Analysis of Act 4 of the play at the bottom. The fourth act (final) in the play "At the Bottom". IV. Creative work

29.06.2020

Additional educational services in pre-school educational institutions in the context of the implementation of federal state educational standards before

Physical education corner equipment

Railway for a steam locomotive

Application of Gauss's theorem to calculate electric fields Gauss's theorem formula

Lesson 15 “THREE TRUTHS” IN GORKY’S PLAY “AT THE BOTTOM”

30.03.2013 78244 0

Lesson 15
“Three Truths” in Gorky’s play “At the Depths”

Goals : consider the characters’ understanding of Gorky’s play “truth”; find out the meaning of the tragic collision of different points of view: the truth of a fact (Bubnov), the truth of a comforting lie (Luke), the truth of faith in a person (Satin); determine the features of Gorky’s humanism.

During the classes

Gentlemen! If the truth is holy

The world doesn’t know how to find a way,

Honor the madman who inspires

A golden dream for humanity!

I. Introductory conversation.

– Restore the sequence of events of the play. What events happen on stage, and which ones happen “behind the scenes”? What is role in the development of the dramatic action of the traditional “conflict polygon” - Kostylev, Vasilisa, Ashes, Natasha?

The relationships between Vasilisa, Kostylev, Ash, and Natasha only externally motivate the stage action. Some of the events that make up the plot outline of the play take place off stage (the fight between Vasilisa and Natasha, Vasilisa’s revenge - overturning a boiling samovar on her sister, Kostylev’s murder takes place around the corner of the flophouse and is almost invisible to the viewer).

All the other characters in the play are not involved in the love affair. The compositional and plot disunity of the characters is expressed in the organization of the stage space - the characters are dispersed in different corners scenes and "closed» in unconnected microspaces.

Teacher . Thus, the play contains two actions in parallel. First, we see on stage (supposed and real). Detective story with conspiracy, escape, murder, suicide. The second is the exposure of “masks” and the identification of the true essence of a person. This happens as if behind the text and requires decoding. For example, here is the dialogue between Baron and Luke.

Baron. We lived better... yes! I... used to... wake up in the morning and, lying in bed, drink coffee... coffee! – with cream... yes!

Luke. And everyone is people! No matter how you pretend, no matter how you wobble, if you were born a man, you will die a man...

But Baron is afraid to be “just a man.” And he does not recognize “just a person.”

Baron. Who are you, old man?.. Where did you come from?

Luke. Me?

Baron. Wanderer?

Luke. We are all wanderers on earth... They say, I heard, that the earth is our wanderer.

The culmination of the second (implicit) action comes when the “truths” of Bubnov, Satin and Luka collide on the “narrow everyday platform”.

II. Work on the problem stated in the topic of the lesson.

1. The philosophy of truth in Gorky’s play.

– What is the main leitmotif of the play? Which character is the first to formulate the main question of the drama “At the Bottom”?

The dispute about truth is the semantic center of the play. The word “truth” will be heard already on the first page of the play, in Kvashnya’s remark: “Ah! You can’t stand the truth!” Truth – lie (“You’re lying!” – Kleshch’s sharp cry, sounded even before the word “truth”), truth – faith – these are the most important semantic poles that define the problematics of “At the Bottom”.

– How do you understand Luke’s words: “What you believe is what you believe”? How are the heroes of “At the Depths” divided depending on their attitude to the concepts of “faith” and “truth”?

In contrast to the “prose of fact,” Luke offers the truth of the ideal—the “poetry of fact.” If Bubnov (the main ideologist of literally understood “truth”), Satin, Baron are far from illusions and do not need an ideal, then Actor, Nastya, Anna, Natasha, Ashes respond to Luke’s remark - for them faith is more important than truth.

Luke’s hesitant story about hospitals for alcoholics sounded like this: “Nowadays they are curing drunkenness, listen! Free, brother, they treat... this is the kind of hospital built for drunkards... They recognized, you see, that a drunkard is also a person...” In the actor’s imagination, the hospital turns into a “marble palace”: “An excellent hospital... Marble.. .marble floor! Light... cleanliness, food... everything for free! And marble floor. Yes!" The actor is a hero of faith, not the truth of fact, and the loss of the ability to believe turns out to be fatal for him.

– What is truth for the heroes of the play? How can their views be compared?(Work with text.)

A) How does Bubnov understand “truth”? How do his views differ from Luke's philosophy of truth?

Bubnov’s truth consists in exposing the seamy side of existence, this is the “truth of fact.” “What kind of truth do you need, Vaska? And for what? You know the truth about yourself... and everyone knows it...” he drives Ash into the doom of being a thief when he was trying to figure himself out. “That means I’ve stopped coughing,” he reacted to Anna’s death.

After listening to Luke’s allegorical story about his life at his dacha in Siberia and the harboring (rescue) of escaped convicts, Bubnov admitted: “But I... I don’t know how to lie! For what? In my opinion, tell the whole truth as it is! Why be ashamed?

Bubnov sees only the negative side of life and destroys the remnants of faith and hope in people, while Luka knows that in a kind word the ideal becomes real: “A person can teach goodness... very simply,” he concluded the story about life in the country, and in setting out the “story” of the righteous land, he reduced it to the fact that the destruction of faith kills a person. Luka (thoughtfully, to Bubnov): “Here... you say it’s true... It’s true, it’s not always due to a person’s illness... you can’t always cure a soul with the truth...” Luke heals the soul.

