Exposing moral problems in Chingiz Aitmatov's novels "The Scaffold and the Eternal Bride" methodological development in literature (grade 11) on the topic. Multidimensionality of narration in the novel Ch

The plight of the ecological environment has long been one of the most pressing topics of modern writers. Ch. Aitmatov in his famous novel “The Scaffold” also addresses this problem. This novel is a call to come to your senses,
realize your responsibility for everything that is carelessly destroyed by man in nature. It is noteworthy that the writer considers environmental problems in the novel inextricably with the problems of the destruction of the human personality.
The novel begins with a description of the life of a wolf family, which lives harmoniously in its lands, until a person appears who disturbs the peace of nature. He senselessly and rudely destroys everything in his path. You feel uneasy when you read about the barbaric roundup of saigas. The reason for such cruelty was simply a difficulty with the meat delivery plan. “The involvement of undiscovered reserves in the planned turnover” resulted in a terrible tragedy: “...across the steppe, along the white snow powder, a continuous black river of wild horror rolled.” The reader sees this beating of saigas through the eyes of the she-wolf Akbara: “Fear reached such apocalyptic proportions that the she-wolf Akbara, deaf from the gunshots, thought that the whole world had become deaf and numb, that chaos had reigned everywhere and the sun itself... was also rushing about and looking for salvation, and that even the helicopters suddenly became numb and, without any roar or whistle, silently circled over the steppe going into the abyss, like giant silent kites...” In this massacre, Akbar’s wolf cubs die. The Akbars’ misfortunes did not end there: five more wolf cubs died during a fire, which was specially set by people to make it easier to obtain expensive raw materials: “For this, you can gut the globe like a pumpkin.” This is what people say, not suspecting that nature will take revenge for everything sooner than they expect. Nature, unlike people, has only one unfair action: while taking revenge on people for their ruin, it does not consider whether you are guilty or not before it. But nature is still devoid of senseless cruelty. The she-wolf, left alone due to human fault, is still drawn to people. She wants to transfer her unspent maternal tenderness to the human child. It turned out to be a tragedy, but this time for the people. But Akbara is not to blame for the death of the boy. This man, in his cruel outburst of fear and hatred for the incomprehensible behavior of the she-wolf, shoots at her, but misses and kills his own son.
Akbar's she-wolf is endowed by the writer with moral memory. She not only personifies the misfortune that befell her family, but also recognizes this misfortune as a violation of the moral law. As long as a person did not touch her habitat, the she-wolf could meet a helpless person one on one and let him go in peace. In the cruel circumstances imposed on her by a man, she is forced to enter into mortal combat with him. But not only Bazarbai, who deserved punishment, dies, but also an innocent child. Boston has no personal guilt before Akbara, but he is responsible for Bazarbai, his moral antipode, and for the barbarity of Kandarov, who destroyed Moyunkum. I would like to note that the author well understands the nature of such human cruelty towards the environment. This is elementary greed, the struggle for one’s own well-being, justified almost by state necessity. And the reader, together with Aitmatov, understands that since gangster actions are committed under the guise of state plans, it means that this is a general phenomenon, not a particular one, and it must be fought.
I believe that we all need to seriously think about what the nature of our fatherland will be like in the future. Is it possible to wish our descendants a life on bare land, without groves and nightingale trills?! This is why I completely agree with the author of “The Scaffold”: ecology and morality are connected by one line of life.

Chingiz Aitmatov’s novel “The Scaffold” touches on many problems of modern society. touched upon very important issues that can confront a person if he is not indifferent to our own and the fate of future generations. Chingiz Aitmatov touched upon the problems of drug addiction, drunkenness, ecology, as well as various moral problems of society. If these problems are not resolved, they will ultimately lead humanity to the “chopping block.”

The main character of the first half of the novel is Avdiy Kallistratov. This is a person who cares about the conditions in which the people around him live. He cannot watch people destroy themselves without heartache. He cannot remain inactive, even though his actions, often naive and not giving the desired result, turned out to be detrimental to him. The writer creates a contrast between Obadiah and young drug addicts, thereby emphasizing two different directions in the development of human character. One path that Obadiah followed leads to the improvement of the best spiritual qualities of a person. The other is to slow degradation, to spiritual impoverishment. In addition, drug addiction gradually makes a person physically weak and sick. A single protest by Avdija could not lead to global changes in society and even in that small group of people with whom he had the misfortune of collecting cannabis together. Society must think about this problem and try to solve it with forces much greater than the strength of one person. However, it cannot be said that Obadiah did nothing. He tried to show people what kind of disaster they could come to, and someone would certainly have supported him if fate had not led Obadiah to death. Someone would support his desire to change his life for the better. By showing the death of Obadiah, the writer seems to be explaining to us what we will all come to if we close our eyes and turn away, seeing something terrible and unfair happening. The people who killed Obadiah are worse than animals, because animals kill to live, but they killed thoughtlessly, simply out of anger. These, if you look at it, pathetic drunkards end up slowly killing themselves morally and physically.

Another problem - the problem of ecology - is most fully revealed through the description of the life of a family of wolves. The author brings their perception of the world closer to human, making their thoughts and experiences understandable and close to us. The writer shows how much we can influence the life of living nature. In the scene of the saigas being shot, people seem to be simply monsters who have no pity for living beings. Wolves running with saigas are seen as more noble and even kinder than people. By destroying living nature, a person will destroy himself. This statement involuntarily suggests itself when you read certain moments of the novel.

The most important and most terrible, it seems to me, is the problem of morality. Unspiritual people are capable of destroying for their own benefit, and they will not feel pain or shame from this. They cannot understand that their actions will turn against themselves, that they will have to pay for everything. Spiritless people in the novel supply teenagers with drugs, kill Avdiy, destroy nature without a twinge of conscience, not realizing what they are doing. A soulless man steals the wolf cubs from Akbara, which causes an even more terrible tragedy: the child dies. But he doesn't care. However, this act led to his death. All problems of humanity are born from the lack of a moral principle in people. Therefore, first of all, we must strive to awaken in people compassion and love, honesty and selflessness, kindness and understanding. Avdiy Kallistratov tried to awaken all this in people; all of us should strive for this if we do not want to end up on the “chopping block.”

Chingiz Torekulovich Aitmatov is a wonderful modern writer. Working in literature for more than forty years, he was able to vividly and truthfully reflect the complex and heroic moments of our history. The writer is still full of creative plans and is working on another novel.

Aitmatov was born in 1928 in the remote village of Sheker in Kyrgyzstan. In 1937, his father, a major party worker, was illegally repressed. It was then that Aitmatov received a lesson in honor: “To the question “whose son are you?” You must, without lowering your head, looking straight into people’s eyes, say the name of your father. This was the order of my grandmother, my father’s mother.” The long-standing lesson of honor became the principle of life and, later, creativity.

The writer makes extensive use of mythology, even fairy tales. Aitmatov’s mythologism is quite unique in nature. Modern mythologism is not only the poetics of myth, but also the worldview behind it, which includes a complex set of ideological and artistic views.

The myth is also present in his “White Steamer”. The whole life of the myth in the story is realistically correlated with reality: the old grandfather tells his grandson a fairy tale, and the grandson, a little boy, as is typical for children, believed in its truth. Aitmatov, gradually revealing to us the inner world of his hero, shows how in his rich poetic imagination, constantly creating his little fairy tales (with binoculars, stones, flowers, a briefcase), the “fairy tale” (as he calls the myth) about the Horned Mother can also live - deer. The appearance of live deer in the local reserve supports the legend about the saving Deer that lives in the boy’s mind.

The second deep plan of the life of the myth is born outside the narration, already in our reader’s consciousness: nature is the mother of all things on earth and of man too: forgetting this truth leads to fatal consequences, most of all fraught with deep moral losses, i.e. myth plays the role of artistic metamorphosis to express this thought of the writer.

Ch. Aitmatov deeply and correctly depicted the undivided human consciousness and managed to enter into it. The realist writer sets himself the task of recreating the unique inner world of the patriarchal Nivkh man. The artist consistently reveals a new national world for himself, making extensive use of Nivkh geographical, ethnic, and folklore material. Ch. Aitmatov constructs his story in his usual epic vein - again making extensive use of repetitions, refrains, again using the technique of the author's voice in the areas of the heroes, the main nerve is still the stream of consciousness, which allows us to identify that subtle psychologism that sets this epic legend into a number of contemporary works. And realistic signs not only of everyday life (clothing, hunting equipment, dugout boat), but also of time, are given, albeit sparingly, but accurately and clearly in order to recreate a certain historical moment in the life of the Nivkhs.

