The history of a city is a literary movement. "The History of a City": chapter-by-chapter analysis of the work. Literary direction and genre

" - a satirical novel by writer M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. It was written in 1870.

Meaning of the name. The title is an indication of the absurdist essence of the novel. This is a kind of historical work, parodying, in particular, “The History of the Russian State.” However, the “state” in the novel has shrunk to the size of a small city.

Events take place in it that satirically reflect the real events of Russian history (mainly the period of the 18th - 19th centuries). The novel is constructed in the form of a historical chronicle - it is the content of a fictional chronicle that the narrator allegedly finds.

Content. “The History of a City” tells the story of the city of Foolov. The “chronicle” tells about the origin of the Foolovites, about the most prominent rulers of the city, and mentions the most important historical events. Here are some descriptions of the rulers: Dementy Brudasty is a mechanical humanoid robot with an “organ” in its head instead of a brain, which each time issues one of several programmed phrases.

After the residents found out who their ruler really was, Brudasty was overthrown. Six female rulers who sought to seize power by all means, including actively bribing soldiers. Pyotr Ferdyshchenko is an unreasonable, frivolous reformer who led his city to mass famine; he himself died from gluttony.

Basilisk Wartkin - reformer-educator, reminiscent of Peter I; at the same time, with wild cruelty he destroyed many villages, thereby obtaining only a few rubles for the treasury. He ruled the city for the longest time. Gloomy-Burcheev is a parody of Arakcheev, a statesman of the times of Paul and Alexander I.

Gloomy-Burcheev is perhaps one of the central characters of “History”. This is a despot and tyrant who intends to build an ideal state machine in his city. This led to the creation of a totalitarian system that brought nothing but disasters to the city. In this part of the novel, Saltykov-Shchedrin was one of the heralds of a new literary genre - dystopia. The death of Gloomy-Burcheev makes people breathe a sigh of relief and gives hope for some changes for the better.

Composition. The novel is built from several large fragments, as befits a “chronicle”. However, this does not violate the integrity of the work. Here's the outline of the story:

1. Introduction to the history of the inhabitants of Foolov;

2. Description of the 22 rulers of the city;

3. Ruler Brusty with an organ in his head;

4. Struggle for power;

5. Board of Dvoekurov;

6. A period of calm and the onset of famine;

7. Reign of Basilisk Wartkin;

8. Changes in the lifestyle of city residents;

9. Depravity of the inhabitants;

10. Ugryum-Burcheev’s rise to power;

11. Wartkin’s discussion of obligations;

12. Mikaladze talks about the appearance of the ruler;

13. Benevolsky’s reasoning about kindness.

Issues. The novel by Saltykov-Shchedrin was created with the aim of describing the eternal disorders of the Russian state and society. Despite the satire and grotesquery, it becomes clear that the writer only highlighted and exaggerated those trends that really took place in Russian history. Even the order of events and the reigns of mayors largely corresponds to Russian historical chronology. Sometimes the correspondence of heroes to their real prototypes reaches photographic accuracy; such is Ugryum-Burcheev, the description of whose appearance is completely copied from the figure of Arakcheev, which can be observed by looking at the famous portrait of this figure. It should be noted, however, that Saltykov-Shchedrin covered Russian history one-sidedly. After all, Peter’s reforms were generally reasonable and adequate, and the era of Elizabeth Petrovna and Catherine was marked by some cultural and economic upsurge. Even Arakcheev, whom Saltykov-Shchedrin apparently hated so fiercely, is assessed largely positively by contemporaries and historians: for example, he never took bribes or abused his position for personal gain, and his fierce persecution of corruption and embezzlement turned out to be effective. However, the satirical pathos of the novel has its own meaning.

Idea. The idea of ​​the novel is that stupidity in the city of the same name is permanent and eternal, and no new “reformer” is able to get rid of it; the new mayor turns out to be no less reckless than the previous ones. This happened in the real history of Russia: smart, intelligent figures did not stay in power for long, and their sound reforms were nullified by subsequent rulers, which is why the country returned to its previous disorder, poverty and savagery. Stupidity is the only source of all the troubles of the city, and certainly not the desire for wealth, acquisitiveness and the thirst for power. Each ruler of Foolov had his own unique form of stupidity, so the nature of the people's disasters was constantly changing. In addition to mayors, ordinary people also live in the city. Their description in the novel is unsightly: they all form a submissive herd that does not want to change, no matter how reasonable the initiatives of some rulers, and does not resist the wild and reckless behavior of the authorities. Time has no effect on ordinary Foolovites. Only a good shake-up, such as the rule of Ugryum-Burcheev, can at least slightly awaken the self-awareness of the population. The ending of the work is in a sense prophetic. The power of Ugryum-Burcheev fell as a result of the revolution, and he himself suffered reprisals; however, there is no certainty that the new ruler elected by the people will be reasonable and respectable. As we know, half a century after the novel was written, this happened in reality.