Luka’s position is more humane and more effective than Bubnov’s naked truth, because it appeals to the remnants of humanity in the souls of the night shelters. For Luke, a person “no matter what he is, is always worth his price.” “I’m just saying that if someone hasn’t done good to someone, then they’ve done something bad.” "To caress a person– never harmful."

Such a moral credo harmonizes relations between people, abolishes the wolf principle, and ideally leads to the acquisition of internal completeness and self-sufficiency, the confidence that, despite external circumstances, a person has found truths that no one will ever take away from him.

B) What does Satin see as the truth of life?

One of the culminating moments of the play is Satin’s famous monologues from the fourth act about man, truth, and freedom.

A trained student reads Satin's monologue by heart.

It is interesting that Satin supported his reasoning with the authority of Luke, the man in relation to whom we at the beginning of the play represented Satin as an antipode. Moreover, Satin's references to Luke in Act 4 prove the closeness of both. "Old man? He’s a smart guy!.. He... acted on me like acid on an old and dirty coin... Let’s drink to his health!” “Man – that’s the truth! He understood this... you don’t!”

Actually, the “truth” and “lies” of Satin and Luke almost coincide.

Both believe that “a person must be respected” (emphasis on the last word) is not his “mask”; but they differ on how they should communicate their “truth” to people. After all, if you think about it, it is deadly for those who fall into its area.

If everything has faded away and one “naked” person remains, then “what’s next”? For the actor, this thought leads to suicide.

Q) What role does Luke play in addressing the issue of “truth” in the play?

For Luke, the truth is in “comforting lies.”

Luke takes pity on the man and entertains him with a dream. He promises Anna an afterlife, listens to Nastya’s fairy tales, and sends the Actor to a hospital. He lies for the sake of hope, and this is perhaps better than Bubnov’s cynical “truth,” “abomination and lies.”

In the image of Luke there are allusions to the biblical Luke, who was one of the seventy disciples sent by the Lord “to every city and place where He Himself wanted to go.”

Gorky's Luka makes the inhabitants of the bottom think about God and man, about the “better man,” about the highest calling of people.

“Luka” is also light. Luka comes to illuminate the Kostylevo basement with the light of new ideas, forgotten at the bottom of feelings. He talks about how it should be, what should be, and it is not at all necessary to look for practical recommendations or instructions for survival in his reasoning.

Evangelist Luke was a doctor. Luke heals in his own way in the play - with his attitude to life, advice, words, sympathy, love.

Luke heals, but not everyone, but selectively, those who need words. His philosophy is revealed in relation to other characters. He sympathizes with the victims of life: Anna, Natasha, Nastya. Teaches, giving practical advice, Ashes, Actor. Understandingly, meaningfully, often without words, he explains with the smart Bubnov. Skillfully avoids unnecessary explanations.

Luke is flexible and soft. “They crumpled a lot, that’s why it’s soft...” he said in the finale of Act 1.

Luke with his “lies” is sympathetic to Satin. “Dubier... keep quiet about the old man!.. The old man is not a charlatan!.. He lied... but it’s out of pity for you, damn you!” And yet Luke’s “lies” do not suit him. “Lies are the religion of slaves and masters! Truth is the god of a free man!”

Thus, while rejecting the “truth” of Bubnov, Gorky does not deny either the “truth” of Satin or the “truth” of Luke. Essentially, he distinguishes two truths: “truth-truth” and “truth-dream”.

2. Features of Gorky’s humanism.

Problem Human in Gorky’s play “At the Depths” (individual message).

Gorky put his truth about man and overcoming the dead end into the mouths of Actor, Luka and Satin.

At the beginning of the play, indulging in theatrical memories, Actor selflessly spoke about the miracle of talent - the game of transforming a person into a hero. Responding to Satin’s words about books read and education, he separated education and talent: “Education is nonsense, the main thing is talent”; “I say talent, that’s what a hero needs. And talent is faith in yourself, in your strength...”

It is known that Gorky admired knowledge, education, and books, but he valued talent even more highly. Through the Actor, he polemically, maximalistically sharpened and polarized two facets of the spirit: education as a sum of knowledge and living knowledge - a “system of thought.”

In monologues Satina the ideas of Gorky's thoughts about man are confirmed.

Man – “he is everything. He even created God"; “man is the receptacle of the living God”; “Faith in the powers of thought... is a person’s faith in himself.” So in Gorky’s letters. And so - in the play: “A person can believe and not believe... that’s his business! Man is free... he pays for everything himself... Man is the truth! What is a person... it's you, me, them, the old man, Napoleon, Mohammed... in one... In one - all the beginnings and ends... Everything is in a person, everything is for a person! Only man exists, everything else is the work of his hands and his brain!”

The Actor was the first to speak about talent and self-confidence. Satin summarized everything. What is the role Luke? He carries the ideas of transformation and improvement of life, dear to Gorky, at the cost of human creative efforts.

“And yet, I see, people are becoming smarter, more and more interesting... and even though they live, they are getting worse, but they want to be better... they are stubborn!” - the elder opens up in the first act, referring to the common aspirations of everyone for a better life.

Then, in 1902, Gorky shared his observations and moods with V. Veresaev: “The mood for life is growing and expanding, cheerfulness and faith in people are becoming more and more noticeable, and - life is good on earth - by God!” The same words, the same thoughts, even the same intonations in the play and the letter.

In the fourth act Satin remembered and reproduced Luke’s answer to his question “Why do people live?”: “And - people live for the best... For a hundred years... and maybe more - they live for the better person!.. That’s it, dear , everyone, as they are, lives for the best! That’s why every person must be respected... We don’t know who he is, why he was born and what he can do...” And he himself, continuing to talk about a person, said, repeating Luke: “We must respect a person! Don’t feel sorry... don’t humiliate him with pity... you have to respect him!” Satin repeated Luke, speaking about respect, did not agree with him, speaking about pity, but something else is more important - the idea of a “better person”.