Ch. Aitmatov tells the story as a legend, but we still perceive it as a story. This happens because, setting himself the task of creating a legend, a myth, Aitmatov deprives the narrative of the conventions inherent in myth and, plunging us into the world of reality, thereby destroys the myth.

The very action of the works, the actions of the heroes, the movement of the plot are devoid of mythical wonder. For Ch. Aitmatov, the truth is fundamentally important. This is his position, his writing credo.

In the novel “And the Day Lasts Longer than a Century” there are, as it were, several spaces: the Buran stop, Sary-Ozekov, a country, a planet, near-Earth and deep space. It's like

one axis of coordinates, the second is time: the distant past, present and almost fantastic future are connected together. Every space has time, they are all interconnected.

From these relationships, which arise thanks to a complex compositional solution, metaphors and associative images of the novel are born, giving depth and expressiveness to the writer’s artistic generalizations. At the very beginning of the novel, switchman Edigei will separate all three

time; The lettered one will go into the future to the Sary-Ozek cosmodrome, Edigei himself will remain in the present, and his thoughts will be carried away into the past. From this moment on, categories of time will exist in different worlds and develop in parallel. They will unite and come together only at the end of the novel in a terrible picture of the apocalypse. “The sky was falling on its head, opening up in clouds of boiling flame and smoke... A man, a camel, a dog - these simple creatures, maddened, ran away. Seized with horror, they fled together, afraid to part with each other, they ran across the steppe, mercilessly

illuminated by gigantic flashes of fire...”

The meeting place of times was the ancient family cemetery of Ana-Beyit, “which arose on the site of the death of a mother, killed by the hand of her Mankurt son, mutilated by the medieval Ruanzhuans.

The new barbarians built a cosmodrome in the family cemetery, where in the depths of the earth, in the ashes of their ancestors, for the time being, robotic rockets were hidden, closing the seemingly broken connection of times on a signal from the future, the forces of evil of the distant past, incredibly cruel with present point of view. Thus, in the novel by Ch. Aitmatov, images of space - time, heroes, thoughts and feelings are intertwined and a surprisingly harmonious unity is born, especially necessary in our century not only because of the invasion of scientific and technological achievements into the field of fiction, but rather because it is contradictory and disharmonious the world in which we live.

The originality of the myth lies in the fact that the past is closely intertwined with the present, which means that people of our time turn to the past, and for Ch. Aitmatov the past is a myth. Therefore, the writer reveals the problems of modernity in myths.

Aitmatov is interested in ideas on a planetary scale. If in the story “The First Teacher” the writer focused primarily on the uniqueness of Kyrgyz love, life, culture and, as they now say, mentality, then in the novels “The Scaffold” and “And the Day Lasts Longer than a Century,” he showed himself as a citizen of the globe. He raises global issues. The writer openly stated that drug addiction is a terrible scourge. And in the USSR at that time there was no drug addiction, just like sex. Aitmatov allowed himself to raise this topic, because no one had been allowed to do so before him.

Aitmatov’s principles of storytelling become more complex. The author's story is sometimes combined through indirect speech with the hero's confession, often turning into an internal monologue. The hero's internal monologue turns into the author's thoughts. The role of folklore elements is increasing. Following the lyrical songs that were used in the early stories, the author more and more freely intersperses folk legends into the fabric of the works.

The pictures of modern life in the story “The White Steamship” are presented against the background of the Kyrgyz legend about Mother Deer, and it is even difficult to understand where the basis is and where the drawing is. In addition, the personification of nature is organic, and man is perceived as an integral part of it. Nature, in turn, is inseparable from man.

The writer’s work as a whole begins to be perceived as an epic tale about the world and man in one of the most majestic eras - a legend created by one of its most active and passionate figures.

Life - human existence - freedom - revolution - the construction of socialism - peace - the future of humanity - these are the steps that form a single and only ladder, according to

in which the real creator and master of life, the Man of Humanity, rises “everything forward! and higher!". He, the main character of Chingiz Aitmatov, is personally responsible for everything that was, is and will be, that can happen to people, the Earth, the Universe. He is a man of action and a man of intense thought - he carefully examines his past in order to avoid miscalculation on the difficult path laid out for all of humanity. He looks anxiously into the future. Such is the scale by which

The writer is guided both in his approach to the modern world and in his portrayal of his hero, comprehending them in all their ambiguity.

“Burany Stop Station” - the first novel by Ch. Aitmatov - is a significant phenomenon in our literature. In this work, those creative discoveries and ideas that “appeared” in the stories found their development; brought the writer not only all-Union, but also world fame. The distinctive feature is the epic focus.” Three storylines developing in parallel and intersecting only once, but their interconnection is carried out throughout the entire narrative. The breadth and spatiality of the depicted world. The category of time enhances the overall epic orientation of the work. The interdependence of the present, past, and future creates the volumetric integrity of the work. The timing is epic. The character of the main character is epic, who finds himself drawn into the most important events taking place in the world. The pathos of the novel lies in the affirmation of the harmonious synthesis of man and society, the triumph of reason and peace. The essential features of an epic novel - the spatiality and volume of time and main plot lines, the epic character and conflict, the worldview of the author himself - are present in the novel in organic unity.

All this constitutes the originality of Ch. Aitmatov’s creativity.

The main actions in the novel “The Scaffold” take place in the endless expanses of the Mayunkum savannah and the Issy-Kul region. The main characters: Avdiy Kallistratov, messengers for cannabis, Oberkandalovites and Boston Urkunchiev. The main artistic arsenal for solving the problem of freedom and unfreedom: techniques that reveal psychology: internal monologues, dialogues, dreams and visions; images-symbols, antithesis, comparison, portrait.

Avdiy Kallistratov is one of the most important links in the chain of heroes of the “Mayunkum” chapters of “The Scaffold”. Being the son of a deacon, he enters the theological seminary and is listed there “... as a promising one...” However, two years later he is expelled for heresy. The fact is (and these were the hero’s first steps as a free individual) that Obadiah, considering “...that traditional religions...are hopelessly outdated...” due to his dogmatism and rigidity, puts forward his own version of “.. .development over time

categories of God depending on the historical development of humanity.” The character is confident that an ordinary person can communicate with the Lord without intermediaries, that is, without priests, and the church could not forgive this. In order to “...return the lost young man to the bosom of the church...” a bishop comes to the seminary or, as he was called, Father Coordinator. During a conversation with him, Obadiah “...felt in him that power that, in every human matter, while protecting the canons of faith, first of all respects its own interests.” However, the seminarian openly says that

dreams of “... overcoming age-old rigidity, emancipation from dogmatism, giving the human spirit freedom in the knowledge of God as the highest essence of its own existence.” In other ways, the “spirit of freedom” must control a person, including his desire to know God.

Contrary to the assurances of Father Coordinator that the main reason for the seminarian’s “rebellion” is the extremism characteristic of youth, Avdiy does not renounce his views. In the “sermon” of the Father

The coordinator heard a thought that became a reality in Kallistratov’s later tragic life: “You can’t lose your head with such thoughts because even in the world they don’t tolerate those

whoever questions the fundamental teachings...and you will pay the price..." Obadiah's conclusions were of an unsettled, debatable nature, but official theology did not forgive him for such freedom of thought, expelling him from its midst.

After being expelled from the theological seminary, Avdiy works as a freelancer for a Komsomol newspaper, the editors of which were interested in such a person, since the former

the seminarian was a kind of anti-religious propaganda. In addition, the hero’s articles were distinguished by unusual topics, which aroused interest among readers. Obadiah’s goal was “...to acquaint the reader with the range of thoughts for which, in fact, he was expelled

from theological seminary.” The character himself speaks about it this way: “I have long been tormented by the idea of ​​finding well-trodden paths to the minds and hearts of my peers. I saw my calling in teaching good” In this aspiration of the hero Ch. Aitmatov can be compared with Bulgakov’s Master, who with his

With his novel about Pilate, he also advocated the most humane human qualities, defending personal freedom. Like the hero of “The Master and Margarita,” Avdiy cannot publish his “alarm” articles about drug addiction, since “... higher authorities...”, deprived of truth, and therefore freedom, and not wanting to damage the country’s prestige with this problem, do not allow them to be published. “Fortunately and unfortunately for himself, Avdiy Kallistratov was free from the burden of such... hidden fear...” The hero’s desire to tell the truth, no matter how bitter it may be, emphasizes his freedom.

