Critics have repeatedly noted the plot and compositional originality of A.M. Gorky "At the bottom". First of all, this is the plot disunity of all the characters (there is no connection with a single plot) and the secondary importance of social conflict and love intrigue. The main focus of the work is in its ideological and philosophical problems. Kostylev, Vasilisa, Natasha and Vaska Pepel participate in the main intrigue, but the love conflict is only one of the episodes of the play. The ideological and philosophical problems of the play are developed by Luka, Satin, Bubnov and Kleshch. Therefore, it is difficult to distinguish between the main and secondary characters in the play. The plot line ends in the third act, and the ideological center of gravity of the play is transferred to the fourth act.

We also note the use by the author of a polylogue (polyphony) in the play (the characters are having a conversation that is not connected by a single topic, but forming a coherent picture), the originality of the centrifugal composition (conditional division of the play into scenes), the presence of “rhyming” episodes (Luke’s parable about righteous land and the suicide of the Actor) that ensure the unity and integrity of the action. Here we see the orientation of A.M. Gorky on Chekhov traditions in dramaturgy.

The image of Luke in the play is ambiguous, dual. He is a subtle psychologist, smart, observant, has a huge life experience. The ideological position of the hero is revealed by Luke's story about two robbers and his parable about the "righteous land". Luke's ideological opponents are Bubnov, Baron and Satin. However, if Bubnov and Baron are cynical realists, then Satin sincerely believes in a person, in his spirit and inner strength.

What is the impact of Luke's "sermons" on the fate of the overnight stays? It contributes to the emergence of hope in the life of the characters (Anna is promised the desired peace after death, the Actor is told about a free hospital for alcoholics, Vaska Peplu is about the opportunity to start new life in Siberia, supports Natasha's romantic love story). And the characters themselves change at the end of the play. Critics noted the atmosphere of humanity, general enthusiasm that reigns in the rooming house. For the first time, Kleshch is generous and kind to people, the Baron thinks about life for the first time, Bubnov treats everyone, and the sounding song unites people. But everything was spoiled by the death of the Actor. And this is already a tragic clash of dreams and reality. The rest also fail to make the dream a reality. Vaska Pepel follows to Siberia for hard labor, Natasha, who believes in romantic love, convicts the Baron of lies, Anna dies.

However, does the author lay responsibility for what is happening only on Luke? What is the author's position in the play? We note the author's critical view of the social structure of Russian society, the presence of internal conflicts among the heroes (fear of life, weak will, laziness of the soul, fear of change). The author defiantly does not support either the position of Luke or the position of Sateen. He poses one of the eternal questions in the play, calling the viewer to reflection and to his own assessment. Of course, Gorky the realist stands for human courage and faith in one's own strength. In Satin's monologue, Gorky's early Nietzsche passions are guessed. However, Gorky the romantic highly valued a person's ability to dream. That is why critics noted that the image of Luke was more successful for the writer than the image of Satin (V. Khodasevich). Also, critics noted a certain "kinship" of these characters. At the end of the play, it is Satin who protects Luka. Thus, the heroes of A.M. Gorky reflect the duality, inconsistency of the nature of the writer himself.

The compositional role of Luke in the play is very significant. In conversations and clashes with him, not only the ideas and positions of all the characters are indicated, but their characters are also clarified.

Gorky Luke is a certain literary type. This is the type of "great provocateur", presented in the novels of F.M. Dostoevsky (Porfiry Petrovich in "Crime and Punishment").

0

driven

Gorky's play "At the Bottom", which serves as an indictment of capitalist society, whose cruel orders throw people to the bottom of life, where they, deprived of honor and dignity, are doomed to eke out a truly miserable existence, could not help but amaze viewers and readers with the depth of its ideological content, bright lighting acute social issues. The characters of the play talk about truth and lies. The author encourages readers to reflect on what is more useful to a person: harsh truth or sweet lies?

Is it necessary to lie in the name of compassion, as Luke does? Gorky expresses his point of view through the mouth of Satin: “Lie is the religion of slaves and masters. Truth is the god of the free man." Luke's position is exactly the opposite. He considers all people pitiful, weak, incapable of actively fighting for their rights and therefore in need of condolence and consolation. The principle followed by this kind unobtrusive wanderer is “white lie”. The dear old man is just a sower of illusions, consoling tales, for which the desperate, unfortunate "tramps" seized so greedily. Luca doesn't so much make up for each of them cherished dream how much it helps to take shape what has long been ripe in their souls. He inspires Vaska Pepl with the idea of ​​a trip to Siberia, where he can start a completely new, honest life; The actor assures that he will be able to recover from drunkenness in a free miracle hospital; the dying Anna is warmed by the hope that for her unbearable torment she will find peace after death and eternal bliss in heaven. However, his consolations did not help anyone, since Luke, with his sweet pills of lies, did not strengthen a person’s faith in his own strength, did not prepare him for the struggle of life. His whole passive-compassionate humanism is based on disbelief in the possibility of man. In the depths of his soul, he is sure that the real situation can no longer be changed, therefore, he approaches everyone with his comforting lies. However, when Joe leaves the elderly wanderer, most of the rooming houses grow stronger faith in the opportunity to start a new life. He will certainly inspire them with hope for a better future, warm their souls with his endless sympathy, which was so lacking for people thrown to the bottom of life. However, his sermons even more brought up in the "tramps" weakness and inability to fight. “You hope! You - believe! he suggested. But a person cannot live in illusions all the time. A confrontation with the bitter truth is, after all, inevitable. A vivid example of this is the fate of the Actor, who did not find the strength to act, crashed against the harsh reality, falling from the height of his dream, waking up inspired by the wanderer's "dream". The philosophy of the itinerant preacher, being tested on the heroes of the play, nevertheless fails, because a lie, even “for salvation,” is primarily a manifestation of disrespect for a person, and, apart from temporary consolation, it is not capable of bringing anything to those who believe in this error. According to the author's opinion, sounding from the lips of Luke's eternal adversary - Sateen, any person, no matter who he is and no matter how low he stoops in this life, certainly deserves respect, because he is, first of all, a man. However, one theory of the former telegrapher, alas, is not enough. Sateen turns out to be unable to change anything either in his life or in the lives of other inhabitants of the “bottom”. And the point here is rather not the correctness of the theories, but the people themselves, who, with or without Luke, with or without Satin, would never have been reborn. Much of what we achieve in life depends on ourselves. And therein lies the vital truth of the play.

0

AlaEva
03/03/2019 left a comment:

M. Gorky's play "At the Bottom" was created in 1902. In many ways, this was a turning point for the country, at which time human life depreciated. Poverty and lawlessness reigned all around. The play "At the Bottom" tells just about this.

All events of the work take place in the Kostylevo rooming house. From the very beginning of the play, we see swearing, drunkenness, cruelty in which tramps live. Before us appears the "former" Baron, regretfully recalling his former importance and wealth; An actor yearning for the stage and pouring wine into his longing; a hereditary thief, born with a stigma and walking along the beaten path of thieves. Before us is the dying Anna, who has not seen a single bright day in her life. We get acquainted with a girl Nastya, who is forced to engage in prostitution, but at the same time dreams of a strong, passionate, bookish love.

Oddly enough, in this basement, which looks more like a cave, there is a clash of ideas, a dispute about a person, about the meaning of life. The basis of this dispute is the problem of truth and lies, the perception of life exactly as it is, with all the hopelessness of the situation of the characters, or life with hope (albeit illusory) for improving one's situation.

This dispute begins even before the appearance of the wanderer Luke on the scene and continues after his departure. But, nevertheless, it is Luka that can be called the catalyst for all disputes and conflicts. After all, it is with his arrival in the rooming house that the philosophical side of the disputes intensifies.

Since the play was written, it was the image of Luke that caused the most fierce controversy. What is this person? Does he bring good or evil to the rooming house? Is his position in life capable of benefiting people?

Luke comforts people, tries to give everyone hope. Therefore, the hero resorts to a saving lie. Thanks to his worldly wisdom, he surprisingly accurately touches the right strings in the soul of everyone, speaks the only true words. No one else cared for the unfortunate, dying Anna as much as Luka. Thanks to him last days the life of a terminally ill woman passed at least in some semblance of peace. Anna was not only happy for a single day of her life, but simply calm. And so the wanderer draws her approaching death as a "comforter". He says that now she will rest, breathe in calmly: “... That means you will die and you will be calm ... you will not need anything else, and there is nothing to be afraid of! .. Death - it calms everything ... If you die - you will rest ... ". And Anna is no longer so afraid to die.

Continued below

0

AlaEva
03/03/2019 left a comment:

Luka is the only person who does not laugh at Nastya because of her fictions about great love. On the contrary, he supports the girl in every possible way, talking to her: "If you believe, you had true love ... it means that she was."

The Stranger once saves Vaska Pepel from killing Korostylev. Luka understands that Pepel is a good person, he really loves Natasha, he is ready for a lot for her. It's just that this person is confused, he needs help, support him. And Luke advises him to go to Siberia, to start honest work there. Perhaps the wanderer also understood that close proximity to Vasilisa and Kostylev could sooner or later end badly for Vasily.

Luke also supports the Actor. He is sorry to see how this man ruins himself. So he tells him about a free clinic for alcoholics. Luka tries to persuade the hero: “You only have to do this: get ready for now! Refrain!.. pull yourself together and - be patient ... And then - you will be cured ... and you will begin to live again ... well, brother, again!”

It is very important that Luka is not just lying to the heroes. He has his own philosophy, he explains his position. This is best shown in his story about two convicts. In it, Luke advocates that it is not violence, but only goodness that can save a person and teach goodness: “A person can teach goodness ... As long as a person believed, he lived, but lost faith and strangled himself.”

It cannot be said, in my opinion, that Luke negatively affects the life of overnight stays. The actor stopped drinking, kept for a while. It turns out that he had the strength to quit drinking. He broke down when his faith in the possibility of being cured in a clinic was cut short. He didn't realize that he could heal himself. If Vaska Pepel had left the rooming house in time, perhaps the trouble would not have happened, he would have remained free.

Even Luka's main opponent in the play, Satin, says of him: “Old man? He is smart! .. He ... acted on me like acid on an old and dirty coin. This hero claims that Luke lied out of pity for the rooming houses. And, indeed, we understand that in fact Luke does not respect a person, for him all people deserve only pity.

The significance of the image of Luke for the play is, of course, great. Perhaps this is the most controversial character of the work. Thanks to him, the characters of the play are revealed in their entirety. In addition, with the appearance of a wanderer in a rooming house, the dispute about a person, about truth and lies, takes on a particularly sharp sound.

Gorky's play "At the Bottom" can be safely called a socio-psychological work. It touches upon important problems relating to the social side of human life, as well as its internal problems, psychology. To develop all these questions, the author is helped by his characters, one of the main among which is the wanderer Luke.

0

Revan
03/03/2019 left a comment:

M. Gorky dedicated his play "At the Bottom" to the lives of those people who belong to the social class - the lowest of all existing in society. In this dramatic work, thieves, gamblers, corrupt girls of easy virtue are gathered under one roof. To build the storyline of the work, the author used the composition. The beginning of the plot was the arrival of the preacher Luke, who later became the cause of all the troubles that happened to the overnight stays. He tells them lies for the good in order to instill in their hearts the belief that changes in life are possible. So, the Actor learns from Luke that there is a clinic for alcoholism, therefore, he has hope for improving his life.

Vaska Pepel from the side of the preacher receives an offer related to the need to go to Siberia, since there a new one can begin for them and their beloved Natasha. happy life. Anna, who is about to die soon, he inspires faith that heaven exists.

But the ideas preached by the wanderer had a negative impact on the fate of the characters. The actor did not leave the hope of a speedy recovery, but he did not quit drinking, and therefore passed away by means of a stranglehold. Pepel committed the murder of Kostylev, and Anna had a long and painful death. Luke, because of the desire to inspire faith in a new, more civilized existence, shook their psyche in the rooming houses.

The words he uttered to the characters made their life even more painful, as they learned the truth regarding the impossibility of changing the course of their existence.