The statements of the three characters are similar, and, mutually reinforcing, they work on the problem of the triumph of Man.

In one of Gorky’s letters we read: “I am sure that man is capable of endless improvement, and all his activities will also develop with him... from century to century. I believe in the infinity of life...” Again Luka, Satin, Gorky - about one thing.

3. What is the significance of the 4th act of Gorky’s play?

In this act, the situation is the same, but the previously sleepy thoughts of the tramps begin to “ferment.”

It started with Anna's death scene.

Luke says over the dying woman: “Much merciful Jesus Christ! Receive the spirit of your newly departed servant Anna in peace...” But Anna’s last words were the words about life: “Well... a little more... I wish I could live... a little more! If there is no flour there... here we can be patient... we can!”

– How should we regard these words of Anna – as a victory for Luke or as his defeat? Gorky does not give a clear answer; this phrase can be commented on in different ways. One thing is clear:

Anna spoke for the first time about life positively thanks to Luke.

In the last act, a strange, completely unconscious rapprochement of the “bitter brethren” takes place. In the 4th act, Kleshch repaired Alyoshka’s harmonica, after testing the frets, the already familiar prison song began to sound. And this ending is perceived in two ways. You can do this: you can’t escape from the bottom - “The sun rises and sets... but it’s dark in my prison!” It can be done differently: at the cost of death, a person ended the song of tragic hopelessness...

Suicide Actor interrupted the song.

What prevents homeless shelters from changing their lives for the better? Natasha’s fatal mistake is in not trusting people, Ash (“I somehow don’t believe... any words”), hoping together to change fate.

“That’s why I’m a thief, because no one ever thought of calling me by another name... Call me... Natasha, well?”

Her answer is convinced, mature: “There’s nowhere to go... I know... I thought... But I don’t trust anyone.”

One word of faith in a person could change the lives of both, but it was not spoken.

The Actor, for whom creativity is the meaning of life, a calling, also did not believe in himself. The news of the Actor's death came after Satin's famous monologues, shading them with contrast: he couldn't cope, he couldn't play, but he could have, he didn't believe in himself.

All the characters in the play are in the zone of action of the seemingly abstract Good and Evil, but they become quite concrete when it comes to the fate, worldviews, and relationships with the lives of each of the characters. And they connect people with good and evil through their thoughts, words and deeds. They directly or indirectly affect life. Life is a way of choosing your direction between good and evil. In the play, Gorky examined man and tested his capabilities. The play is devoid of utopian optimism, as well as the other extreme - disbelief in man. But one conclusion is indisputable: “Talent is what a hero needs. And talent is faith in yourself, your strength...”

III. The aphoristic language of Gorky's play.

Teacher . One of the characteristic features of Gorky’s work is aphorism. It is characteristic of both the author’s speech and the speech of the characters, which is always sharply individual. Many aphorisms of the play “At the Depth,” like the aphorisms of the “Songs” about the Falcon and the Petrel, became popular. Let's remember some of them.

– Which characters in the play do the following aphorisms, proverbs, and sayings belong to?

a) Noise is not a hindrance to death.

b) Such a life that you get up in the morning and howl.

c) Expect some sense from the wolf.

d) When work is a duty, life is slavery.

e) Not a single flea is bad: all are black, all jump.

e) Where it is warm for an old man, there is his homeland.

g) Everyone wants order, but there is a lack of reason.

h) If you don’t like it, don’t listen, and don’t bother lying.

(Bubnov - a, b, g; Luka - d, f; Satin - g, Baron - h, Ash - c.)

– What is the role of the aphoristic statements of the characters in the speech structure of the play?

Aphoristic judgments receive the greatest significance in the speech of the main “ideologists” of the play - Luka and Bubnov, heroes whose positions are indicated extremely clearly. The philosophical dispute, in which each of the characters in the play takes its own position, is supported by general folk wisdom, expressed in proverbs and sayings.

IV. Creative work.

Write your reasoning, expressing their attitude to the work they read. (Answer to one question of your choice.)

– What is the meaning of the dispute between Luke and Satin?

– Which side do you take in the “truth” debate?

– What problems raised by M. Gorky in the play “At the Lower Depths” did not leave you indifferent?

When preparing your answer, pay attention to the speech of the characters and how it helps to reveal the idea of the work.

Homework.

Select an episode for analysis (oral). This will be the topic of your future essay.

1. Luke’s story about the “righteous land.” (Analysis of an episode from the 3rd act of Gorky’s play.)

2. Dispute among shelters about a person (Analysis of the dialogue at the beginning of the 3rd act of the play “At the Depths.”)

3. What is the meaning of the ending of Gorky’s play “At the Lower Depths”?

4. Luka's appearance in the shelter. (Analysis of a scene from the 1st act of the play.)

Working on a complex dramatic work is always problematic for teachers and students. Play by A.M. Gorky’s “At the Lower Depths” in this sense is one of the most serious works of the school curriculum. The polyphony of sound, the philosophical issues, and the almost complete absence of a plot (in the usual sense for a schoolchild) make studying the work difficult. This is one side of the issue. The other side of it is that very often the conversation in the lesson centers around a debate about truth and lies, pity and compassion. Of course, these issues should be discussed, but it is no less important to talk about the general sound of the play, about the author’s attitude towards the characters and towards the Man. I think that it is necessary to maintain a certain intrigue, arousing interest in the analysis of serious problems solved by the author in the drama. One of these intrigues may be the teacher’s statement that A.P. Chekhov considered the last act of the play almost superfluous. In the light of this statement, the analysis of the fourth act can begin. It is interesting to compare the stage directions for the first and last acts of the play.