Gender and genre. “The History of a City” is a novel classified as “literature of the absurd.” In it, the realistic beginning gives way to the grotesque, exaggeration, and fantasy. At the same time, folklore elements are actively used: for example, individual episodes (like the story about the origin of the Foolovites) resemble fairy tales. At the same time, the author strives to give his narrative the most realistic image possible.

The chronicle structure comes into play - the novel gives the exact dates of all events, the years of life of the mayors, the history of Foolov is correlated with the history of real Russia and the world; the narrator quotes from famous writers. The reader unwittingly begins to believe what is written. It is noteworthy that Saltykov-Shchedrin’s “historical” work is addressed to his contemporary reader. By this he wants to say that well-known problems in society arose a long time ago and have not disappeared over time.

“The History of a City” Saltykov-Shchedrin

"The Story of a City" analysis of the work - theme, idea, genre, plot, composition, characters, issues and other issues are discussed in this article.

“The History of a City” is one of the central works of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. It was published in the journal Otechestvennye zapiski in 1869-1870 and caused a wide public outcry. The main means of satirical exposure of reality in the work are grotesque and hyperbole. In terms of genre, it is stylized as a historical chronicle. The image of the author-narrator is called in it “the last archivist-chronicler.”

After the title there is a note: “According to original documents, published by M.E. Saltykov /Shchedrin/.” It is intended to create the illusion of authenticity.

M.E. writes with subtle irony. Saltykov-Shchedrin about how the faces of these mayors change with the change of a particular historical era: “So, for example, the mayors of Biron’s time are distinguished by their recklessness, the mayors of Potemkin’s time by their diligence, and the mayors of Razumovsky’s time by unknown origin and knightly courage. All of them flog the townsfolk, but the first flog the townsfolk absolutely, the latter explain the reasons for their management by the requirements of civilization, the third want the townsfolk to rely on their courage in everything.” Thus, from the very beginning, a hierarchy is built and emphasized: higher spheres - local government - ordinary people. Their destinies mirror what is happening in areas of power: “in the first case, the inhabitants trembled unconsciously, in the second they trembled with the consciousness of their own benefit, in the third they rose to awe filled with trust.”

The author emphasizes that the chronicler’s appearance is very real, which does not allow one to doubt his authenticity for a minute. M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin clearly indicates the boundaries of the period under consideration: from 1931 to 1825. The work includes “Address to the reader from the last archivist-chronicler.” To give a documentary character to this fragment of the narrative, the author places a footnote after the title stating that the address is conveyed exactly in the words of the chronicler himself. The publisher allowed himself only spelling corrections of the text in order to edit certain liberties in the spelling of words. The appeal begins with a conversation with the reader about whether there will be worthy rulers and leaders in the history of our country: “Is it really possible that in every country there will be glorious Nero and Caligula, shining with valor, and only in our own country will we not find such?” The omniscient publisher supplements this quote with a reference to a poem by G.R. Derzhavina: “Caligula! Your horse in the Senate Could not shine, shining in gold: Good deeds shine!” This addition aims to emphasize the value scale: it is not gold that shines, but good deeds. Gold in this case acts as a symbol of acquisitiveness, and good deeds are proclaimed as the true value of the world.

Further in the work there is a discussion about man in general. The chronicler encourages the reader to look at his own person and decide what is more important in him: the head or the belly. And then judge those in power. Analyzing the people's memory of city leaders and benefactors, the chronicler notes with subtle irony: “You don’t know what to glorify more: the power that dares in moderation, or these grapes that give thanks in moderation?”