0

damian
03/03/2019 left a comment:

Gorky's play "At the Bottom" covers many problems, it raises various acute social issues. Gorky shows the bottom of the human soul, reflected in the stay of overnight stays at the “day of life”. The author also encourages us to think about what is more useful to a person: the bitter truth or the sweet lie.

One of the characters in the play, the wanderer Luke, lies in the name of compassion. He is guided by the rule "lie for good", not realizing that such does not exist. Luka does not believe that the inhabitants of the rooming house are capable of decisive actions. He believes that these people are worthy of pity and compassion. That is why he makes them believe in dreams that will not come true. Luka inspires Ashes with the idea of ​​moving to Siberia, where he can start a completely new life, convinces the actor that he can recover from alcoholism in a free miracle hospital.

Even sick dying Anna Luka tells fairy tales. He tells her that after death, eternal rest awaits her, which is due to her for all the suffering she has endured.

Luke managed to inspire hope in all these people, faith in a brighter future, but no more. The Stranger did not tell them how to act in order to achieve their goals. He did not teach them to act, but only put false pipe dreams into their heads. With his sermons, Luke did not strengthen a person's faith in his own strength, did not prepare him to deal with difficulties. A person cannot constantly live with illusions, sooner or later he comes to the realization of the bitter truth. This is exactly what happened to the actor, deceived by false hopes.

He could not endure the harsh reality in which he was threatened with only a miserable existence without any changes, and committed suicide.

So, Luke's sermons had a negative effect on the overnight stays. It is impossible to instill false hopes in a person without explaining that it is very difficult to achieve something in life. Such influence can lead to dire consequences. After all, everything that we achieve in life depends on ourselves, on our actions, and not on faith in the illusory.

This question is quite difficult, because from the moment the play was created to the present day, no one can answer it with accuracy. I am no exception, so I can only express my opinion in relation to this character.

So, having carefully studied the biographies, having analyzed the changes in the fate of the inhabitants of the rooming house, I think Luke had a positive influence on almost every one of them. After all, the actor briefly stopped drinking, began to work, we can say that he "slept and saw" his bright future. Vasily, aka Pepel, was ready to give up the thieves' life and leave for Siberia with his beloved Natasha; I was ready to start a new life, where I would earn every penny by honest work.

But, unfortunately, these characters could not be helped. They really ended up at the bottom, and there is no way to get them out of there. If Luca had appeared a little earlier, the story would have ended differently. Still, his efforts are commendable. For so short term he was able to direct several characters on the true path, helped them find the purpose of life; only the weak willpower of the inhabitants of the rooming house prevented the planned achievement. Even some teachers who try to educate children for six years do not have such an impact. Notice the difference between the first and second situation.

I think Luka is a positive character. We always need people to support us. But one should not think that someone will make the right decisions for us all his life and do the right things for us, as the characters of the work “At the Bottom” hoped for.

How the life of the overnight stays changed with the appearance of Luke in the play.

How does Luke appear in the play?

Luka enters the rooming house with Natasha.

Is his presence in the play important? Why?

Luke is a very important character in the play. It appears and breaks the habitual rhythm of life and thoughts of overnight stays. He speaks to everyone those words that cannot leave indifferent, for everyone he has a consoling phrase. Luke knows how to notice the main thing in a person.

What description can we give to this hero?

He is old, not conflicted.The appearance of Luke in the rooming house becomes like a ray of light in the dark kingdom of the bottom. The wanderer differs sharply from all the other lodging-houses of this bottom of life.

What is your first impression of Luke? What does he immediately call the roomers?

The impression is positive.Entering, he wishes everyone good health and calls the honest people.

What principle of attitude towards people does Gorky show in Luke?

The principle of compassion. He comforts the overnight stays by painting illusions for them.

Do the overnight stays like Luka?

Yes.

From the very beginning we see the life position of this man. Find quotes in the text.

His answer to Bubnov is very important: “I don’t care! I respect crooks too, in my opinion, not a single flea is bad: everyone is black, everyone jumps ... ”What a vivid comparison! (He reveals Luke's attitude towards people. All people are equal, Luke has the ability not to distinguish between people "no flea is bad"

What was life like in a rooming house before Luka appeared? How did people get into the hostel?

The inhabitants of the rooming house hate each other,In a rooming house, at the bottom of life, people find themselves for various reasons: some did not know another life, were born in a similar rooming house, others can be called "former people", that is, those who once had a different life.

Where do we see the moral degradation of heroes?

when Vaska Pepel suffers from boredom. What kind of entertainment does a young man invent for himself? He says to the Baron: “Well, lay down! It will be funny to me ... You are a gentleman ... you had a time when you didn’t consider our brother a person ... and all that ... ”.

Which of the overnight stays wants to escape from the "bottom"?

The actor, Ashes, Nastya, Natasha, Kleshch - strive to break free from the "bottom" of life. But they feel their own impotence before the constipation of this "prison". They have a feeling of hopelessness of their fate and a craving for a dream, an illusion that gives at least some hope for the future.

Who is particularly receptive to Luke's consolations?

Nastya (talking about love)All the heroes of the play are sitting in a wasteland behind a rooming house and listening to Nastya talk about her affair with a French student. The baron catches her in a lie. Nastya screams in despair that he cannot understand true love. Luke asks her to continue. Bubnov continues to mock Nastya, but Natasha and Baron ask her to tell more. She continues the hysterical story of parting with her beloved. At the end of the story, she cries, and Luka and Natasha comfort her. The baron says that Nastya read this tragic story in the dime novel Fatal Love. Luka says that if Nastya believes that she had this love, then it was so. They leave with Nastya.

Actor (believes in a hospital for drunkards)Luka tells him about some free hospital for drunkards, says that later he will name the city in which she is located. The actor also encourages while to refrain from alcohol. The actor excitedly talks about his plans to go to a drunken asylum, saying that he is on the road to a renaissance. He says that on the stage he had the name Sverchkov-Zavolzhsky, but no one here knows about it, that he no longer has a name, and even dogs have nicknames.

Anna (believes that after death she will find peace)Anna complains to Luka about the impoverished, hungry life she lived, saying that she saw nothing but beatings and resentment. Luke consoles her and says that she will rest in the next world. The old man consoles her again, tells how, after death, the Lord will kindly look at Anna and reward for all the suffering, sending her to paradise. Suddenly Anna has a desire to live. She believes that if the torment ends there, then here you can endure.

Ash (new life in Siberia)Luka persuades Pepel to leave for the "golden" land - to Siberia, where it is good for anyone who has strength and reason.

Is the poem read by the Actor significant in the work? (pp. 378-379)

Yes.

What is the meaning and meaning of the poem?

People are ready to believe even in a lie, if there was a person who could instill a “golden dream” in the minds, hope and faith are the only things that keep a person afloat.

What is the essence of the story about the righteous land? (p. 387 - 389 read by roles)

a man lived, overcoming all misfortunes and pains, and believed that there is a land where there is nothing of this, where everyone helps each other. The scientist, immersed headlong in a mountain of books, replied that there was no such land. It turns out that there is no place on earth where you will simply be treated like a human being. As a result, the hopeless gloom of life remains and will forever remain around.Indeed, in the story about the “righteous land”, the scientist could really help a person by simply saying yes. The scribe would instill faith in him, and he would be able to find a righteous land for himself, that corner where he would feel good.

What hope is instilled in the souls of the overnight stays after the story of the righteous land?

and what if they are the lucky ones, and they will be able to find that righteous land that they dreamed about. And Pepel, who most adequately assesses the situation, is influenced by the "righteous earth." He calls Natasha with him and wants to start life from scratch. The actor believes that his “righteous land” is a free clinic that will be a ticket to a new life.

Which of the hostels does not believe a single word of Luke?

Satin, from beginning to end, does not accept the truth of Luke. He is sure that a man who once killed another killed his own. inner world. In the future, he will not be able to count on a righteous land where everyone helps each other - he is not worthy of this. Although his act has a justification: he defended his sister - he is sure that "after prison - there is no way!".

Should Luke even talk about the “righteous land”?

Of course, the events after Luke's stay and telling him the story of the righteous land changed dramatically, showing that a person is able to build his own life, despite external obstacles and the neglect of those around him. The actor nevertheless earned some money and managed not to drink it,Pepel asks Natasha to leave with him, says that he will start life anew, stop stealing and go to work. He believes that Natasha can help him change.

What does Luke call for overnight stays? Find quotes.

For example: "You - hope, you - believe!"

The ashes nevertheless ended up in Siberia, but not as a worker, but as a convict (Could Luka influence the course of events? Yes, he could. He heard Vasilisa ask Ash to kill Kostylev)

The actor, who found hope for salvation, hanged himself. (Why?

With the disappearance of Luka, all his dreams of recovery collapsed, since Luka did not show the way to the hospital)

D.Z. In the next lesson, we will have a lesson - a dispute dedicated to Satin and Luke. Your choice will have to be justified, defended. Consider the life positions of each hero on faith, conscience, love, truth, life. Decide which hero is closer. And who is the hero - the reasoner in the play. The statements of the heroes about the truth, about the person, write down in a notebook, whoever wishes. Can conduct a small study on the topic “The aphoristic language of M. Gorky's play “At the Bottom” (those who wish to do this work by Monday in writing).

Text based on the play by A.M. Gorky "At the bottom"

What did the wanderer Luka bring to the life of the Actor and other overnight stays?

A play by A.M. Gorky "At the bottom" - a realistic work, a socio-philosophical drama, written in 1902.

The main characters of the play are the inhabitants of the rooming house, unfortunate people offended by fate, whose situation is deeply tragic: all of them have no way out of life's impasse. The heroes of the play know about this and put up with everything, realizing their powerlessness and worthlessness.

But here the wandering old man Luka appears in the rooming house, who gives the unfortunate faith in getting rid of poverty and miserable living. In essence, an elderly, wise person inspires strength and a desire to overcome certain difficulties on the way to rebirth in the “cohabitants”.

He promises the dying Anna peace in another world, the corrupt woman Nastya assures that she is worthy of true love (“What you believe is what you are”), he promises to help the Actor find a hospital where they treat alcohol. The thief Vasily Peplu is advised to voluntarily leave for Siberia, where "a man is like a cucumber in a greenhouse."

But the reality is cruel: none of the overnight stays finds the strength to endure the burden of their misfortunes. The actor hanged himself, never knowing the name of the city where he could be cured of drunkenness. Anna, in anticipation of easing her fate after death, is not at all happy: she is ready to “be patient” if only to live longer. Vasily Pepel, obviously, will go to Siberia, but not of his own free will, but as a convict sentenced to exile for murder.

The hope that flared up in the hearts of unfortunate people has faded for them forever, and being “at the bottom” will become even more terrible and hopeless for them.

Why does Luke deceive the overnight stays? Why don't his monotonously soothing words contain a charge of effective goodness and, in fact, bring even more confusion and empty hopes into the life of "roommates"? He makes his speeches, apparently with one goal: to get rid of those who bother him, bother him with endless complaints - people who are weak, deprived of outside support and often completely helpless.

One can justify or blame the old man for the fact that the empty illusions of possible happiness he has sown deprive the unfortunate of the last hope for rebirth. But he sincerely pities people - thereby, at least for a brief moment, warms their suffering souls. And what can he do - a weak person outside the law: after all, he himself does not have a "patchport".

Searched here:

• what the wanderer of the onion brought to the life of the actor and other overnight stays
• but after the disappearance of Luka, without knowing the name of the location of the hospital, the actor loses hope of faith in his salvation and decides to die
• what does the bow promise to the overnight stays

Lord! If the truth is holy
The world can't find the way,
Honor to the madman who will inspire
Mankind has a golden dream!

The outset of the conflict in Gorky's play "At the Bottom" is the appearance of the wanderer Luke. He immediately finds himself in the center of attention of the overnight stays, and the entire development of the plot is concentrated on him.

Question

Find in the text and read what does Luka look like when he first appears in the rooming house?

Answer

Luka with a stick in his hand, with a knapsack over his shoulders, a bowler hat and a teapot at his belt.