To do this, let's ask the question: What details in the stage directions catch your eye upon first reading?

Remarks for the first act

Remark to the fourth act

... the corner is occupied blocked thin bulkheads Ashes room..., between the stove and the door against the wall there is a wide bed, closed dirty calico canopy

... Tick sits in front of the anvil, trying on keys to old locks.

In the middle of the shelter there is a large table, two benches, a stool, everything is unpainted and dirty.

Light - from the viewer and, from top to bottom - from the square window on the right side.

The beginning of spring. Morning.

The setting of the first act. But There is no Ash room - bulkheads are broken.

Sitting at the table Mite, He repairs harmony, sometimes trying out the frets. At the other end of the table are Satin, Baron and Nastya. In front of them is a bottle of vodka and three bottles of beer, a large slice of black bread.

The stage is lit lamp standing in the middle of the table.

Night. Outside - wind.

Commenting on the details of the two remarks, we find that the author’s statement: “The setting of the first act” does not quite correspond to the picture that is drawn. First of all, it is worth noting that the partitions that separated not only the living areas of the shelters have disappeared, but, most likely, those barriers that did not allow the inhabitants of the shelter to hear and understand each other have disappeared. (Remember the beginning of the first act - a real conversation between the deaf, in which there is no common theme, no common positions, no understanding of the person, no interest in other people's words).

Considering the activities of Kleshch, one cannot help but pay attention to the fact that in the first act he “creaks” both in the literal and figurative sense: he repairs keys, knocks on an anvil, utters words strange for a person: “These? What kind of people are they? Ragged, golden company... people! I’m a working man... I’m ashamed to look at them... Do you think I won’t break out of here? I’ll get out... I’ll rip off the skin, and I’ll get out... Wait a minute... my wife will die...”

On the one hand, these words contain complete contempt for those who live nearby, on the other hand, a terrible recognition in its cynicism of the expectation of the death of a loved one. There is no pity, no compassion, no love in these words - none of what constitutes the essence of man.

Now the viewer (reader) faces another Tick. He creates harmony. Yes, of course, it is still impossible to perform beautiful melodies on this broken harmony. But Kleshch's aspirations are obvious. Let us remember that harmony is not only the name of a musical instrument (although in the context of a play only this meaning is applicable); Harmony is also consonance, proportionality. If the playwright did not want to draw the reader’s attention to this circumstance, he would have said “The Mite is repairing the accordion.”

The following details confirm our assumptions: before us is a different situation, different people, different relationships. If the stage directions to the first act emphasize disunity, now the community of the inhabitants of the shelter is emphasized: they sit at the same table, united by a common feast, common light (a lamp in the middle of the table), and, as we learn later, a common conversation.

An interesting detail is the “wind”. What kind of wind could this be? The wind of change? Wind in your head? Wind as a natural phenomenon? You can think about these questions. It is obvious that this detail was given intentionally, because it completes the picture: despite any horrors

(“night”, “wind”) people are together where it is light, warm, where there are common interests.

The sound of the remark does not contradict what the reader sees and feels from the first remarks of the fourth act: before us are not only people living in the same place, united by common troubles, common memories, before us are people who know how, while remaining themselves, to evaluate a person according to one and the same the same criteria. From the first lines of the fourth act we hear a conversation about Luke and his activities.

Nastya. He was a good old man!..

S a t i n. Curious old man...yes!

S a t i n. And in general... for many he was... like crumbs for the toothless...

B a r o n. (Laughing) Like a plaster for boils...

Tick. He... was pitiful.

T a t a r i n. The old man was good...he had law in his soul.

These are not just remarks “about”, these are Luke’s assessments. The proximity of the heroes' positions is obvious.

It also becomes obvious that the principles that Luke seemed to pronounce by the word were accepted not only by Satin, but also by other heroes, even those who, it would seem, did not listen to the wanderer (For example, the Baron, the Tatar).

The climax of the first scene of Act IV is the “riot” of the night shelters. This riot was provoked by the words of the Tatar: “...your Koran must be the law. Soul – there must be a Koran...yes!” and Satin’s answer: “Well, yes... the time has come and given“The Code of Punishments”...A strong law...will not wear out soon!”

Turning to the TSB, we find out what the “Penal Code” was:

“Code on criminal and correctional punishments 1845- 85, codification of criminal law of pre-revolutionary Russia. It served as an instrument for suppressing the revolutionary movement, protecting the privileges of the ruling classes and protecting landowner and capitalist property. 9 sections out of 12 Codes of 1845 were devoted to the protection of the socio-political system. Section 1 contained articles of the general part of criminal law. All criminal offenses were divided into crimes and misdemeanors. The punitive system was extremely harsh. Punishments were divided into 2 main categories [criminal - combined with deprivation of rights (death penalty, exile to hard labor, exile) and correctional (delivery to prison companies, imprisonment, etc.), 11 types and 35 levels.

Separate punishments were provided for persons belonging to classes exempted from corporal punishment (nobles, merchants of the 1st and 2nd guilds, etc.), and for all other persons to whom beating with rods, whips, etc. was applied. The articles on state crimes (section 3) provided for punishment in the form of deprivation of all rights of state and, in addition, the death penalty, exile to hard labor (for life or for a term of 20 years), etc.”