In order to collect detailed material about the anashists, Avdiy penetrates their environment and becomes a messenger. The day before his trip to the Mayunkum steppes to collect the “evil thing”, realizing the danger and responsibility of what he is undertaking, he unexpectedly receives great moral support: a concert of Old Bulgarian temple singing. Listening to the singers, “... this cry of life, the cry of a man with raised hands, speaking of the eternal thirst to assert himself,... to find a foothold in the vast expanses of the universe...”, Obadiah receives the necessary energy and strength to fulfill his mission . Under the influence of singing, the hero involuntarily recalls the story “Six and Seven,” which tells about the time of the civil war on the territory of Georgia, and finally understands the reason for the tragic ending when security officer Sandro, who infiltrated Guram Dzhokhadze’s detachment, after singing together the night before parting kills everyone and himself. A song flowing from the very

hearts, brings people together, spiritualizes, fills souls with a feeling of freedom and Sandro, splitting into two in the struggle of duty and conscience, having punished the bandits, kills himself.

In this episode, music symbolizing a sense of freedom fills the soul of a former seminarian. Ch. Aitmatov, through the mouth of the hero, reflects: “Life, death, love, compassion

and inspiration - everything will be said in music, because in it, in music, we were able to achieve the highest freedom for which we fought throughout history...”

The day after the concert, Avdiy rushes to Mayunkum together with the marijuana addicts. As the hero meets the messengers, the original plan of simply collecting material for an article gives way to the desire to save lost souls. Avdiy “...was obsessed with the noble desire to turn their (anashists - V.D.) destinies towards the light with the power of the word...”, not knowing “... that evil opposes good even when good wants to help those who have embarked on the path of evil ...”]

The culminating moment in the story with the anashists is the dialogue between Avdiy and the leader of the messengers, Grishan, during which the views of the characters become obvious precisely from the point of view of the problem that interests me.

Grishan, having understood Kallistratov’s plan to save young drug addicts, tries to prove the incompetence of Avdiy’s actions, their senselessness. The former seminarian hears words that are similar to what Father Coordinator once told him: “Have you, savior-emissary, thought before about what force is opposing you?” These words sound like a direct threat, but the preacher remains true to himself. Obadiah believes that “...to withdraw, seeing the atrocity with one’s own eyes... is tantamount to a grave fall from grace.” Grishan claims that he, more than anyone else, gives everyone freedom in the form of a high from the drug, while the Kallistratovs “... are deprived of even this self-deception.”

However, in the very words of the leader of the anashists lies the answer: freedom under the influence of the drug is self-deception, which means neither the messengers nor Grishan have true freedom. That's why

the anashists attack Avdiy and, having severely beaten him, throw him off the train. Remarkable fact: Grishan does not participate in the beating. He, like the biblical Pontius Pilate, washes his hands of the victim, handing it over to be torn to pieces by a maddened crowd.

Thanks to his young body or some miracle, Avdiy Kallistratov remains alive. Now it would seem that the hero will come to his senses and understand the danger of fighting the “windmills” of immorality, lack of spirituality, and lack of freedom. However, this does not happen. Avdiy, having barely recovered, ends up in the “brigade” or “junta,” as the people themselves dubbed themselves, of Ober-Kandalov, a former military man “... formerly from the penal battalion...”], who was sent to Mayunkum for

shooting saigas to fulfill the meat delivery plan. The raid had a strong effect on Obadiah: “...he screamed and rushed about, as if in anticipation of the end of the world - it seemed to him that everything was going to hell, being thrown into a fiery abyss...” Wanting to stop the brutal massacre, the hero wanted to turn people to God who came to Savannah hoping to earn blood money. Avdiy “... wanted to stop the colossal machine of extermination that was accelerating in the vastness of Mayunkumskaya

savannah, - this all-crushing mechanized force... I wanted to overcome the irresistible...” This force physically suppresses the hero. He doesn’t try to save, but it was almost impossible, because Ober-Kandalov countered with a cruel thought: “... whoever is not with us, raised his tongue so that his tongue was immediately on one side. He would hang everyone, everyone who is against us, and in one string he would wrap his arms around the entire globe, like a hoop, and then no one would oppose a single word of ours, and everyone would walk around

in line...” Obadiah could not and did not want to walk “in line,” so he was crucified on saxaul. His “... figure was somewhat reminiscent of a large bird with outstretched wings...” The mention of a bird, the free image of which appears three times in the biblical legend of the novel, allows

assert: the comparison indicates that Obadiah dies as a free person, while the Oberkandalites, deprived of all moral standards, of human semblance in general, are not free.

Father Coordinator, Anashists and Oberkandalovites are a modern alternative to Obadiah, Christ of the twentieth century. They tried to force him to renounce his beliefs, faith, and freedom. However, just as two thousand years ago Pontius Pilate heard refusal from the lips of Christ three times, so modern Pilates cannot break the will of a free man - Obadiah Kallistratov.

The last character in the “Mayunkum” chapters, in the appendix to which the problem of freedom and unfreedom is explored, is Boston Urkunchiev. The character's storyline is intertwined with the line of wolves. The hero never meets Avdiy Kallistratov on the pages of the novel, but, nevertheless, his life is filled with the ideas of Christ of the twentieth century. Boston “...accumulates the healthy skills and principles of life accumulated by the people over thousands of years and

of his stay on earth...taking into account the experience of man in the twentieth century, he expresses aspirations for real humanism.”

The most important thing in the hero’s life is family (wife and little Kenjesh) and work, “...after all, from childhood he lived by work.” Boston puts his whole soul into the difficult work of a shepherd, working with lambs almost around the clock. He is trying to introduce a rental contract in the team he leads, believing that for every “... business, someone in the end must... be the owner.” The desire for significant changes, giving more freedom to make decisions and actions, confirms and indicates the hero’s desire not only for freedom on a narrow, specific, but also on a global scale.

However, it is not possible to implement the plan due to misunderstanding, indifference, and indifference of the state farm management, which in certain circumstances turns into criminal permissiveness and misanthropy. This was precisely the reason for the enmity between Urkunchiev and the drunkard Bazarbai. It is indifference and misunderstanding in general lack of spirituality that are the main reasons for the death of Ernazar, a friend and like-minded person of Boston, who dies on the way to new pastures for livestock.

Boston is having a hard time with Ernazar's death. Although, if you think about it, the character is not to blame for the tragedy that occurred. Not Urkunchiev, but society, indifferent and ossified, holding on,

like the official church, based on dogmatism, it pushes shepherds into risky business. The freedom of the character by the author of “The Scaffold” is derived from the concept of “morality, that is, only a highly moral person who correlates his actions with his conscience, according to Ch. Aitmatov, can be free. All these qualities are inherent in Boston Urkunchiev. After the death of Ernazar, “...for a long time, years and years, Boston dreamed of the same terrible dream, forever imprinted in his memory...”, in which the hero descends into an ominous abyss, where Ernazar, frozen in the ice, found his last refuge. A dream during which a shepherd experiences torment again and again is

determining the issue of morality, and therefore the issue of the character’s freedom.

Human degradation and cruelty, intensified in the treatment of nature and surrounding people, become the cause of the Boston tragedy. The fact is that Bazarbai, having destroyed the wolf’s lair, leads the animals to Boston’s home. In response to the shepherd’s repeated requests to give away or sell the wolf cubs

Bazarbai refused. Meanwhile, the wolves slaughtered the sheep and did not allow them to sleep peacefully at night with their howls. The hero, in order to protect his family and household from such a disaster, sets up an ambush and kills the wolf-father. His death is the first link in subsequent deaths. Next came his son Kenjesh and the she-wolf: Boston, wanting to shoot the beast that kidnapped the child, kills both. For the hero, the world fades, “...he disappeared, he was gone, in his place there was only raging fiery darkness.” From this moment on, the character, who differed from those around him by the presence of moral purity and freedom, loses it. This can be explained this way: by killing the mother wolf, who embodies and personifies Nature, her highest wisdom and intelligence, Boston kills himself in his offspring.

However, on the path of losing freedom, Boston goes even further, becoming the same unfree person as Kochkorbaev, Oberkandalovites and anashists, committing lynching of Bazarbai.

Concluding the conversation about the existence or lack of freedom among the heroes of the “Mayunkum” chapters of the novel, we can draw the following conclusions. The only hero who has exceptional freedom is Avdiy Kallistratov. A character who fought to save the “lost souls” of marijuana and

Oberkandalovtsy, who preaches goodness, moral purity and freedom, dies without changing his faith in man, without renouncing the beliefs of a free person. Anashists and Oberkandalovites, deprived of moral principles, pursuing only one goal in life - enrichment, are deprived of freedom. At the same time, anashists, considering the dope of the drug as liberation from

all prohibitions, aggravate their lack of freedom.