Question

Who is Luca? What do the hostels learn about his past?

Answer

Luke doesn't say much about himself. He utters only a mysterious phrase: "They crumpled a lot, that's why he is soft." In addition, the roomers learn that Luka served as a watchman for an engineer near Tomsk, and when the robbers attacked the house, he first, pointing a gun at them, forced them to flog each other, and then, as they say, gave his word to say. It turned out that these were runaway convicts who were tired of begging, and they decided to go on a robbery. Luka took pity on the robbers and left them for the winter.

Luka most likely has no documents. To Vasilisa's demand to give a passport, he answers evasively: "I will bring it to you ... I will drag it to your apartment ...". Perhaps Luka is hiding from the police, wandering around. In a conversation with Ash, Luke leaves unanswered the assumption that he also had problems with the law - perhaps he once killed a person.

Question

Answer

Luke brings comfort to the inhabitants of the rooming house, inspires hope in their souls, faith in the best, tries to find the good in everyone.

Question

Who and how does Luke “comfort”? Prove your answers with examples from the text.

Answer

Luka "comforts" Anna, Nastya, the Actor and Pepel. In each of the heroes, he finds " weakness”, so words of comfort always turn out to be very timely. Luke finds kind words for a dying woman who is very afraid of death.

Ash, at first skeptical of Luka, gradually succumbs to his stories, decides to quit stealing and go to Siberia to start a new life.

Luca tells the actor about the hospital for alcoholics and gives him hope for recovery.

Nastya Luka does not promise anything, he simply becomes a grateful listener for her, pretends to believe in her stories about the beautiful and unhappy love that happened in her life.

Question

Is Luke pursuing any selfish goals by deceiving people?

Answer

Luka has no benefit in talking with the rooming houses, the only reason that prompts him to console him is “I want to understand human affairs ...”

Question

What is the meaning of life for Luke?

Answer

According to Luke, all people live “for the best”, so that one day a special person will appear and improve human life with his skill and talent: “After a hundred years ... or maybe more - they live for a better person!

Question

What is the meaning of life, according to Satan? Comment on the role of the monologue about the Man in order to understand the problems of the play.

Answer

The main life value, according to Satin, is the freedom to create and transform the world at will: “Everything is in a person, everything is for a person! Only man exists, everything else is the work of his hands and his brain! One should not humiliate a person with pity. Compassion is necessary only for those who are "weak in soul ... and who live on other people's juices."

The monologue about man contains the author's own answer to the question of truth. Luka, the “comforter,” leaves the stage quietly, furtively, afraid of being taken to the police for participating in a fight, while Satin remains in Act IV, “a strong point in the drama,” utters words about a Man who must be respected and not humiliated with pity. In Satine's monologue, one can also see the justification of Luke's "consolation". Satin speaks of people who lie beautifully, with inspiration, excitingly, out of pity for a person. The importance of this episode for clarifying the author's position is emphasized by the fact that all the characters, except for Satin, seem to “freeze” for a while, their internal state is commented on by the author's remark:

“Nastya stubbornly looks into the face of Satin. The tick stops working on harmony and also listens. The baron, bowing his head low, softly beats his fingers on the table. The actor, leaning out of the stove, wants to carefully climb down onto the bunk.

Question

How does Satin feel about work?

Answer

Satan doesn't want to work. He believes that people work in order to be full. And man is above satiety.

Question

Whose beliefs of Luke or Sateen are closer to you?

Question

What is the meaning of the name Luke?

Answer

On the one hand, this name is reminiscent of the biblical evangelist Luke and means “bright”, and on the other hand, Luke is associated with the word “evil”, that is, “devil”.

Question

What is the difference between the life beliefs of Sateen and Luke?

Answer

The life positions of Luke and Sateen in criticism are traditionally opposed. The philosophy of Luke is concentrated in the parable of the righteous land, the views of Sateen - in a monologue about Man. Luke is a comforter, evoking a “golden dream” for the overnight stays. Satin, on the other hand, exposes his “slave” worldview and affirms the ideal of a free person.

For both Sateen and Luke, the only value and measure of morality is a person, his convictions and internal law. Both of them offer the overnight stays to "overcome" life only on their own. No values ​​from the outside exist for them: for Sateen there are no social laws, but for Luke - God ("What you believe is what it is").

Having proclaimed the value of a particular person, both Satin and Luka stand up for a person in general. According to Luke, all people live for the sake of the emergence of a better, perfect person. Satin, on the other hand, sees in an outstanding personality the embodiment of all mankind.

Both life positions do not go beyond conversations. Luka only promises to change the life of Nastya, Natasha, Actor, Ash. Satin's reasoning is also self-valuable, aesthetic in nature and does not bring any practical benefit.

The methods of escaping reality proposed by Satin and Luke turn out to be ultimately untenable; they do not bring relief either to their authors or to the overnight stays. The drunkard and cheat Satin rots on the bunk, talking about the greatness of a proud man, the wanderer Luka again goes on the run, the deceived rooming houses are left with nothing.

Criticism often accused Luka of the Actor's suicide, but Sateen's preaching did not save him either. Therefore, the formulation of the problem of true and false humanism in the play, and even more so the correlation of true love for a person with the image of Sateen, do not seem fair. Satin and Luke are not even two different solutions to the problem of the relationship between truth and man. These are two equal opinions on how one can try to solve an unsolvable problem. The choice between truth and fiction, hatred for the dirt of life and compassion for people, pride in a person and awareness of his imperfection was not made by the author in all certainty, so the final play remains open.

Results

Gorky does not accept passive consciousness, the ideologist of which he considers Luka. According to the writer, it can only reconcile a person with the outside world, but will not move him to change this world. Although Gorky does not accept Luka's position, this image seems to be getting out of the author's control. According to the memoirs of the actor I.M. Moskvin, in the production of 1902, Luka appeared as a noble comforter, almost the savior of many desperate inhabitants of the rooming house.

Luke is a living image precisely because he is contradictory and ambiguous.

Literature

D.N. Murin, E.D. Kononova, E.V. Minenko. Russian literature of the twentieth century. Grade 11 program. Thematic lesson planning. St. Petersburg: SMIO Press, 2001

E.S. Rogover. Russian literature of the XX century / St. Petersburg: Paritet, 2002

N.V. Egorova. Lesson developments in Russian literature of the twentieth century. Grade 11. I semester. M.: VAKO, 2005

1. The "truth" of Luke.
2. Interpretation of the image of Luke.
3. The role of Luke in the life of the inhabitants of the "bottom".

The socio-philosophical drama "At the Bottom" was conceived by Gorky in 1900. The play was first published in Munich in 1902. In Russia, the work was published by the Znanie publishing house in 1903. The play shows the life of the inhabitants of the rooming house. These are degraded, unfortunate, destitute people. There is nothing bright in their lives.

The image of Luke is rightfully considered the most complex in the play. This man is trying to console the suffering. His position directly contradicts the phrase: "Truth is the god of a free man." Luke does not accept the cruel and evil "truth". For him, the truth is the “truth” in which a person believes.

Luca is very kind to those around him. He finds for everyone exactly those words that a person needs. Let this consolation have nothing to do with the real truth of life. But on the other hand, if you can make a person even a little happier, why neglect this opportunity? The play raises a complex philosophical question, whether Luke's compassion is better than the bare "truth" that reveals to the inhabitants of the "bottom" all the wretchedness of their existence... Everyone can answer this question in different ways. But one cannot but admit that the role of Luke in the life of other characters in the play is great.

Luke is not trying to convince anyone of anything: He simply consoles those who need it. He does not impose his point of view, and this shows his wisdom. Luke is sure: "What you believe is what you are." One cannot but agree with this. A person's subjective perception of the surrounding reality can be very different from the opinions of others. But the opinion of others is not necessarily considered true. Luke helps the underprivileged find hope. But this is very important for a person.

Critics could not come to unambiguous conclusions about the image of Luke. Some believed that Luka is a positive hero, because he helps people find something good in themselves. Others considered Luka a negative character, because after he left the rooming house, the inhabitants of the "bottom" had even more difficulty, because they were forced to say goodbye to illusions. The attitude of Gorky himself towards Luka was very contradictory. In 1910, the writer spoke about the hero of the play: “Luka is a crook. He doesn't really believe in anything. But he sees how people suffer and rush about. He feels sorry for these people. Here he tells them different words- for consolation.

The inhabitants of the rooming house treat Luka as a storyteller. They do not delude themselves about the words of the old man. For example, Pepel says: “You lie well ... You speak tales pleasantly! Lie! Nothing...". So, Luke's words still find a response in the souls of tormented people.

Anna Luca consoles with talk about the peace that will come after death. For a dying woman, these words can mean much more than the reasoning of the "working man", her husband Klesch, that after her death he will be able to arrange his life. So, in this case, the role of Luke is certainly positive. To an actor suffering from drunkenness, Luke talks about special hospitals where alcoholics can be cured. This hope could give strength. And Luka cannot be blamed for the fact that, having lost hope, the Actor decides to commit suicide. Hope for a better lot could make a person stronger if he initially had at least a little more strength and desire to break out of the vicious circle.

Vaska Peplu Luka says that his life in Siberia will not turn out so badly. “And the good side is Siberia! Golden side! Whoever is in power and in the mind is there - like a cucumber in a greenhouse! Let the old man's words be doubtful. But on the other hand, an attempt to instill confidence in the future is better than the intention to trample a person into the dirt, to deprive him of his last dream.

It is no coincidence that Luke tells a parable about how a certain person believed that somewhere there is a righteous land. And when the faith was destroyed by a scientist who managed to prove that this land does not exist, the man hanged himself. He could not survive the collapse of his hopes. The old man is sure that a lie can bring salvation, but the truth, on the contrary, is dangerous and cruel.

The image of Luke is the personification of humanity and philanthropy. Paradoxically, he himself is the same inhabitant of the "bottom" as the others. But he has not lost his human qualities, he finds in himself kindness and compassion for those around him. The rest for a long time no longer find in themselves at least a drop of sympathy for those who are nearby. How did Luke manage to keep kindness in himself? Perhaps the reason for this is that, unlike those around him, he does not cease to love and respect the people around him. Even in those cases when there is nothing to love and respect them for. Attempts to console the suffering for Luke are not valuable in themselves. He does not revel in his role as a comforter, he uses lies as a means to awaken something human in the dead souls of the inhabitants of the "bottom". And it is not his fault for the lack of results. Luka can be reproached for the fact that after his departure, the life of the inhabitants of the rooming house became even more difficult. They had to part with illusions, again they found themselves face to face with the realities of life. But on the other hand, the reproaches against the elder look unfounded. The trouble with the inhabitants of the “bottom” is that they are inactive, submit to circumstances, do not try to do anything to change their fate. Luke could be a guiding light for the Actor. But it's easier to believe Sateen. Not Luke, but Satin and the Baron caused the Actor's suicide. After all, it was they who convinced the unfortunate that there are no hospitals for alcoholics. On the other hand, was it in hospitals? Couldn't the Actor believe in his future and make attempts to change something in life? Luka tried to influence him, said to Sateen: “And you, why are you confusing him?” The rest are indifferent to the words, both their own and those of others.

Luca leaves the rooming house because he can't change the course of things. It is not in his power to help people leave the "bottom", to become full members of society. Luke understands that his help to the disadvantaged cannot be something material, tangible. The role of the comforter cannot be permanent, otherwise it will depreciate. Attempts to inspire hope, to encourage should resemble a flash of light in impenetrable darkness. And then people will decide for themselves whether to do something or not. The play does not answer whether the life of at least one of the inhabitants of the bottom will change. And, in my opinion, this is not accidental; Gorky in the work posed the most difficult questions, which everyone can answer in their own way.

The purpose of the lesson: to create a problematic situation and encourage students to express their own point of view on the image of Luke and his position in life.

Methodical techniques: discussion, analytical conversation.

Lesson equipment: portrait and photographs of A.M. Gorky of different years.

Download:

Preview:

During the classes.

1. Analytical conversation.

Let us turn to the extra-event series of the drama and see how the conflict develops here.

