powerfully folded hands, in her quiet voice there was a sense of enormous inner strength that suppressed people. However, the actress did not like this role and preferred to play Feklush in “The Thunderstorm”.

In the endless list of Sadovskaya’s wonderful creations there are masterpiece roles. One of them is Domna Panteleevna in “Talents and Admirers,” Nogina’s mother, a simple, almost illiterate woman, endowed with a sharp, worldly acumen mind, recognizing at first glance who is worth what, and decisively changing the tone of the conversation depending on the interlocutor. Her dream is to save her daughter from poverty and marry her off to Velikatov. But, understanding Negina’s feelings, she carefully, with tears in her eyes, saw off her daughter to last date with Meluzov. And her tears are tears of understanding, of joy for her daughter, who, before forever uniting her fate with Velikatov, snatches from life a moment of happiness, not clouded by calculation.

Ostrovsky, who loved the actress in all his plays, believed that she played Domna Panteleevna “perfectly.”

The actress also performed in Tolstoy's plays. In general, dissatisfied with the production of “Fruits of Enlightenment,” the author singled out among the performers he liked Sadovskaya, who played the cook, who calmly, simply expressed her opinion about the gentlemen, telling the men about the lordly way of life.

Tolstoy was especially captivated by her folk speech and her amazing authenticity. He was even more surprised by the actress in the role of Matryona in The Power of Darkness, who played “a dry, hard and unyielding old woman,” according to the critic. Tolstoy was delighted with the simplicity and truth of the image, with the fact that Sadovskaya played not a “villain”, but “an ordinary old woman, smart, businesslike, wanting the best for her son in her own way,” which is how the author saw her.

Sadovskaya superbly played the countess-grandmother in “Woe from Wit” - “the ruin of old Moscow.” And in the last year of her life she encountered new drama - she played Zakharovna in Gorky’s play “The Old Man”.

Sadovskaya's art delighted literally everyone. Chekhov considered her a “real artist-artist,” Fedotova advised her to learn simplicity from her, Lensky saw in her the “muse of comedy,” Stanislavsky called her “the precious diamond of the Russian theater.” For many years she was a favorite of the public, personifying true folk art.

Alexander Pavlovich Lensky(1847--1908) - actor, director, teacher, theorist, outstanding theater figure late XIX- beginning of the 20th century.

The illegitimate son of Prince Gagarin and Italian Vervitziotti, he was brought up in the family of actor K. Poltavtsev. At the age of eighteen he became a professional actor, taking the pseudonym Lensky. For ten years he worked in the provinces, at first he played mainly in vaudeville, but gradually switched to the roles of “first lovers” in the classical repertoire. He was invited to join the Maly Theater troupe for this role in 1876.

He made his debut in the role of Chatsky, captivating with the gentleness and humanity of his performance and subtle lyricism. There were no rebellious, accusatory motives in it, but there was a deep drama of a man who experienced the collapse of his hopes in this house.

Unusuality and unconventionality also distinguished his Hamlet (1877). A spiritualized young man with noble features and a noble soul, he was imbued with sorrow, not anger. His restraint was considered by some contemporaries to be coldness, his simplicity of tone to be a lack of temperament and the necessary strength of voice - in a word, he did not correspond to the Mochalov tradition and was not accepted by many in the role of Hamlet.

The first years in the troupe were a search for my path. Charming, pure at heart, but lacking inner strength, subject to doubts - these were mainly Lensky’s heroes in the modern repertoire, for which he was dubbed the “great charmer.”

And at this time Ermolova’s star had already risen, the vaults of the Maly Theater resounded with the inspired pathos of her heroines. Next to them, Lensky's blue-eyed youths seemed too amorphous, too socially passive. The turning point in the actor’s work was associated precisely with Ermolova’s partnership. In 1879, they performed together in Gutzkow's tragedy Uriel Acosta. Lensky, playing Acosta, could not completely and immediately renounce what had become familiar to him, his acting techniques did not change - he was also poetic and spiritual, but his social temperament was expressed not through formal techniques, but through a deep understanding of the image of the advanced philosopher and fighter.

The actor performed in other roles of the heroic repertoire, but in-depth psychologism, the desire for versatility in roles where literary material did not require this, led to the fact that he lost and seemed inexpressive next to his spectacular partners.

Meanwhile his denial external signs romantic art was fundamental. He believed that “our time has moved far beyond romanticism.” He preferred Shakespeare to Schiller and Hugo, although his understanding of Shakespearean images did not find a response.

After the half-recognized Hamlet, in 1888 Othello, who was not at all recognized by the Moscow audience and critics, followed, which the actor chose for his benefit performance and had previously played. Lensky's interpretation was distinguished by its undoubted novelty - his Othello was noble, intelligent, kind, and trusting. He suffered deeply and felt subtly; he was alone in the world. After the murder of Desdemona, he “wrapped himself in a cloak, warmed his hands by the torch and trembled.” The actor was looking for humanity in the role, simple and natural movements, simple and natural feelings.

He was not recognized in the role of Othello and broke up with her forever.

And subsequent roles did not bring him full recognition. He played Dulchin in “The Last Victim”, Paratov in “Dowry”, Velikatov in “Talents and Admirers”, and in all roles the critics lacked accusatory sharpness. She was there, Stanislavsky examined her, Yu. M. Yuryev saw her, but she expressed herself not directly, not directly, but subtly. Indifference, cynicism, self-interest had to be seen in these people under their external charm and attractiveness. Not everything was considered.

His success in the role of Muromsky in Sukhovo-Kobylin’s “The Case” was more unanimously recognized. Lensky played Muromsky as naive, kind, soft person. He embarked on an unequal duel with the bureaucratic machine, believing that truth and justice would triumph. His tragedy was a tragedy of insight.

But Lensky won universal recognition in Shakespearean comedies and, above all, in the role of Benedict in Much Ado About Nothing.

In the cheerful world of people who are beautiful with their inner freedom, where justice and love win, in the world of cheerful practical jokes, where even “evil” cannot do without a game, Benedikt Lensky was the embodiment of cheerful and ironic misogyny, until he himself was defeated by love. Researchers describe in detail the pause when Benedict learns that Beatrice is in love with him. In a silent scene, the actor showed a complex internal process: a wave of joy gradually took possession of his Benedict, at first barely perceptible, it filled him entirely, turning into stormy jubilation.

The actor's performance in this role was energetic and impetuous; the performer revealed in his hero intelligence, humor and a naive thief in everything that happened around him. He only did not believe in Gero’s betrayal, because he was kind by nature and in love.

Beatrice played Fedotov. The duet of two magnificent masters continued in The Taming of the Shrew.

The role of Pstruccio was one of Lensky's debuts at the Maly Theater and remained in his repertoire for many years. Fearless Petruchio bravely declared that he would marry Katarina for money and tame the rebellious one, but when he saw his bride, he fell in love with her as violently as before he only craved money. An integral, trusting and gentle nature was revealed under his bravado and he “tamed” Katarina - with his love. He saw in her his equal in intelligence, in her desire for independence, in her rebellion, her unwillingness to submit to the will of others. It was a duet of two wonderful people who found each other in the bustle of life and were happy.

In 1887, Lensky played Famusov in Woe from Wit. He was a charmingly frivolous Moscow gentleman, hospitable and good-natured. Even his dislike of papers was endearing. Drawing after a pretty maid, eating a hearty meal, gossiping about this and that - these are his favorite pastimes in life. He tried not to allow trouble into himself, but Uncle Maxim Petrovich simply delighted him, he was an unattainable ideal. It seemed to Famusov-Lensky that he had completely defeated Chatsky with his story. He didn’t even really listen to the beginning of his monologue, and, having delved into the meaning of his words, he was even somehow offended by his interlocutor, turned away from him, showing with all his appearance that he didn’t want to listen to him, muttered something under his breath , covered his ears. And when he still didn’t calm down, he simply shouted almost in despair: “I’m not listening, I’m on trial!” - and ran away. There was nothing dark about him. This good-natured man with a cheerful tuft of hair and the manners of an old saint was simply “blissful in the world,” enjoying delicious food, a well-spoken word, pleasant memories of his uncle, and the thought of the marriage of Sophia and Skalozub. The appearance of Chatsky brought chaos into his life, threatened to ruin his plans, and in the finale he almost cried at the thought of Marya Alekseevna.