Boston Urkunchiev, being an extraordinary, initially free person, as a result of the crime of human norms, following the lead of people like Kochkorbaev, Father Coordinator, anashists and Oberkandalovites, loses his freedom, puts an end to his life as a free person and the life of his family.

27. Deepening the social analysis of reality in Ch. Aitmatov’s story “Farewell, Gyulsary.”

A writer from Kyrgyzstan now worthily represents both his people and all post-Soviet literature abroad. Achievements, interacting literatures, are judged by the achievements of such writers as Ch. Aitmatov.

After completing six classes, Aitmatov was the secretary of the village council, a tax agent, an accountant, and performed other work on the collective farm. After graduating from the Dzhambul Zootechnicum, he entered the Kyrgyz Agricultural Institute. It was at this time that short notes, essays, and correspondence written by the future writer began to appear in the republican press. Aitmatov also conducted philological research during his student years, as evidenced by the articles “Translations that are far from the original” and “On the terminology of the Kyrgyz language.” In this work, he is helped by equally fluent command of both his native and Russian languages. After working for three years in his specialty on an experimental livestock farm, Aitmatov entered a two-year higher literary course in Moscow. Aitmatov took his first steps in the writing field in the fifties. In 1958, his first book, “Face to Face,” was published in Russian. Translation from Kyrgyz was carried out by A. Drozdov. This short story, but vivid in content, tells about the dramatic period of our history - the Great Patriotic War. She reached the distant Kyrgyz village with tears of pain and loss. She burned Seide, the main character of the story, with a terrible and shameful word: “deserter.”

After studying in Moscow, Aitmatov worked in the republican press, and then - for five years - as his own correspondent for the Pravda newspaper in Kyrgyzstan.

In the 60s, the writer wrote the stories “The Camel’s Eye”, “The First Teacher”, “The Poplar in the Red Scarf”, “The Mother’s Field”. They talk about the difficult development of Kyrgyzstan, about overcoming inertia and prejudice, about the victory of the human spirit.

In the 70s, Aitmatov continued to work in the genre of stories. “Early Cranes” appears, telling about the difficult wartime, when teenagers, bypassing their youth, stepped straight into adulthood. This is largely an autobiographical story. Aitmatov is also from this generation. “The White Steamer” is a tragic story about childhood destroyed by the cruelty of adults. This is one of the author's best stories, written in 1970.

Beginning with the story “Farewell, Gyulsary!”, with the militantly affirming pathos of his work, it amazes with the acute drama of life’s collisions, stunning

turns in the destinies of heroes, sometimes tragic destinies in the most sublime meaning of these words, when death itself serves to elevate a person.

The story “Farewell, Tulsary!” talks not only about some important social problems of the 40-50s, about mistakes and excesses during that period. Many of the mistakes of that time have been overcome, excesses have been corrected, but literature has deeper tasks than pointing out individual, even significant, errors and shortcomings of social life.

When analyzing the social connections of the hero of the story “Farewell, Gyulsary!” We should not forget about the historically specific, geographically precisely defined environment in which Tanabai Bakasov operates. The artistic persuasiveness of the story lies in the fact that the writer, through the power of talent, was able to show the fate of his contemporary, highlighting in it the essential social relationships of the world and man, and was able to give the story about the dramatic fate of one person a universal sound.

The development of Tanaya Bakasov's character follows concentric circles of gradually expanding knowledge of life. Corporal Bakasov would not have learned much if he had remained to work as a hammerman in the village forge. This was in the first post-war years, when all Soviet people lived on “the air of victory like bread.” Even then, the thought of how to quickly and better improve the lives of his fellow villagers flashed through the head of the impatient Tanabai. The whole story, in fact, became a summary; it begins with those difficult final questions that usually arise before a person once in a life, at some critical moment: about the meaning of life, about the dignity of man, about the passing of time. The writer used these two themes as the basis of his artistic construction: the life of a man and the life of a pacer.

From the first pages of the story, these two characters are outlined - the collective farmer Tanabai Bakasov and the famous horse Gyulsary. And the whole action develops as the story of a restless man, beating against the sharp corners of life, a man who has resisted the hardships of time. At the same time, the tragic story of the famous pacer Gyulsary unfolds, patiently enduring all the blows of fate, with an even step he walked the road of life from the winner of horse racing to a wretched, driven old horse, stretching out his zeroes on the frozen steppe road on a cold February night.

The comparison of these two destinies is inevitable for the writer; the story begins and ends with their comparison; it runs like a poignant refrain through all the chapters - the old man and the old horse. The comparison is carried out according to the principle of similarity and the principle of dissimilarity. The analogy in this case would be dry, dead, flat. The artist needed such an ideological and compositional technique in order to emphasize the spiritual obsession of a man who has not resigned himself to his fate, who continues to fight for the cause to which he devoted all his strength and the best years of his life. With each refrain, the author emphasizes the old shepherd’s desire to comprehend his past, to understand the years he has lived.

And Tanabai’s stubborn desire to assert his rightness, his position as a communist, gradually grows. The old man indignantly recalls the absurd words of his daughter-in-law: “Look, why did you join the party if you spent your whole life as a shepherd and a herdsman, and were kicked out in old age...”

Then, in a conversation with his daughter-in-law and son, Tanabai had not yet been able to find the right words about himself, about his destiny. And on the way to the lady, he still cannot forget the insults. It took a sleepless night by the fire in the cold February darkness, next to the dying pacer, to mentally relive your whole life, remember the path of your beloved horse, and finally firmly say to yourself: “I am still needed, I will be needed...”

The ending is generally optimistic, but what an abyss of human suffering, strength of spirit, and insatiable desire for the ideal is revealed by the writer in the biography of the Kyrgyz herdsman and shepherd Tanabay Gakasov, who bled his sides and heart in the struggle for his principles.

And in the story on a burning modern theme, the story about a Kyrgyz collective farmer, the chilling depth and inexhaustibility of the eternal questions of human life are revealed.

The writer divides Tanabai’s path of understanding his existence, his time into two stages. The first covers the period when Tanabai worked as a herdsman, raised and groomed Gyulsary. It ends with the hero's dramatic shock associated with the forcible expulsion of the pacer from his herd, the emasculation of Gyulsara. The second stage of Tanabai’s social self-awareness is his work as a shepherd, a hard winter in the thin sheep folds, a clash with the district prosecutor Selizbaev, and expulsion from the party.

In the first half of the story, Tanabai lives away from the artel, driving a herd of horses through the pastures, in which he immediately noticed an unusual pacer. This part of the story is painted in major, light colors, however, already here, working as a herdmaster, Tanabai saw the state of the artel economy. The harsh winter and lack of food sometimes drove Tanabai to despair. Aitmatov notes: “The horses did not remember this, the man remembered this.” But spring came, bringing with it warmth, joy and food for the horses. In these first years, with the herd, Tana6ai enjoyed his strength, youth, he felt how the pacer was growing up, how “from a shaggy, short one-and-a-half-year-old he was turning into a slender, strong stallion.” Tanabai was admired for his character and temperament. The pacer was still possessed by only one passion - a passion for running. He rushed among his peers like a yellow comet, “driven tirelessly by some incomprehensible force.” And even when Tanabai rode the young horse and accustomed him to the saddle, Gyulsary “almost did not feel any embarrassment from him. It became easy and joyful for him to carry a rider.” This is an important detail in the pacer’s and Tanabay’s sense of life: they both felt “easy and joyful”; they aroused the admiration of people who, seeing how quickly and smoothly the horse ran along the road, gasped: “Put

a bucket of water on him - and not a drop will spill out!” And the old herdsman Torgoy said to Tanabai: “Thank you, it’s good - I left. Now you will see how your pacer’s star will rise!”

For Tanabai, those years were perhaps the best of the entire post-war period. “The gray horse of old age was waiting for him just beyond the pass, although it was close...” He experienced happiness and courageous excitement when he showed off in the saddle on his pacer. He recognized true love for a woman and turned to her every time he drove past her yard. At that time, Tanabai and Gulysary experienced together the delightful feeling of victory at the Kyrgyz national horse race - Alaman-baig. As the old herdsman Torgoy predicted, “the pacer’s star rose high.” Everyone in the area already knew the famous Gyulsary. The fifth chapter of the story, describing the victory of the pacer on the big Alaman-baiga, depicts the highest point of the living unity of man and horse. This is one of the best pages of Aitmatov’s prose, where the fullness of the feeling of life is permeated with the passionate drama of struggle. After the races, Gyulsary and Tanabai go around to the sound of enthusiastic screams, and this is well-deserved recognition. And everything that happens to the pacer and Tanabai after their joint celebration will be assessed in the story from the point of view of a harmonious, true life.