How do the inhabitants of the rooming house perceive their situation before the appearance of Luke?

(In the exposition, we see people, in fact, resigned to their humiliating position. The roommates languidly, habitually quarrel, and the Actor says to Satin: “One day they will completely kill you ... to death ...” “And you are a blockhead,” Satin snaps. “Why "- the Actor is surprised. "Because - you can’t kill twice." These words of Sateen show his attitude to the existence that they all lead in a rooming house. This is not life, they are all already dead. It seems everything is clear. But the response is interesting Actor: "I don't understand...why not?". Perhaps it is the Actor, who has died more than once on stage, who understands the horror of the situation more deeply than others. After all, it is he who commits suicide at the end of the play.)

- What is the meaning of using the past tense in the self-characteristics of the characters?

(People feel like “former”: “Satin. I was an educated person” (the paradox is that the past tense is impossible in this case). “Bubnov. I was a furrier.” Bubnov utters a philosophical maxim: don’t paint yourself, everything will be erased ... everything will be erased, yes!”).

Which character is opposed to the rest?

(Only one Kleshch has not yet reconciled himself to his fate. He separates himself from the rest of the rooming houses: “What kind of people are they? Ran, golden company ... people! I am a working person ... I am ashamed to look at them ... I have been working since I was young ... I won't get out of here? )

Which scene is the beginning of the conflict?

(The outset of the conflict is the appearance of Luka. He immediately announces his views on life: “I don’t care! I respect crooks, in my opinion, not a single flea is bad: everyone is black, everyone jumps ... that’s it.” And also: “An old man - where it’s warm, there is a homeland ...” Luka is in the center of attention of the guests: “What an interesting old man you brought Natasha ...” - and all the development of the plot is concentrated on him.)

How does Luke affect the overnight stays?

(Luka quickly finds an approach to the rooming houses: “I’ll take a look at you, brothers, - your life - oh-oh! ....” He pities Alyoshka: “Oh, boy, you are confused ....” He does not respond to rudeness, skillfully bypasses questions that are unpleasant for him, is ready to sweep the floor instead of bed-beds. Luka becomes necessary for Anna, pities her: “How can you leave a person like that?” Luka skillfully flatters Medvedev, calling him “under”, and he immediately falls for this bait.)

What do we know about Luke?

(Luka says almost nothing about himself, we only learn: “They crushed a lot, that’s why he is soft ...”.)

What does Luke say to each of the inhabitants of the rooming house?

(In each of them, Luka sees a person, reveals their bright sides, the essence of personality, and this produces a revolution in the lives of the heroes. It turns out that the prostitute Nastya dreams of beautiful and bright love; the drunken Actor receives hope for a cure for alcoholism; the thief Vaska Pepel plans to leave to Siberia and start a new life there with Natalia, to become a strong master.Anna Luka gives consolation: "Nothing, nothing more will be needed, and there is nothing to be afraid of! Quiet, calm - lie to yourself! "Luke reveals the good in every person and inspires faith in the best.)

Did Luka lie to the rooming-houses?

(There may be different opinions on this matter. Luke selflessly tries to help people, inspire faith in themselves, awaken the best sides of nature. He sincerely wishes for good, shows real ways to achieve a new, a better life. After all, there really are hospitals for alcoholics, indeed Siberia is the golden side, and not just a place of exile and hard labor. As for the afterlife with which he beckons Anna, the question is more complicated; it is a matter of faith and religious beliefs. What did he lie about? When Luka convinces Nastya that he believes in her feelings, in her love: “If you believe, you had true love ... then it was! Was!" - he only helps her find the strength in herself for life, for real, not fictional love.)

How do the inhabitants of the rooming house feel about Luke's words?

(The overnight stayers are at first distrustful of his words: “Why are you all lying?” Luka does not deny this, he answers the question with a question: “And ... why do you really need it painfully ... think about it! She, really, can , but for you ... ". Even to a direct question about God, Luka answers evasively: "If you believe, there is; if you don’t believe, no ... What you believe, that is ... ".)

What groups can the characters in the play be divided into?

"believers" "non-believers"

Anna believes in God. Tick ​​no longer believes in anything.

Tatar - in Allah. Bubnov never believed in anything.

Nastya - in fatal love.

Baron - in his past, perhaps invented.

What is the sacred meaning of the name "Luke"?

(The name "Luka" has a dual meaning: this name resembles the evangelist Luka, meaning "bright", and at the same time associated with the word "evil" (hell).)

(The author's position is expressed in the development of the plot. After Luka's departure, everything happens completely different from what Luka convinced and how the heroes expected. Vaska Pepel really ends up in Siberia, but only to hard labor, for the murder of Kostylev, and not as a free settler. The actor who lost faith in himself, in his strength, exactly repeats the fate of the hero of Luke's parable about the righteous land.Luke, telling a parable about a man who, having lost faith in the existence of a righteous land, strangled himself, believes that a person cannot be deprived of dreams, hopes, even imaginary. on the other hand, by showing the fate of the Actor, he assures the reader and viewer that it is precisely false hope that can lead a person to suicide.)

Gorky himself wrote about his plan: “The main question I wanted to pose is what is better, truth or compassion. What is needed. Is it necessary to bring compassion to the point of using lies, like Luke? This is not a subjective question, but a general philosophical one.

Gorky contrasts not truth and falsehood, but truth and compassion. How justified is this opposition?

(This faith did not have time to gain a foothold in the minds of the overnight stays, it turned out to be fragile and lifeless, with the disappearance of Luke, hope goes out.)

What is the reason for the rapid fading of faith?

(Perhaps the point is the weakness of the heroes themselves, their inability and unwillingness to do at least something to implement new plans. Dissatisfaction with reality, a sharply negative attitude towards it, are combined with a complete unwillingness to do anything to change this reality.)

How does Luke explain the failures of the overnight stay life?

(Luke explains the failures of the life of the overnight stays by external circumstances, does not at all blame the heroes themselves for the failed life. Therefore, they were so drawn to him and so disappointed, having lost external support with the departure of Luke.)

Luke is a living image, precisely because he is contradictory and ambiguous.

1. Discussion of D.Z.

The philosophical question posed by Gorky himself: what is better - truth or compassion? The question of truth is multifaceted. Each person understands the truth in his own way, having in mind some final, higher truth. Let's see how the truth and lies correlate in the drama "At the Bottom".

What do the characters in the play mean by truth?

(This word has many meanings. See the dictionary.

There are two levels of "truth".

Prepare for an essay on the work of M. Gorky.

O.V. Smirnova

Five lessons on the play "At the Bottom"

Lesson 1

Before reading, it is necessary to tell a little about the history of the play. "At the Bottom" was written specifically for the Moscow Art Theater, like everything that Gorky wrote for the theater. The Moscow Art Theater aroused Gorky's delight, which he poured out in a letter to Chekhov: “The Art Theater is as good and significant as the Tretyakov Gallery, St. Basil's and all the best in Moscow. It is impossible not to love him, not to work for him is a crime.”

The love turned out to be mutual, and the directors of the Moscow Art Theater willingly staged Gorky, especially since this always aroused almost scandalous interest among the public - even high-ranking ones. When his first play (“The Petty Bourgeoisie”) was being prepared for a production (more precisely, probably for a touring production), according to Stanislavsky’s memoirs, “the entire “governing” St. a reinforced police detachment was appointed, mounted gendarmes rode around the square in front of the theater. One might think that they were preparing not for a dress rehearsal, but for a general battle.

The production of "At the Bottom" promised to be even more scandalous, because no government likes it when they demonstrate the poverty and hopelessness in which their subjects are. (Hence, for the most part, implausible interiors in television series: it is supposed to show the “beautiful life”). Censorship allowed only one theater to stage this play - the Moscow Art Theater. It is believed that this was done in the hope of failure: the text looked painfully strange, “unstaged”. The Moscow Art Theater approached the work on the play seriously. Since none of the actors, and even more so the actresses, had not seen the doss-houses and their inhabitants with their own eyes, an excursion to Khitrovka was arranged. In order to avoid the troubles that could be expected from such places, the well-known reporter and writer Vladimir Alekseevich Gilyarovsky (“Uncle Gilyay”), whom all criminal Moscow knew and respected for his phenomenal physical strength, was taken as a guide. Troubles, of course, happened. According to Gilyarovsky, a company from the Moscow Art Theater (foppish and smart - some beautiful actresses were worth something) went into a sort of brain center of Khitrovka - a rooming house where drunken and unclaimed former actors sat and rewrote roles for theaters (this is cheaper than hiring a typist, and roles In each performance, you need to paint a lot). Seeing their more successful colleagues, the “former” fell into ambition, climbed on the rampage and were ready to start a fight, but then “Uncle Gilyai” did not lose his head and so gasped on the floor with a stool that the tramps immediately came to their senses. The actors of the Moscow Art Theater were quickly taken away, but they, presumably, managed to feel the realism of the play.

"At the bottom", as already mentioned, is a "new drama", and all the tricks in it are emphasized naked. Gorky generally loves external effects, and there will be plenty of them. We take a book and start reading as much as we can. Along the way, I usually pay attention to such things:

List of actors: after reading it, you can be sure that this is a kind of cross section of Russian society. There are people of all classes - from the aristocracy (Baron) to the peasantry (Luka), there are their own masters of life and corrupt "siloviki". At the same time, they all live "at the bottom", in a dirty rooming house, and no one likes such a life, except perhaps for the main owner - Kostylev and policeman Medvedev.

Big remark at the beginning of the first act. Will anyone remember why this is a sign of "new drama"? – But because the boundaries of literary genres and genres are blurred: writers use the possibilities of the epic, because plays are not only staged, but also read like ordinary prose. Why is such a long remark needed? - For the production, it is just redundant: the director will still do what is more convenient for him. But when reading, it creates the impression of gloom, hopelessness, a prison or a crypt.

First line: “Baron. Farther!" - The play starts in the middle. It seems that there, behind the curtain, there was some kind of life, and when the curtain was raised, we saw this life. On the stage is a piece of life, that is, the ultimate realism. And this is done, of course, in order for the viewer to realize the realism of the action.

The dialogues that take place on the stage seem to be unrelated to each other. Two pairs of heroes are talking to each other, not paying attention to their neighbors (Baron - with Nastya, Kleshch - with Kvashnya). And Sateen sometimes growls. Along the way, we will see that the dialogues are connected in meaning. In this case, they are about the same thing, sometimes some remarks will sound like a comment on a completely different conversation. And this is also an unusual technique in drama: usually, in plays, people spoke in turns.

In this drama, as we shall see, the main thing for Gorky is thought. And he will emphasize it in every possible way so that the slow-witted viewers do not miss anything important. For example, let's pay attention to the first dialogue between the Actor and Sateen:

A. One day you will be completely killed ... to death ...

S. And you are a blockhead.

And why?

C. Because you can't kill twice.

A. (after a pause). I don't understand... Why not?

What is there not to understand? However, Sateen's remark is shocking, the audience should comprehend it, and therefore the Actor asks his stupid questions: attention attracts. You can ask the class again: what is it about? - Probably, that the inhabitants of the rooming house feel thrown out of life - that is, dead. Already killed once.

If someone follows the text, they may ask why Gorky has so many dashes. Usually I read them a moral that literate people put punctuation marks “from the mind”, according to the structure of the text. And the illiterate try to convey with the help of intonation signs. Still, the corrector will not allow them to use commas for this, but the dash - as an exception - was left to the great proletarian Gorky. And, accordingly, if someone abuses this sign in the same way, then he betrays his illiteracy.

next moment, which I draw attention to (or was it a little earlier?), - Kvashnya's quarrel with Klesch:

Kvashnya. You beat your wife half to death ...

Mite. Shut up, old dog! It's none of your business...

Kvashnya. Ah! Can't stand the truth!

Baron. Began!

In fact, of course, a scandal began. But, in addition, the Baron's remark heralds that the debate about truth is the main line of this play. Effective such ambiguity.

