It's just a confusing matter. An Entangled Case - Stories

CONFUSED CASE

First published in the magazine " Domestic notes", 1848, No. 3, Dept. I, pp. 50-120 (censored version - February 29). Subtitle - “Case”. Signature: “M. S". The manuscript is unknown. In this volume, the story is reproduced from the text of "Notes of the Fatherland" with the elimination of typos and some obvious oversights.

The lack of a manuscript and the author’s dating do not allow us to accurately determine the time of Saltykov’s work on “A Confused Case.” The newspaper and magazine polemics “about the emancipation of animals” mentioned in the story, rumors about the cholera epidemic and the discontent of St. Petersburg cab drivers date back to September 1847 - January 1848, when “A Confused Affair” was apparently written. At the beginning of 1848, Saltykov read the newly completed story to V. E. Kankrin, who “was delighted with it.” Taking advantage of friendly relations with I. I. Panaev, Kankrin handed over the manuscript to Sovremennik. Panaev, having met her, rejected Saltykov’s story, citing censorship difficulties as the reason for the refusal. "A Confused Affair" was accepted by the editors of Otechestvennye zapiski.

In 1863, Saltykov-Shchedrin included “A Confused Affair” in the collection “Innocent Stories,” significantly shortening the text of the story and straightening it stylistically (see vol. 3 of this edition). Considering that in 1848 the stories were blamed for “semi-mysterious hints,” the satirist considered them unsafe even in the context of censorship persecution in 1863. The writer eliminated in most cases Beobachter's booming "rrrr" - a kind of satirical allusion to the "revolutionaryism" of this character (p. 213, lines 19–20, p. 214, lines 1–2); removed multiple descriptions of the passenger’s threateningly energetic gesture “with raised eyebrows” (p. 233, lines 31–34, p. 235, lines 1–3), shortened the discussion about the “resignation” of the French nation (p. 237, lines 22–25 ); removed the story of the “son of nature” who suffered for his frankness (p. 256, lines 17–22), Perezhiga’s allusion to the incident with the police officer buried alive (p. 273, lines 24–30, etc.).

However, most of the notes - the removal of repetitions, lengths, naturalistic details - should be attributed to increased skill. The text of 1863 does not contain Samoila Petrovich’s warning about “actors” and the author’s commentary on it (pp. 201–202, lines 20–28, 1–8), the scene of the daily examination of the Burnt Dead Cat (p. 209, lines 34–40) , the story of a “Hungarian woman” about a hereditary tendency to sweat (p. 234, lines 13–27), etc.

Despite extensive editing, “A Confused Affair”, even in the 1863 edition, remained in many ways a typical story of the forties, retaining characteristics worldview of young Saltykov. While preparing for publication the second and third editions of “Innocent Stories” (1881, 1885) and the first collected works (1889), Saltykov-Shchedrin continued to work on “A Confused Case,” improving it stylistically. But no significant reductions or changes were made compared to the 1863 revision.

In this volume, which contains the works of the young Saltykov, the story is reproduced in the 1848 edition, which fully reflected the creative experience and socio-philosophical quest of the writer in the first period of his activity, which ended with arrest and exile.

The whole complex is public psychological problems"Entangled Case" is inextricably linked with the tense situation of the second half of the forties, when the question of "the fate of the lower classes" became one of the "most important issues of our time."

In an atmosphere of lively talk about the abolition of serfdom and expectations of revolutionary events in France, Belinsky demanded from writers " natural school""exciting humanity and sympathy" for the oppressed part of society, especially highlighting the works of Dostoevsky, Nekrasov, Butkov and others, whose "muse loves people in attics and basements."

Herzen's fiction and journalism were directed against the humiliation of the human person. His attention was occupied by “the situation of people who shed blood and sweat, who suffered and were exhausted.”

In October 1847, Turgenev’s most acute anti-serfdom stories, “The Burmister” and “The Office,” were published on the pages of Sovremennik; a month later, Grigorovich’s story “Anton the Miserable,” a passionate protest against the lack of rights and poverty of the people, appeared. The thought of the Petrashevites developed in the same direction: “What do we see in Russia?” asked N.A. Mombelli. “Tens of millions suffer, are burdened by life, deprived of human rights, but at the same time a small caste of privileged lucky people, impudently laughing at the misfortunes of their neighbors , is exhausted in the invention of luxurious manifestations of petty vanity and base debauchery"

The main motive of Saltykov’s work also becomes the contrast between the poor man, exhausted from need, and the rich loafers, “greedy wolves” who have taken over life. As in the first story, Saltykov sought to expose the tragic side of poverty, which was for the hero of “Contradictions” “an inevitable synonym for death.” IN " A complicated matter“This thought became the ideological and artistic center of the story about the death of Ivan Samoilich Michulin, “as if he were superfluous in the world.”

In interpreting the everyday philosophy of the “poor man,” Saltykov again echoed Milyutin, who analyzed not only the economic, but also the moral nature of “pauperism” in order to “give true concept about the real depth of this social wound." “If a poor person,” Milyutin emphasized, “sees prosperity, abundance and even luxury everywhere around him, then comparing his fate with the fate of other people should naturally further intensify his torment and add moral suffering to physical suffering.” ".

It is these tragic contrasts that are the source of Michulin’s sad thoughts, embodied in his allegorical dreams. The power of exposing social inequality increases with each new vision of Michulin.

These gloomy visions are completed by the image of a social pyramid, symbolizing repression, lack of rights, “mental pauperism,” “moral poverty” of the oppressed masses, personified by Michulin, whose head was “so disfigured by the weight weighing over it that it lost even the signs of its human character.”

In his portrayal of Michulin, Saltykov proceeded from traditional ideas about " little man", which developed under the influence of Gogol and Dostoevsky. The episode with the stolen overcoat, the description of Michulin’s death, his first dream, which significantly echoed Piskarev’s dreams, the description of St. Petersburg with its ugly poverty and insane luxury, went back to Gogol’s stories in “The Confused Affair.” However, Saltykov did not repeated Gogol; his Michulin was a kind of synthesis of a dispossessed “poor man" and a reflective philosopher like Nagibin. This was the same “poor man” in whom “education,” according to Milyutin, “developed a consciousness of self-worth and a wide variety of needs.” Michulin is trying to comprehend his “plight” and find some way out of the “circumstances” that are “so bad, so bad that it’s easy to get into the water.”

Michulin is also significantly different from Dostoevsky’s “poor people,” although, in comparison with Gogol’s “little man,” the hero of “Entangled Affair” is much closer to the reasoning Devushkin or Golyadkin than to the silently submissive Bashmachkin. Saltykov sought to show in “An Entangled Case” the complexity of the poor man’s mental world with his “outward timidity” and “hidden ambition,” his “murmur and liberal thoughts,” “expressing the individual’s protest against external violent pressure.” However, the nature of the protest in Saltykov’s story differs significantly from the position of Dostoevsky with his broad interpretation of humanism, devoid of the harsh intransigence that was inherent in “A Confused Affair.” The scene of Michulin’s collision with the “right person”, reminiscent of Gogol’s “ significant person" (cf. "The Overcoat"), contrasted with the idyllic description of the meeting of Devushkin, "devoted to his superiors, with his Excellency", who not only "took pity" on the unfortunate official and helped him with money, but, in the words of Makar Alekseevich, "they themselves, straw, drunkard, you deigned to shake my unworthy hand" ("Poor People", 1846).

Saltykov’s analysis of Michulin’s oppressed psyche was subordinated to the comprehension and “research” of social reality, the reflection and consequence of which was Michulin’s “sick” soul, exhausted by thoughts about “the meaning and significance of life, about final causes, and so on.” Michulin, in essence, was solving the same “damned questions” that Nagibin asked Valinsky in the story “Contradictions,” demanding an explanation, “why is it that some people ride in carriages, while you and I walk through the mud.”