Lensky had an excellent command of Griboedov's verse, did not turn it into prose and did not recite it. Filled inner meaning Every phrase, impeccable logic of character was expressed in the impeccability of the melody of speech, its intonation structure, change of words and silence.

The skill of penetrating into the essence of the image, psychological justification of the character’s behavior, and subtle taste kept the actor from caricature, from acting, from external demonstration, both in the role of the Governor in “The Inspector General” and in the role of Professor Krugosvetlov in “The Fruits of Enlightenment.” Satire arose from the essence, as a result of the disclosure internal structure an image - in one case, convinced and not even suggesting that one can live differently, a swindler who dramatically experiences his mistake in the finale; in the other, a fanatic who religiously believes in his “science” and serves it with inspiration.

The carefree bachelor Lynyaev in "Wolves and Sheep", for whom all the pleasure of life is to eat and sleep, suddenly fell into the charming hands of Glafira, who grabbed him with a death grip, in the finale appeared unhappy, aged and sad, hung with umbrellas, capes, clumsy and an awkward old page with a beautiful young wife.

Lensky's art became truly perfect; his organic nature, ability to justify everything from within, and his mastery over any of the most complex materials made him the natural leader of the Maly Theater. After he played the role of Nicholas in “The Struggle for the Throne,” the Art Theater actor L. M. Leonidov wrote: “Only a great, world-class actor could play like that.”

Each role of Lensky was the result of enormous work, the strictest selection of colors in accordance with the given character and author. The internal content of the image was cast into a precise and spiritualized form, justified from within. While working on the role, the actor drew sketches of makeup and costume, mastered the art of external transformation with the help of one or two expressive strokes, did not like an abundance of makeup, and was excellent at facial expressions. He owns a special article on this issue - “Notes on facial expressions and makeup.”

Lensky's activities at the Maly Theater were not limited to acting work. He was a teacher and raised in Moscow theater school many wonderful students. His work as a director began with pedagogy, in an understanding of the principles of which he was close to Stanislavsky. At matinees at the Maly Theater, and since 1898 in the premises of the New Theater, a branch of the imperial stage, young actors performed their performances. Some of them, such as The Snow Maiden, could compete with the productions of the Art Theater.

Lensky was a theorist; he wrote articles that formulated the principles of acting, analyzed certain works, and contained advice on the problems of acting.

In 1897, the First All-Russian Congress of Stage Workers took place, at which Lensky made a report “Causes of the decline of theater in the provinces.”

As an actor, director, teacher, theorist, and public figure, he fought to raise general culture Russian acting, opposed hopes for “guts”, demanded permanent job and study. Both in his practice and in his aesthetic program, he developed the traditions and behests of Shchepkin. “You cannot create without inspiration, but inspiration is very often caused by the same work. And the fate of an artist who has not accustomed himself to the strictest discipline in his work is sad: inspiration, rarely called upon, can leave him forever,” he wrote.

Having taken the post of chief director of the Maly Theater in 1907, he tried to carry out a reform of the old stage, but under the conditions of the imperial leadership and the inertia of the troupe, he was unable to carry out this intention.

In October 1908, Lensky died. Ermolova perceived this death as a tragic event for art: “Everything died with Lensky. The soul of the Maly Theater died... With Lensky, not only the great actor died, but the fire on the sacred altar, which he supported with the tireless energy of a fanatic, went out.”

Alexander Ivanovich Yuzhin-Sumbatov (1857 -- famous playwright and a wonderful actor. While still a high school student and then a student at St. Petersburg University, he was interested in theater and played in amateur performances. My acting started on the amateur stage - in the private Brenko Theater. In 1882, he was invited to the Maly Theater, where he worked for more than forty years, playing two hundred and fifty roles, of which thirty-three in foreign plays, twenty in works by Ostrovsky.

Predominance foreign plays due to the fact that by the nature of his talent Yuzhin was a romantic actor. He came to the theater in those years when heroic-romantic art experienced a short-lived but unusually bright rise. In many performances, Yuzhin performed together with Yermolova - he played Dunois in “The Maid of Orleans”, Mortimer in “Mary Stuart” - and this was another famous duet at the Maly Theater.

Possessing an excellent stage temperament, courageous, handsome, inspired, Yuzhin expressed noble and lofty feelings on stage, in tune with the revolutionary sentiments of the time, expressed sublimely, casually, was not afraid of pathos, and was statuesque in the plastic. His Marquis Pose in Schiller's Don Carlos, Charles V in Hernani and Hugo's Ruy Blase enjoyed enormous success. Charles's scene at the tomb of Charlemagne was, according to N. Efros, "a complete triumph of the actor, his beautiful pathos, his art of declamation, his good stage pomp and embellished truth, which did not thereby become a lie."

The short rise of heroic-romantic art ended in decline, but not in the work of Yuzhin, who easily switched to the tragic roles of Shakespeare, the best of which was Richard III. The actor revealed in the image not only cruelty and deceit, but also enormous power, talent, will to achieve the goal.

He played comedic roles superbly in Russian and foreign drama. His performance of Figaro in The Marriage of Figaro by Beaumarchais was unsurpassed. His Famusov differed from Famusov-Lensky in that he was an important dignitary, an ideological opponent of Chatsky, a convinced enemy of new ideas. In his face Moscow society had powerful support, his Famusov was a force that the lonely rebel Chatsky could not break.

The comedic effect of Repetilov's image was achieved by the discrepancy between his lordly importance and empty talk, significantness and unexpected naivety.

Later, Yuzhin will become a wonderful Bolingbrok in “A Glass of Water” by E. Scribe.

A master of virtuoso dialogue, always spectacular on stage, Yuzhin was a consciously and demonstratively theatrical actor. They didn’t find simplicity in him, well, he didn’t strive for it. It was condemned for its lack of life-likeness, but in classical roles it was not part of the actor’s image system, who was always on the other side of the ramp and did not try to assure the viewer that this was not theater, but life. He loved beauty on stage; makeup and wigs were integral means of his transformations.

The fact that Yuzhin deliberately chose this style of performance can be judged by his modern roles, especially in Ostrovsky’s plays, where the actor had simplicity, vital recognition, and subtlety; Murov (“Guilty Without Guilt”), Agishin (“The Marriage of Belugin”), Berkutov (“Wolves and Sheep”), Telyatev (“Mad Money”), Dulchin (“The Last Victim”)—that’s far from full list his roles in Ostrovsky’s plays, where the actor was not only simple and reliable in a modern way, but significant and deep in a modern way. Due to the peculiarities of his individuality, Yuzhin could not play weak or small people; his heroes were always strong, strong-willed, and extraordinary individuals. Sometimes this force led them to collapse, sometimes it degenerated into individualism, in comedy it shone through with irony, but it always constituted the organic nature of the characters he created.

After Lensky's death, Yuzhin headed the Maly Theater, trying to preserve and continue best traditions, the artistic height of his art, which was difficult at a time of the general decline of the theater. “Your importance for the theater is no less than mine,” Yermolova wrote to Yuzhin, “and if all that’s left of me is only a piece of the old, tattered banner... then you still invariably move forward, further and further...”

She wrote a special and brightest chapter in the history of the Maly Theater Maria Nikolaevna Ermolova (1853 -- 1928).