Along the way, I comment on the argument about whose turn it is to take revenge on the floor - very similar to school disputes about duty with the leitmotif "why me?" We pay attention to the intricate words that Satin mutters: “Organism ... organon ... Sicambre ... And there is also - trans-scendental.” The latter is a favorite word of the Symbolists, as everyone should still remember. And one can imagine how it angered Gorky, who had not been taught such words, although, of course, he somehow mastered them.

I am commenting on Bubnov's monologue about the paint on his hands, which has worn off, like all other signs of class, shop and other social affiliation. “It turns out that no matter how you paint yourself, everything will be erased ...” This is essential for the play: it claims to be philosophical, to solve some eternal universal problems. And in this sense, declassed rooming houses are just people who are faced with these problems. People in an abstract, philosophical sense, not social roles.

If time permits, I skip something, retell it in a patter and read how Vaska Pepel is exhibited in front of Natasha, and at this time Bubnov mutters to himself: “But the threads are rotten.” A very effective move, indeed.

Next comes the problem D/Z. Depending on the capabilities of the class, I asked very different things. There were strong classes, to whom I immediately, without preliminary discussions, outlined a system of images: divide the heroes into some groups and justify their constructions. Of course, it was interesting to discuss their calculations. From the first two acts, I suggested to the conscientious classes that they write out aphorisms on the theme of honor, conscience, truth and lies. In three columns: what do the hosts, the hosts and Luka (and those who agree with him) think about this. A lighter version of the same task: find and write out remarks about what a person should be like (what a person is valued for) from the point of view of a) hosts, b) roommates, c) Luke. Perhaps this is the most convenient D / Z option. If the class is completely hopeless, let them just read on and try to determine what conflict (or conflicts) is in this play and what the discussion is about.

Lesson 2

What the dispute is about in this play, everyone more or less guesses - about truth and lies. That's what it is discussion, which in the intellectual drama replaces the traditional conflict. What role does it play plot? - It serves as a kind of visual illustration of the views of the parties participating in the discussion. More precisely, a working model on which you can demonstrate how what the characters are arguing about actually happens. So, in order to understand this play, one must see how the discussion about the truth correlates with the events and fates of the overnight stays. You can build on both the discussion (abstract formulations) and the real course of events. The second is even more interesting, but this is the path for those who are ready to immediately and independently comprehend the system of images.

To begin with, let's ask how many opinions collide in this dispute. Or in another way: what conflicts are visible in this play? The difficulty is that there are not two positions, but more. It's the same with conflicts. To begin with, it is worth carefully separating that branch of the discussion that lies on the surface and rarely interests anyone now: this is a dispute between hosts and hosts about traditional morality. And, accordingly, the conflict of hosts and overnight stays. It is important enough, and there is enough sharpness in it.

Gorky was very interested in this branch of the discussion at one time. He many times undertook to prove that traditional Christian morality is a product of class society: it (according to Marxism) protects the interests of those who have property and power from the encroachments of the poor, exploited masses. Already after “At the Bottom”, in 1906, Gorky wrote an article “The Priest of Morality”, which says: “It is not profitable for anyone to be honest among crooks ... Morality is beneficial for you when you have everything you need and want to keep it for myself alone; it is unprofitable if you have nothing more than hair on your head ... If a person has money, oxen, slaves, donkeys, and he himself is not an idiot - he is a moralist.

Such a "moralist" in the play is Kostylev, who loves to sing something divine and light lamps, but will not forgive anyone's debt, and even charge a fee.

If you were asked to write out what different “groups” value people for, then it is easy to see that in this conflict Luka is in solidarity with all the overnight stays. This line severely divides the masters from the disenfranchised exploited masses. Extracts can be of varying degrees of detail. It is important that the following "points" are noted:

Attitude to law, honor and conscience.

hosts believe that people should obey the law, not violate public order and act honestly.

Accommodations they say it's not good for them. “Every person wants his neighbor to have a conscience…” But a neighbor, as a rule, does not have one. In their opinion, the best people are thieves: they easily part with money (Gorky already outlined this idea in Chelkash and, as we see, did not refuse it). Another aphorism on the same topic: "Honour-conscience is needed for those who have power and strength."

True, there are also naive souls among the roomers: Tatarin believes that “one must have the law of the soul,” and tries to live according to this law, but in the end he joins the gamblers (sharpers), because he was left without a hand, and therefore without a job.

Luke seems to be completely on the side of the overnight stays: "I respect crooks." "Not a single flea is bad: all are black, all are jumping." However, he himself is not a swindler. And, moreover, he begins by showing his conscience: he takes a broom and pities Anna. But he is completely indifferent to the law.

Loyalty to the authorities, in particular, submission to the passport regime.

Until now, this issue is complex and controversial. But before the revolution, all the “leftist” figures were sure that the passport regime is a shame, because, firstly, it violates the freedom of the individual and makes it possible to track the movements of objectionable persons, and secondly, it simply humiliates human dignity, because some then a piece of paper for the authorities is more important than a person.

hosts naively assert: Good man must have a patchport. All good people they have a patchport."

It is easy to guess that the overnight stays do not have "patchports", which makes them very vulnerable and dependent on their superiors. You have to pay bribes all the time to stay out of jail.

Settlement.

For Gorky, this is a very personal motive (he himself wandered around Russia and caused great irritation with the authorities). But it also has an element of a political program: a free man has the right to move freely wherever his heart desires.

hosts they cannot agree with this. "Kostylev. A person should live in one place ... And not get confused on the ground in vain ... "

What does he need Luke sarcastically replies: “And if for which there is a place everywhere?” And he says to Medvedev, who said with surprise that he had not seen this old man on his site: “This is because, uncle, not all of our land fit in your site ... it remains a little to oprich him.” And once again he will say: “We are all wanderers on earth.” And he will add: our Earth is a wanderer in the sky.

And here are all the others overnight stays they would like to become wanderers and leave this brothel even to the ends of the earth, even to crawl away on all fours, but they lack freedom for this (mainly internal). Although the desire to leave, to escape is the leitmotif of the play and its main plot.

4. Work

hosts believe that "good" people must work. Otherwise, who is to be exploited?

Convinced overnight stays they don't even try to work. Satin expresses their position: judging by the work, the horse is better than any person: it works and is silent. This remark in 1902 was a huge success, because it alluded to the strikes of the workers, who not only stopped working, but also did not remain silent.

Accommodation for beginners(Kleshch, Tartar) agree with the owners: you have to work to maintain self-respect. Both will eventually lose their jobs.

Silence and noise

hosts They want people to be quiet and peaceful. Noise is disorder, and disorder can turn into outrage, into rebellion and rebellion.

Accommodations On the contrary, they make noise: growl, cough, creak, swear, recite poetry, sing. And this is a kind of form of resistance, a demonstration of protest. And if not, if the cry simply draws attention to the terrible situation these people are in, it still bothers the owners.

When we realized this (and at the same time separated the dispute between hostels and hosts from the main discussion), we can still do image system. If there was no such D / Z, then suggest right in the lesson to divide all the actors into some meaningful groups. At first, perhaps, someone will follow the line of least resistance and offer to divide everyone into hosts and overnight stays. But we have already worked out this line, and we no longer need it. Therefore, if the class itself does not offer more sensible versions, you can ask provocative questions:

- Who can leave the rooming house, who can't?- Turns out, maybe go alone Luke. All the rest are somehow chained to it, and this does not depend on their social status. Luke is always outside this world, above it. The freest hero is truly a wanderer.

- Who doesn't want to leave? – Kostylev and Medvedev(until the last action). They are tied to the rooming house by their power and selfish interests. They feel like it's all up to them. They are very wrong. Nochlezhka (another incarnation of that Gorky "swamp" that destroys weak people) grinds their lives in the same way as the lives of poor guests. This, of course, is an image-symbol that one should not forget to talk about sometime: a symbol of life, which in essence is not life, but death.

- Which of the overnight stays would like, but does not hope and does not try to break free? – Bubnov and Satin. Both consider themselves dead (at least until the last action). They, therefore, do not participate in Luke's experiments and are not even included in the "control group" (what - more on that later). This also probably includes a shoemaker. Alyoshka, who plays a funeral march and shouts that he wants nothing. He clearly adjoins these living dead.

- Which of the overnight stays does Luke give hope and comfort? – Anna, actor, Natasha and Ash. For everyone, he finds his own version of support, so you need to talk about them in detail - about each.

- Who among the rooming-houses comforts himself - with the hope of "liberation" or in some other way?– Tick, Kvashnya, Vasilisa, Tatarin and Nastya with Baron. They also have different options for consolation, and they also need to be discussed in more detail. But you can immediately say that this is the "control" group, with the help of which Gorky shows that it is practically impossible for the heroes to leave the rooming house. By the way, both "masters" can also be attributed here: they also considered themselves free and were deceived.

And thus we get three groups: 1) those who have no illusions and who consider themselves dead, 2) those who themselves harbor illusions that “from the bottom” you can get out or at least “shelter” somewhere from a bleak reality (in the past or in dream), 3) those to whom Luke offers a way out that seems real and quite achievable. Luka himself stands outside the groups: he is an experimenter and a manipulator here, a kind of puppeteer. However, the author's attitude towards him changed more than once (he altered the play quite radically), and in the text there are traces of directly opposite assessments: both enthusiastic and accusatory. This deliberate duality of the image of Luke is a godsend for directors and compilers of examination questions: such scope for reasoning and disputes, where diametrically opposed judgments can be substantiated by the text of the play.

It would be nice right there, in this lesson, to have time to talk about "control group". What did they hope for and what happened to them?

Kostylev considered himself invulnerable - in the end he was killed.

Medvedev helped him - as a result, he was fired from the police and joined the ranks of the overnight stays.

Kvashnya she hoped that she would get out "from the bottom" if she married Medvedev (although she did not admit it in words). As a result, not only did she not get out, but she also put Medvedev on her neck.

Mite waiting for the death of his wife. But when she died, he had to sell the instrument in order to bury her, and he remained the same "lumpen" as the others, whom he despised and considered idlers.

Vasilisa she hoped that Vasily would kill her husband, and she would become free and rich. As a result, both of them are accused of murder, and a prison awaits her.

Nastya finds consolation in invented love (in which Luke only encourages her: “What you believe is what you are”). But in the end, he literally rages and wants to break free. Consolation no longer saves her.

Baron hides in his memories. But Nastya, in revenge for his ridicule, shouts to him: “I don’t believe it!” - and Satin finishes off: “In the carriage of the past - you won’t go anywhere!” And the Baron loses his saving niche.

Conclusion? - Nochlezhka does not let anyone go. Any attempt to get out of it is an illusion that will dissipate sooner or later. That is probably why some of the overnight stays do not try to get out of it. Some - because they clearly see the horror of their position. This, according to Gorky, is their strength. They are not afraid truth, although it is absolutely deadly. Luka does not even try to approach these heroes with his conversations. Others - because they do not dare to hope for anything. Too weak for hope, although we would be glad to hope. So Luke is trying to help them.

And again D/Z- problem. We need to get Luke and Satine's dispute. But it is so hard. Maybe we should just focus on Luke for now? Well, let's say: "Luke: for and against." With mandatory answers to several questions. 1) What is the fate of those whom Luca tried to help compared to the “control group”? 2) Why were these people not saved? 3) Is what Luke offered them a lie? How does he explain it himself? 4) How does he justify his understanding of truth and falsehood? 5) How did you understand the parable of the “righteous land”? 6) What do people live for, according to Luke? (Attention! We learn about this in the last act, in the retelling of Sateen. And do not say that this is not in the play). And what does this theory look like? 7) What do you think: is Luke a good person? What are his pros and cons?

If, on the contrary, the class does not need detailed instructions, let them look for the pros and cons themselves. It is only necessary to hint to them so that they do not lose the righteous land and about the meaning of life in the retelling of Sateen. And so that the episode with the fugitive convicts is not missed.

Lesson 3. Two looks at Luka.

The course of the lesson depends on how the D / Z was done. If you do it yourself, just listen to a few respondents. If there are questions, then we will go on questions. The first is unpredictable, I'll write down the second.