And further dramatic events are already anticipated in the first half of the story. In these best years of his life, rejoicing at the growing pacer, Tanabai often asked anxious questions to himself and his friend, the chairman of the collective farm, Choro Sayakov - about affairs in the artel farming, about the situation of collective farmers. Elected to the audit committee, Tanabai often thought about what was happening around him. Just as the pacer was possessed by a “passion for running,” so Tana-

The boy was often overcome with impatience. Choro’s friend often told him: “Do you want to know, Tanabai, why you have no luck? Out of impatience. By God. Everything to you as quickly as possible. Bring on the world revolution immediately! But the revolution, the ordinary road, the climb from Aleksandrovka is unbearable for you... But what do you gain? Nothing. You still sit there, at the top, waiting for others.”

But Tanabai is impatient, hot-tempered, and quick-tempered. He saw that the situation on the collective farm was dire, “the collective farm was completely in debt, the bank accounts were frozen.” Tanabai often argued with his comrades in the collective farm office, asking “how is this happening and when will such a life finally begin, so that the state will have something to give and so that people will not work in vain.” “No, it shouldn’t be like this, comrades, something is wrong here, there’s some kind of problem here,” said Tanabai. “I don’t believe that it should be like this. Either we have forgotten how to work or you are leading us incorrectly.”

Even before the war, Tanabai was an active communist, and after going through the front, having known the happiness of victory over fascism, he grew spiritually and morally. This is how all his fellow villagers felt. It is not for nothing that Chairman Choro, thinking about “how to do things to improve the economy, feed the people and fulfill all plans,” notices the main process in the spiritual development of his compatriots: “And people are no longer the same, they want to live better...”

Tanabai cannot yet say what is the matter; he only doubts whether collective farm and district leaders are working correctly. He feels anxiety and personal responsibility for the fate of the common cause. He had his own “special” reasons for anxiety and concern.” They are very important both for understanding the main character of the story and for understanding the social sound of the entire work. Artel business is in decline. Tanabai saw that the collective farmers “now laugh at him quietly and, seeing him, look defiantly in his face: well, how are you doing? Maybe you'll take up dispossession again? Only now the demand from us is small. Wherever you sit down, that’s where you’ll get off.”

These are the social origins of the personal drama of the old herdsman, which develops into the drama of millions of honest peasants who believed in the socialist cooperation of the village and painfully experienced the zigzags and disruptions of collective agriculture.

And if you look from a personal point of view, it is easy to see that the failures and difficulties of restoring the post-war economy became the personal problems of hundreds of thousands of peasants, such as Tanabai, ardently devoted to the ideals of socialism. The gap between the increased consciousness of people and difficult circumstances will look even more sharp. This is what the exposition of Tanabai Bakasov’s drama looks like. The most difficult acts of this drama are yet to come. He assesses many things indirectly for now, based on the position of the pacer. This is how he meets the new chairman, based on his attitude towards Gyulsary. And when a written order comes from the new chairman (it is very typical that the signature under the order is illegible) to place the pacer in the collective farm stable, Tanabai senses impending disaster. Gyulsary is taken away from the herd, but he stubbornly runs away back into the herd, appearing in front of Tanabai with pieces of rope around his neck. And then one day the pacer hobbled with forged iron shackles - a log on his feet. Tanabai could not stand such treatment of his beloved horse, he freed him from the shackles and, handing Gyulsary to the grooms, threatened the new chairman to “break his head with a kishen.”

In the ninth chapter, an event occurs that puts an end to Gyulsara’s former free life: the pacer is emasculated. Castrating such a breeding stallion as Gyulsary meant greatly impoverishing and weakening the genetic branch of collective farm horse breeding, but the chairman of the collective farm, Aldanov, was not thinking about economic interests, but about his external prestige: he wanted to show off riding the famous pacer. And earlier, before this terrible operation, the relationship between the horse and the chairman was bad: Gyulsary could not stand the fusel smell that often emanated from the new chairman. They said that “he’s a tough guy, he’s been in 6 big bosses. At the very first meeting, he warned that he would severely punish those who were negligent, and for failure to fulfill the minimum, he threatened to sue...” But the chairman appears for the first time in the scene of the horse being castrated. Aldanov “stands importantly, spreading his thick short legs in wide riding breeches... With one hand akimbo, the other twists a button on his tunic.” This scene is one of the most amazing in terms of skill and precise psychological depiction. Strong, healthy people perform a cruel operation, not justified by any economic considerations, of castrating a noble, talented horse. The operation is carried out on a bright sunny day, to the sounds of a child’s song during the game and especially contrasts with the dark plans of the people who decided to pacify the unruly horse. When they knocked him to the ground, tied him tightly with lassoes and crushed him with his knees, then Chairman Aldanov jumped up, no longer fearing the pacer, “squatted down at the head of the head, doused him with yesterday’s fusel smell and smiled in open hatred and triumph, as if the 6s were lying in front of him not a horse, but a man, his fierce enemy.” The man was still squatting in front of him, looking and waiting for something: “And suddenly a sharp pain exploded the light in the eyes” of the pacer, “a bright red flame flared up, and immediately it became dark, black-black...”

Of course, this is the murder of Gyulsara. It is no coincidence that the fawning Ibrahim, who participated in the castration of the horse, said, rubbing his hands: “Now he won’t run anywhere. That's all - I ran around." And for such a horse not to run means not to live. The unreasonable operation carried out from Gyulsary prompted Tanabai to new sad thoughts about Chairman Aldanov and collective farm affairs. He told his wife: “No, it still seems to me that our new chairman is a bad person. The heart feels it." The reflection begins with a direct reason close to Tanabai—his relationship with the pacer. After dinner, circling around the herd in the steppe, Tanabai tries to distract himself from his gloomy thoughts: “Maybe you really shouldn’t judge a person like that? Stupid, of course. Probably because I’m getting old, because I drive a herd all year round, I don’t see or know anything.” However, Tanabai cannot escape from doubts and anxious thoughts. He recalled “how they once started a collective farm, how they promised the people a happy life... Well, at first they lived well. We would have healed even better if it weren’t for this damned war.” And is it just a matter of war? After all, many years have passed since the war, and we “are all patching up the farm like an old yurt. If you cover one place, a hole will appear in another. From what?"

The herder is approaching the most serious moment of his thoughts, he is still timid in the face of vague guesses, he is still eager to talk frankly with his friend Choro: “If I’m confused, let him tell me, but what if not? What then?”

A stubborn, persistent thought torments Tanabai’s heart and mind; he is sure of only one thing: “It shouldn’t be like this,” and how it should be, he doesn’t dare to say right away; he still refers to district and regional leaders: “There are wise people there...”. Tanabai recalls how in the 30s, representatives from the region came and immediately went to the collective farmers, explained and advised. “And now he comes, shouts at the chairman in the office, but still doesn’t talk to the village council at all. He will speak at a party meeting, so everything is about the international situation, but the situation on the collective farm does not seem to be such an important matter. work, give a plan, and that’s it...”

Tanabai seems to feel the gaze of people on himself, who “every minute will ask: “Well, here you are, a party man, you started a collective farm - you tore the throat out of everyone else, explain to us how it all turns out?” What will you tell them? What could the restless herdsman say, what could he answer them, if not everything was clear to himself, his party conscience? For example, “why does the collective farm seem not to belong to you, as it was then, but seem to be someone else’s? Then what the meeting decided was the law. They knew that they had adopted the law themselves and that it must be followed. And now the meeting is nothing but empty talk. No one cares about you. It seems that the collective farm is not managed by the collective farmers themselves, but by someone from the outside. They twist and turn the farm this way and that, but to no avail.”

This is where the sphere of moral problems begins.

Before setting off on a new nomadic camp, he kept racking his brains over complex questions, trying to understand “what’s the big deal.” At the end of the eleventh chapter, Tanabai drives his herd through a large meadow, past the village, and at the sight of the house of his beloved Byubuzhan, where he usually visited on his pacer, the herdman’s heart ached: “Now there was neither that woman nor the pacer Gyulsary for him. Gone, everything is a thing of the past, that couple made a noise like a flock of gray geese in the spring...”