On January 30, 1870, at a benefit performance by N. M. Medvedeva, Lessing’s play “Emilia Galotti” was performed. Leading actors were involved in the play; the title role was to be played by G. N. Fedotova. Suddenly she fell ill, and Yermolova appeared on the famous stage for the first time in an ensemble of famous actors. The audience, according to eyewitnesses, did not expect anything good, the replacement seemed too unequal, but when Emilia Ermolova ran onto the stage and uttered the first words in a beautiful, low voice, the entire hall was captured by the power of amazing talent, which made the audience “forget the stage” and experience you have with the actress the tragedy of young Emilia Galotti.

The very first performance made the name of Ermolova - the granddaughter of a former serf violinist, then the “wardrobe master” of the imperial troupe, the daughter of the Maly Theater prompter - famous. But in the first years of her service in the theater, despite her brilliant debut, she was assigned mainly comedic roles in vaudeville and melodrama, and she performed them unsuccessfully, thereby confirming the management’s opinion that her first success was an accident. It cannot be said that all of Ermolova’s roles were bad based on literary material, they were simply not “her” roles. If the actress’s individuality were less bright, the discrepancy would not be so striking, but a unique talent not only rejects “alien” material, it is helpless in front of it. Nevertheless, the actress played everything, gained professional experience and waited in the wings. It came three years after her first performance on stage. On July 10, 1873, she played Katerina in The Thunderstorm.

And then chance came to the rescue: Fedotova fell ill again, her performances were left without the main performer, and in order not to remove them from the repertoire, some roles were transferred to Yermolova.

Breaking the tradition of everyday performance of the role of Katerina, the young actress played a tragedy. From the very first scenes, one could discern in her heroine a passionate and freedom-loving person. Katerina - Ermolova was only outwardly submissive, her will was not suppressed by Domostroevsky orders. The moments of her meetings with Boris were moments of complete and absolute freedom. The heroine Ermolova, who knew the joy of both this freedom and this happiness, was afraid not of retribution for “sin”, but of returning to captivity, to her unloved husband, to her mother-in-law, to whose power she could no longer submit.

The triumph of the actress were the last two acts. The scene of repentance shocked the audience with its tragic intensity.

It seemed as if the whole world had fallen like a thunderstorm on a fragile woman who dared to experience moments of happiness in its dark abyss, to enjoy the joy of a huge and free, albeit “forbidden”, but true feeling stolen from life. The image of Katerina sounded like a challenge to fate and this world, which cruelly punished the young woman, and the stupor of prejudice that brought her to her knees in front of the crowd, and separation from Boris, whom only her great feeling distinguished from this crowd, but whom love did not transform, did not breathe into him courage and rebellion, as in Katerina, did not rise above the philistine fear. Separation from Boris was tantamount to death for this Katerina. Therefore, Ermolova played the last act almost calmly - her heroine seemed to be in a hurry to leave life, to put an end to its joyless vanity.

In the image of Katerina, features have already appeared that will soon force us to call the actress’s art romantic, and she herself as a continuer of the Mochalov tradition on the Russian stage and an exponent of those sentiments that were characteristic of the new generation of rebels, who had already entered the historical arena and formed into a movement that became the second stage in the revolutionary history of Russia.

Ermolova came to understanding public role art consciously. In 1911, she named two sources for the formation of her civic and aesthetic views - Moscow University and the Society of Amateurs Russian literature, which elected her as an honorary member in 1895. At various times, members of the Society were Zhukovsky and Pushkin, Gogol and Turgenev, Ostrovsky and Dostoevsky, Leo Tolstoy and Chekhov. Ermolova was the first artist elected as an honorary member - this happened in the year of the twenty-fifth anniversary of her stage activity, but her connections with the progressive intelligentsia of the time go back to the very beginning creative path actresses. Among her friends were university professors, members of various stage clubs, some of the populists; the actress knew well “about social needs, about the poverty and misery of the Russian people,” about the revolutionary sentiments of the time. Her work reflected these ideas.

In 1876, Ermolova received her first benefit performance. Writer and translator S. Yuryev translated Lope de Vega’s “The Sheep Spring” for her, and on March 7, 1876, the actress played Laurencia, a Spanish girl who raised the people to revolt against the tyrant, for the first time on the Russian stage.

The audience perceived this image as revolutionary. Those who saw the performance wrote that Laurencia Ermolova made a “deep, stunning impression.” In the third act, where the heroine’s angry and inviting monologue sounds, “the audience’s delight reached the point of enthusiasm,” wrote Professor N. Storozhenko, who noted that Ermolova’s benefit performance “was in in every sense words of a holiday of youth." The performance acquired a completely obvious political meaning; its revolutionary pathos could not help but worry the authorities. Already at the second performance the hall was full of detectives, and after several performances the play was removed from the repertoire and banned from production for many years.

After Laurencia, Yermolova became a favorite, an idol of youth, a kind of their banner. Each of her performances turned into a triumph. The hall was filled with the “Yermolov audience” (as Ostrovsky called it in his diary). After the performance, a crowd of students was waiting for the actress on the street. After one of the performances, she was presented with a sword as a symbol of her art. In Voronezh, she was placed in a carriage decorated with flowers and taken to the hotel by torchlight. This audience love will remain with the actress forever.

This attitude made it necessary to live up to the hopes that the younger generation had for their favorite. But it was difficult to comply - the repertoire consisted mainly of vaudevilles and melodramas. Nevertheless, out of ten or twelve roles played by the actress in each season, there were several that allowed Yermolova’s talent to sound in full force. She played in Shakespeare's plays - Hero ("Much Ado About Nothing"), Ophelia, Juliet, Lady Anne ("King Richard III"); and plays by Lope de Vega, Calderon, Moliere. In “Urnals Acosts” K. Gutskova acted as Judith, in Goethe’s “Faust” - as Margarita. At her benefit performance in 1881, Ermolova played Gulnara in A. Gualtieri’s play “The Corsican Woman,” which in many ways continued the theme of Laurencia. In official circles, the play first caused sharp criticism, and then it was forbidden not only to play and publish it, but also to mention it in print.

Truly triumphant success befell the artist in Schiller's plays, which were close to her for the purity of tragic pathos, the nobility of ideas, and the high intensity of passions. Since 1878, Ermolova dreamed of playing “The Maid of Orleans” in Zhukovsky’s translation, having achieved the lifting of the censorship ban on the play. But she managed to realize this dream only in 1884.

Yuzhin recalled with what concentration Ermolova conducted the first rehearsals, with what detachment from everything that was happening around, immersed not even in the process of creating stage image, but in the process of internal merging, “complete identification” with Joanna. And during the performance, her absorption in the thoughts of the heroine literally fascinated the audience, and they believed in the authenticity of this chosen and tragic fate.

The embodiment of the heroic spirit of the people became the main theme of the image. In the first act, when Joanna, speaking through the herald to to the English king and his subjects, called them “the scourge of my country,” the power with which the actress pronounced these words made Yuzhin remember Salvini, with whom he played in “Othello,” and assert that “the greatest tragedian of our time did not have a single moment , equal to Yermolov’s in this phrase.”

IN final scene When Joanna, in prison, with chains on her hands, heard the screams of approaching enemies, she suddenly broke the chains and rushed to where the French troops were fighting. And a miracle happened - with Joanna at their head, they won. She died in battle - not at the stake, as we know from the biography of Joan of Arc - she died, having accomplished another feat for the glory of her homeland and bringing liberation to her people. The power of Ermolova’s inspired impulse was so great that at every performance the actress forced a thousand spectators to forget about the props and believe in the truth of the miracle happening before their eyes.

Ermolova played the “Maid of Orleans” for sixteen years and considered playing the role of Joanna “her only service to Russian society.”