1. First, let them tell what happened to those who were helped by Luke. What did he offer them and what came of it.

Anna - the afterlife.

Vasily and Natasha - an honest life in Siberia.

Actor - a hospital for alcoholics.

These experiments ended tragically. What do all these promises have in common? - They are executable on the condition faith. As Luka says to Natasha: you remind Vasily more often that he is good, and he will improve. And he became a thief because everyone told him: Vaska is the son of a thief and a thief himself. Or a suggestion to the Actor: I, they say, will remember where the hospital is, but don’t drink yet. By the way, the story of the Actor sometimes aroused indignation among the guys: after all, the action takes place in Moscow, where Fr. Alexei Mechev really saved alcoholics. But, in fact, it was necessary to believe and go to him. So Gorky did not sin so much against the truth. And Luca too.

We know nothing about Anna's afterlife (Gorky does not believe in life after death). Luke consoled her and made her last days easier - thanks to him.

Vasily is in prison, he is accused of killing Kostylev.

Natasha Vasilisa scalded her legs, and Natasha disappeared somewhere.

Is it Luke's fault? - In part: he did not go to testify in favor of Vasily, fearing that he himself would be in trouble due to the fact that he did not have a patchport. However, his testimony probably did not mean much. The cruel “truth of life” took up arms against these two, and it is very difficult to cope with it by faith alone.

The actor hanged himself solely through the fault of Luke: he deceived the awakened faith and hope. The Actor could not resist only due to his internal forces: he is a weak person.

The people can argue here: Luke (the evil one) does not compose outright fables, he gives hope and invites a person to rely on himself, his inner strength, his dreams, after all.

His views quite accurately fit into the system of ideas characteristic of subjective idealists: "What you believe is what you are." Since this is not currently taught in schools, it is worth making a brief digression and describing the classification of philosophical trends in which Gorky was brought up (by the Marxists). According to this classification, all philosophical systems are divided into materialistic (matter is primary, everything spiritual comes from nerves) and idealistic (spirit is primary). And those, in turn, are also divided into two large groups. “Objective” idealists believe that God is primary, who first conceived and then created the world. Or otherwise, ideas are primary, and their material embodiment is secondary and always defective. "Subjective" idealists believe that human consciousness is primary, from which we cannot "jump": we know only what has been refracted in our brain. It is not a fact that our vision corresponds to reality (that is, the fact that it never quite corresponds). In the extreme case, subjective idealism can go so far as to declare only consciousness itself to exist, and the world to be its (delusional) creation (and this is called solipsism, if anyone is interested). So, Luke invites everyone to believe in their own truth, because faith (the spiritual beginning) has very real power and authority in this world. If you believe and do your best to achieve what you believe in, it can happen. And if you don't believe, then nothing will work. In this system, the measure of truth is a person and his faith. Dream, goal, faith is not a lie, because it is the inner truth of man.

This could be said by those who would independently undertake to defend Luka. What can be against such protection objections?

Human faith is opposed by reality, which is capable of destroying all good human impulses with its brute force. How Vasilisa destroyed Vaska and Natasha's attempt to start a new life. And this reality somehow (and someone - which is the main thing) needs to be fought, otherwise people will not become better and happier. Faith alone is not enough. At least, faith in yourself and your strengths.

Luke never takes responsibility for those people whom he beckoned with hope. And never openly goes against the harsh and cruel reality. Except as a word and advice, he does not help anyone. Unless on trifles: sweep the floor, bring Anna from the hallway into the warmth.

3. Why is Luka trying to help (albeit in his own way) the rooming houses? Does he believe that they will be able to get out "from the bottom" and "resurrect" - that is, begin to live some other, full life?

The second question is auxiliary, it may not be presented if the children themselves answer the first. Usually the class responds that it helps them mainly out of pity. Maybe he is trying to give some at least some, but a chance - what if it works out? (Not Anna - Ashes). And what gives his pity to the hopeless? – The ability to endure life to the end and at the same time suffer a little less. It is obvious that it is for this that he comforts Anna and Nastya. Perhaps he treated the Actor in the same way, and he - an artistic and hot nature - overestimated himself and took everything at face value. Luka himself hardly believes that any of the overnight stays will be able to break free. Although he knows how to be free.

In an interview given by Gorky about his play in 1903, he spoke unambiguously about Luka: “The main question I wanted to pose is which is better: truth or compassion? What do you need? Is it necessary to bring compassion to the point of using lies, like Luke? This is not a subjective question, but a general philosophical one.

Experts on Gorky's work believe that L.N. was the prototype of Luka. Tolstoy. Gorky was outraged by his preaching, he considered Tolstoyism a lie, leading away from reality and the revolutionary struggle. However, this is hardly important for understanding the play.

For the sake of what, in the understanding of Luke, do people live in the world? And what does it look like

theory?

It is necessary that this fragment from Sateen's monologue (4th act: “Once I asked him: “Grandfather! Why do people live?”) Read aloud. Hearing it, everyone will guess that it is very similar to Raskolnikov's theory. People are divided into 2 categories: the “best” (“able to say a new word in their environment”) and the material that serves to give rise to their own kind. The best, as usual, move humanity forward, and the ordinary can only endure this life and wait for the best to change it. Among the overnight stays, there are hardly any "best", which means that the most merciful thing towards them is to console them with fairy tales and hopes. To give them faith in the best that must one day appear.

Here it is worth recalling the parable of the righteous land. What conclusion can be drawn from it? – Most likely, there is no point in living without ideals for people. But after all, there is no such land in the world, why strive for it? “Probably so that one day she will appear. Gorky is sly and says nothing directly here, but he will not agree to admit that humanity does not need a "righteous land." And if it does not exist, it must be created, relying on the faith in the best that everyone has in their souls.

If you look at it this way, Luke is not exactly lying, but supports the desire for the best in people, even if these people fail to bring anything of the “best” into the world.

Gorky himself, at first, with tears of delight, read the words of his Luke and loved him as a kind of prophet who, by his kindness, managed to awaken in the souls of the shelters a desire for the best, human dignity, etc. However, party comrades explained to him that Luke's humanism was false, based on traditional Christian morality ("love your neighbor as yourself"). And generally on a comforting lie. This means that it must be debunked from the point of view of a new, revolutionary humanism: what leads to revolution is humane, because the revolution must lead humanity to the era of universal communist happiness. And Christian humanism is “objectively” beneficial only to the masters of life: it helps to endure and prevents rebellion.

It is possible to debunk his position only "theoretically" - by setting out another, "correct" theory (this will be done by Satin). To debunk Luka as a person should be a story about convicts (if his cowardly flight is not enough). There is no other point in putting it in a play. In this story, we recall, Luke explains why he is gentle and kind. He explains in a very peculiar way: because "they crushed a lot." And as evidence, he cites the case of how a pair of runaway convicts attacked him, and he forced them to flog each other at gunpoint. And after that they became like silk. The current student is only perplexed: what a strange story? And history has historical roots. Those who read A. Brushtein's "Spring" remember that the political actions of workers in the early twentieth century were indeed pacified with the help of corporal punishment. They didn’t execute, they didn’t mutilate - they humiliated. And those seemed to be humbled. Patience and humility are two virtues that are especially intolerable to the pride of a true revolutionary. Or endure and reconcile with the existing system - the Russian people, brought up in the Christian faith, are so used to it. Or proudly rise up against oppression - but then down with humility. Pride and humility are generally antagonists. Luke helps the roommates endure their lives with his comforting speeches. This is not enough. He humbly takes up the broom and generally knows how to adapt to circumstances, does not take offense at rudeness, etc. Why? But because he does not consider humility humiliating. So, he is at one with the authorities! So, he also believes that people can be humiliated even with a flogging! This associative flight is, of course, difficult to prove. Perhaps by the opposite method: if Gorky was not going to expose humility, then why do we need an episode with convicts? To the modern reader, it usually seems like some kind of incomprehensible appendage that does not fit into the action of the play.

It would be good to bring all these conversations into the system 5-7 minutes before the end of the lesson. So, we need to comprehend the duality of the author's attitude towards Luke. To do this, you can use one simple trick: compare Luka and Danko(a hero loved by the author unconditionally). At the same time, we recall the comparison algorithm.

General. Both pity the people who find themselves in the "swamp" of life. They are told to get out of there. Everyone is trying to help in their own way.

Difference. 1) Danko tore out his heart for the sake of people. Luka does not want to sacrifice anything and take risks. 2) Danko calls to overcome bad circumstances. Luka is trying to suggest a way out for someone, and most of his speeches are only helped to endure an unbearable life. 3) Danko is driven by pride, unwillingness to accept defeat and slow death. Luke preaches humility - "softness", compliance, tolerance.

Conclusion. Gorky does not believe that Luka is able to bring people "to the light." And he hardly believes that they themselves - without a leader - are able to get out of their swamp.

Maybe suggest writing a short essay at the end of the lesson: “My assessment of Luke”? (“Is Luka a good man?” “Good or evil did Luka bring to the rooming house?”). Let them realize at least their position in relation to this hero.

D/Z. After re-reading the fourth act, determine what Satin agrees with and disagrees with Luke. Support your findings with quotes. By the way, remember the story of Sateen: who is he, how did he get into the rooming house. From there, from the last action, it is necessary to extract the opinions of other heroes about Luke, their pros and cons.

Lesson 4 artistic originality of the play.

What we did in the last lesson is more about plot, how discussions. It can be recalled that the plot in the "intellectual drama" serves as a kind of illustration to the reasoning of the characters: someone confirms the correctness, someone refutes.

We checked if Luka could help anyone with his speeches (that is, with his "pathetic" humanism). They came to the conclusion that in a collision with reality, his humanism based on faith lost. Although it is not clear what is to blame: either too difficult circumstances, or the weak faith of the experimental characters, or all together. They also found out that Luka himself did not dare to oppose circumstances in order to protect Vaska Pepel - he cowardly fled. After that, the rooming houses concluded that all Luke's speeches were lies.

However, this is where the discussion begins. Recall: "At the Bottom" is a typical "intellectual drama", and in it the "conflict of people" is replaced by a "conflict of ideas", a dispute. Gorky draws it up unexpectedly and spectacularly. The main antagonists in his play are Luke and Satin They don't even argue with each other. Luke speaks in the first three acts, and Satin in the fourth, when Luke has already caught a cold. Other hostels also discuss Luke's position, that is, they participate in discussions, already towards the end.

First they discuss the old man himself.

"Satin. (laughing) And in general ... for many it was ... like a crumb for the toothless.

"Mite. He was pitiful… you have… no pity.”

"Nastya. He saw everything… understood everything.”

"Tatar. The old man was good ... he had a law to his soul! Whoever has the law of the soul is good!”

"Satin. Yes, it was he, the old trembling, who fermented our roommates ... "

"Mite. He beckoned somewhere ... but he himself did not say the way ... "

"Baron. The old man is a charlatan."

This roll call of opinions will include a conversation about the law and the law of the soul. The Tatar says that one must live according to the Koran, Kleshch agrees - yes, according to the Gospel. And Satin turns everything inside out and compares these books with the Code of Criminal and Correctional Punishments. Another associative feint, disguised as an empty chatter. He equates faith in God and the fulfillment of his commandments with submission to the authorities.

Then Satin suddenly rushes to defend Luka and interpret his speech in his own way. He declares his famous: “He ... acted on me like acid on an old and dirty coin ...” - and utters several long monologues. They will have to be sorted out: ask what it is about and how it is connected with Luke.

First monologue about lies and truth. We read it and note along the way the famous aphorisms and how they are connected with the events in the play.

“What is truth? The man is the truth! Yes, we have already discussed this. Only Luke and Satin understand differently that a person is the truth. For Luke, this is primarily the right to subjectivity, for Sateen it is the requirement to consider the main value of a person, and not something external (observance of the law, work, loyalty to the authorities, nobility, honesty, etc.). Although such an understanding is also not alien to Luke. And Sateen's cry is more of a replica in a dispute with the owners than with Luka.