It is the mention of the “Code...” in contrast to the “law of the soul” that makes Nastya go into a rage: “I’ll leave... I’ll go somewhere... to the ends of the world!” The Actor agrees with Nastya: “Ignorants! Savages! Melpomene! People without hearts!”

If Nastya does not have any reasonable explanations for her actions, there is only a desire to get away from what is “disgusting,” if she asks the question: “And why ... why do I live here ... with you?”, then the Actor is only at first glance inconsistent in his thoughts and words. In fact, his speech is extremely interesting for its subtext. Let us recall the almost lightning-fast skirmish between Actor, Baron and Satin:

A k t e r. Yes! He- will leave! He will go away...you'll see!

B a r o n. Who is he, sir?

A k t e r. I!

B a r o n. Merci, servant of the goddess...what's her name? Goddess of drama, tragedy... what was her name?

S a t i n. Lachesa...Hera...Aphrodite, Atropa...the devil will sort them out!...

A k t e r. Ignorant people! Savages! Melpomene! People without hearts! You will see - he will leave!“Gobble up, dark minds”... Bérenger's poem... yes! He will find a place for himself... where there is no... no...

B a r o n. Is there anything, sir?

A k t e r. Yes! Nothing! “ This pit... will be my grave...I’m dying weak and frail.” For what You do you live? For what?

Let's analyze the most interesting feature of the Actor's speech in this episode. In the hero’s remarks, two pronouns are constantly heard - HE and I, and The actor speaks about himself in both the first and third person. Together with the students Let's think about why a person talks about himself so strangely?

The most likely answer, born in the first seconds of the discussion, is this: due to constant drunkenness, the Actor develops a split personality. Let us remind students that we are not specialists in the field of psychiatry, therefore we do not have the right to make such a diagnosis. It's different if we try understand a person, understand his words. In solving this difficult question, we turn to thoughts about what is Man? What is its essence? Everyone understands that two principles are connected in Man - the physical and the spiritual. And if this is so, then why not assume that the Actor speaks either on behalf of his physical essence (I) or on behalf of the spiritual component (HE).

Arguing this idea, let us pay attention to the context in which the pronouns I and HE sound: “ This pit... will be my grave...I’m dying weak and frail.” Today's Actor is weak and frail - a drunken, weak-willed person. More than once we have heard the hero speak about his illnesses and his powerlessness. HE, the free creative SPIRIT, behaves completely differently. It is the tormented Soul of the Actor, outraged by ignorance, inhumanity, lack of love, that cries out: “Ignorants! Savages!.. People without hearts!” Addressing these people, the Spirit himself assures: “You will see that he will leave.” Beranger's poem quoted by the Actor also confirms our assumptions.

Gobble up, dark minds.
We share the blessings of life with you!
To you– blues and thin dinners,
Us– love and reason of victory,
And a simple lunch, where at the table
Wit sparkles with wine,
And the stomach is not a hindrance to the heart.
Oh! If you burst, it will be from laughing.
Burst with laughter!

The poet, beloved by the Actor, whose works he has quoted more than once, clearly distinguishes between “gentlemen gastronomes” and people who live with their hearts: love, hope, fun, people for whom the life of the Soul is above earthly goods, above serving Mammon.

Commenting on what we read from Beranger, let us tell our students that Mammon is the god of wealth and gain among the ancient Syrians; and Lachesis and Atropos, mentioned in vain by Satin, are goddesses of fate in the religious ideas of the ancient Greeks; Hera - queen of the gods, wife of Zeus; Aphrodite is the goddess of love and beauty, and Melpomene is the muse who patronizes tragedy.

“Decoding” now the dispute between the Actor and Satin, we see that the Actor, indeed, contrasts both Satin and the Baron with his hard-won position: in a world where love and beauty are not recognized, where there is no reverence for fate, where there is no place for the spiritual component, Melpomene lives , the muse of tragedy, it is she who “leads” the Soul of the Actor to where, according to the Baron, “there is nothing.” At first glance, the Actor agrees with the Baron: “ He will find a place for himself... where there is no... no..." But this is only at first glance. Figures of silence indicate that behind them there is unspoken pain, unspoken words. Why pronounce them in a society of savages and ignoramuses? Everything has already been said in Beranger's poem. In the world where HE goes, there is no pain, no suffering, no hatred, no misunderstanding, no dislike.

The revolt of Nastya and the Actor is surprisingly completed by Satin: “Let them scream... break their heads... let them! There is a meaning here! ... Don't bother the man as the old man said..."

Summing up the first results of what we saw and felt, we come to the conclusion that the principles formulated by Luke: “try to understand the person”, “don’t disturb the person” are now being brought to life, and their main guide is Satin; it is no coincidence that he pronounces a monologue, the key phrase of which is the phrase: “Man is the truth.” Satin Understood that is the truth of Man himself. And really, is it really true that Nastya is a street girl and an inventor living in an absolutely unreal world? Is it really true that the Actor is a drunkard? But isn’t it equally true that the Actor has a subtle, vulnerable, kind, suffering soul; But isn’t it true that Nastya strives for love and beauty? The external idea of a person, which is generally considered to be the truth, very often does not coincide with the true essence of Man, his inner essence, this is exactly what Satin states in his monologue.