In February 1886, Ermolova staged Schiller’s “Mary Stuart” in her benefit performance and created another stage masterpiece. Fedotova played Elizabeth in the play, which made the struggle between the two queens take on a special scale. The audience was especially shocked by the scene of the meeting between Mary and Elizabeth and Yermolova’s monologue, about which Yuryev wrote that “it was no longer even “stage truth”, but “truth” - the pinnacle of peaks.” Dooming herself to death, cutting off all paths to salvation, Maria Ermolova triumphed here as a woman and a queen.

No matter who the actress played, her performance always combined this eternally feminine and rebellious beginning - a huge spiritual potential and moral maximalism, high human dignity, courageous disobedience and sacrifice. In one of her letters to M.I. Tchaikovsky, Ermolova wrote that she loved life, “everything that is good in it.” And she knew how to see this “good” in each of her heroines; it was no coincidence that she was called the lawyer of her roles.

Ermolova was extremely attentive to the works of her contemporaries and performed even in weak plays if she found a living thought or intonation in them. Not to mention such authors as Ostrovsky, in whose plays she played about twenty roles during the playwright’s lifetime. The playwright himself rehearsed a number of roles with her - Eulalia in “Slaves”, Vesna in “The Snow Maiden”, Negina in “Talents and Admirers”. Ostrovsky wrote, not without pride: “for Fedotova and Ermolova, I am a teacher.”

Among the numerous roles played in his plays, the highest achievements of the Russian stage include Katerina and Negina, Eulalia and Yulia Tugina (“The Last Victim”), Vera Filippovna (“The Heart is Not a Stone”) and Kruchinina (“Guilty Without Guilt”). There were also roles that Ermolova tried, but could not play. So, she was forced to refuse the role of Barabosheva in the comedy “Truth is good, but happiness is better,” frankly admitting to Yuzhin: “The role is not given to me in any way.” This is natural. Ermolova was not an everyday artist, and roles such as Barabosheva did not correspond to her individuality. Another Ostrovsky was closer to her - the singer of difficult female share and theater singer, Ostrovsky is poetic, lyrical, and psychologically subtle. Where Ermolova found a way out into tragedy, as in Katerina, an opportunity to reveal the inner drama or contrast the philistine human “forest” with the world of noble and selfless aspirations of her provincial brothers - actors, there she not only achieved the greatest successes, but also brought into the images of Ostrovsky that passionate and reverent note that transformed his works.

Unsurpassed in Ostrovsky’s stage history was Ermolova’s performance of the role of Negina in “Talents and Admirers” - a young provincial actress, “a white dove in a black flock of rooks,” as one of the characters in the play says about her. In Negina-Ermolova there was an absolute absorption in art, detachment from everything small in everyday life. That's why she didn't immediately understand true meaning Dulebov's proposals, the mother's meticulous lamentations, Smelskaya's hints. Negina lived in her own world, sober rationalism and calculation were completely unusual for her, she did not know how to resist vulgarity. Accepting Velikatov’s offer, she, with his help, saved the most dormant thing in herself - art. Ermolova herself was close to being absorbed in creativity, and the feeling of being chosen, and the ability to sacrifice in the name of art. This is what she sang and affirmed in Negina.

In “Wolves and Sheep” the actress played Kupavina, unexpectedly transforming into a simple-minded, ingenuous, trusting and uncalculating creature. In “Slave Girls” her Eulampia dramatically experienced the drama of disappointment in the “hero”, the drama of early devastation. In “The Last Sacrifice” Ermolov with enormous power played the first love in Yulia Tugina’s life, sacrifice in the name of love and liberation from the slavery of her feelings.

Returning to the stage in 1908, she performed the role of Kruchinina in the play “Guilty Without Guilt.” She did not play the first act, but appeared immediately in the second, where Kruchinina’s main theme began - the tragedy of her mother. This theme would later become firmly entrenched in her work.

On May 2, 1920, the half-century anniversary of the actress’s stage activity was celebrated. On the initiative of V.I. Lenin, a new title was approved - People's Artist, which Ermolova was the first to receive. This was recognition not only of her talent, but also of the social significance of her art.

K. S. Stanislavsky, who called the actress “a heroic symphony of the Russian stage,” wrote to Ermolova: “Your ennobling influence is irresistible. It raised generations. And if they asked me where I received my education, I would answer: at the Maly Theater, with Yermolova and her associates.”

Maly Theater (State Academic Theater of Russia), the oldest Russian drama theater in Moscow, which played an outstanding role in the development of national culture. In relation to the Maly Theater, such a concept as the Moscow theater school arises, which expressed the essence of Russian acting art - warmth, cordiality, passion of romantic protest, sympathy " little man"and the desire for natural sincerity and truth of life on stage.

“The Second University” – from history to metaphor

From the very beginning, the creative path of the Maly Theater was closely connected with advanced social thought and the freedom-loving sentiments of the intelligentsia - writers, historians, and professors at Moscow University.

Maly Theater as a “second University” – most important characteristic Moscow scene. This is not so much a metaphor as the history of the Maly Theater itself.

In 1776, on the basis of the former university troupe, a theater was created, later called Petrovsky. After the fire in 1805, the troupe played in various theater spaces until the end of 1824, when it found its permanent home in a building designed by O.I. Beauvais on Petrovskaya, (currently Teatralnaya) square. Since that time, the Moscow drama troupe has become no longer part of the opera and ballet company, but an independent organism. The theater began to be called Maly (in contrast to the Bolshoi, located on the same square). However, long before this, in 1806, the theater acquired the status of a state theater, entering the system of imperial theaters. Thus, actors who joined the troupe from serf theaters were immediately freed from serfdom, such as S. Mochalov, the father of the famous tragedian, P. Mochalov.

Even at its very origins, at the end of the 18th century, the former university troupe was under the direct influence of the progressive Moscow intelligentsia, primarily the greatest Russian educator N.I. Novikov, a writer and publisher known for his anti-serfdom sentiments. From the very beginning, the theater's repertoire consisted of the best dramatic works, both Russian (from D. Fonvizin to I.A. Krylov) and foreign authors (from J.B. Moliere and Beaumarchais to R. Sheridan and C. Goldoni). In his best stage creations talented actors troupes such as V. Pomerantsev, Y. Shusherin, P. Plavilshchikov, and the Sandunovs sought to create living human characters, gradually accumulating experience in realistic acting. But the real rise of the Maly Theater’s stage art is associated with the work of P.S. Mochalov and M.S. Shchepkin - luminaries of the Moscow scene.

Shchepkin Theater

P.S. Mochalov, a “plebeian actor,” in the words of the critic V.G. who praised him. Belinsky, managed to overcome the canons of the previous style, expressed by the aesthetics of classicism. Instead of recitation and solemn poses, the actor brought to the stage bubbling lava of hot passion and gestures that struck with suffering and pain. Mochalov’s romantic loners protested and fought against the entire evil world hostile to them, despairing, and often losing heart. Thus, the actor’s work reflected the very era of ups and downs - the time of hopes and disappointments of Russian society 1820–1840. Best roles actor - Hamlet, Richard III (in the tragedies of the same name by W. Shakespeare), Chatsky, Ferdinand (Cunning and Love by F. Schiller). With the creativity of P.S. Mochalov is associated with the emergence of the most important theater movement - romanticism.

The next significant milestone in the history of the Maly Theater is the work of the great Russian actor-reformer M.S. Shchepkina. “He was the first to create truth on the Russian stage, he was the first to become non-theatrical in the theater,” A.I. said about Shchepkin. Herzen. M.S. Shchepkin made his debut in Moscow in 1822 as an already established provincial actor. Throughout his entire career, the actor, who had previously been a serf, strove for fidelity to the truth of life and natural intonations on stage. The actor’s broad demands and aesthetic views went beyond purely “guild” interests, hence his close rapprochement with the advanced Moscow intelligentsia, writers, theatergoers, critics who had influence on the Moscow theater: S.T. Aksakov, V.G. Belinsky, A.I. Herzen, N.V. Gogol, A.S. Pushkin.