But now Saltykov’s hero is intensely looking for an opportunity to act, so as not to at least die of hunger. In desperation, he even decides to violate his “father’s code” of “humility, patience and love,” entering into angry arguments with the “right person.” However, Michulin’s attempts to find “his role” in life ended in tears - “there is no place for him, no, no and no.”

One of the objects of Saltykov’s criticism was the ideas characteristic of the teachings of utopian socialists about the possibility of establishing a just social order by promoting ethical ideals, in particular the Christian commandment to love one's neighbor. “Society itself,” declared, for example, Petrashevsky following Saint-Simon and Feuerbach on the pages of the Pocket Dictionary foreign words", - should become "the practical implementation of the covenant of brotherly love and communication, left to us by the Savior in one word, so that everyone consciously loves his neighbor as himself."

A poisonous caricature of the theorists of dreamy “love” for humanity and “embraces” is given in the image of the poet Alexis Zvonsky.

According to the assumption of P.N. Sakulin, Saltykov used for satirical characterization Zvonsky some details from the biography of the Petrashevsky poet A. N. Pleshcheev with his “anonymous enthusiasm” and “social sadness”. V.I. Semevsky joined this hypothesis, pointing out that “a minor from the nobility” Zvonsky, like Pleshcheev, did not complete a university course and published feuilletons in newspapers.

With no less irony, the story outlines the image of Zvonsky’s friend, the “candidate of philosophy” Wolfgang Antonich Beobachter (in German - observer), who “certainly demanded destruction” and hinted “with a tiny movement of his hand from top to bottom” to the fall of the guillotine knife. According to V.I. Semevsky, such extreme opinions as Beobachter, of all the Petrashevites, could be expressed by N.A. Speshnev, with whom Saltykov met at Petrashevsky’s “Fridays.” A supporter of the “immediate uprising”, Speshnev, traveling around Europe, specially studied history and experience secret societies(for example, Blanqui, Barbesa) with the aim of organizing a revolutionary coup in Russia.

Calls for uprising and revolutionary terror in the conditions of Russian reality of the forties seemed to Saltykov as utopian as appeals to “universal” love, so he directly pointed out that the “disagreements” between Beobachter and Zvonsky “are only in details,” but “in the main they both adhere to the same principles," remaining within the limits of contemplative theory. Like Zvonsky, Beobachter turned out to be completely powerless in the face of Michulin’s “confused matter,” recommending to him, instead of real help, “a tiny book of those that in Paris, like mushrooms in a rainy summer, spring up in the thousands.”

Michulin came to the consciousness of social injustice and spontaneous protest under the influence of life itself, and not book ideas about it. Having become convinced in practice that “silent bowing of the head” threatens starvation, Michulin begins to think about “Beobachter’s way of thinking.” These moods took hold of Michulin with particular force in the theater, when, under the influence of heroic music, he dreamed of the “charming smoke” of the uprising and the indignant crowd that he would like to see in reality. Dressing Michulin’s “rebellious” thoughts in the form of sleep, dreams, delirium, Saltykov emphasized the vagueness and uncertainty of his freedom-loving intentions, shading their illusory nature with an ironic description of the inhabitants of the “side dish” and Michulin’s unexpected allies, who robbed him after assurances of “love and brotherhood.” By the very death of Michulin, who had never resolved the question of his “life purpose,” Saltykov once again pointed out that the Michulin case remains “confused” and awakened the idea of the need for fundamental changes in the situation of “suffering humanity.”

In his second story, Saltykov more deeply grasped the ideological and aesthetic principles of the “natural school.” Instead of “intricate syllogisms” and Nagibin’s abstract reasoning about A, B and C, “calmly and without difficulty enjoying life,” in “An Entangled Affair” there appear very specific colorful figures, painted in sharply accusatory tones. The owners of the “fashionable droshky”, the irritable “necessary man”, the formidable “big one”, the angry Wartkin, the “gloomy” clerk and the old red tape from Michulin’s dreams - all of them, from different sides, demonstrated intransigence social contradictions in the forms of real life.

The severity of the problem, the anti-serfdom orientation (see Perezhiga’s stories about the cruel treatment of serfs and the massacre of peasants against the police chief), the saturation of politically bold reminiscences from progressive philosophical and socio-economic literature (see hints at the denial of God by Feuerbach, the disputes between Beobachter and Zvonsky, Aesop’s description conversation in the carriage) immediately attracted the attention of both progressive and conservative circles of the Russian public to Saltykov’s story.

“I cannot be surprised at the stupidity of the censors who let such works through,” wrote P. A. Pletnev on March 27, 1848, not yet having read the end of “The Confused Affair.” “Nothing else is proven here than the necessity of the guillotine for all the rich and noble.”

The “destructive spirit of the story” alarmed the employees of the III Department, one of whom (M. Gedeonov) wrote a special note about “The Confused Case.” “Wealth and honors,” wrote the secret censor of the III Department, defining “ general meaning"the story, - in the hands of unworthy people, who should be killed every last one. How to equalize wealth? Is it not the punitive machine of the candidate Beobachter, that is, the guillotine? This question, which breathes the whole story, is not resolved by the author, and therefore the title of the story is explained "It's a complicated matter."

"Among the general panic" in connection with French revolution“An Entangled Case” and “The Thieving Magpie” by Herzen, according to M. N. Longinov, “became the grounds for criminal proceedings against literature.” Saltykov was arrested by the authorities and, by decision of Nicholas I, exiled to Vyatka as the author of stories - they also talked about “Contradictions” - “the entire presentation” of which “reveals a harmful way of thinking and a destructive desire to spread ideas that have already shaken the whole of Western Europe and overthrown authorities and public peace."

Radical youth, excited revolutionary events in France, saw in “A Confused Affair” a direct attack against the autocratic-serf system. In I. I. Vvedensky’s circle, which included Chernyshevsky, Blagosvetlov and others, “they knew Saltykov’s exile very well and took to heart.”

The tragic image of a “pyramid of people” was perceived in progressive circles as Saltykov’s speech against the autocratic serfdom system, at the top of which “Emperor Nicholas stands and crushes some people over others.”

“A complicated matter” that, according to Chernyshevsky, has caused “ big noise"in the forties, continued to" arouse interest in people younger generation". In the mid-fifties, Dobrolyubov, along with Herzen's story "Who is to Blame?", tried to propagate Saltykov's work among young people, explaining the reasons and significance of the success of "The Entangled Case" among democratic readers in the article "Downtrodden People." We did not find him in his “Provincial Sketches” with such a living, painfully heartfelt attitude toward poor humanity as in his “Confused Affair,” published 12 years ago. It is clear that there were different years, different forces, different ideals. It was a living and active direction, a truly humane direction, not confused or weakened by various legal and economic maxims, and if this direction had continued, it would, without a doubt, be more fruitful than all those that followed it." Contrasting "Entangled Affair" liberal accusatory fiction, Dobrolyubov further argued that Saltykov’s story not only indicated the main source of evil, but also awakened a “courageous thought” about the fight against it.

Page 201. ..white - hundred-ruble banknote.

Page 205. Vakshtaf - a type of tobacco.

Page 208. Come to the palace, you are my dear. - Words from an aria from the opera “Rusalka” by F. Cauer and S. I. Davydov, popular in the thirties and forties (libretto by N. S. Krasnopolsky).

Page 210. I have read both Bruno Bauer and Feuerbach in my time... - The works of L. Feuerbach, especially “The Essence of Christianity” (1841), were actively studied in advanced circles of the forties, where the books of Bruno Bauer were also popular (see note on p. 248). F. G. Tol, for example, spoke at Petrashevsky’s “Fridays” with an abstract about Bauer and Feuerbach, without separating the teachings of the great materialist from Bauer’s atheistic declarations, masking his subjective idealistic view of nature and society (see V. I. Semevsky, From the history of social ideas in Russia at the end of the 40s, 1917, p. 44, “The Case of the Petrashevites,” vol. II, p. 165).