The next episode of Act IV opens with Satin’s unexpected memories of conversations with Luke. Satin says “smiling,” “trying to speak in Luke’s voice and imitating his manners.” At this moment he looks a lot like Luka. What about the rest? The playwright gives a comprehensive picture in the stage directions: “Nastya stubbornly looks into Satin’s face. The tick stops working on harmony and also listens. The Baron, bowing his head low, quietly hits the table with his fingers. The actor, leaning out of the stove, wants to carefully climb down onto the bunk.” Satin quotes Luke: “Everything, my dear, everything, as it is, lives for the best! Because every person must be respected... We don’t know who he is, why he was born and what he can do... maybe he was born for our good fortune... for our great benefit?”

The third principle of attitude towards a person, the third principle of life “from Luke” is formulated. This principle Always the Baron violated (mocking Nastya, offending Luka with his words, putting himself above all other people). Now, demonstrating her complete agreement with Luka, as if in revenge for herself, and for Luka, and for everyone whom the Baron offended with his disrespect, Nastya laughs at the Baron with mischievous pleasure, with subtle mockery, denying everything that was in his life and what the Baron, when he first thought about it, remembers with sadness.

B a r o n. Mm-yes... For the best? This...reminds us of our family...Old surname...from the time of Catherine...nobles...warriors! Immigrants from France...Served, rose higher and higher...

Nastya. You're lying! This didn't happen!

Nastya. This didn't happen!

BARON (shouting) House in Moscow! House in St. Petersburg! Carriages...carriages with coats of arms!

N a s t i.. It wasn’t!

B a r o n. Tsits! I say...dozens of lackeys!

N a s t i.. (with pleasure) N-it wasn’t!

B a r o n. I'll kill you!

N a s t i .. (preparing to run) There were no carriages!

A kind of castling - Nastya in the place of the Baron, the Baron in the place of Nastya - could end with the complete victory of the “crazy” (in the words of the Baron) Nastya, who, triumphantly declares: “Ah, howled? Do you understand what it’s like for a person when they don’t believe him?” However, the playwright trusts Satine to complete the second climax. Addressing the Baron, Satin says:

“Come on! Don't touch... Don't offend the person! I can’t get this old man out of my head! (laughs) Don't offend a person!...” Who is Satin laughing at? Isn't it above yourself? Is it because he is now, like Luka, disingenuous, like Luka, teaching the Baron what he himself is not sure of. (“Do not offend a person! And if I was once offended and - for the rest of my life at once! What should I do? Forgive? Nothing. To anyone...”) Behind Satin’s words and behind the figure of silence is not only the duality of his position, not only doubts, not only an attempt to continue an argument with the already absent Luke, but also excitement and a direct indication of the fact that the fourth principle of life, formulated by Luke, found a response in Satin’s soul.

The principles that Luke formulated in the course of the action sounded from Satin’s lips. It is logical to assume that this peculiar concentration of Luke’s words within one action was necessary for the author in order to show were the elder’s words effective?(?)

First to respond Mite. Answering Satin’s question, Kleshch says: “Nothing... There are people everywhere... At first you don’t see it... then you look, it turns out they’re all people... nothing!” In the memory of the reader (viewer) Kleshch’s words are completely different: “These? What kind of people are they? Ragged, golden company... people! I’m a working man... I’m ashamed to look at them...”

Following Kleshch, he formulates his position Satin. He delivers a monologue, the meaning of which can be understood from the key sentences:

“A person can believe or not believe... it’s his business!
Man is free... he pays for everything himself: for faith, for unbelief, for love, for intelligence - man pays for everything himself, and therefore he is free.”
“Man – that’s the truth!”
“Everything is in man, everything is for man! Only man exists, everything else is the work of his hands and his brain! Human! It's great! It sounds proud!”
"Human! We must respect the person! Do not feel sorry... do not humiliate him with pity... you must respect him!

"Work? For what? To be full?...Man is higher! Man is beyond satiety!” And everything that happens and Satin’s words resonates in the soul Barona,

who for the first time thinks about the question: “But... for some reason I was born... huh? It was at this moment he asks the Tatar: “For me...pray...”, “Pray... for me!”; (“He quickly gets off the stove, goes to the table, pours vodka with a trembling hand, drinks and - almost runs - into the hallway”). And here we hear the last word of the Actor - “Gone!”

Appeared Bubnov appears before the astonished reader in a new way, declaring in an outburst of love and kindness: “If I were rich... I would set up a free tavern!” By God! With music and a choir of singers... Come. Drink, eat, listen to songs... take your breath away. Poor man...come to my free inn!”

Changes in people, in their attitude towards others, towards life, towards themselves are undeniable. The situation in the shelter is transformed, and now instead of squabbles, instead of a scattered hum of voices, a song sounds, albeit discordantly, albeit timidly, even if its words are joyless: “The sun rises and sets, but it’s dark in my prison...”, but it sounds to the accompaniment of harmony, debugged by Kleshch. And it was at this moment, when, it would seem, everything began to get better, the door opens and the Baron, standing on the threshold, shouts: “In the vacant lot... there... The actor hanged himself!”

Can this ending be regarded as tragic? It seems that there is no clear answer to this question. On the one hand, the death of the Actor is a tragedy, on the other hand, if we regard it as the Actor himself said, it is the liberation of the Spirit, the Soul. (Note such a detail as wasteland- empty space, free space, unrestricted, neglected. The duality of perception increases). (Remember Anna's death - liberation from suffering).

One cannot help but be interested in the response to this terrible news. Nastya is the first to react. She “slowly, eyes wide open, walks towards the table.” What motivates Nastya? Fear? Bitterness? Amazement at the determination of the Actor, who managed to break with what oppressed him? Actor's fortitude?

You can read a lot in Nastya’s wide-open eyes.

Satin reacts completely differently to Baron’s message: “Eh... ruined the song... stupid cancer.”