Shchepkin’s realistic method developed mainly in the roles of Russian classics - Famusov (Woe from Wit by A.S. Griboyedov, 1831) and Gorodnichy (The Inspector General of N.V. Gogol, 1836), in which the actor, with all his inherent comedy and observation, created living typical images of the “pillars of society”.

The creativity of N.V. played a huge role in the formation of the artistic principles of the Maly Theater. Gogol (in 1842 the theater staged scenes from Dead souls, and in 1843 - Marriage).

In addition to Shchepkin and Mochalov, the leading actors of the theater are M.D. Lvova-Sinetskaya, N.V. Repina, V.I. Zhivokini, L.L. Leonidov, K.N. Poltavtsev, I.V. Samarin, S.V. Shumsky.

The author comes to the theater

From the mid-1850s, the main playwright of the theater was A.N. Ostrovsky, “Russian Shakespeare”. Forty-seven of his plays were staged at the theater, making up an entire era in the history of Russian theater. “The first performance of the first national drama, Don’t sit in your own sleigh, was solemnly celebrated in Moscow. It did several miracles: the first: it immediately put the great actor P. Sadovsky on a pedestal, the second: it simultaneously created the brilliant talent of S. Vasilyev, the third: it immediately lifted the national Russian artist L.P. Nikulina-Kositskaya, at least for a while from vile sentimental dramas...”

On dramaturgy A.N. Ostrovsky produced a brilliant galaxy of actors. In addition to those already mentioned, this is S.V. and E.N. Vasilievs, N.V. Rykalova, N.N. Medvedeva, N.A. Nikulina, V. Borozdina, G.N. Fedotova, N.I. Musil and others. Ostrovsky was directly involved in the life of the Maly Theater, he was the director of his plays, demanding from the actors the correctness of the found “tone”, a harmonious ensemble of all performers, high culture stage speech, authenticity and artistic unity of all components of the performance. Therefore, the Maly Theater will also be called the “Ostrovsky House”. Despite the unjustified dominance of one-day plays in the theater’s repertoire, the general direction in the 19th century, along with Ostrovsky’s works, was determined by classical drama, Russian and foreign.

On the best samples Western drama the creativity of the great Russian tragic actress M.N. blossomed. Ermolova. Having made her debut in the role of Emilia (G.E. Lessing, Emilia Galotti), showing remarkable temperament and the power of passion, the actress subsequently created a gallery of heroic female images, which were united by the theme of protest against the inhumanity of society and the affirmation of individual dignity and rights. (Laurencia - Sheep Source Lope de Vega, Maria Stuart - Maria Stuart F. Schiller and Joan of Arc - Maid of Orleans by the same author, and many others). Not only hot pathos was characteristic of Ermolova’s art, but also special sincerity, warm lyricism, and subtlety of psychological experiences.

On the wings of romance

In the 1880s, a need arose in society for theatrical experiences and romantic heroics, since everyday reality was impoverished in it.

There was a gradual change of generations. Just as in 1850 the theater of the playwright Ostrovsky replaced the Shchepkin Theater, the next page of the Maly Theater will, of course, take place under the sign of the great M.N. Ermolova. The actress played a number of her best roles in Ostrovsky's plays (Katerina in Thunderstorm, Negina in Talents and Admirers, Kruchinina in Guilty Without Guilt and others). But this is a different, more modern Ostrovsky, cleared of those everyday excesses that began to burden and overwhelm the recent drama innovator. And this was precisely the “enlightened”, poetic truth that Shchepkin insisted on in his last decade.

Ermolova’s associates were A.P. Lensky, A.I. Yuzhin, K.N. Rybakov, E.K. Leshkovskaya, A.A. Yablochkin, later - A.A. Ostuzhev. The magnificent ensemble of the Maly Theater was also decorated by O.O. and M.P. Sadovsky, from the famous dynasty, irreplaceable, first of all, in Ostrovsky’s repertoire.

More than once at performances with the participation of M.N. Ermolova, political manifestations of students and democratic intelligentsia took place, which once again proves the enormous social significance of the Maly Theater.

But the theater also experienced crises. At the turn of the 19th–20th centuries. The importance of the theater has weakened somewhat. The repertoire became smaller, and the direction lagged behind modern times. The Maly Theater was primarily looking for ways to renew art by actor and director A.P. Lensky. However, the New Theater he created, a branch of the Maly Theater, was unable to implement the reform program. A.I. Yuzhin, who headed the theater in 1909, sought to strengthen the position of the theater, but his attempts were unsuccessful. The crisis of the Maly Theater reflected the general theatrical crisis, the way out of which was the creation in 1898 of the Moscow Art Theater, possible only on the basis of radical comprehensive theatrical reforms. These reforms were carried out by K.S. Stanislavsky and V.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko - the first directors in modern understanding this word. Remembering his theatrical youth, Stanislavsky more than once said that Ermolova and Lensky are examples of creativity, examples of the true “life of the human spirit” on stage, examples of true service to the theater, which the great director himself professed.

The theater listens to the revolution

After the October Revolution of 1917, no less difficult times came for the Maly Theater, associated with the need to organically fit into modernity, while maintaining its originality. In 1919, the Maly Theater was awarded the title of academic. But at the same time, the theaters of the left front, created in the wake of the revolution, reject academic theaters, which means they are outdated and useless for the people. There is a call to close them altogether, as a stronghold of bourgeois-noble culture. The first People's Commissar of Enlightenment, A.V., comes to the defense of the Maly Theater. Lunacharsky.

A milestone production for the Maly Theater after the revolution was the play Lyubov Yarovaya based on the play by K.A. Trenev in 1926 (directed by I.S. Platon and L.M. Prozorovsky). A high level of stagecraft was demonstrated by theater veterans V.O. Massalitinova, S.L. Kuznetsov, E.D. Turchaninova, V.N. Ryzhova, P.M. Sadovsky, V.N. Pashennaya and actors of the middle generation: E.N. Gogoleva, S.N. Fadeeva, N.A. Annenkov and others. The “museum” art of the Maly Theater turned out to be extremely viable. In a tightly knit, dynastically closed troupe, roles and even interpretations themselves were inherited. Later roles of G.N. Fedotova was subsequently transferred to A.A. Yablochkina, and the repertoire of O.O. Sadovskaya was inherited by V.N. Ryzhova and V.O. Massalitinova. But in the 1930s, the Maly Theater troupe was replenished with artists from other theaters (N.M. Radin, M.M. Blumenthal-Tamarina, E.M. Shatrov, D.V. Zerkalova) and from the theater V.E. Meyerhold, closed by that time as a theater of “hostile aesthetics.” The theater, which at one time led the left front, was disbanded, and its leading artists - I.V. Ilyinsky, M.I. Tsarev, M.I. Zharov took a worthy place in the traditional academic theater. These earlier polar poles, at the end of the 1930s. brought together due to the unfading, romantically elevated theatricality and external stage expressiveness characteristic of such different, seemingly aesthetically diametrically opposed groups. As for directing, in the Maly Theater, as a rule, this is a “director with the actors,” and very often in practice, theater actors act in performances staged by them (I. Ilyinsky, B. Babochkin, V.I. Khokhryakov, etc. .).

Maly Theater - Actor's Theater

The basis of the repertoire of the Maly Theater 1930–1940 will remain Ostrovsky, as well as N.V. Inspector. Gogol and Woe from Wit A.S. Griboyedov, with M. Tsarev in the role of Chatsky (40 years later the artist will successfully play Famusov).

During the Great Patriotic War A front-line branch operated at the theater. Among the performances, such as Front A.E. Korneychuk (1942), Invasion by L.M. Leonova (1943) Pygmalion B. Shaw (1943), Ivan the Terrible A.N. Tolstoy (1945). These performances gave rise to faith in human capabilities and spiritual strength.