At the end of the address, Foolov is compared to Rome, this again emphasizes that we are not talking about a specific city, but about a model of society in general. Thus, the city of Foolov is a grotesque image not only of all of Russia, but also of all power structures on a global scale, for Rome has been associated with the imperial city since ancient times, the same function is embodied by the mention of the Roman emperors Nero (37-68) and Caligula (12-68). 41) in the text of the work. For the same purpose, to expand the information field of the narrative, the names Kostomarov, Pypin and Solovyov are mentioned in the work. Contemporaries had an idea of ​​what views and positions were being discussed. N.I. Kostomarov is a famous Russian historian, researcher of the socio-political and economic history of Russia and Ukraine, Ukrainian poet and fiction writer. A.N. Pypin (1833-1904) - Russian literary critic, ethnographer, academician of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, cousin of N.G. Chernyshevsky. B.C. Solovyov (1853-1900) - Russian philosopher, poet, publicist, literary critic of the late 19th - early 20th centuries.

Further, the chronicler dates the action of the story to the era of tribal feuds. At the same time, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin uses his favorite compositional technique: the fairy-tale context is combined with the pages of real Russian history. All this creates a system of witty subtle hints that are understandable to a sophisticated reader.

Having come up with funny names for the fairy-tale tribes, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin immediately reveals to the reader their allegorical meaning when representatives of the tribe of blockheads begin to call each other by name (Ivashka, Peter). It becomes clear that we are talking specifically about Russian history.

The bunglers decided to find themselves a prince, and since the people themselves are stupid, they are looking for an unwise ruler. Finally, one (the third in a row, as is customary in Russian folk tales) “princely lordship” agreed to rule this people. But with a condition. “And you will pay me many tributes,” the prince continued, “whoever brings a bright sheep, sign the sheep to me, and keep the bright one for yourself; Whoever happens to have a penny, break it in four: give one part to me, the other to me, the third to me again, and keep the fourth for yourself. When I go to war, you go too! And you don’t care about anything else!” Even unreasonable blockheads hung their heads from such speeches.

In this scene M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin convincingly shows that any power is based on the obedience of the people and brings them more troubles and problems than real help and support. It is no coincidence that the prince gives the bunglers a new name: “And since you did not know how to live on your own and, stupid, you yourself wished for bondage, then you will no longer be called bunglers, but Foolovites.”

The experiences of deceived bunglers are expressed in folklore. It is symbolic that on the way home one of them sings the song “Don’t make noise, mother green oak tree!”

The prince sends his thieving governors one after another. A satirical inventory of city governors gives them an eloquent description, testifying to their business qualities.

Clementius received the proper rank for his skillful preparation of pasta. Lamvrokanis traded in Greek soap, sponges and nuts. The Marquis de Sanglot loved to sing obscene songs. One can list for a long time the so-called exploits of mayors. They did not stay in power for long and did nothing worthwhile for the city.

The publisher considered it necessary to present detailed biographies of the most prominent leaders. Here M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin resorts to N.V., already known from “Dead Souls.” Gogol's classical technique. Just as Gogol portrayed landowners, he presents to the readers a whole gallery of typical images of city governors.

The first of them is depicted in the work of Dementy Varlamovich Brudasty, nicknamed Organchik. In parallel with the story about any specific mayor M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin constantly paints a general picture of the actions of city authorities and the perception of these actions by the people.

So, for example, he mentions that the Foolovites for a long time remembered those bosses who flogged and collected arrears, but at the same time they always said something kind.

The organ struck everyone with the most severe severity. His favorite word was the cry: “I won’t stand it!” Next M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin says that master Baibakov secretly came to the mayor of organ affairs at night. The secret is revealed suddenly at one of the receptions, when the best representatives of the “Gluiovsky intelligentsia” come to see Brudasty (this very phrase contains an oxymoron, which gives the story an ironic connotation). There the mayor breaks down the organ he was using instead of his head. Only Brudasty allowed himself to portray an uncharacteristic friendly smile for him, when “... suddenly something inside him hissed and buzzed, and the longer his mysterious hissing lasted, the more and more his eyes spun and sparkled.” No less interesting is the reaction of the city's secular society to this incident. M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin emphasizes that our ancestors were not carried away by revolutionary ideas and anarchist sentiments. Therefore, they only sympathized with the city mayor.

In this fragment of the work, another grotesque move is used: the head, which is being taken to the mayor after repairs, suddenly begins to bite around the city and utters the word: “I’ll ruin it!” A special satirical effect is achieved in the final scene of the chapter, when two different mayors are brought to the rebellious Foolovites almost simultaneously. But the people have become accustomed to not being greatly surprised by anything: “The impostors met and measured each other with their eyes. The crowd dispersed slowly and in silence.”