Does Binbacher stand his ground? Everyone says that there is no main thing, no big thing?- Saltykov hints at the denial of God by L. Feuerbach. The Petrashevites associated with the teachings of Feuerbach new stage in the development of philosophy, when it, “embracing materialism, considers the deity to be nothing more than a general and supreme formula human thinking, turns into atheism" ("Pocket Dictionary of Foreign Words" - In the book "Philosophical and socio-political works of the Petrashevites", p. 184). The ironic name of Feuerbach Binbacher was in the vocabulary of the progressive youth of the forties, who possibly borrowed it from Saltykov's story (see N. G. Chernyshevsky, vol. XIV, pp. 206, 791).

Page 211. … a monstrously colossal punitive machine. - It's about about the guillotine.

How can you manage without him here! This is in their land - well, whistle once or twice - everything is ready!- “Without him” - that is, without the king. Perezhiga rethinks in his own way the opinion of the “mysterious Binbacher” about the “most important”, “greatest” (see note on p. 210).

Page 212. Alexis in his poems constantly depicted breasts plowed with suffering... “suffering, grief and melancholy”- In the lyrics of A. N. Pleshcheev of 1845–1848, as well as in the poetry of D. D. Akhsharumov, S. F. Durov and other poets of the liberal wing of the Petrashevites, against whom the image of Zvonsky was obviously directed (see. above, p. 421), the motives of “unaccountable sadness” prevailed. Compare, for example, Pleshcheev’s lines: “To suffer for everyone, to suffer immensely, to find happiness only in torment...”, “And my chest sank, tormented by melancholy,” “Your chest is tormented by suffering and melancholy,” etc. (A. N. Pleshcheev, Poems, "Poet's Library", L. 1948, pp. 56, 60–62, 69).

“After all, in our days suffering is saving!”- line from Turgenev’s poem “Parasha” (1843), stanza V.

he’ll slam you here, he’ll squeeze you there, he’ll squeeze you in another place... then...- Beobachter’s mysterious “then”, as well as his love for words containing the letter “r”, are Aesopian designations for the words revolution, revolutionary uprising.

Page 214. … looked sideways at him, like Bertram looked at Robert- We are talking about the heroes of D. Meyerbeer’s romantic-fantasy opera “Robert the Devil” (libretto by E. Scribe and J. Delavigne), staged in St. Petersburg by the Italian Opera in 1847–1848. Bertram is a tempter devil sent to earth to force his son Robert to sign a pact with hell at any cost.

Page 216 "Ugolino" - romantic drama N. Polevoy, first staged in St. Petersburg in 1837–1838 and renewed in theater seasons 1846–1848. In “Ugolino,” the famous tragic actor V. A. Karatygin played the role of Nino, Veronica’s lover.

Page 223. bonchretienam - a variety of pears.

Page 232. a carriage invented for the benefit of poor people... “at this opportunity,” he would think, perhaps, about the industrial direction of the century.- Here and further, the text is filled with a number of topical responses to the emergence of omnibus transport and to the newspaper and magazine discussion that arose in connection with this innovation “about the benefits and benefits of public spring carriages,” in which “you can ride from one end to the other for a dime, and, moreover, take a ride calmly, comfortably and even in pleasant company" ("Contemporary", 1847, No. 12, section IV, "Modern Notes", p. 172).

Page 234. Red - ten-ruble banknote.

Page 235. … if you look at the matter, for example, from the side of animal emancipation.- The question of “the emancipation of animals” was raised in V. S. Poroshin’s articles about Krylov’s fables (“St. Petersburg Gazette”, 1847, No. 113–116) and did not leave the pages of newspapers and magazines for a long time. "Domestic Notes" described V.S. Poroshin's speech as "an energetic protest against the ruthless treatment of animals by our fellow countrymen. A horse is kind, intelligent and highest degree useful creation, arouses compassion in him" ("Notes of the Fatherland", 1847, No. 8, department VIII, p. 71; see also No. 11, department VIII, p. 76, 1848, No. 1, department V, p. 13).In contrast to these rumors about a “humane” attitude towards horses, Sovremennik pointed out the “plight” of the working people, responding to the controversy with a description of the hungry, cruel and hopeless life of St. Petersburg cab drivers (Sovremennik, 1848, No. 2, dept. IV, “Modern Notes”, pp. 151–155) In the same ironic sense, the issue of “the emancipation of animals” is mentioned in Saltykov’s story.

Page 235. But it's all poof! The French brought it all!- an ironic response to the feuilleton "Vedomosti of the St. Petersburg City Police" dated September 19, 1847, No. 206. The police newspaper condemned the position of the "St. Petersburg Gazette", seeing in the articles of V. S. Poroshin and A. P. Zabolotsky (see below) undermining patriotic feelings, an attempt to “make” the Russian people “angrier and harsher than all the peoples of Europe” and the intention to “introduce foreign institutions that do not agree with the climate, character, or needs of the people. What is good and useful abroad can It’s bad or even harmful to be with us.”

Page 236. … Have you read the article in the Petersburg Gazette?- We are talking about the article “On cruelty to animals”. Its author, A.P. Zabolotsky, supported V.S. Poroshin (see above), turning the conversation into general discussions about the humanization of morals using the example of “the extensive activities of the English Royal Society for the Protection of Animals,” ultimately aimed at improving the morality of common people. In “A Few Words of Answer,” V. S. Poroshin picked up the idea of “ moral education commoner" by introducing on Russian soil "humane" treatment of horses, etc. ("St. Petersburg Gazette", 1847, Nos. 201 and 202 of September 3 and 6).

Page 237. "resignation" can't be found anywhere except in the French. - The words of the “gentleman with the briefcase,” who hoped to “raise dying humanity from the dust” through economic reforms, apparently contain a hint of the utopian projects of French socialists and economists who proposed reforming the distribution of public goods on the principle of equality and conscious concessions (resignation) on the part of the propertied classes in favor of the poor (see about this V.A. Milyutin, Experience about national wealth, or On the principles of political economy - Sovremennik, 1847, No. 12). At the end of 1847, in particular, Proudhon repeatedly wrote about this, defending the idea of an “economic revolution” through credit and the people’s bank (see, for example, Le representant du peuple, 1847, No. 1). These projects of Proudhon were noted by Sovremennik (1847, No. 12, section IV, p. 220).

Page 243. "Rampant, bright and loving"- the first line of a song widespread among students of the thirties and forties based on the words of N. M. Yazykov (1828) (see N. M. Yazykov, Complete collection poems, "Academia", 1934, p. 325).

Page 244. a painting depicting the burial of a cat by mice. - We are talking about the famous popular print "The Burial of a Cat by Mice", created in the 18th century. The painting reflects the dissatisfaction of the adherents of antiquity with the transformations of Peter, who is depicted in the form of a cat lying on a log, tied up with mice (D. A. Rovinsky, Russians folk pictures, book first, St. Petersburg. 1881, pp. 395–396).

Page 245. There had long been rumors about some strange disease... which indifferently invited me to the next world. - Here and further we refer to the cholera epidemic. “Cholera, which has spread its wide arms over the whole of Russia,” wrote A.V. Nikitenko on November 2, 1847, “is slowly but surely approaching St. Petersburg” (A.V. Nikitenko. Diary, vol. I, Goslitizdat, M. , 1955, p. 308).

Page 248. And that scoundrel Binbacher! He doesn't want to know anything! nothing, he says, is not necessary! I will destroy everything, out of sight!- A satirical response to the broadcast but superficial radicalism of Bruno Bauer, which attracted the sympathies of the opposition youth of the forties to him. In his books “Critique of the Gospel Theory of John” (1840) and “Critique of the Synoptic Gospels” (1841–1842), Bauer “spared neither religion in general nor the Christian state” (see G. V. Plekhanov’s notes to the book by F. Engels “ Ludwig Feuerbach and the end of classical German philosophy", M., 1931, p. 104).