Among the post-war productions of the Maly Theater, a big event was the play by M.A. Vassa Zheleznov. Gorky with the participation of V.N. Pashennaya (1952).

In the 1950s, the following directors worked at the theater: K.P. Khokhlov, I.Ya. Sudakov, L.A. Volkov, A.D. Wild. The brightness of the acting and director's decisions distinguished the performances of The Power of Darkness by L.N. Tolstoy (1956), Masquerade M.Yu. Lermontov (1962), Macbeth by W. Shakespeare (1955), dramatizations of Vanity Fair by W. Thackeray (1958) and Madame Bovary by G. Flaubert (1963).

A colossal acting success was the role of tongue-tied goldsmith Akim played by I.V. Ilyinsky (The Power of Darkness, production by B. Rovensky). Born during the “thaw”, after the 20th Party Congress, the entire performance was imbued with modernity. Passionate preaching of living according to conscience, rejection of lies and compassion for people distinguished Akim in the masterful performance of Ilyinsky. Tolstoy's theme is not accidental for the actor. In 1970, Ilyinsky played the role of a great writer and thinker in I. Drutse’s play Return to Square, a milestone for his work. The image of Tolstoy can rightfully be called the pinnacle of the actor’s creativity, who showed last years the life of a philosopher in constant spiritual search.

The acting and directing activities of B.A. played a significant role in the life of the theater. Babochkina. B.A. Babochkin first staged at the Maly Theater A.P. Chekhov (Ivanov, 1960), playing the main role in the play. Previously, theatrical means of expression The Maly Theater was considered contraindicated in the aesthetics of Chekhov's plays. “They don’t invite you anywhere,” Yermolova characterized them, rejecting Chekhov’s plays as applied to herself and her theater. Thus, the actress involuntarily formulated the most important property of the Maly Theater - a clear civil position. Actor and director B. Babochkin succeeded in this production, perhaps because he took on the most “non-Chekhovian” of Chekhov’s plays.

In the period 1960–1980, performances were also staged at the Maly Theater by such interesting directors as L.V. Varpakhovsky, L.E. Kheifets, B.A. Lvov-Anokhin. I.V. also staged performances. Ilyinsky. Along with the Russian classics that never disappear from the repertoire, the Maly Theater staged Fiesco's Conspiracy in Genoa by Schiller (1977), King Lear (1979), E. Rostand's Cyrano de Bergerac (1983) and others.

In 1990 staged in the theater Uncle's dream F.M. Dostoevsky, Tsar Boris and the Death of Ivan the Terrible A.K. Tolstoy, There wasn’t a penny, but suddenly there was Altyn, Wolves and sheep, Forest, Labor bread, Crazy money A.N. Ostrovsky, as well as Chaika A.P. Chekhov. The list of performances in the domestic repertoire continues with M. Gorky’s Eccentrics, A.N. Krechinsky’s Wedding. Kolker according to A.V. Sukhovo-Kobylina, The Tale of Tsar Saltan A.S. Pushkin.

IN different years The Maly Theater was directed by: A.I. Yuzhin, I.Ya. Sudakov, P.M. Sadovsky, K.A. Zubov, M.I. Tsarev, E.R. Simonov, B.I. Ravenskikh and others. Since 1988 artistic director theater - Yu.M. Solomin, in 1988–1995 the main director was B.A. Morozov. The troupe included: E.A. Bystritskaya, V.V. Kenigson, V.I. Korshunov, I.A. Lyubeznov, R.D. Nifontova, E.V. Samoilov, V.I. Khokhryakov, M.I. Zharov, E.Ya. Vesnik, Yu.I. Kayurov, G.A. Kiryushina, N.I. Kornienko, A.I. Kochetkov, I.A. Likso, T.P. Pankova, V.M. Solomin, L.V. Yudina, V.P. Pavlov, E.E. Martsevich, K.F. Rojek, A.S. Eibozhenko and many others.

The Maly Theater strives to express modernity, drawing on the rich traditions of Russian acting school, remaining a theater of academic classics, a theater of high stage culture. This is exactly how the play Woe from Wit with Yu.M. was staged in 2000. Solomin as Famusov.

A theater school has been operating at the Maly Theater since 1918 (since 1938 - the Shchepkin Theater School, since 1943 - a university). The Maly Theater has two stage areas– main stage and branch. In 1929 a monument to A.N. was erected. Ostrovsky in front of the Maly Theater.

A permanent Moscow theater troupe was formed in Moscow in 1806. Dramatic actors worked together with opera and ballet actors. The troupe did not have its own building; performances were staged either in Pashkov’s house on Mokhovaya, or in Apraksin’s house on Znamenka, or in theater building at the Arbat Gate.

In 1821, Petrovskaya Square was formed in Moscow. Around it, plots were sold on preferential terms with installment payments for five years, on which buildings had to be built in a short time in accordance with the architect's plan. Three such plots were purchased in 1818 by the merchant V. Vargin.

Vargin's house was built according to the design of A.F. Elkinsky with a facade made by Bove. The residential building had a row of shops along the ground floor with an open gallery.

In July 1824, Vargin entered into a contract with the office of the imperial theaters to rent part of his building on Petrovskaya Square for the Maly Theater. In October, the first poster appeared on the facade: “Next Tuesday, the 14th of October, the first performance for this performance will be given at the new Maly Theater in Vargin’s house, on Petrovskaya Square, namely New Overture, essay by A.N. Verstovsky...” Since then, on October 14, the theater has celebrated its founding day.

The interior decoration of the theater, according to contemporaries, was “very good, majestic,” even “too golden.”

The Bolshoi and Maly had a single troupe and staged drama, opera and ballet. Often performances of one of the theaters were performed on the stage of another. For a long time, theaters were connected by an underground passage. “We need to go to the Bolshoi – Maly is playing there today,” they said in Moscow.

At first, “small” was a simple designation of the size of the building in comparison with the Petrovsky – “big” theater, which was being built nearby. But very soon the words “Big” and “Small” became proper names, and are now heard in Russian in all countries of the world.

In 1838–40 the building was rebuilt inside according to the design of K.A. Tones. He also created the “New Outbuilding” along Neglinny Proezd, along with an auditorium and a stage. In 1894, for the architect’s centenary, a memorial plaque was installed on the house. The final formation of the appearance of the theater belongs to the architect of the imperial theaters A.S. Nikitin.

Since 1840, the Maly Theater troupe began performing on stage. M.S. played here. Shchepkin, M.N. Ermolova, V.N. Pashennaya, A.A. Ostuzhev, B.A. Babochkin and many others.

This theater for Muscovites was the second university. Performances based on the plays of Shakespeare, Schiller, Gogol, A. Tolstoy were staged on stage, but the name of Ostrovsky became significant for the theater. Maly is called the “Ostrovsky House”. It was his plays that attracted the Moscow merchants to the theater and made it special.

On May 2, 1914, a terrible fire occurred in the theater warehouse, which all Moscow newspapers wrote about. Black smoke billowed over Moscow for six hours. The costumes and scenery of the Bolshoi Theater were destroyed in the fire, and the power plant and apartments of theater employees were damaged.

In 1929, a monument was erected in front of the theater building, the work of sculptor N. Andreev.

Maly Theater, especially valuable cultural site country, became a national treasure together with the Bolshoi Theater, Tretyakov Gallery and the Hermitage.

The last large-scale reconstruction of the building was carried out in 1939–1948. under the leadership of engineer A.N. Popov and architect-artist A.P. Velikanov. Comprehensive scientific restoration 2012–2016 included the entire range of reconstruction and restoration work. The building structures were strengthened and stabilized, and basement and attic spaces were reclaimed. Restoration and reconstruction of lost elements of historical facades and interiors of the spectator area, director's area, and some artistic premises were carried out. A new concept for the operation of engineering systems has been introduced.