“He lied… but it was out of pity for you. There are many people who lie out of pity for their neighbor…” In other words, it is precisely the right to subjectivity and faith that Luke insisted that Satine considers a comforting lie. Although the replica looks illogical and as if unfinished. After all, Satin undertook to defend Luka, but as if he didn’t finish: why is Luka better than these “many”?

“There is a comforting lie, a reconciling lie... Those who are weak in soul... and who live on other people's juices need a lie... some support it, others hide behind it." He wants to say that the lie maintains the existing order of things (and therefore - from the point of view of the revolution - is a tool in the hands of the exploiters). It helps some to endure, others to deceive the poor people. By the way, by lies, Gorky primarily means religion. It was not for nothing that Kostylev sang something "divine" and lit the lamps all the time.

“And who is his own master ... who is independent and does not eat someone else's - why should he lie? Lies are the religion of slaves and masters… Truth is the god of a free man!” I wonder how this connects with Luke's defense. After all, his preaching, in this interpretation, is a lie. This means that Luke brings up slaves and thus serves the masters. But by this time we are no longer talking about Luka. The main thing is to shout out a ringing slogan.

However, Satin will return to him in the second big monologue - about the Man. This satanic monologue has not yet evoked any feelings in any of my students, except for deep indignation at its illogicality and indistinctness. If Gorky wanted to realistically portray the speech of a tipsy demagogue, then yes, it must be admitted that he succeeded. If, however, he thought that he had finally resolved all philosophical questions and wiped out Tolstoy and Dostoevsky... Namely, such a super-task here, apparently, was set.

“What is a person?.. It’s not you, not me, not them… no! - it's you, me, them, the old man, Napoleon, Mohammed ... in one. It's huge. This is where all the beginnings and ends are. Everything is in a person, everything is for a person!” What is he talking about? The fact that people should not be divided into two categories (see Raskolnikov's theory). If you read Gorky's early allegories, everything will become clearer. He has one, which is called “Man”. About the ascent of humanity along the Hegelian-Marxist spiral from the swamp of primitive-slave-owning-feudal-autocratic-capitalist life to some shining peaks. And every person participates in this ascent, even to the best of their abilities. Everyone is a part of humanity and is entitled to their share in the fruits of progress. Nobody should be left out.

“There is only man, everything else is the work of his hands and brain! Human! This is great. This sounds… proud!” What is this about? Normal people will immediately ask: did the mountains, rivers and seas, not to mention the Moon and deep space - all this was also created by man? But Satin and Gorky at this moment do not think about the universe. They are trying to say that there is no God, but only a world culture created by man himself. And religion is also the work of the hands and brain of man. Therefore, one should not believe in God (morality, the law of the soul, etc.), but one must believe in oneself and one's own strength. Know that you alone are the truth. And for you, everything in this life should be arranged.

“You have to respect the person! Do not pity ... do not humiliate him with pity ... you must respect! In other words, Luke is still wrong. Although Luka also said that he respects all people. Yes, but at the same time he felt sorry for them, but you don’t need to feel sorry for anyone. It is necessary for everyone to feel the Human in themselves and ... what's next? Probably, he began to defend his right to be a Man, rebelling against the authorities, faith and the whole habitual order of life. Unfair and indifferent to the fate of people.

You can ask (control question): did the self-esteem awaken in the rooming houses? – In a sense, yes. Nastya rebelled against the Baron. The Baron, in turn, for the first time thought about "what's next." Kleshch, who had previously despised all overnight stays (“I am a working person”), admitted that they are also people. The Tatar, who had risen to pray even in this action, resolutely rises from his knees and goes to drink along with everyone, trampling the law (the Koran forbids drinking). They all saw the truth (and became free like gods). But what about the Actor? - He also saw the truth, but could not stand it and hanged himself. Satin refused to pity him: “Fool! I ruined the song." The truth that the rooming-houses see is expressed in the final song. What is the song about? The fact that they live in prison, and there is no way out of this prison yet.

In Soviet times, it was customary to emphasize that, although Satin is the spokesman for the author’s ideas in this play, he should by no means be considered a “positive” hero (whom Gorky so wants to find), because he only calls for protest, but himself (as lumpen-proletarian, cheater and drunkard) is incapable of it. And Gorky will finally create a real hero in the novel "Mother". This will be the "correct" hero: a proletarian and a revolutionary. We can probably agree: satin, of course, also not Danko, there is nothing to compare here.

Now you can breathe more freely and write down some information about the play. And after having a rest during the recording process, to sort out along the way a very interesting question about the composition of the play. So, let's go through the "plan for analyzing a literary work."

1. Topic. The life of the "bottom", the spiritual impoverishment of the individual, the moral impasse of the author's contemporary life and the search for a way out of this impasse.

2. Issues. Problems of life and death, truth and lies, the meaning of human life, "true and false humanism" - whatever the author means by this.

3. Ideological orientation(a rare case when one can speak about it confidently enough: the play is biased, the author knew exactly what he wanted to say). An attempt to debunk traditional (Christian) humanism; exposure of lies, with the help of which the exploiters keep the people in obedience; the awakening of faith in some kind of “beautiful far away”, to which humanity should strive; the awakening of pride and human dignity even in the most miserable and downtrodden people.

4. artistic method- realism ("typical characters in typical circumstances"). At the same time, there are elements of realistic symbolism: the rooming house symbolizes the entire Russian society, whose life seems to Gorky a hopeless and meaningless dead end. The action is happening in early spring and immediately - in the fall: at first - hope, then - hopelessness.

5. Genre. There are several aspects that need to be discussed here.

- drama or tragedy? - It is considered to be a drama. What's the Difference? – It’s not at all about who will die in the end, but who will survive (there is no main character in this play at all). The most significant difference is in the level of conflict. If the conflict is universal (hero and fate, humanity and unjust gods, love and death, etc.) - this is a tragedy. If it is more private (a warm heart and a soulless little world where the hero lives), then it is drama. In this case, the shelters do not face universal evil, but social. It's really a drama. Although I.F. Annensky thought differently: in his opinion, the rooming house here plays the role of fate, evil fate, from which no one can escape. We will delve into his reasoning a little later, but for now we will take into account that the compilers of the USE do not agree with him.

What drama? - Socio-philosophical. What does it mean? - So, it raises philosophical questions (life, death, truth, lies ...), but they are not solved at an abstract level (as is customary among philosophers), but as specific social problems. What and how should be corrected in society so that these questions receive the “correct” answers? Or you can put it another way: Gorky elevates social problems (the existence of bunkhouses and bunkhouses, social injustice) to the level of philosophical questions. Here, too, a kind of spectacular technique: people driven to the extreme, driven "to the bottom" of life, not only drink and despair, but suddenly begin to solve "eternal" issues - because they are still people and have the right to do so.

In addition, this "new drama", and all the tricks in it are accentuated, striking: double, shading each other's dialogues, underlined semantic accents. Discussion instead of traditional conflict. Moreover, there is such a discussion that there is not even a dispute between the main antagonists - it's all from the drama intellectual. There are some elements lyrical drama: poems by Beranger and the song in the finale; the presence of a lyrical composition (about it a little later). Yes, and huge remarks are also a sign of “blurring of boundaries” between genera and genres. The author uses the possibilities of the epic.

6. Conflict(the basis of any play) there is not one, but two, at least. 1) Social conflict - night-beds and owners of life. 2) Philosophical - that very "dispute" of Luke and Sateen about truth and lies, about the "best" and any person. The conflicts are interconnected: in the course of the dispute, Gorky tries to prove that Luke's position "objectively" helps to strengthen the position of the masters ("lie is the religion of slaves and masters").

I suspect that somewhere here the lesson should end and it will be possible to set the comprehension of the composition at home. The D/C could consist of two questions: 1) list all storylines, which are in the play (the storyline is some completed action: something began, happened and ended with something; if nothing happens to the hero and nothing changes in him, then this character is out of plot), think over their logic again ; 2) find (draw, draw) a double scheme for the development of the action: classical (outset, climax, denouement) and emotional (lyrical). It makes sense to compare them.

Lesson 5 Credit work.

7. Composition. We deal with D / Z.

1) We already considered the logic of the plot when we talked about the system of images. All storylines are connected with the desire of the characters to escape from the rooming house. There are very few heroes who would not participate in this “main plot” at all: these are Bubnov and the shoemaker Alyoshka (both put an end to themselves). Kostylev is connected with the line of Pepel, Vasilisa and Natasha; Medvedev - with the Kvashnya line. Satin eventually changes and awakens, which means that he also participates in the plot. At the center of this general plot is the figure of Luke, who divides all the heroes into two groups: those whom he is trying to help, and the “control group” (we have already talked about this). As a result, no one manages to get out of the rooming house - except to die (Anna and the Actor). But in everyone something has changed, awakened. Probably, everyone abandoned that lie, or rather, self-deception, in which they habitually eked out their lives before. Although not everyone weathered this tough awakening.

2) The plot of the drama - the appearance of Luke. From that moment on, the process began. The main climax is the end of the third act, when Luka has already persuaded Vaska and Natasha to run away from the rooming house, but the carnage begins. Vasilisa destroys all dreams and good intentions, and Luka escapes, refusing to testify against Ash. The entire air castle he built is crumbling. The denouement is the end of the play. All kinds of awakening of heroes from sleep, dope and self-deception.

3) The lyrical composition is somewhat different from the plot. In my opinion, the point is that it does not follow the line “truth and lies”, but the line “life and death”, which we somehow lost sight of (because they don’t ask about it at the Unified State Examination). If you look at the emotional “peaks” of the play, then two more acts are added to the climax of the 3rd act: the ending of the second act and the ending of the fourth. In their structure, these scenes are completely identical. First, an emotional take-off (a kind of lyrical self-deception): in the second act, the Actor recites his favorite poem in rapture, in the fourth, everyone sits down to feast and sing a song. Then a sharp emotional decline, caused by the fact that one of the overnight stays dies.

The meaning of the song we have already discussed once. The meaning of the poem could have been specified earlier: it is directly related to the main problem of the play. “Peace to the madman who will inspire / / Mankind has a golden dream” is downright a hymn in honor of Luke. There is a symbolic subtext in this scene that needs to be addressed. The actor recites over the body of the newly deceased Anna. Luke promised him a “resurrection” and a new life if he stops drinking and remembers his beloved, if he believes in a hospital, etc. However, all his enthusiasm disappears when he realizes that he was reciting over a corpse. Beautiful words are not enough to raise from the dead. Satin at the end of this action growls and shouts: "The dead do not hear!" Since he himself and many other rooming-houses consider themselves "dead", the scene acquires a symbolic meaning: no convictions, faith, self-deception, delight, inspiration and other "subjectivisms" can defeat death. This ending already predicts tragic ending all the attempts of the overnight stays to “resurrect” and start a new life.

Gorky, as we remember from "Old Woman Izergil", was worried about the theme of immortality, but not the one that religions talk about, but some special one. In romantic stories, immortality is sparks and shadows, songs and legends. In the later Gorky mythology, immortality (more precisely, resurrection) consists in participation in the revolution and the great ascent of mankind to the shining heights of progress. The fact that the verses of a fairy tale, inspiration and self-deception will not save from death and will not resurrect, does not cause objections among the guys. But it should be taken into account that Gorky also refers belief in God to fairy tales of self-deception. Gorky dreams of some other resurrection, which he hardly imagines clearly, but connects it with the revolution and true. The novel "Mother" contains the verses of one revolutionary: "And the innocently killed / / The power of truth will resurrect." He tries to express something of the same kind in "At the Bottom": a lie, a fairy tale, self-deception are bad because they do not resurrect. And the power of truth resurrects. However, she also killed the Actor - but probably because he succumbed too much to Luke's false consolations.

8) Image system. We have already dismantled it, now you can just recall. In the center of the play is the image of Luke (the one who tried to free the heroes). The rest of the heroes are divided into several groups: 1) "masters of life" - they have no need to leave the rooming house, 2) heroes who find solace and hope for themselves (Kvashnya, Baron, Nastya, Kleshch, Tatarin, Vasilisa), 3) heroes who Luka tries to help (Anna, Vaska with Natasha, Actor), 4) heroes who consider themselves "dead" (Bubnov, Alyoshka, Satin). From last group The satin eventually falls out and seems to come to life at the very end.