Here, for the second time, a beautiful Kyrgyz song about a white camel who lost her black-eyed camel appears in the story. The first time this sad song was sung to Tanabai by his wife Dasaidar, was when the pacer was taken away from them and put in a stable. Listening then to the ancient music of the nomads, Tanabai thought about his youth, again saw in his aged wife “a dark-skinned girl with braids falling on her shoulders,” he remembered himself, “young and young,” and his former closeness with that girl whom he fell in love with for her songs , for her playing the temir-komuz... Later, in the last chapters, the saddest, tragic notes of the life of the pacer and his master will be woven into this rhythm of a sad, thoughtful melody. And here is the magic of folk art: everything dark and difficult that happened to Tanabai and Gyulsary finds in the ancient Kyrgyz song a kind of emotional outlet, catharsis, revealing to the reader the eternal depth of human suffering, helping to correctly perceive the dramatic scenes of the story. And the system of “man and social environment”, which the writer explores, is logically supplemented by more general categories - “man and environment”, “man and the world”. At the same time, the social guidelines of artistic research are by no means dissolved or abolished; they are built in a more complex perspective - temporal and spiritual.

This is what the first stage of Tanabay Bakasov’s social insight looks like. Tanabai then had to look at the world more directly and directly. And, moving to the second half of the biography of “an old man and an old horse,” the reader feels how the theme of the social maturation of a person who faces considerable life trials comes to the fore.

The next stage of the spiritual evolution of the hero of the story begins strictly, business-like: “In the autumn of that year, the fate of Tanabai Bakasov unexpectedly took a turn.” The herder became a shepherd. Of course, “it will be a bit boring with sheep.” But - a party assignment, a duty of a communist, for Tanabai his whole life is in these words. And the party organizer Choro honestly says to his old friend: “I will captivate you, Tanabai.”

Before sending his hero to the most difficult test, the writer draws some encouraging features of collective farm life: the artel received a new car, serious plans are being developed to improve livestock farming, in particular, sheep breeding. Tanabai is glad that things on the collective farm will improve a little, that he is going to a meeting of livestock breeders in the regional center, where he must speak and take on a high commitment. True, he had not yet seen the sheep and the shepherds, nor had he seen his assistants and sponsored young shepherds. But he feels that some changes are coming. The work of a shepherd on a Kyrgyz collective farm is one of the hardest. Therefore, going to his flocks, Tanabai did not expect easy success.

Before sending his hero to the mountains, to the sheep flocks, the writer again showed his close friend, party organizer Choro, and the pacer Gyulsary. Bitter premonitions arise when meeting them again. An old friend, party organizer Choro persuaded Tanabai to speak at a meeting of livestock farmers, to take on unreasonable obligations and did not advise him to say “nothing else”, what was boiling in his soul. Remembering his performance with shame, Tanabai was surprised that Choro had become so cautious. Tanabai felt: something in Choro “moved, changed somehow... he learned to catch, it seems...” And Gyulsary? Tanabai did not see him running. The narrator shows the pacer on Choro’s way from the regional center to his native village, and the first phrases about the pacer are alarming, then they amaze: the horse stamped its hooves along the evening road, like a running car. Of everything he had before, the only passion he had left was running. Everything else had long since died in him. They killed him so that he would only know the saddle and the road.” From now on, Gyulsary will no longer worry, be self-willed, or strive to fulfill his impulses and desires. Now he will have no impulses or desires. The living, extraordinary horse in him was killed.

The shepherd’s mind was filled with persistent questions: “Why all this?.. Why do we raise sheep if we can’t protect them? Who is to blame for this? Who?" The shepherd’s first spring in the uterine

re. Tanabai turned gray and aged many years. And on sleepless nights, when Tanabai was choking from his offensive and bitter thoughts, “a dark, terrible anger rose in his soul. She rose, covering her eyes with the black darkness of hatred for everything that was happening here, for this ruined sheepfold, for the sheep, for herself, for her life, for everything for which he fought here like a fish against ice.”

The last state - dullness, indifference - is perhaps the most terrible for Tanabai. It is no coincidence that the writer sets out the 6iagraphy of his hero in this very chapter, which shows the extreme degrees of Tanabai’s denial of the established order on the collective farm. Tanabai's biography and his character are also given in comparison with the character of his older brother Kulubai. Once in their youth, both of them worked for the same owner, and he cheated them and did not pay anything. Tanabai then openly threatened the owner: “I’ll remember this when I grow up.” But Kulubay didn’t say anything; he was smarter and more experienced. He wanted to “become a master, acquire livestock, and own land.” He then told Tanabai: “I will be the owner and will never offend a worker.” And when collectivization began, Tanabai wholeheartedly embraced the ideas of artisanal farming. At a meeting of the village council, lists of fellow villagers subject to dispossession were discussed. And, having reached the name of Tanabaev’s brother - Kulubai, the village councilors began to argue. Choro doubted: is it necessary to dispossess Kulubai? After all, he himself is from the poor. He was not involved in hostile agitation. The young, determined Tanabai cut from the shoulder in those years. “You always doubt,” he attacked Choro, “you are afraid, like 6s, that something is wrong. If it’s on the list, it means it’s a fist! And no mercy! For the sake of Soviet power, I will not regret my own father.”

This act of Tanabai was condemned by many fellow villagers. The narrator doesn't approve of him either. Kulubai’s hard work and diligence, his willingness to give his entire household to the collective farm were known to the villagers. Then people recoiled from Tanabai, and when voting on his candidacy they began to abstain: “So little by little he dropped out of the active.” It is not without reason that after Tanabai’s memoirs about his clash with his brother Kulubai, the writer again returns his hero to bitter thoughts about what happened to the collective farm and why the artel economy was brought to a decline. “Or maybe they made a mistake, went the wrong way, the wrong way? - Tanabai thought, but immediately stopped himself: - No, it shouldn’t be like this, it shouldn’t! The road was right. What then? Lost? Lost? When and how did this happen? Tanabai did not fulfill his obligations. There were heavy losses in the flock. In connection with the case of Tanabai Bakasov, a shepherd at the White Stones collective farm, the bureau of the district party committee is meeting. Chingiz Aitmatov writes psychologically detailed portraits of people who must deal with the Tanabai case. Among them is the secretary of the district Komsomol committee, Kerimbekov, an impetuous, spontaneous, honest person, who ardently spoke out in defense of the shepherd and demanded that Segizbaev be punished for insulting Tanabai. In one or two strokes, the chairman of the collective farm, Aldanov, is shown taking revenge on Tanabai for the old threat to “break his head with a kishen” for the pacer. With pain in his heart, the narrator describes the behavior of party organizer Choro Sayakov at the bureau: he confirmed the factual accuracy of the prosecutor’s report and wanted to explain something else, to defend Tanabai, but the secretary interrupted Choro’s speech, and he fell silent. Tanabai was expelled from the party. When he listened to the accusations against him, he was horrified. Having gone through the entire war, they “did not suspect that the heart could scream as loudly as it screamed now.” Segizbaev’s report turned out to be much worse than himself. You can’t rush against her with a pitchfork in your hands.”

In the scenes of the meeting of the district committee bureau, Tanabai’s subsequent trip to the district and regional committees, the writer shows that history is created by living people with their own characters, passions, strengths and weaknesses. A thousand random circumstances influenced the solution to the question of Tanabai, his fate.

At the end of the story, when Tanabai buried Choro Sayakov, when there was no longer any hope left for revising the unfair decision of the district committee on expulsion from the party, an ancient Kyrgyz lament sounds for the great hunter Karagul, who thoughtlessly destroyed everything “that came to live and multiply”: “I interrupted There's all the game in the mountains around him. He did not spare pregnant queens, nor did he spare small cubs. He destroyed the herd of the Gray Goat, the first mother of the goat family.” And he even raised his hand against the old Gray Goat and the first mother Gray Goat. And he was cursed by her: the goat led him into inaccessible rocks, from where there was no way out, and with tears she said to the great hunter Karagul: “You will never escape from this place forever, and no one can save you. Let your father cry over you, as I cry for my murdered children, for my disappeared family.” The meaning of crying for the great hunter Karagul is multifaceted. When Tanabai was expelled from the party, he “became unsure of himself and felt guilty in front of everyone. Somehow I became intimidated." And here’s what’s remarkable: how the people reacted to Tanabai in those days. In one phrase - “no one poked his eyes” - the writer made one feel the immense generosity of the people towards their sons, who may make mistakes, but also recognize their mistakes.