Page 253. They were performing some kind of heroic opera.- We are talking about the opera “William Tell” by Giacomo Rossini, libretto by I. Bi and V. Zhuy (1829). At the request of the censors, this opera with a pronounced national liberation content was staged in St. Petersburg according to a modified libretto by R. M. Zotov under the title “Karl the Bold.” However, the opera retained its heroic sound. “Do you know,” wrote a theater reviewer for Sovremennik, “anything fresher, more indestructible than Rossini’s “Charles the Bold?” (“Sovremennik”, 1847, No. 1, section IV, p. 76). The revolutionary impact of “William Tell” “Saltykov-Shchedrin later noted more than once about the progressive youth of St. Petersburg, for example in the article “St. Petersburg Theaters” (1863). See note on page 255.

Page 254. and what a crowd! - not at all the one he was used to seeing every day on Sennaya or Konnaya.- Michulin’s thoughts about the heroic crowd of the popular uprising and the ordinary market crowd of the famous trading areas of the capital are interesting as one of the first sketches of Saltykov’s thoughts about the people “embodying the idea of democracy” and the “historical people” who have not yet risen to the consciousness of their position and role in history . See about this in the notes to the essay “Foolish debauchery” (vol. 4 of this edition) and “History of a city” (vol. 8 of this edition).

Page 255. ..he wants to run after the crowd himself and sniff the charming smoke along with them.- This refers to the second act of the opera (see note on page 253), in which the freedom-loving Swiss discuss the plan of uprising and vow to throw off the yoke of the Austrian tyrant. “There are places in William Tell at which the blood boils, tears on the eyelashes,” Herzen wrote in his diary in 1843, speaking about the “thrilling” action of both the music and “the drama itself developed in the opera” (A.I. Herzen, vol. II, p. 313).

Page 257. … give us some drums - that's it!- An allusion to “La Marseillaise” (1792), which embodies the music of the revolution - marching rhythms, the beat of drums, the rumble of cannon carriages, etc.

Page 265. … the columns... are completely correct pyramid... are not made at all from granite or any similar mineral, but are all made up of the same people. - By creating this image of the property and legal hierarchy, Saltykov rethinks the famous pyramid of Saint-Simon. Its “granite” base was made up of workers, the middle layers “made of valuable materials” - scientists, people of art, and top part- nobles, rulers and other “rich parasites” supporting the “magnificent diamond” - royal power, were made of gilded plaster (Saint-Simon, Selected Works, vol. II, pp. 330–331). Close to the image of the Saint-Simon pyramid is the image of the “arch”, composed of the nobility, bourgeoisie and people, in George Sand’s novel “The Wandering Apprentice”, which Saltykov read - See note. to page 102). The people, J. Sand warned, will be able to throw off the “overhanging arch” and “straighten up to their full height” (J. Sand, Selected Works, vol. I, M 1950, p. 717). Michulin’s dream about the pyramid served as one of the main points of accusation brought against Saltykov’s story, after the intervention of the III Department, by the so-called “Menshikovsky” censorship committee, whose members “found” that “in this dream one cannot help but see a daring intention - to portray in an allegorical form Russia" (K. S. Veselovsky, Echoes of old memory - "M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin in the memoirs of contemporaries", pp. 412–414).

Page 267. pale death pallidamors... You read Horace.- This refers to lines from Horace’s ode to his friend Lucius Sestius (“Evil Winter Surrenders”), book. I, ode 4: “Pale death breaks with one and the same foot //Into the hovels of the poor and into the palaces of kings” (Quintus Horace Flaccus, Complete Works, “Academia”, M-L 1936, p. 13).

Page 273. But in Holland...- censorship replacement for Russia.

CONFUSED CASE

First published in the journal "Otechestvennye zapiski", 1848, No. 3, dep. I, pp. 50-120 (censored February 29). Subtitle - "Case". Signed: "M.S." Manuscript unknown. In this volume, the story is reproduced from the text of "Notes of the Fatherland" with the elimination of typos and some obvious oversights.

Despite extensive editing, “A Confused Affair”, even in the 1863 edition, remained in many ways a typical story of the forties, retaining the characteristic features of the young Saltykov’s worldview. While preparing for publication the second and third editions of “Innocent Stories” (1881, 1885) and the first collected works (1889), Saltykov-Shchedrin continued to work on “A Confused Case,” improving it stylistically. But no significant reductions or changes were made compared to the 1863 revision.

The entire complex of socio-psychological problems of "Entangled Case" is inextricably linked with the tense situation of the second half of the forties, when the question of "the fate of the lower classes" became one of the "most important issues of our time."

In an atmosphere of lively talk about the abolition of serfdom and expectations of revolutionary events in France, Belinsky demanded from writers of the “natural school” to “arouse humanity and sympathy” for the oppressed part of society, especially highlighting the works of Dostoevsky, Nekrasov, Butkov and others, whose “muse loves people” in attics and basements."

The main motive of Saltykov’s work also becomes the contrast between the poor man, exhausted from need, and the rich loafers, “greedy wolves” who have taken over life. As in the first story, Saltykov sought to expose the tragic side of poverty, which was for the hero of “Contradictions” “an inevitable synonym for death.” In “An Entangled Affair,” this thought became the ideological and artistic center of the story about the death of “as if one were superfluous in the world” of Ivan Samoilich Michulin.

In his interpretation of the everyday philosophy of the “poor man,” Saltykov again echoed Milyutin, who analyzed not only the economic, but also the moral nature of “pauperism” in order to “give a true understanding of the real depth of this social wound.” “If a poor person,” Milyutin emphasized, “sees prosperity, abundance and even luxury everywhere around him, then comparing his fate with the fate of other people should naturally further intensify his torment and add moral suffering to physical suffering.”

It is these tragic contrasts that are the source of Michulin’s sad thoughts, embodied in his allegorical dreams. The power of exposing social inequality increases with each new vision of Michulin.

In his portrayal of Michulin, Saltykov followed traditional ideas about the “little man” that developed under the influence of Gogol and Dostoevsky. The episode with the stolen overcoat, the description of Michulin’s death, his first dream, which palpably echoed Piskarev’s dreams, the characterization of St. Petersburg with its ugly poverty and insane luxury, went back to Gogol’s stories in “An Entangled Case.” However, Saltykov did not repeat Gogol; his Michulin was a kind of synthesis of a destitute “poor man” and a reflective philosopher like Nagibin. This was the same “poor man” in whom “education,” according to Milyutin, “developed a consciousness of self-worth and a wide variety of needs.” Michulin is trying to comprehend his “plight” and find some way out of the “circumstances” that are “so bad, so bad that it’s easy to get into the water.”

Michulin is also significantly different from Dostoevsky’s “poor people,” although, in comparison with Gogol’s “little man,” the hero of “Entangled Affair” is much closer to the reasoning Devushkin or Golyadkin than to the silently submissive Bashmachkin. Saltykov sought to show in “An Entangled Case” the complexity of the poor man’s mental world with his “outward timidity” and “hidden ambition,” his “murmur and liberal thoughts,” “expressing the individual’s protest against external violent pressure.” However, the nature of the protest in Saltykov’s story differs significantly from the position of Dostoevsky with his broad interpretation of humanism, devoid of the harsh intransigence that was inherent in “A Confused Affair.” The scene of Michulin’s collision with the “right person,” reminiscent of Gogol’s “significant person” (cf. “The Overcoat”), contrasted with the idyllic description of the meeting of Devushkin, “loyal to his superiors,” with “His Excellency,” who not only “took pity” on the unfortunate official and helped him money, but, in the words of Makar Alekseevich, “you yourself, a straw man, a drunkard, deigned to shake my unworthy hand” (“Poor People”, 1846).

One of the objects of Saltykov’s criticism was the idea, characteristic of the teachings of utopian socialists, about the possibility of establishing a just social system through the promotion of ethical ideals, in particular the Christian commandment to love one’s neighbor. “Society itself,” Petrashevsky declared, for example, following Saint-Simon and Feuerbach on the pages of the “Pocket Dictionary of Foreign Words,” should become “the practical implementation of the covenant of brotherly love and communication left to us by the Savior in one word, so that everyone consciously loves his neighbor like yourself."