After this, anarchy begins in the city, as a result of which women seized power. These are the childless widow Iraida Lukinishna Paleologova, the adventurer Clementine de Bourbon, the Revel native Amalia Karlovna Shtokfish, Anelya Aloizievna Lyadokhovskaya, Dunka the fat-fifted, Matryonka the nostril.

In the characteristics of these mayors one can discern subtle hints about the personalities of the reigning persons in Russian history: Catherine II, Anna Ioannovna and other empresses. This is the most stylistically reduced chapter. M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin generously rewards the mayors with offensive nicknames and insulting definitions (“fat-fleshed”, “thick-footed”, etc.). Their entire reign boils down to chaos. The last two rulers generally resemble witches more than real people: “Both Dunka and Matryonka committed unspeakable outrages. They went out into the street and knocked the heads of passers-by with their fists, went alone to taverns and smashed them, caught young guys and hid them underground, ate babies, and cut out women’s breasts and ate them too.”

An advanced person who takes his responsibilities seriously is named in the work of S.K. Dvoekurov. In the author’s understanding, he correlates with Peter the Great: “One thing is that he introduced mead making and brewing and made the use of mustard and bay leaves mandatory” and was “the founder of those brave innovators who, three quarters of a century later, waged wars in the name of potatoes.” Dvoekurov's main achievement was his attempt to establish an academy in Foolov. True, he did not achieve results in this field, but the desire to implement this plan in itself was already a progressive step compared to the activities of other mayors.

The next ruler, Pyotr Petrovich Ferdyshchenko, was simple and even liked to equip his speech with the affectionate word “brother-sudarik.” However, in the seventh year of his reign, he fell in love with the suburban beauty Alena Osipovna. All nature has ceased to be favorable to the Foolovites: “From the very spring of St. Nicholas, from the time the water began to enter low water, and until Ilyin’s day, not a drop of rain fell. The old-timers could not remember anything like this, and not without reason attributed this phenomenon to the brigadier’s fall from grace.”

When the pestilence spread throughout the city, the truth-loving Yevseich was found in it, who decided to talk to the foreman. However, he ordered that the old man be put on a prisoner's uniform, and so Yevseich disappeared, as if he had not existed in the world, disappeared without a trace, as only the “miners” of the Russian land can disappear.

Light is shed on the real plight of the population of the Russian Empire by the petition of the residents of the most unfortunate city of Foolov, in which they write that they are dying out, that they see the authorities around them as unskillful.

The savagery and cruelty of the crowd is striking in the scene when the residents of Foolov throw the unfortunate Alenka from the bell tower, accusing her of all mortal sins. The story with Alenka had barely time to be forgotten when the foreman found himself a different hobby.

- shooter Domashka. All these episodes, in essence, show women's powerlessness and defenselessness in front of the voluptuous foreman.

The next disaster that befell the city is a fire on the eve of the feast of the Kazan Mother of God: two settlements burned down. The people perceived all this as another punishment for the sins of their foreman. The death of this mayor is symbolic. He drank too much and ate too much of the people's treat: “After the second break (there was a pig in sour cream) he felt sick; however, he overcame himself and ate another goose with cabbage. After that, his mouth twisted. You could see how some administrative vein on his face trembled, trembled and trembled, and suddenly froze... The Foolovites jumped up from their seats in confusion and fear. It's over..."

The next city ruler turned out to be efficient and meticulous. Vasilisk Semyonovich Wartkin flashed around the city like a fly, loved to shout and take everyone by surprise. It is symbolic that he slept with one eye open (a kind of allusion to the “all-seeing eye” of the autocracy). However, Wartkin's irrepressible energy is spent for other purposes: he builds castles in the sand. Foolovites aptly call his way of life the energy of inaction. Wartkin wages wars for enlightenment, the reasons for which are ridiculous (for example, the Foolovites’ refusal to plant Persian chamomile). Under his leadership, the tin soldiers, entering the settlement, begin to destroy the huts. It is noteworthy that the Foolovites always learned about the subject of the campaign only after its completion.