Gorky's worldview is hardly close to any of the schoolchildren, which is why the system he built is so difficult to decipher. And few people like to write about this play, but they have to. There are two options for the work to be done. For those who do not pass the exam, I have long saved for the end excerpts from the “Book of Reflections” by I.F. Annensky, who wrote an article-review of Gorky's play. It seems that we have not yet said that Annensky is a poet (a teacher of acmeists), a classical philologist, a translator of ancient tragedies (and therefore it is worth listening to his opinion about the genre of this play) and the director of the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum. He wrote his reviews of books in free form (he is a poet, after all), and therefore it is not so difficult to read them. But interesting and helpful.

We sometimes wrote down excerpts from Annensky's article under dictation in Russian. You can take this text and write your own reasoning “in response” to Annensky: agree or argue. However, you can simply write down Annensky, but do not give assignments for him, distribute topics on the exam to everyone (see. Application).

I. F. Annensky

Strictly speaking, Gorky's drama has neither the usual beginning nor the traditional denouement. The beginning is the awakening of the rooming house. The whole rooming house seems to be born at the moment the curtain rises. Night gave its inhabitants an indisputable illusion, at night, during sleep, the very existence of this hell was like a chimera.

I spoke above about the somewhat mystical nature of fate, which makes people the former. Formerly, fate chose royal victims for itself: it needed either Lear's gray hair, or Cordelia's lilies. Now she saw that the game might not be devoid of spice and with less rare specimens, and she was content with some Ticks and Satins.

The end of the play is amazing. If you want, this is the reconciliation of the soul of a former person with fate. Fate, of course, takes its toll: taking revenge on the former man for the rebellion, she introduces three new ones to her victims. Firstly, Kleshch, who from this day on will no longer talk about honest work, and secondly, Tatar. The third victim is comic. This is the debunked ruler Medvedev, who today changed the whistle of the alarm clock to his wife's jacket, becoming also former man.

For Luka, all people eventually became good, but this is the same Gorky: he does not love anyone and will not love. Not even the most people are interested in him. And why bother with the same people for a long time, if the earth is wide and there are many people on it.

Luka loves not people, but what lies behind people. A skeptic and a contemplative, Luke noticed that on the manure of praise, every soul dissolves and shows itself more. Luka is accustomed to lying, but without this it is impossible in his business ... In the world where he wears, without lies, as without vodka, people would probably not be able to get along.

... Gorky lifts the veil of a completely new world order for us - the future lovelessness of people, that is, their true freedom and pure ideology ... Reading it, you think not about reality and the past, but about ethics and the future.

... I listen to Gorky-Satin and say to myself: yes, all this really sounds great: “Man - that's true! .. Everything is in a person, everything is for a person!” But look, Satin-Gorky, won’t it be frightening for a person, and most importantly, won’t it be immeasurably boring for him to realize that he is everything and that everything is for him and only for him?

It is possible not to touch Annensky at all. In the topics for comparison, they ask which authors Gorky studied with and where else there is the topic of the spiritual impoverishment of the individual. He studied with Nekrasov, Ostrovsky and Chekhov ("new drama"). The theme of spiritual impoverishment is Ostrovsky (“Thunderstorm” - under the yoke of the “dark kingdom”); probably Dostoevsky (Marmeladovs and Luzhin), Gogol ("Dead Souls"). If you come up with more, please share.

In school years, many probably had a chance to get acquainted with the work of the respected Russian writer Maxim Gorky - the play "At the Bottom", without embellishment, describing to all of us the familiar archetypes of people living in Russian realities.

Despite the fact that more than a century has passed since the publication of the drama, the situations that it touches on remain relevant today.

In this article, we will analyze in detail the image of the character Luke from this play, get acquainted with his statements and talk about the attitude of other heroes of the work towards him.

In contact with

Where did the wanderer come from

does not reveal the secret the origin of Luke, only a fleeting mention of his wandering life. The wanderer has neither a homeland, nor at least some definite place of residence. He himself says this about it: "Old man – where it is warm, there is homeland.

The inhabitants of the rooming house are also not interested in the past of the old man, they are preoccupied with their problems and attempts "get out in public", and not drag out an existence "at the bottom" for the rest of his life.

Analysis of character characteristics

Luke appears before us in the form kind-hearted old man preaching goodness, love, pity and the will of a person to create his life as his heart tells.

From the hero directly emanates an aura of peacefulness and understanding, which, of course, disposes the characters of the play to him, making them believe that the future is not hopeless and there is a chance to improve their social position, fulfill dreams and desires.

To everyone who, willy-nilly, ended up in a rooming house, Luke chooses the right words, gives everyone hope and encourages them to believe in their dreams, no matter how ridiculous they may seem to themselves and others.

But no matter how sweet and comforting the words of the wanderer sounded, they were only empty sounds, distracting roommates from everyday hardships, and not real support, giving strength to get out of poverty and dishonor.

However, Luka is not a liar, he just sincerely pities those around him and cheers them up, even if it is absolutely pointless and useless.

Luke's relationship with other characters in the play "At the Bottom"

The characters relate to the elder in two ways:

• alone ( thief Vaska Pepel, Actor, Anna, Nastya, Natasha) tell him with relief about their life, confess and receive in response the necessary pity, sympathy and soothing statements;
• other ( kartuznik Bubnov, Satin, Baron, Tick) do not trust a stranger too much and speak to him briefly and skeptically.

One thing is certain - nobody remained indifferent to the appearance of such an extraordinary personality in such a dirty and doomed place.

After the sudden disappearance of the wanderer, the fate of some characters has changed dramatically. The wife of the locksmith Klesch, Anna, died of tuberculosis, the Actor could not come to terms with the hopelessness of his life and hanged himself, Vaska Pepel went to hard labor in Siberia due to an accidental murder, his dreams of an honest life with Natasha came to an end. The rest of the heroes continued to while away their time in a rooming house, but at the same time started thinking about the meaning of their existence, their actions and the problems of others.

Parable of the Righteous Land

The parable of Luke tells us about a man who endured all the hardships and sufferings of earthly life, believing that there is a righteous land where people live in great relationships, help each other and never lie. One day he went to a local scientist he knew and asked him to show the righteous land on a map. He tried to find what he was looking for, but could not. Then the man got angry, hit the scientist, and then went home and strangled himself.

This parable seemed to predetermine the fate of several characters - the death of Anna and the Actor, the imprisonment of the thief Vaska. They believed that their own righteous land would be found for them, that it was possible to get out of the bottom, poverty, but this did not happen. Luka soon left, and with him the hope that warms the heroes of the play also left.

Quotes

The play "At the bottom" is rich thoughtful phrases and the statements of the characters, but perhaps the most significant of them are the words of Elder Luke.

Here are a few of his quotes, to make an analysis and reflect on which everyone who reads the play "At the Bottom" by Gorky should:

“All of them are people! No matter how you pretend, no matter how you wobble, but you were born a man, you will die a man ... "

"I don't care! I respect crooks too, in my opinion, not a single flea is bad: everyone is black, everyone jumps ... "

“You, girl, do not be offended ... nothing! Where is it, where are we to pity the dead? E, honey! We don’t feel sorry for the living… we can’t feel sorry for ourselves… where is it!”

“Here, then, you will die, and you will be calm ... you will not need anything else, and there is nothing to be afraid of!”

“... not in the word - the point, but - why is the word spoken? - that's the problem!"

Outcome

The image of the wanderer Luka in Maxim Gorky turned out to be very multifaceted and reflective major philosophical questions about life, love, principles and human priorities.

And not only Luke - all the characters in one way or another reflect those who we meet in real life.

The writer managed to reflect in his work entertaining philosophical and psychological ideas:

All of the above is important for a correct understanding of the work and simply the situations that happen to people around us, it teaches us to sympathize and set life priorities correctly.

The image of Luka in M. Gorky's play "At the Bottom" is rightfully considered one of the most interesting and controversial.

This work is studied at school, but it is interesting to study and analyze at any age.

Characteristics of Luke in the play "At the Bottom"

The Wanderer Luka first appears on the pages of the work, when the reader has already become a little acquainted with the main characters who find themselves on the “day of life” and the plot.

The playwright gives a very modest description of the hero, without focusing on his biography.

It's pretty old man with a stick in his hand, he had a knapsack over his shoulders, a kettle and a bowler hat on his belt.

The roommates treated the wanderer rather indifferently, not suspecting what role he would play in their difficult life.

The role of Luke in the drama of Maxim Gorky

M. Gorky made people think about life, about what people turn into under the pressure of life circumstances, and how scary it is to be on the “day of life”, from which you can’t get out.

Philosophy and Truth of Luke

No matter how readers consider the image of Luke, positive or negative, one thing is clear: this kind man came into the life of little people who found themselves on the “day of life” for a reason, he had his own position - a certain mission.

Did he lie? Did he speak the truth? Everyone will answer these rhetorical questions in their own way.

Luka radically changed the atmosphere that was in the rooming house. The heroes began to think, began to dream about something again. The elder was at the same time so gentle and convincing in his speeches that even the biggest skeptics changed their attitude to truth, to man.

Luke quotes and aphorisms

Luke's words are sparkling phrases with deep philosophical overtones. Their topics are very diverse:

• value of human life:
• moral and ethical standards of behavior:
• the power of a word:
• the power of faith:
• parenting:

The meaning of the name Luka in the play "At the Bottom"

It should be noted that the above name is quite interesting, having a hidden meaning. It is of ancient Greek origin, literally means "farmer".

But subconsciously the reader's imagination associates him with the biblical images of the Holy Martyr Luke. Thus, according to many critics, Jesus Christ himself looks at us from the pages of the play and gives his wise advice.

How the inhabitants of the rooming house feel about Luke's words

All Luke's sayings had a deep meaning. He spoke briefly, but always to the point. Each of his words was thought out, honed by life and therefore hit the target.

How does Luke affect overnight stays?

Over time, the heroes realize that Luke deceived them in most cases, but this already becomes unimportant.

The heroes simply perfectly understood that the elder said what supported them, helped to exist in this dirty rooming house.

His parable about the “righteous land”, which so agitated their minds, is just words of comfort that gave them hope. But this, in truth, was exactly what they lacked.

They were lonely and no one needed them, just no one believed in them. And Luke picked up the keys to their so devastated hearts, gave the advice they needed.

Luke's sayings about people - what he says to each of the inhabitants of the rooming house

The hero was not just listened to, the roomers heard him:

• he managed to find words of comfort for Anna before her death;
• was able to convince the Artist to start fighting alcoholism, despite failures and failures;
• supported the girl of easy virtue Nastya, who firmly believed in love;
• even tried to reach out to such a complex Vasily Ash and warn him against a fatal mistake - the murder of his mistress's husband.

Not all the characters in the play needed Luke's advice, there were those whom Luke did not advise anything.

Gorky's attitude to Luka

Quite intriguing was the moment of Luke's disappearance.

He left as quietly and imperceptibly as he had appeared in the rooming house.

The position of the author is clear, he sympathizes with his hero, convincing the reader that all the actions of the wanderer were from good intentions - to help unfortunate, downtrodden people, give them hope, instill faith in themselves and their strengths, identify a goal in life.

Positive or negative character Luke

Over the years, critics and literary scholars have characterized this character rather ambiguously, referring him to either heroes or anti-heroes.

This polarity in views was primarily due to historical realities. At the beginning of the 20th century, Luke was seen as a negative character who was engaged in empty chatter and excited the minds of people who could not change anything in their lives.

Later, critics agreed that Luke gave people hope and faith, and they themselves chose their own path in life.

Science from Gorky Luk

Soviet postulates in education taught readers that each work necessarily has an instructive implication. Speaking of M. Gorky's drama "At the Bottom", it's hard to argue with that.

The image of the wanderer Luke gives readers the opportunity to think about whether society needs such people, what role they play in our lives, how often they come and teach us goodness, faith in our own strength.