A poisonous caricature of the theorists of dreamy “love” for humanity and “embraces” is given in the image of the poet Alexis Zvonsky.

According to the assumption of P. N. Sakulin, Saltykov used for a satirical characterization of Zvonsky some details from the biography of the Petrashevsky poet A. N. Pleshcheev with his “anonymous enthusiasm” and “social sadness.” V.I. Semevsky joined this hypothesis, pointing out that “a minor from the nobility” Zvonsky, like Pleshcheev, did not complete a university course and published feuilletons in newspapers.

With no less irony, the story outlines the image of Zvonsky’s friend, the “candidate of philosophy” Wolfgang Antonich Beobachter (in German - observer), who “certainly demanded destruction” and hinted “with a tiny movement of his hand from top to bottom” to the fall of the guillotine knife. According to V.I. Semevsky, such extreme opinions as Beobachter, of all the Petrashevites, could be expressed by N.A. Speshnev, with whom Saltykov met at Petrashevsky’s “Fridays.” A supporter of the “immediate uprising,” Speshnev, traveling around Europe, specially studied the history and experience of secret societies (for example, Blanca, Barbes) with the aim of organizing a revolutionary coup in Russia.

In his second story, Saltykov more deeply grasped the ideological and aesthetic principles of the “natural school.” Instead of "intricate syllogisms" and abstract reasoning Nagibin about A, B And WITH, “calmly and effortlessly enjoying life,” in “An Entangled Affair,” very specific, colorful figures appear, depicted in sharply accusatory tones. The owners of the "fashionable droshky", the irritable "necessary man", the formidable "big one", the angry Wartkin, the "gloomy" clerk and the old red tape from Michulin's dreams - all of them, from different sides, demonstrated the irreconcilability of social contradictions in the forms of real life.

The “destructive spirit of the story” alarmed the employees of the III Department, one of whom (M. Gedeonov) wrote a special note about “The Confused Case.” “Wealth and honors,” wrote the secret censor of the III Department, defining the “general meaning” of the story, “are in the hands of unworthy people, who should be killed every last one. How to equalize wealth? Is it not with the punitive machine of candidate Beobachter, that is, with the guillotine? This question , which breathes the whole story, is not allowed by the writer, and therefore the title of the story “A Confused Affair” is precisely explained.

“Among the general panic” in connection with the French revolution, Herzen’s “Entangled Case” and “The Thieving Magpie,” according to M. N. Longinov, “became reasons for criminal proceedings against literature.” Saltykov was arrested by the authorities and, by decision of Nicholas I, exiled to Vyatka as the author of stories - they also talked about “Contradictions” - “the entire presentation” of which “reveals a harmful way of thinking and a destructive desire to spread ideas that have already shaken the whole of Western Europe and overthrown authorities and public peace."

Radical youth, excited by the revolutionary events in France, saw in “Entangled Affair” a direct attack against the autocratic-serf system. In I. I. Vvedensky’s circle, which included Chernyshevsky, Blagosvetlov and others, “they knew Saltykov’s exile very well and took to heart.”

“The Confused Affair,” which, according to Chernyshevsky, made “a big splash” in the forties, continued to “arouse interest among people of the younger generation.” In the mid-fifties, Dobrolyubov, along with Herzen’s story “Who is to Blame?”, tried to propagate Saltykov’s work among young people, explaining the reasons and significance of the success of “The Entangled Case” among democratic readers in the article “Downtrodden People.” “In none of the “Provincial Sketches” did we find such a living, painfully heartfelt attitude toward poor humanity as in his “Confused Affair,” published 12 years ago. It is clear that then there were other years, different forces, other ideals. It was a living and active direction, a truly humane direction, not confused or weakened by various legal and economic maxims, and if this direction had continued, it would, without a doubt, be more fruitful than all those that followed it." Contrasting “A Confused Affair” with liberal accusatory fiction, Dobrolyubov further argued that Saltykov’s story not only indicated the main source of evil, but also awakened a “courageous thought” about the fight against it.

Page 201. ..white- hundred-ruble banknote.

Page 205. Vakshtaf- type of tobacco.

Page 208. Come to the palace, you are my dear. - Words from an aria from the opera “Rusalka” by F. Cauer and S. I. Davydov, popular in the thirties and forties (libretto by N. S. Krasnopolsky).

Page 210. I have read both Bruno Bauer and Feuerbach in my time... - The works of L. Feuerbach, especially “The Essence of Christianity” (1841), were actively studied in advanced circles of the forties, where the books of Bruno Bauer were also popular (see note on p. 248). F. G. Tol, for example, spoke at Petrashevsky’s “Fridays” with an abstract about Bauer and Feuerbach, without separating the teachings of the great materialist from Bauer’s atheistic declarations, masking his subjective idealistic view of nature and society (see V. I. Semevsky, From the history of social ideas in Russia at the end of the 40s, 1917, p. 44, “The Case of the Petrashevites,” vol. II, p. 165).

Does Binbacher stand his ground? Everyone says that there is no main thing, no big thing?- Saltykov hints at the denial of God by L. Feuerbach. With the teachings of Feuerbach, the Petrashevites associated a new stage in the development of philosophy, when it, “embracing materialism, considers deity to be nothing more than the general and highest formula of human thinking, passes into atheism” (“Pocket Dictionary of Foreign Words” - In the book “Philosophical and socio-political works of the Petrashevites", p. 184). The ironic name of Feuerbach Binbacher was in the vocabulary of the progressive youth of the forties, who possibly borrowed it from Saltykov’s story (see N. G. Chernyshevsky, vol. XIV, pp. 206, 791).

Page 211. … a monstrously colossal punitive machine.- We are talking about the guillotine.

How can you manage without him here! This is in their land - well, whistle once or twice - everything is ready!- “Without him” - that is, without the king. Perezhiga rethinks in his own way the opinion of the “mysterious Binbacher” about the “most important”, “greatest” (see note on p. 210).

Page 212. Alexis in his poems constantly depicted breasts plowed with suffering... “suffering, grief and melancholy”- In the lyrics of A. N. Pleshcheev of 1845–1848, as well as in the poetry of D. D. Akhsharumov, S. F. Durov and other poets of the liberal wing of the Petrashevites, against whom the image of Zvonsky was obviously directed (see. above, p. 421), the motives of “unaccountable sadness” prevailed. Compare, for example, Pleshcheev’s lines: “To suffer for everyone, to suffer immensely, to find happiness only in torment...”, “And my chest sank, tormented by melancholy,” “Your chest is tormented by suffering and melancholy,” etc. (A. N. Pleshcheev, Poems, "Poet's Library", L. 1948, pp. 56, 60–62, 69).

“After all, in our days suffering is saving!”- line from Turgenev’s poem “Parasha” (1843), stanza V.

he’ll slam you here, he’ll squeeze you there, he’ll squeeze you in another place... then...- Beobachter’s mysterious “then”, as well as his love for words containing the letter “r”, are Aesopian designations for the words revolution, revolutionary uprising.

Page 214. … looked sideways at him, like Bertram looked at Robert- We are talking about the heroes of D. Meyerbeer’s romantic-fantasy opera “Robert the Devil” (libretto by E. Scribe and J. Delavigne), staged in St. Petersburg by the Italian Opera in 1847–1848. Bertram is a tempter devil sent to earth to force his son Robert to sign a pact with hell at any cost.

Page 216 "Ugolino"- a romantic drama by N. Polevoy, first staged in St. Petersburg in 1837–1838 and renewed in the theater seasons of 1846–1848. In “Ugolino,” the famous tragic actor V. A. Karatygin played the role of Nino, Veronica’s lover.