How long does the silence last after Satin’s sorrowful sigh? (Note that this is exactly the same Satin who assured: that a person should “not feel sorry for..., not humiliate him with pity. Where does this sorrowful “Eh...” come from now?)

The second part of the remark – “ruined the song” – is also ambiguous. What song are we talking about? About the one that the night shelters sing? Maybe. Why not assume that we are talking about the song of life that was heard by Satin and could have sounded for the Actor if he had found the strength to hear it?

To whom is the third part of Satin’s last phrase addressed? Whom does Satin, stuttering, call a fool? The actor who interrupted the song of life? Baron, invading with terrible news? Or maybe himself, for not stopping the Actor, although he shouted after him: “Hey, Sicambrus!” Where?" And there is no certainty here.

The ending of the play does not put an end to solving problems. It is only obvious that the fourth act of the drama “At the Bottom” cannot be called superfluous, it is permeated with new thoughts, it presents new features of seemingly familiar characters, new questions.

Luke left, but people remained who had to build their lives in accordance with their ideas, their faith, their principles. What awaits them in this life? What did they see “at the bottom”? And we will not find an unambiguously boring, moralizing answer to these questions. Why? Because for one, the “bottom” is the very furnishings of the shelter, and for another, it is that infinite depth of the soul into which not only Gorky’s heroes, but also readers managed to look; For one, the concept of “bottom” is associated with the idea of death, of hopelessness, and for another, the same concept is a symbol of purity, primordiality, beginning, a symbol of the origin of life.

Surprisingly, in our opinion, these various manifestations of life were captured by K.S. Stanislavsky, who imagined the final moment of the play as follows: “Pause. The stage is empty. In the distance, only a dog is howling, and perhaps a child who has woken up is screaming again, or they struck at matins, and the light of a new day begins to spread in the room.” What will it be like? Solve Che-lo-ve-ku!

Gorky M.

Essay on the work on the topic: Analysis of Act 4 of M. Gorky’s play “At the Depths”

Human! It's great!
M. Gorky
The drama “At the Bottom” arose as a result of the writer’s broad life observations and philosophical quests.
The first three acts of the play are Luke’s struggle for the souls of those thrown to the “bottom”. Luke captivates people with the illusion of future joy, the mirage of achievable happiness. The murder of Kostylev at the end of the third act and the subsequent events of the fourth act mark a turn in the development of the play: the denouement begins. Life has tested the validity of the theory of the saving lie. Hard labor, hunger, homelessness, drunkenness, incurable diseases - all this, leading to oppressive hopelessness, furious anger and suicide - is the natural result of a dissipated mirage.
The fourth act reveals the serious consequences of the experience, since, as Satin puts it, “the old man left our roommates sour.” Tramps think: “How, what to live with?” The Baron expresses his general state, admitting that he had “never understood anything” before, “lived as if in a dream,” he notes in thought: “... after all, for some reason I was born...” The same bewilderment binds everyone. An atmosphere of communication that is completely different from the previous one is emerging. People listen to each other. The playwright contrasts the philosophy of comforting lies and petty humiliating “truths” with the idea of a harsh, big truth. It is expressed by Satin. Defending Luke at first, denying that he is a conscious deceiver, a charlatan, Satin then goes on the offensive - an attack on the old man’s false philosophy. Satin says: “He lied... but it was out of pity for you... There is a comforting lie, a reconciling lie... I know the lie! Those who are weak at heart... and who live on other people's juices need lies... some are supported by it, others hide behind it... And who is their own master... who is independent and does not eat someone else's things - why does he need lies? Lies are the religion of slaves and masters... Truth is the god of a free man!” Satin concludes: “Everything is in man, everything is for man! Only man exists, everything else is the work of his hands and his brain!”
For the first time in the shelter, a serious speech is heard, pain is felt because of the lost life. Bubnov's arrival reinforces this impression. “Where are the people? - he exclaims and proposes to sing... all night, to sob his inglorious fate.” That is why Satin responds to the news of the actor’s suicide with harsh words: “Eh,... ruined the song..., fool!”
A peculiar feature in the development of the action of the play is that drama, through careful hints, allows one to predict the further course of events in the lives of the characters. The writer does not strive for spectacular situations. The relationships between the inhabitants of the shelter, for all their tension, inevitably arise from the living conditions of the “bottom”; there is nothing unusual in them.
In the fourth act, the tragic end of the Actor is already guessed even before the Baron announces what happened in the wasteland. The death of the Actor, caused primarily by his longing for a past life, to which - he understands - there is no return, was accelerated by a flash of dubious hope. The idea that the Actor will die is suggested both by the poetic quotes he utters and by the suicide note asking him to pray for him.
Events in the lives of many of the characters in the play are outlined in the work. Let's take Tick, for example, and trace his fate from the first to the fourth act. In the first act, he still strives to rise from the “bottom” where unemployment has thrown him: “I’ll get out,... I’ll rip off my skin, but I’ll get out.” In the second act, the tick is in a state of confusion: there is no money for his wife’s funeral, and in general “he doesn’t know what to do now.” In the fourth act, he already comes to terms with the inevitability: the struggle is impossible, the future fate is clear.
In the fourth act, the storylines of the characters' relationships further develop. And some of them are completed. So, for example, the line of the locksmith Kleshch, who lost his job and sank to the bottom, comes to its logical end.
The culmination of the fourth act is Satin's monologue, his passionate appeal to “respect man.” “Do not feel sorry, do not humiliate him... with pity...” This monologue is the author’s declaration. There are a lot of Gorky's own thoughts about life here.
There is practically no dialogue in the final act; everyone takes part in the conversation. We can say that this is a polyphonic dialogue.
The fourth act is full of aphorisms, some of which literally turn into slogans: “Man is the truth!”, “Whoever is weak at heart... needs a lie...”, “Lies are the religion of slaves and masters.”, “Truth is the god of a free man.” .
The title “At the Bottom” evokes a feeling of some kind of understatement. I just want to put an ellipsis. “At the bottom” of what? Is it only life? Maybe even souls? Yes, this is the meaning that takes on paramount importance.
Summing up the analysis of the fourth act of M. Gorky’s play “At the Depths,” we can say that the author, with the entire development of events, showed that false consolation and even sympathy do not change life. The ending of the existence of people who believed the reassuring lie clearly speaks of this: the suicide of the Actor, the death of Ash, the disappearance of Natasha, the hopelessness of Nastya were a response to the stories about the “promised land” that was “prepared for them.”