28. Affirmation of moral ideals in Ch. Aitmatov’s story “Mother’s Field.”

Chingiz Aitmatov is trying to penetrate the innermost secrets of life; he does not shy away from the most pressing issues generated by the twentieth century.

“Mother Field” became a work close to realism; it marked the transition

writer to the harshest realism, which reached its maturity in the stories “Farewell, Gyulsary!” (1966), “White Steamer” (1970), “Early Cranes” (1975), in the novel “Stormy Stop” (1980).

The movement of history, which requires spiritual fortitude and unparalleled endurance from an individual, as in “The First Teacher,” continued to occupy the writer in “Mother Field,” one of the most tragic works of Chingiz Aitmatov.

The story begins and ends with words about the grandson Zhanbolot. And this is not just a compositional device to frame Tolgonai’s monologue. If we remember that Aliman, Zhanbolot’s mother, also runs through the entire story and is, along with Tolgonai, the heroine of “The Mother’s Field,” then the writer’s intention becomes clearer. The fate of women-mothers - Tolgogai, Alman - is what interests the writer.

The situation is extreme, very dramatic: in the face of death, a person usually remembers what he cannot take with him to the grave. This intense drama immediately draws our attention to old Tolgonai. Moreover, the field with whom she is talking also claims that “a person must find out the truth,” even if he is only twelve years old. Tolgonai’s only fear is how the boy will be able to perceive the harsh truth, “what he will think, how he will look at the past, whether his mind and heart will reach the truth,” whether after this truth he will turn his back on life.

We do not yet know what kind of boy we are talking about, who brings him to old Tolgonai, we only know that she is lonely and this one boy lives with her, trusting and ingenuous, and it is to him that old Tolgonai must “open her eyes to herself.”

The writer explores the fate of one Kyrgyz woman, Tolgonai Suvankulova, over half a century - from the twenties to the present day. The story is structured as a monologue of an old woman from Akenshina, recalling her long, difficult life alone with Mother Earth.

Tolgonai begins with his childhood, when as a barefoot, shaggy little girl she guarded the crops,

Pictures of happy youth appear transformed in the memories of old Tolgonai.

Aitmatov keeps the description of happy moments on the verge of romantic and realistic perception. Here is a description of Suvankul’s affection: “With a strained hand, heavy as cast iron, Suvankul quietly stroked my face, forehead, hair, and even through his palm I heard how wildly and joyfully his heart was beating.”

The writer does not describe the details of Tolgonai’s pre-war life; we do not see how her three sons grow up. Aitmatov only paints the scene of the arrival of the first tractor on the collective farm field, selfless collective work on the land, the appearance of the beautiful girl Aliman in the Suvankulov family, who became the wife of the eldest son, Kasym. It is important for the author to convey the happy atmosphere of the pre-war socialist village, in which the dreams of rural workers came true. On the eve of the war, in the evening, Tolgonai was returning from work with her husband, thinking about her growing sons, about the flying years, and, looking at the sky, she saw the Strawman's Road, the Milky Way, “something trembled in my chest”; she remembered: “that first night, and our love, and youth, and that mighty grain-grower about whom I dreamed. So, everything has come true,” the woman thinks joyfully, “everything we dreamed of!” Yes, the land and water became ours, we plowed, sowed, threshed our bread - it means that what we thought about on the first night came true.”

The war hits an ordinary Kyrgyz woman blow after blow: her three sons and husband go to the front. The author depicts only individual episodes of the heroine’s difficult military life, but these are the very moments when suffering fell upon Tolgonai with renewed vigor and her soul absorbed new pain and torment. Among such episodes is the fleeting meeting of Tolgonai and Aliman with Maselbek, who, as part of a military train, rushed past the station, only having time to shout two words to them in code and throw his hat to his mother. A frantically rushing train and for one short moment the face of young Maselbek: “The wind tousled his hair, the skirts of his overcoat beat like wings, and on his face and in his eyes there was joy, and grief, and regret, and forgiveness!” This is one of the most moving scenes of the story: a mother running after an iron train, a mother hugging a cold steel rail in tears and lamentations; “The sound of the wheels went further and further away, and then it died down.” After this meeting, Tolgonai returned to her native village “yellow, with sunken, exhausted eyes, as if after a long illness.” The writer notes external changes in the old woman’s face very sparingly, in one or two phrases, in Tolgonai’s conversation with Mother Earth or with her daughter-in-law. It was sadly noted how Tolgonai's head was covered in gray hair, and how she left gritting her teeth. But she had no idea what trials awaited her in the future: the death of three sons and her husband, the hunger of the village children and women, a desperate attempt to collect the last kilograms of seeds from starving families and, contrary to all the requirements of the collective farm charter and wartime requirements, to sow a small plant beyond the plan. a deposit area to alleviate the suffering of Ail residents.

The pictures of the military, half-starved village in “Mother’s Field” are among the best pages of Soviet multinational prose, dedicated to the selfless work of women, old people and teenagers in difficult times. Tolgonai went from house to house asking for a handful of seeds to sow an extra piece of land for her fellow countrymen. I collected 2 bags. And a deserter and his friends stole them... How to look people in the eyes? It is difficult to imagine more severe trials that the writer offers his heroes in “The Mother’s Field.”

The people's view of the ongoing tragic events is expressed primarily in the symbolic dialogue of Tolgonai with mother earth, with the maternal field, a dialogue that essentially leads the narrative, emotionally preparing the reader for the upcoming presentation of memories, sometimes anticipating events. The story begins and ends with a dialogue with Mother Earth. The Earth knows how to remain silent understandingly, watching with pain how Tolgonai changes and ages. After she saw only for a moment the middle son of Masel-bek in a thundering military train flying past the station, past Tolgonai and Aliman, the earth notices: “You became silent then, stern. She came here silently and left, gritting her teeth. But it was clear to me, I saw it in my eyes, every time it became more and more difficult for you.” The Mother Field suffers from human wars; it wants people to work peacefully, turning our planet into a wonderful home for humans. Together with the people, the mother field in Ch. Aitmatov’s story rejoiced on Victory Day, but the earth very accurately defines the complex emotional tone of the experiences of those days: “I always remember the day when you people met the soldiers from the front, but I still can’t tell Tolgonai what was more - joy or grief.” It was truly a heartbreaking experience.

more: a crowd of Kyrgyz women, children, old people and disabled people stood on the outskirts of the village and waited with bated breath for the soldiers to return after the victory. “Everyone silently thought about his own things, with his head down. People were waiting for fate to decide. Everyone asked themselves: who will return, who will not? Who will wait and who won't? Life and future fate depended on it.” And only one soldier appeared on the road with an overcoat and a duffel bag slung over his shoulder. “He was approaching, but none of us moved. There was bewilderment on people's faces. We were still waiting for some miracle. We couldn’t believe our eyes because we were expecting not just one, but many.”

In the most difficult years, “the people did not scatter, they remained the people,” Tolgonai recalled. “The women of that time are now old women, the children have long been fathers and mothers of families, it’s true that they have already forgotten about those days, but every time I see them, I remember what they were like then. They appear before our eyes as they were - naked and hungry. How they worked then, how they waited for victory, how they cried and how they took courage. According to Kyrgyz custom, it is not customary to immediately bring sad news to a person; elders decide at what point it would be more tactful to report trouble, and gradually prepare the person for it. In this concern of the people, the old tribal instinct of self-preservation is reflected, which has taken the form of nationwide sympathy, compassion, which to some extent alleviates the mental pain and misfortune of the victim. Chingiz Aitmatov twice describes scenes of universal grief - when reporting the deaths of Suvankul and Kasym and when receiving Maselbek’s last letter. In the first case, an aksakal comes to Tolgonai’s field and takes her ail, helping her with a word, helping her to dismount at her native Yard, where a crowd of fellow villagers has already gathered. Tolgonai, gripped by a terrible premonition, “already dead,” slowly walks towards the house. The women quickly approached her silently, took her hands and told her about the terrible news.

The people not only sympathize, they actively intervene in events, while maintaining dignity and common sense. After the war, when the deserter Dzhenshenkul was tried for fleeing from the front and for stealing widow's wheat. The next morning, the deserter’s wife was no longer in the village. It turns out that at night fellow villagers came to Dzhenshenkul’s wife, loaded all her goods onto chaises and said: “Go wherever you want. There is no place for you in our village.” In these harsh simple words there is popular condemnation of the deserter and his wife, a deep understanding of the grief of Tolgonai and Aliman.