The walls of the Maly Theater have seen many events in their lifetime, because it is one of the very first theaters in the country. He played a big role in the formation theatrical arts Russia and was a kind of reference point for other similar organizations.

The origins of the Maly Theater were a student troupe created in 1756 by decree of Empress Elizaveta Petrovna at Moscow University. Already in 1787, this amateur association turned into the Bolshoi Petrovsky Theater, which opened with the premiere of the play “The Marriage of Figaro.” After the war with Napoleon in 1812, the theater building was destroyed, and only in 1824 the architect A.F. Elkinsky completely rebuilt the house of the merchant Vargin, which was located on Theater Square, under the theater. Since then it received its modern name.

The theater opened for spectators with the premiere of A.N. Verstovsky's overture on October 26, 1824. He almost immediately won the love and recognition of the audience, because they worked at the Maly Theater talented artists, and almost everything was staged on stage - from dramas to comedy vaudevilles. A.N. Ostrovsky made a great contribution to the development of the theater. He created 48 plays written specifically for the Maly Theatre, several of which are still present in his repertoire.

From 1988 to the present day, the theater has been led by Yu.M. Solomin, who has chosen the absolutely correct vector of development and delights the guests of the Maly Theater with interesting productions.

Maly Theater these days

The modern Maly Theater is one of the main cultural objects of Moscow. The directors who stage their productions here preserve the traditions of past years, developed by their predecessors, but also do not reject fresh ideas.

For every new season The theater produces four or five new productions and often goes on tour to other countries. Thus, residents of Japan, Slovakia, Mongolia, France, Poland, Germany, the Czech Republic, Greece, Bulgaria, Israel and others have already had the opportunity to get acquainted with the performances of the Maly Theater.

In addition, the theater regularly organizes the festival “Ostrovsky in Ostrovsky’s House,” at which theaters from other Russian cities show their productions of the classic’s plays.

MALY THEATER

In the second half of the 19th century, the Maly Theater had a first-class troupe. The life of this theater reflected the socio-political contradictions of the time. The desire of the leading part of the troupe to maintain the authority of the “second university” and to correspond to a high social purpose encountered a difficult obstacle to overcome - the repertoire. Significant works appeared on stage most often during actors' benefit performances, while the daily playbill consisted of plays by V. Krylov, I.V. Shpazhinsky and other modern writers, who based the plot mainly on the events of the “love triangle”, relationships in the family, and were not limited to them. going through them to social problems. Ostrovsky's plays, new revivals of The Inspector General and Woe from Wit, and the appearance of heroic-romantic works from the foreign repertoire in the 1870s and 1880s helped the theater maintain the height of social and artistic criteria, correspond to the advanced sentiments of the time, and achieve a serious impact on its contemporaries. In the 1890s, a new decline began, heroic-romantic plays almost disappeared from the repertoire, and the theater “went into conventional picturesqueness and melodramatic colorfulness” (Nemirovich-Danchenko). He also turned out to be creatively unprepared for mastering new dramatic literature: the plays of L. Tolstoy were not performed on his stage in full force, the theater showed no interest in Chekhov at all and staged only his vaudevilles. There were two directions in the acting art of the Maly Theater - everyday and romantic. The latter developed unevenly, in fits and starts, flaring up during periods of social upsurge and dying out during the years of reaction. Everyday life developed steadily, gravitating towards a critical tendency in its best examples. The Maly Theater troupe consisted of the brightest acting individuals.

Glikeria Nikolaevna Fedotova(1846-1925) - a student of Shchepkin, as a teenager she appeared on stage with her teacher Shchepkin in “Sailor”, with Zhivokini in the vaudeville “Az and Firth”, learning the lessons of not only professional skill, but also the highest acting ethics. At the age of ten, Fedotova entered the Theater School, where she studied first in ballet and then in drama class. At the age of fifteen, she made her debut at the Maly Theater in the role of Verochka in P. D. Boborykin’s play “The Child” and in February 1863 she was enrolled in the troupe. The fledgling talent developed unevenly. The melodramatic repertoire contributed little to his development. In the first years of her work, the actress was often criticized for sentimentality, mannered performance, and “whining acting.” But from the beginning of the 1870s, the true flowering of the actress’s bright and multifaceted talent began. Fedotova was a rare combination of intelligence and emotionality, virtuoso skill and sincere feeling. Her stage decisions were unexpected, her performance was bright, she could master all genres and all colors. Possessing excellent stage abilities - beauty, temperament, charm, infectiousness - she quickly took a leading position in the troupe. For forty-two years she played three hundred and twenty-one roles of varying artistic merit, but if in weak and superficial drama the actress often saved the author and the role, then in classical works she revealed an amazing ability to penetrate into the very essence of character, into the author’s style and the characteristics of the era . Her favorite author was Shakespeare. Alexander Pavlovich Lensky (1847-1908) - actor, director, teacher, theorist, outstanding theater figure of the late 19th - early 20th centuries. The illegitimate son of Prince Gagarin and Italian Vervitziotti, he was brought up in the family of actor K. Poltavtsev. At the age of eighteen he became a professional actor, taking the pseudonym Lensky. For ten years he worked in the provinces, at first he played mainly in vaudeville, but gradually switched to the roles of “first lovers” in the classical repertoire. He was invited to join the Maly Theater troupe for this role in 1876. He made his debut in the role of Chatsky, captivating with the gentleness and humanity of his performance and subtle lyricism. There were no rebellious, accusatory motives in it, but there was a deep drama of a man who experienced the collapse of his hopes in this house. Unusuality and unconventionality also distinguished his Hamlet (1877). A spiritualized young man with noble features and a noble soul, he was imbued with sorrow, not anger. His restraint was revered by some contemporaries as coldness, the simplicity of his tone as a lack of temperament and the necessary strength of voice - in a word, he did not correspond to the Mochalov tradition and was not accepted by many in the role of Hamlet. The first years in the troupe were a search for my path. Charming, pure in soul, but lacking inner strength, subject to doubts - these were mainly Lensky’s heroes in the modern repertoire, for which he was dubbed the “great charmer.” And at this time Ermolova’s star had already risen, the vaults of the Maly Theater resounded with the inspired pathos of her heroines. Next to them, Lensky's blue-eyed youths seemed too amorphous, too socially passive. The turning point in the actor’s work was associated precisely with Ermolova’s partnership. In 1879, they performed together in Gutzkow's tragedy Uriel Acosta. Lensky, playing Acosta, could not completely and immediately abandon what had become familiar to him; his acting techniques did not change - he was also poetic and spiritual, but his social temperament was expressed not through formal techniques, but through a deeply understanding of the image of a leading philosopher and a fighter. The actor performed in other roles of the heroic repertoire, but his deep psychologism and desire for versatility in roles where the literary material did not require it led to the fact that he lost and seemed inexpressive next to his spectacular partners. Meanwhile, his denial of the external signs of romantic art was fundamental. He believed that “our time has moved far beyond romanticism.” He preferred Shakespeare to Schiller and Hugo, although his understanding of Shakespearean images did not find a response. After the half-recognized Hamlet, in 1888 Othello, who was not at all recognized by the Moscow audience and critics, followed, which the actor chose for his benefit performance and had previously played. Lensky's interpretation was distinguished by its undoubted novelty - his Othello was noble, intelligent, kind, and trusting. He suffered deeply and felt subtly; he was alone in the world. After the murder of Desdemona, he “wrapped himself in a cloak, warmed his hands by the torch and trembled.” The actor was looking for humanity in the role, simple and natural movements, simple and natural feelings. He was not recognized in the role of Othello and broke up with her forever. And subsequent roles did not bring him full recognition. He played Dulchin in “The Last Victim”, Paratov in “Dowry”, Velikatov in “Talents and Admirers”, and in all roles the critics lacked accusatory sharpness. She was there, Stanislavsky examined her, Yu. M. Yuryev saw her, but she expressed herself not directly, not directly, but subtly. Indifference, cynicism, self-interest had to be seen in these people under their external charm and attractiveness. Not everything was considered. His success in the role of Muromsky in Sukhovo-Kobylin’s “The Case” was more unanimously recognized. Lensky played Muromsky as a naive, kind, gentle person. He embarked on an unequal duel with the bureaucratic machine, believing that truth and justice would triumph. His tragedy was a tragedy of insight. But Lensky won universal recognition in Shakespearean comedies and, above all, in the role of Benedict in Much Ado About Nothing. The actor's performance in this role was energetic and impetuous; the performer revealed in his hero intelligence, humor and a naive thief in everything that happened around him. He only did not believe in Gero’s betrayal, because he was kind by nature and in love. Beatrice played Fedotov. The duet of two magnificent masters continued in The Taming of the Shrew. The role of Pstruccio was one of Lensky's debuts at the Maly Theater and remained in his repertoire for many years. Fearless Petruchio bravely declared that he would marry Katarina for money and tame the rebellious one, but when he saw his bride, he fell in love with her as violently as before he only craved money. An integral, trusting and gentle nature was revealed under his bravado and he “tamed” Katarina - with his love. He saw in her his equal in intelligence, in her desire for independence, in her rebellion, her unwillingness to submit to the will of others. It was a duet of two wonderful people who found each other in the bustle of life and were happy. Lensky had an excellent command of Griboedov's verse, did not turn it into prose and did not recite it. He filled every phrase with inner meaning, expressed the impeccable logic of character in the impeccability of the melody of speech, its intonation structure, change of words and silence. The skill of penetrating into the essence of the image, psychological justification of the character’s behavior, and subtle taste kept the actor from caricature, from acting, from external demonstration, both in the role of the Governor in “The Inspector General” and in the role of Professor Krugosvetlov in “The Fruits of Enlightenment.” Satire arose from the essence, as a result of revealing the internal structure of the image - in one case, a swindler convinced and not even suggesting that he could live differently, dramatically experiencing his mistake in the finale; in the other, a fanatic who religiously believes in his “science” and serves it with inspiration. Lensky's art became truly perfect; his organic nature, ability to justify everything from within, and his mastery over any of the most complex materials made him the natural leader of the Maly Theater. Each role of Lensky was the result of enormous work, the strictest selection of colors in accordance with the given character and author. The internal content of the image was cast into a precise and spiritualized form, justified from within. While working on the role, the actor drew sketches of makeup and costume, mastered the art of external transformation with the help of one or two expressive strokes, did not like an abundance of makeup, and was excellent at facial expressions. He owns a special article on this issue - “Notes on facial expressions and makeup.” Lensky was a theorist; he wrote articles that formulated the principles of acting, analyzed certain works, and contained advice on the problems of acting. As an actor, director, teacher, theorist, and public figure, he fought to raise the general culture of Russian acting, opposed reliance on the “guts,” and demanded constant work and study. Both in his practice and in his aesthetic program, he developed the traditions and behests of Shchepkin. “You cannot create without inspiration, but inspiration is very often caused by the same work. And the fate of an artist who has not accustomed himself to the strictest discipline in his work is sad: inspiration, rarely called upon, can leave him forever,” he wrote. Having taken the post of chief director of the Maly Theater in 1907, he tried to carry out a reform of the old stage, but under the conditions of the imperial leadership and the inertia of the troupe, he was unable to carry out this intention. October 1908 Lensky died. Ermolova perceived this death as a tragic event for art: “Everything died with Lensky. The soul of the Maly Theater died... With Lensky, not only the great actor died, but the fire on the sacred altar, which he supported with the tireless energy of a fanatic, went out.”