Page 223. bonchretienam - pear variety

Page 232. a carriage invented for the benefit of poor people... “at this opportunity,” he would think, perhaps, about the industrial direction of the century.- Here and further, the text is filled with a number of topical responses to the emergence of omnibus transport and to the newspaper and magazine discussion that arose in connection with this innovation “about the benefits and benefits of public spring carriages,” in which “you can ride from one end to the other for a dime, and, moreover, take a ride calmly, comfortably and even in pleasant company" ("Contemporary", 1847, No. 12, section IV, "Modern Notes", p. 172).

Page 234. Red- a ten-ruble banknote.

Page 235. … if you look at the matter, for example, from the side of animal emancipation.- The question of “the emancipation of animals” was raised in V. S. Poroshin’s articles about Krylov’s fables (“St. Petersburg Gazette”, 1847, No. 113–116) and did not leave the pages of newspapers and magazines for a long time. "Domestic Notes" described V. S. Poroshin's speech as "an energetic protest against the ruthless treatment of animals by our fellow countrymen. The horse, this kind, intelligent and extremely useful creature, arouses compassion in him" ("Domestic Notes", 1847, no. 8, Dept. VIII, p. 71; see also No. 11, Dept. VIII, p. 76, 1848, No. 1, Dept. V, p. 13). In contrast to these rumors about a “humane” attitude towards horses, Sovremennik pointed out the “plight” of the working people, responding to the controversy with a description of the hungry, cruel and hopeless life of St. Petersburg cab drivers (Sovremennik, 1848, No. 2, department IV, "Modern Notes", pp. 151–155). In the same ironic sense, the question of “the emancipation of animals” is mentioned in Saltykov’s story.

Page 235. But it's all poof! The French brought it all!- an ironic response to the feuilleton "Vedomosti of the St. Petersburg City Police" dated September 19, 1847, No. 206. The police newspaper condemned the position of the "St. Petersburg Gazette", seeing in the articles of V. S. Poroshin and A. P. Zabolotsky (see below) undermining patriotic feelings, an attempt to “make” the Russian people “angrier and harsher than all the peoples of Europe” and the intention to “introduce foreign institutions that do not agree with the climate, character, or needs of the people. What is good and useful abroad can It’s bad or even harmful to be with us.”

Page 236. … Have you read the article in the Petersburg Gazette?- We are talking about the article “On cruelty to animals”. Its author, A.P. Zabolotsky, supported V.S. Poroshin (see above), turning the conversation into general discussions about the humanization of morals using the example of “the extensive activities of the English Royal Society for the Protection of Animals,” ultimately aimed at improving the morality of common people. In “A Few Words of Answer,” V. S. Poroshin picked up the idea of “moral education of the common people” by introducing “humane” treatment of horses, etc. on Russian soil (St. Petersburg Gazette, 1847, No. 201 and 202 of September 3 and 6).

Page 237. "resignation" can't be found anywhere except in the French. - The words of the “gentleman with the briefcase,” who hoped to “raise dying humanity from the dust” through economic reforms, apparently contain a hint of the utopian projects of French socialists and economists who proposed reforming the distribution of public goods on the principle of equality and conscious concessions (resignation) on the part of the propertied classes in favor of the poor (see about this V.A. Milyutin, Experience on National Wealth, or On the Principles of Political Economy - Sovremennik, 1847, No. 12). At the end of 1847, in particular, Proudhon repeatedly wrote about this, defending the idea of an “economic revolution” through credit and the people’s bank (see, for example, Le representant du peuple, 1847, No. 1). These projects of Proudhon were noted by Sovremennik (1847, No. 12, section IV, p. 220).

Page 243. "Rampant, bright and loving"- the first line of a song widespread among students of the thirties and forties based on the words of N. M. Yazykov (1828) (see N. M. Yazykov, Complete collection of poems, “Academia”, 1934, p. 325).

Page 244. a painting depicting the burial of a cat by mice. - We are talking about the famous popular print "The Burial of a Cat by Mice", created in the 18th century. The painting reflects the dissatisfaction of the adherents of antiquity with the transformations of Peter, who is depicted in the form of a cat lying on a log, tied with mice (D. A. Rovinsky, Russian folk pictures, book one, St. Petersburg 1881, pp. 395–396).

Page 245. There had long been rumors about some strange disease... which indifferently invited me to the next world. - Here and further we refer to the cholera epidemic. “Cholera, which has spread its wide arms over the whole of Russia,” wrote A.V. Nikitenko on November 2, 1847, “is slowly but surely approaching St. Petersburg” (A.V. Nikitenko. Diary, vol. I, Goslitizdat, M. , 1955, p. 308).

Page 248. And that scoundrel Binbacher! He doesn't want to know anything! nothing, he says, is not necessary! I will destroy everything, out of sight!- A satirical response to the broadcast but superficial radicalism of Bruno Bauer, which attracted the sympathies of the opposition youth of the forties to him. In his books “Critique of the Gospel Theory of John” (1840) and “Critique of the Synoptic Gospels” (1841–1842), Bauer “spared neither religion in general nor the Christian state” (see G. V. Plekhanov’s notes to the book by F. Engels “ Ludwig Feuerbach and the end of classical German philosophy", M., 1931, p. 104).

Page 253. They were performing some kind of heroic opera.- We are talking about the opera “William Tell” by Giacomo Rossini, libretto by I. Bi and V. Zhuy (1829). At the request of the censors, this opera with a pronounced national liberation content was staged in St. Petersburg according to a modified libretto by R. M. Zotov under the title “Karl the Bold.” However, the opera retained its heroic sound. “Do you know,” wrote a theater reviewer for Sovremennik, “anything fresher, more indestructible than Rossini’s “Charles the Bold?” (“Sovremennik”, 1847, No. 1, section IV, p. 76). The revolutionary impact of “William Tell” “Saltykov-Shchedrin later noted more than once about the progressive youth of St. Petersburg, for example in the article “St. Petersburg Theaters” (1863). See note on page 255.

Page 254. and what a crowd! - not at all the one he was used to seeing every day on Sennaya or Konnaya.- Michulin’s thoughts about the heroic crowd of the popular uprising and the ordinary market crowd of the famous trading areas of the capital are interesting as one of the first sketches of Saltykov’s thoughts about the people “embodying the idea of democracy” and the “historical people” who have not yet risen to the consciousness of their position and role in history . See about this in the notes to the essay “Foolish debauchery” (vol. 4 of this edition) and “History of a city” (vol. 8 of this edition).

Page 255. ..he wants to run after the crowd himself and sniff the charming smoke along with them.- This refers to the second act of the opera (see note on page 253), in which the freedom-loving Swiss discuss the plan of uprising and vow to throw off the yoke of the Austrian tyrant. “There are places in William Tell at which the blood boils, tears on the eyelashes,” Herzen wrote in his diary in 1843, speaking about the “thrilling” action of both the music and “the drama itself developed in the opera” (A.I. Herzen, vol. II, p. 313).

Page 257. … give us some drums - that's it!- An allusion to “La Marseillaise” (1792), which embodies the music of the revolution - marching rhythms, the beat of drums, the rumble of cannon carriages, etc.

Page 265. … the columns... form a completely regular pyramid... not made of granite or any similar mineral, but all made up of the same people. - By creating this image of the property and legal hierarchy, Saltykov rethinks the famous pyramid of Saint-Simon. Its “granite” base was made up of workers, the middle layers “made of valuable materials” - scientists, people of art, and the upper part - nobles, rulers and other “rich parasites” supporting the “magnificent diamond” - royal power, was made of gilded plaster (Sen -Simon, Selected Writings, vol. II, pp. 330–331). Close to the image of the Saint-Simon pyramid is the image of the “arch”, composed of the nobility, bourgeoisie and people, in George Sand’s novel “The Wandering Apprentice”, which Saltykov read - See note. to page 102). The people, J. Sand warned, will be able to throw off the “overhanging arch” and “straighten up to their full height” (J. Sand, Selected Works, vol. I, M 1950, p. 717). Michulin’s dream about the pyramid served as one of the main points of accusation brought against Saltykov’s story, after the intervention of the III Department, by the so-called “Menshikovsky” censorship committee, whose members “found” that “in this dream one cannot help but see a daring intention - to portray in an allegorical form Russia" (K. S. Veselovsky, Echoes of old memory - "M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin in the memoirs of contemporaries", pp. 412–414).