Under the pen of a talented artist, a small gray-haired woman with dull eyes is transformed into a symbolic personification of the heroic, patient, wise people, and even more precisely, our Soviet women who bore the burden of war on their shoulders. Outwardly, she remains the same Tolgonai, silent, gray-haired, with a staff in her hands, standing alone in a field, thinking about her life, but the spiritual content of the image by the end of the story is surprising: old Tolgonai evokes admiration and admiration. Such is the charm of an epic character. It arises naturally, organically and fully corresponds to the writer’s intention. As a fourteen-year-old teenager during the war years, he saw around him many people like Tolgonai and Aliman, beautiful, heroic women who shouldered an exorbitant burden of labor.

In the epic narrative of a Kyrgyz prose writer, objective necessity usually dominates, “fate reigns,” as German philosophers expressed it in the last century. It is this objective necessity of the events taking place, determined by the historical existence of the people, that dominates in such works of Aitmatov as “The First Teacher” and “Mother’s Field”.

The wise, old Tolgonai doubts for a long time whether she will be able to fully and correctly tell her grandson Zhanbolot about his mother, about her tragic fate.

The story “Mother's Field” is not only an ode to the heroic grain farmers of the wartime, in other words, it is a revelation of the selfless character of Tolgonai. The writer’s plan is more complex: parallel to the fate of Tolgonai, throughout the story the author explores the story of Aliman,

which is also the fate of the mother, the fate of a broken one, disfigured by the cruel consequences of the war.

Old Tolgonai, left without her husband and three sons, nevertheless survived and survived the most difficult war and post-war years; The spiritual and moral fortitude she developed over decades of living together with the real communist Suvankul had an impact.

The young beauty Alimam, not seasoned in the struggle of life, broke internally, and her death - accidental, of course - became a harsh reminder of the cold big world in which the war raged, scattering and maiming people, leaving its cruel traces in biographies and human souls for a long time .

The artist explores the tragic breath of war in “Mother Field.” After all, the war not only killed soldiers going on the attack, it starved children and the elderly. It took a lot of mental fortitude; to preserve the best human values. Tolgonai did it. Aliman became dull and could not stand it. This is not about the moral decline of women. Chingiz Aitmatov shows the development of a tender, loving, noble soul. It is precisely the uniqueness of this character

tera Alimam determined the depth of suffering of the young woman, who was left a widow at less than twenty years old. Tolgonai notes more than once that Aliman’s strong, only love for the deceased Kasym overshadowed the whole world for her, and she could no longer even think about loving someone else.

Popular common sense is expressed very clearly in this dramatic situation. “Of course, over time, the wounds in Aliman’s soul would have healed,” the heroine of the story reflects. “The world is not without people; perhaps she would have found a person whom she would even love. And life would return with new hopes. The other soldiers did the same." This is what a normal everyday scenario would look like. Aytatov became interested in a deep, psychologically more complex case. The writer moves away from the average phenomenon, choosing a more individual outcome, and in it reveals general moral processes, once again confirming the artistic dialectic of the relationship between the individual and the typical.

Aitmatov does not analyze the inner state of the young woman; he shows Aliman mainly from the outside, through the eyes of Tolgonai, and through her perception we can guess about the storms raging in Aliman’s soul. In such cases, the writer skillfully uses the psychological expressiveness of an external gesture. Let us recall for example only one case with flowers, in

The novel "The Scaffold" sounds like a warning. The action takes place in Central Asia, in the Moyunkum steppe. The novel begins with the theme of wolves. Their natural habitat is dying, dying due to the fault of a person who breaks into the savannah like a predator, like a criminal. Wolves are not simply humanized in the work, as has always been the case with images of animals in literature. They - based on the author's intention - are endowed with that nobility, that high moral strength, which the people opposite them are deprived of. Boston, one of the main characters of the novel, takes responsibility for both those who shot saigas from helicopters and for Bazarbai, who carried away the wolf cubs.

The writer develops in detail in the novel the storyline of Boston, which personifies the moral norm, that natural humanity that is violated and desecrated by Bazarbai. The she-wolf carries away Boston's son. Boston kills his son, the she-wolf, Bazarbai. The origins of this murder lie in the disruption of the existing balance. Having shed blood three times, Boston understands: he killed himself with these three shots. The beginning of this catastrophe was there, in the Moyunkum savannah, where, according to someone’s plan, sealed with authoritative seals, the natural course of life was destroyed.

Aitmatov sees the depicted situation from two sides, as if on two levels. And as a result of gross mistakes in the economic and business field. And as a manifestation of both an ecological and moral crisis of universal significance. The storyline of the wolves and Boston develops in parallel with the line of Avdiy Kallistratov. This is the second semantic and plot center of the novel. The former seminarian wants and hopes with his moral influence, his high spirituality and dedication to turn these fallen people, drug dealers, away from their criminal trade and criminal path. The writer gives his interpretation of the legend of Jesus Christ and compares the story of Obadiah with the story of Christ, who sacrificed himself to atone for the sins of mankind. Obadiah makes self-sacrifice in the name of saving human souls. But apparently times have changed. The death of Obadiah, crucified like Christ, is unable to atone for human sins. Humanity is so mired in vices and crimes that sacrifice can no longer return anyone to the path of Good. The idea that leads Avdija to the chopping block is not approved, but is tested for viability in today's world, for real social effectiveness. The writer's conclusions are pessimistic.

Ch. Aitmatov’s novel “The Scaffold” sounded in the 1980s as a signal of distress, as a warning to humanity, which forgets that it lives in the natural world, that it itself belongs to it, that the destruction of nature, neglect of its laws and its primordial balance threatens incalculable disasters for both the individual and the entire human community. The writer seeks to understand environmental problems as problems of the human soul. If humanity does not listen, does not stop in its ever-accelerating movement towards the edge, towards the abyss, a catastrophe awaits it.

Composition

Chingiz Aitmatov’s novel “The Scaffold” touches on many problems of modern society. The writer touched upon very important issues that may confront a person if he is not indifferent to our own fate and the fate of future generations. Chingiz Aitmatov touched upon the problems of drug addiction, drunkenness, ecology, as well as various moral problems of society. If these problems are not resolved, they will ultimately lead humanity to the “chopping block.”
The main character of the first half of the novel is Avdiy Kallistratov. This is a person who cares about the conditions in which the people around him live. He cannot watch people destroy themselves without heartache.
He cannot remain inactive, even though his actions, often naive and not giving the desired result, turned out to be detrimental to him. The writer creates a contrast between Obadiah and young drug addicts, thereby emphasizing two different directions in the development of human character. One path that Obadiah followed leads to the improvement of the best spiritual qualities of a person. The other is to slow degradation, to spiritual impoverishment. In addition, drug addiction gradually makes a person physically weak and sick. A single protest by Avdija could not lead to global changes in society and even in that small group of people with whom he had the misfortune of collecting cannabis together. Society must think about this problem and try to solve it with forces much greater than the strength of one person. However, it cannot be said that Obadiah did nothing. He tried to show people what kind of disaster they could come to, and someone would certainly have supported him if fate had not led Obadiah to death. Someone would support his desire to change his life for the better. By showing the death of Obadiah, the writer seems to be explaining to us what we will all come to if we close our eyes and turn away, seeing something terrible and unfair happening. The people who killed Obadiah are worse than animals, because animals kill to live, but they killed thoughtlessly, simply out of anger. These, if you look at it, pathetic drunkards end up slowly killing themselves morally and physically.
Another problem - the problem of ecology - is most fully revealed through the description of the life of a family of wolves. The author brings their perception of the world closer to human, making their thoughts and experiences understandable and close to us. The writer shows how much we can influence the life of living nature. In the scene of the saigas being shot, people seem to be simply monsters who have no pity for living beings. Wolves running with saigas are seen as more noble and even kinder than people. By destroying living nature, a person will destroy himself. This statement involuntarily suggests itself when you read certain moments of the novel.
The most important and most terrible problem, it seems to me, is the problem of morality. Unspiritual people are capable of destroying for their own benefit, and they will not feel pain or shame from this. They cannot understand that their actions will turn against themselves, that they will have to pay for everything. Spiritless people in the novel supply teenagers with drugs, kill Avdiy, destroy nature without a twinge of conscience, not realizing what they are doing. A soulless man steals the wolf cubs from Akbara, which causes an even more terrible tragedy: the child dies. But he doesn't care. However, this act led to his death. All problems of humanity are born from the lack of a moral principle in people. Therefore, first of all, we must strive to awaken in people compassion and love, honesty and selflessness, kindness and understanding. Avdiy Kallistratov tried to awaken all this in people, and we all should strive for this if we do not want to find ourselves on the “chopping block.”

Other works on this work