SADOWSKY Mikhail Provovich (12(24).XI.1847, Moscow, -26.?11(8.VIII). 1910, ibid). Son of Prov Mikhailovich Sadovsky Prepared for the stage by his father and A. N. Ostrovsky, Misha Sadovsky in 1867-69 participated in the performances “Artistic. mug" (1st role: Andrei Titych - "In someone else's feast there is a hangover" by Ostrovsky, 1867). In 1869 he made his debut at the Maly Theater in the roles of Podkhalyuzin, Andrei Bruskov, Vasya Shustroy, Borodkin (“Our own people - we will be numbered”, “ Hard days ", "Warm Heart", "Don't Get in Your Own Sleigh" by Ostrovsky). In 1870 he was accepted into the theater troupe in the role of “everyday simpleton” and “character comedian.” A remarkable stage interpreter and passionate promoter of Ostrovsky's dramaturgy, Sadovsky played over 60 roles in his plays. First performer of roles: Bulanov (“Forest”, 1871), Gruntsov (“Labor Bread”, 1874), Murzavetsky (“Wolves and Sheep”, 1875), Mukhoyarov (“Truth is good, but happiness is better”, 1876), Andrei Belugin (“The Marriage of Belugin” by Ostrovsky and Solovyov, 1877), Karandyshev (“Dowry,” 1878), Konstantin Karkuyaov (“Heart is not a Stone,” 1879), Mulin (“Slaves,” 1880), Meluzov (“Talents and fans”, 1881), Okaemov (“Handsome Man”, 1882), Milovzorov (“Guilty Without Guilt”, 1884), etc. At the request of the playwright, Sadovsky was also given roles in the revived performances: Tikhon (“The Thunderstorm”), Golutvin ( “For every wise man...”), Khorkov (“Poor Bride”), Schastlivtsev (“Forest”), Afonya and Krasnov (“Sin and misfortune live on no one”), Ippolit (“It’s not all Maslenitsa for cats”), Khlynov (“Warm Heart”) and others. A student, a creative follower of his father, a democratic actor, an excellent expert on the life of old Moscow, Sadovsky was fluent in stage speech. His original, national, truly folk art was distinguished by its utmost truthfulness, noble simplicity, light humor, sincerity and at the same time drama and satirical sharpness. Following his father, Sadovsky headed the accusatory-critical direction in the national-everyday repertoire of the Maly Theater. The leading theme of Sadovsky's work is the fate of his contemporary, an inconspicuous, simple, disadvantaged person. Playing Schastlivtsev, Sadovsky created an optimistic, humorous image of an actor who passionately loves the theater. The theme of protecting the “little” man, the protest against his humiliation, sounded with great force in Sadovsky’s role as Karandyshev. The image of Murzavetsky was imbued with subtle, intelligent irony. Khlynov is depicted satirically. The image of the democrat-educator Meluzov, permeated with a passionate hatred of the old life, received recognition from progressive viewers. Among the significant roles of Mikhail Provovich were: Khlestakov; Peter, 1st man (“The Power of Darkness”, “Fruits of Enlightenment”), Misail and Leporello (“Boris Godunov” and “The Stone Guest” by Pushkin), Bespandin (“Breakfast with the Leader” by Turgenev), Kalguev (“New Business” Nemirovich-Danchenko), Stremglov (“Sunset” by Sumbatov), ​​etc. Sadovsky is the author of essays and stories from the life of the Moscow bourgeois and merchant backwoods (ed. 1899, 2 vols.). His translations of plays were staged at the Maly and other theaters: “The Corsican” by Gualtieri (1881), “Phaedra” by Racine (1890, both plays translated for benefit performances by M. N. Ermolova), “The Barber of Seville” by Beaumarchais (1883, Maly Theater, in the role of Figaro is the author of the translation), plays by Goldoni, Gozzi, Labiche and others. He wrote the play “Darkness of the Soul” (1885, Maly Theatre, benefit performance by O. O. Sadovskaya, in the role of Varya - Ermolov). For his literary works, Sadovsky was elected a member of the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature. He is also known as a writer of sharp epigrams directed against officialdom, bureaucratic dominance and bureaucratic arbitrariness in the theater. He taught at the Music and Drama School of the Moscow Philharmonic Society and at drama courses at the Moscow Theater School.