Page 267. pale death pallidamors... You read Horace.- This refers to lines from Horace’s ode to his friend Lucius Sestius (“Evil Winter Surrenders”), book. I, ode 4: “Pale death breaks with one and the same foot //Into the hovels of the poor and into the palaces of kings” (Quintus Horace Flaccus, Complete Works, “Academia”, M-L 1936, p. 13).

Page 273. But in Holland...- censorship replacement for Russia.

First published in the journal Otechestvennye zapiski, 1848.

The entire complex of socio-psychological problems of “Entangled Case” is inextricably linked with the tense situation of the second half of the forties, when the question of “the fate of the lower classes” became one of the “most important issues of our time” 1.

The main motive of Saltykov’s work also becomes the contrast between the poor man exhausted from need and rich slackers, “greedy wolves” who have taken over life. In “An Entangled Affair”, this idea about the tragic side of poverty became the ideological and artistic center of the story about the death of “as if one were superfluous in the world” of Ivan Samoilich Michulin.

Michulin's first dream about his unexpected transformation into a “darling of fortune,” despite the sad ending, is presented in Gogolian, sympathetically mocking tones. The second dream was essentially a detailed illustration of Nagibin’s sorrowful thoughts regarding the fate of a poor man who decided to have a family. Rethinking the plot of Nekrasov’s poem “Am I Driving Down a Dark Street at Night” 2, Saltykov painted a picture “full of burning, unbearable despair,” strengthening the denunciation and protest by introducing the allegorical motif of “greedy wolves” who “must be killed,” “every one of them.” These gloomy visions are completed by the image of a social pyramid, symbolizing repression, lack of rights, “mental pauperism,” “moral poverty” of the oppressed masses, personified by Michulin, whose head was “so disfigured by the weight weighing over it that it lost even the signs of its human character.”

In his portrayal of Michulin, Saltykov followed traditional ideas about the “little man” that developed under the influence of Gogol and Dostoevsky. The episode with the stolen overcoat, the description of Michulin’s death, his first dream, which palpably echoed Piskarev’s dreams, the characterization of St. Petersburg with its ugly poverty and insane luxury, went back to Gogol’s stories in “An Entangled Case.” However, Saltykov did not repeat Gogol: his Michulin was a kind of synthesis of a dispossessed “poor man” and a reflective philosopher like Nagibin. This was the same “poor man” in whom “education,” according to Milyutin, “developed... a consciousness of self-worth and a wide variety of needs” 3 . Michulin is trying to comprehend his “plight” and find some way out of the “circumstances” that are “so bad, so bad that it’s easy to get into the water.”

Michulin is also significantly different from Dostoevsky’s “poor people,” although, in comparison with Gogol’s “little man,” the hero of “Entangled Affair” is much closer to the reasoning Devushkin or Golyadkin than to the silently submissive Bashmachkin. Saltykov sought to show in “An Entangled Case” the complexity of the poor man’s mental world with his “outward timidity” and “hidden ambition,” his “murmur and liberal thoughts» , “expressing an individual’s protest against external violent pressure.” However, the nature of the protest in Saltykov’s story differs significantly from the position of Dostoevsky with his broad interpretation of humanism, devoid of the harsh intransigence that was inherent in “A Confused Affair.” The scene of Michulin’s collision with the “right person,” reminiscent of Gogol’s “significant person” (cf. “The Overcoat”), contrasted with the idyllic description of the meeting of Devushkin, “loyal to his superiors,” with “His Excellency,” who not only “took pity” on the unfortunate official and helped him money, but, in the words of Makar Alekseevich, “they themselves, a straw man, a drunkard, deigned to shake my unworthy hand” (“Poor People”, 1846).

The analysis of Michulin’s oppressed psyche was subordinated by Saltykov to the comprehension and “research” of social reality, the reflection and consequence of which was Michulin’s “sick” soul, exhausted by thoughts about “the meaning and significance of life, about final causes, and so on.” Michulin, in essence, was solving the same “damned questions” that Nagibin asked Valinsky in the story “Contradictions,” demanding an explanation, “why is it that some people ride in carriages, while you and I walk through the mud.”

One of the objects of Saltykov’s criticism was the idea, characteristic of the teachings of utopian socialists, about the possibility of establishing a just social system through the promotion of ethical ideals, in particular the Christian commandment to love one’s neighbor. “Society itself,” Petrashevsky declared, for example, following Saint-Simon and Feuerbach on the pages of the “Pocket Dictionary of Foreign Words,” should become “the practical implementation of the covenant of brotherly love and communication left to us by the Savior; in a word, so that everyone consciously love your neighbor as yourself»

The ironic theme of “open arms” runs through the entire story, from the allusion to the “truth about open arms” that Michulin’s father imagined, and ending with Ivan Samoilich’s meeting with the “son of nature”, who proposed to “unite in one common embrace.” A poisonous caricature of the theorists of dreamy “love” for humanity” and “embraces” is given in the image of the poet Alexis Zvonsky. According to the assumption of P. N. Sakulin, Saltykov used for a satirical characterization of Zvonsky some details from the biography of the Petrashevsky poet A. N. Pleshcheev with his “anonymous enthusiasm” and “social sadness” 1. V.I. Semevsky joined this hypothesis, pointing out that “a minor from the nobility” Zvonsky, like Pleshcheev, did not complete a university course and published feuilletons in newspapers 2 .

With no less irony, the story outlines the image of Zvonsky’s friend, the “candidate of philosophy” Wolfgang Antonich Beobachter (in German - observer), who “certainly demanded destruction” and hinted “with a tiny movement of his hand from top to bottom” to the fall of the guillotine knife. Calls for uprising and revolutionary terror in the conditions of Russian reality of the forties seemed to Saltykov as utopian as appeals to “universal” love, so he directly pointed out that the “disagreements” between Beobachter and Zvonsky were “only in details,” but “in the main they both adhere to the same principles,” remaining within the limits of contemplative theory. Like Zvonsky, Beobachter turned out to be completely powerless in the face of Michulin’s “confused matter,” recommending to him, instead of real help, “a tiny book of those that in Paris, like mushrooms in a rainy summer, spring up in the thousands.”

Michulin came to the consciousness of social injustice and spontaneous protest under the influence of life itself, and not book ideas about it. Having become convinced in practice that “silent bowing of the head” threatens starvation, Michulin begins to think about “Beobachter’s way of thinking.” These moods took hold of Michulin with particular force in the theater, when, under the influence of heroic music, he dreamed of the “charming smoke” of the uprising and the indignant crowd that he would like to see in reality. Dressing Michulin’s “rebellious” thoughts in the form of sleep, dreams, and delirium, Saltykov emphasized the vagueness and uncertainty of his freedom-loving intentions, shading their illusory nature with an ironic description of the inhabitants of the “side dish” and Michulin’s unexpected allies, who robbed him after assurances of “love and brotherhood.” By the very death of Michulin, who had never resolved the question of his “life purpose,” Saltykov once again pointed out that the Michulin case remains “confused” and awakened the idea of the need for fundamental changes in the situation of “suffering humanity.”

In his second story, Saltykov more deeply grasped the ideological and aesthetic principles of the “natural school.” Instead of Nagibin’s “intricate syllogisms” and abstract reasoning about A, B and C, “calmly and without difficulty enjoying life,” in “An Entangled Affair,” very specific colorful figures appear, depicted in sharply accusatory tones. The owners of the “fashionable droshky”, the irritable “necessary man”, the formidable “big one”, the angry Wartkin, the “gloomy” clerk and the old red tape from Michulin’s dreams - all of them, from different sides, demonstrated the irreconcilability of social contradictions in the forms of real life.