“At the Depths” arose as a result of the writer’s broad life observations and philosophical quests. The first three acts of the play are Luke’s struggle for the souls of those thrown to the “bottom”. Luke captivates people with the illusion of future joy, the mirage of what is achievable.

The murder of Kostylev at the end of the third act and the subsequent events of the fourth act mark a turn in the development of the play: the denouement begins. Life has tested the validity of the theory of the saving lie. Hard labor, hunger, homelessness, drunkenness, incurable diseases - all this, leading to oppressive hopelessness, furious anger and suicide - is the natural result of a dissipated mirage. The fourth act reveals the serious consequences of the experience, since, as Satin puts it, “the old man left our roommates sour.”

Tramps think: “How, what to live with?” The Baron expresses his general state, admitting that he had “never understood anything” before, “lived as if in a dream,” he notes in thought: “... after all, for some reason I was born...” The same bewilderment binds everyone.

An atmosphere of communication that is completely different from the previous one is emerging. People listen to each other. The playwright contrasts the philosophy of comforting lies and petty humiliating “truths” with the idea of a harsh, big truth. It is expressed by Satin. Defending Luke at first, denying that he is a conscious deceiver, a charlatan, Satin then goes on the offensive - an attack on the old man’s false philosophy.

Satin says: “He lied... but it was out of pity for you... There is a comforting lie, a reconciling lie... I know the lie! Who is weak at heart...

and those who live on other people's juices need lies... some are supported by it, others hide behind it... And who is his own master... who is independent and does not eat someone else's things - why does he need lies?

Lies are the religion of slaves and masters... Truth is the god of a free man!” Satin concludes: “Everything is in man, everything is for man! There is only , everything else is the work of his hands and his brain!

“For the first time in the shelter, a serious speech is heard, pain is felt because of the lost life. Bubnov's arrival reinforces this impression. “Where are the people?

he exclaims and suggests...singing...all night, to weep at his inglorious fate.” That’s why Satin responds to the news of the actor’s suicide with harsh words: “Eh,... ruined the song..., fool!

“A peculiar feature in the development of the play’s action is that drama, through careful hints, allows one to predict the further course of events in the lives of the characters. does not strive for spectacular situations. The relationships between the inhabitants of the shelter, for all their tension, inevitably arise from the living conditions of the “bottom”; there is nothing unusual in them. In the fourth act, the tragic end of the Actor is already guessed even before the Baron announces what happened in the wasteland. The death of the Actor, caused primarily by his longing for a past life, to which - he understands - there is no return, was accelerated by a flash of dubious hope.

The idea that the Actor will die is suggested both by the poetic quotes he utters and by the suicide note asking him to pray for him. Events in the lives of many of the characters in the play are outlined in the work. Let's take Tick, for example, and trace his fate from the first to the fourth act.

In the first act, he still strives to rise from the “bottom” where unemployment has thrown him: “I’ll get out,... I’ll rip off my skin, but I’ll get out.” In the second act, the tick is in a state of confusion: there is no money for his wife’s funeral, and in general “he doesn’t know what to do now.” In the fourth act, he already comes to terms with the inevitability: the struggle is impossible, the future fate is clear.

In the fourth act, the storylines of the characters' relationships further develop. And some of them are All Soch. RU 2005 are ending. So, for example, the line of the locksmith Kleshch, who lost his job and sank to the bottom, comes to its logical end. The culmination of the fourth act is Satin's monologue, his passionate appeal to “respect man.”

“Do not feel sorry, do not humiliate him... with pity...” This monologue is the author’s declaration. There are a lot of Gorky's own thoughts about life here.

There is practically no dialogue in the final act; everyone takes part in the conversation. We can say that this is a polyphonic dialogue. The fourth act is full of aphorisms, some of which literally turn into slogans: “Man – that’s the truth!

", "Those who are weak in soul... need lies...", "Lies are the religion of slaves and masters...

", "Truth is the god of a free man." The title “At the Bottom” evokes a feeling of some kind of understatement. I just want to put an ellipsis. “At the bottom” of what?

Is it only life? Maybe even souls? Yes, this is the meaning that takes on paramount importance. Summing up the analysis of the fourth act of M. Gorky’s play “At the Lower Depths,” we can say that the whole development of events showed that false consolation and even sympathy do not change life.

The ending of the existence of people who believed the reassuring lie clearly speaks of this: the suicide of the Actor, the death of Ash, the disappearance of Natasha, the hopelessness of Nastya were a response to the stories about the “promised land” that was “prepared for them.”

Need a cheat sheet? Then save - "Analysis of Act 4 of M. Gorky's play "At the Depths". Literary essays!