“Among the general panic” in connection with the French revolution, Herzen’s “Entangled Case” and “The Thieving Magpie,” according to M. N. Longinov, “became the grounds for criminal proceedings against literature” 2. Saltykov was arrested by the authorities and, by decision of Nicholas I, exiled to Vyatka as the author of stories - they were also talking about “Contradictions” - “the entire presentation” of which “reveals a harmful way of thinking and a destructive desire to spread ideas that have already shaken the whole Western Europe and overthrew the authorities and public peace."

“A Confused Affair,” which, according to Chernyshevsky, made “a big splash” in the forties, continued to “arouse interest among people of the younger generation.” In the mid-fifties, Dobrolyubov, along with Herzen’s story “Who is to Blame?”, tried to propagate Saltykov’s work among young people, explaining the reasons and significance of the success of “The Confused Affair” among democratic readers in the article “Downtrodden People”: “Not in any of the “Provincial “in his essays” we did not find such a living, painfully heartfelt attitude towards poor humanity as in his “Intricate Affair”, published 12 years ago. It is clear that there were different years, different forces, different ideals. It was a living and active direction, a truly humane direction, not confused or weakened by various legal and economic maxims... and if this direction had continued, it would, without a doubt, be more fruitful than all those that followed it.” Contrasting “A Confused Affair” with liberal accusatory fiction, Dobrolyubov further argued that Saltykov’s story not only indicated the main source of evil, but also awakened a “courageous thought” about the fight against it.

Born into the wealthy family of Evgraf Vasilyevich Saltykov, a hereditary nobleman and collegiate adviser, and Olga Mikhailovna Zabelina. Received home education– his first mentor was the serf artist Pavel Sokolov. Later education young Mikhail the governess, the priest, the seminary student and his older sister were engaged. At the age of 10, Mikhail Saltykov-Shchedrin entered the Moscow Noble Institute, where he demonstrated great academic success.

In 1838, Mikhail Saltykov-Shchedrin entered the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum. There, for his academic success, he was transferred to study at state expense. At the Lyceum, he began to write “free” poetry, ridiculing the shortcomings around him. The poems were weak, soon future writer stopped studying poetry and did not like being reminded of the poetic experiences of his youth.

In 1841, the first poem "Lyre" was published.

In 1844, after graduating from the Lyceum, Mikhail Saltykov entered service in the office of the War Ministry, where he wrote free-thinking works.

In 1847, the first story, “Contradictions,” was published.

On April 28, 1848, for the story “A Confused Affair,” Mikhail Saltykov-Shchedrin was sent on official transfer to Vyatka - away from the capital and into exile. There he had an impeccable work reputation, did not take bribes and, using great success, was allowed into all houses.

In 1855, having received permission to leave Vyatka, Mikhail Saltykov-Shchedrin left for St. Petersburg, where a year later he became an official of special assignments under the Minister of Internal Affairs.

In 1858, Mikhail Saltykov-Shchedrin was appointed vice-governor of Ryazan.

In 1860 he was transferred to Tver as vice-governor. During the same period, he actively collaborated with the magazines “Moskovsky Vestnik”, “Russian Vestnik”, “Library for Reading”, “Sovremennik”.

In 1862, Mikhail Saltykov-Shchedrin retired and tried to found a magazine in Moscow. But the publishing project failed and he moved to St. Petersburg.

In 1863, he became an employee of the Sovremennik magazine, but due to microscopic fees he was forced to return to service.

In 1864, Mikhail Saltykov-Shchedrin was appointed chairman of the Penza Treasury Chamber, and was later transferred to Tula in the same position.

In 1867, as head of the Treasury Chamber, he was transferred to Ryazan.

In 1868, he again retired with the rank of a truly state councilor and wrote his main works “The History of a City,” “Poshekhon Antiquity,” “The Diary of a Provincial in St. Petersburg,” and “The History of a City.”

In 1877, Mikhail Saltykov-Shchedrin became the editor-in-chief of Otechestvennye zapiski. He travels around Europe and meets Zola and Flaubert.

In 1880, the novel “Gentlemen Golovlevs” was published.

In 1884, the journal “Domestic Notes” was closed by the government and Mikhail Saltykov-Shchedrin’s health condition deteriorated sharply. He has been sick for a long time.

In 1889, the novel “Poshekhon Antiquity” was published.

In May 1889, Mikhail Saltykov-Shchedrin fell ill with a cold and died on May 10. He was buried at the Volkovskoye cemetery in St. Petersburg.

Mikhail Evgrafovich Saltykov-Shchedrin was born on January 15 (27), 1826 in the village of Spas-Ugol, Tver province in the ancient noble family. Elementary education the future writer received it at home - a serf painter, a sister, a priest, and a governess worked with him. In 1836, Saltykov-Shchedrin studied at the Moscow Noble Institute, and from 1838 at the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum.

Military service. Link to Vyatka

In 1845, Mikhail Evgrafovich graduated from the lyceum and entered service in the military chancellery. At this time, the writer became interested in the French socialists and George Sand, and created a number of notes and stories (“Contradiction”, “An Entangled Affair”).

In 1848, in a short biography of Saltykov-Shchedrin, a long period of exile began - he was sent to Vyatka for freethinking. The writer lived there for eight years, first serving as a clerical official, and then was appointed adviser to the provincial government. Mikhail Evgrafovich often went on business trips, during which he collected information about provincial life for his works.

Government activities. Mature creativity

Returning from exile in 1855, Saltykov-Shchedrin entered service in the Ministry of Internal Affairs. In 1856-1857 his “ Provincial essays" In 1858, Mikhail Evgrafovich was appointed vice-governor of Ryazan, and then Tver. At the same time, the writer was published in the magazines “Russian Bulletin”, “Sovremennik”, “Library for Reading”.

In 1862, Saltykov-Shchedrin, whose biography was previously associated more with career than with creativity, left public service. Stopping in St. Petersburg, the writer gets a job as an editor at the Sovremennik magazine. Soon his collections “Innocent Stories” and “Satires in Prose” will be published.

In 1864, Saltykov-Shchedrin returned to service, taking the position of manager of the treasury chamber in Penza, and then in Tula and Ryazan.

The last years of the writer's life

Since 1868, Mikhail Evgrafovich retired and was actively involved in literary activity. In the same year, the writer became one of the editors of Otechestvennye Zapiski, and after the death of Nikolai Nekrasov, he took the post of executive editor of the magazine. In 1869 - 1870, Saltykov-Shchedrin created one of his most famous works - “The History of a City” (summary), in which he raises the topic of relations between the people and the authorities. Soon the collections “Signs of the Times”, “Letters from the Province”, and the novel “The Golovlev Gentlemen” will be published.

In 1884, Otechestvennye zapiski was closed, and the writer began to publish in the journal Vestnik Evropy.

IN last years Saltykov-Shchedrin's creativity reaches its climax in the grotesque. The writer publishes the collections “Fairy Tales” (1882 – 1886), “Little Things in Life” (1886 – 1887), “Peshekhonskaya Antiquity” (1887 – 1889).

Mikhail Evgrafovich died on May 10 (April 28), 1889 in St. Petersburg, and was buried at the Volkovsky cemetery.

Chronological table

Other biography options

While studying at the Lyceum, Saltykov-Shchedrin published his first poems, but quickly became disillusioned with poetry and left this activity forever.
Mikhail Evgrafovich made it popular literary genre a social-satirical tale aimed at exposing human vices.
The link to Vyatka became turning point in the personal life of Saltykov-Shchedrin - there he met his future wife E. A. Boltina, with whom he lived for 33 years.
While in exile in Vyatka, the writer translated the works of Tocqueville, Vivien, Cheruel, and took notes on Beccari’s book.
In accordance with the request in his will, Saltykov-Shchedrin was buried next to the grave of Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev.

Biography test

After reading short biography Saltykova-Shchedrin, take the test.