When Mikoladze, a champion of graceful manners, comes to power, the Foolovites grow fur and begin to suck their paws. On the contrary, wars for education make them dumber. Meanwhile, when education and legislative activity ceased, the Foolovites stopped sucking their paws, their fur faded without a trace, and soon they began to dance in circles. The laws spell out great poverty, and the inhabitants become obese. The “Charter of Good Cookies” convincingly shows how much stupidity is concentrated in legislative acts. It states, for example, that it is prohibited to make pies from mud, clay and building materials. As if a person of sound mind and good memory is capable of baking pies from this. In fact, this charter symbolically shows how deeply the state apparatus can intervene in the everyday life of every Russian. They are already giving him instructions on how to bake pies. Moreover, special recommendations are given regarding the position of the filling. The phrase “Let everyone use the filling according to their condition” indicates a clearly defined social hierarchy in society. However, the passion for legislation also did not take root on Russian soil. Mayor Benevolensky was suspected of having connections with Napoleon, accused of treason and sent “to that region where Makar did not drive calves.” So, using the figurative expression of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin writes allegorically about exile. Contradictions in the artistic world of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, which is a caustic parody of the author’s contemporary reality, awaits the reader at every turn. So, during the reign of Lieutenant Colonel Pyshch, the people in Foolov were completely spoiled because he preached liberalism in the reign.

“But as freedom developed, its original enemy arose - analysis. With the increase in material well-being, leisure was acquired, and with the acquisition of leisure came the ability to explore and experience the nature of things. This always happens, but the Foolovites used this “newly discovered ability” not in order to strengthen their well-being, but in order to undermine it,” writes M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin.

Pimple became one of the most desirable rulers for the Foolovites. However, the local leader of the nobility, who was not distinguished by special qualities of mind and heart, but had a special stomach, once, on the basis of gastronomic imagination, mistook his head for stuffed. In describing the scene of Pimple's death, the writer boldly resorts to the grotesque. In the final part of the chapter, the leader in a rage rushes at the mayor with a knife and, cutting off pieces of the head slice by slice, eats it completely.

Against the backdrop of grotesque scenes and ironic notes by M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin reveals to the reader his philosophy of history, in which the flow of life sometimes stops its natural flow and forms a whirlpool.

The most painful impression is made by Gloomy-Burcheev. This is a man with a wooden face, never illuminated by a smile. His detailed portrait eloquently tells about the character of the hero: “Thick, comb-cut, pitch-black hair covers the conical skull and tightly, like a yarmulke, frames the narrow and sloping forehead. The eyes are gray, sunken, shadowed by somewhat swollen eyelids; the look is clear, without hesitation; the nose is dry, descending from the forehead almost straight down; lips are thin, pale, covered with trimmed mustache stubble; the jaws are developed, but without an outstanding expression of carnivory, but with some inexplicable bouquet of readiness to crush or bite in half. The whole figure is lean with narrow shoulders raised upward, with an artificially protruded chest and long, muscular arms.”

M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, commenting on this portrait, emphasizes that we have before us the purest type of idiot. His style of government could only be compared with the random cutting of trees in a dense forest, when a person waves it right and left and steadily walks wherever his eyes look.

On the day of remembrance of the apostles Peter and Paul, the mayor ordered people to destroy their homes. However, this was only the beginning of Napoleonic plans for Ugryum-Burcheev. He began sorting people into families, taking into account their height and physique. After six or two months, no stone remained from the city. Gloomy-Burcheev tried to create his own sea, but the river refused to obey, tearing down dam after dam. The city of Glupov was renamed Nepreklonsk, and the holidays differed from everyday life only in that instead of labor worries, intensive marching was ordered. Meetings were held even at night. In addition to this, spies were appointed. The end of the hero is also symbolic: he instantly disappeared, as if he had melted into thin air.

The very unhurried, drawn-out style of narration in the work of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin shows the insolubility of Russian problems, and satirical scenes emphasize their severity: rulers are replaced one after another, and the people remain in the same poverty, in the same lack of rights, in the same hopelessness.

Mikhail Evgrafovich Saltykov-Shchedrin ridiculed the Russian government with his novel and described all its flaws in a satirical form. The novel is written about a city that has changed a large number of bosses, but none of them could do anything good for the city. Saltykov-Shchedrin highlighted in his work reality intertwined with fantasy.

In such a light and satirical form, the writer was able to fully express his thought and intended idea. The novel “The Story of a City” depicts the problem of all of Russia. In a city where bosses are constantly changing and cannot lead the state normally. All bosses are very stupid and each of them pursues their own goals.

Saltykov-Shchedrin writes about the city of Glupov as a capital, or as a provincial small town, or generally calls it a village. The author collected all segments of the population and described different times for the city. Mikhail Evgrafovich writes that the city stands on a swamp, and at other times it stands on seven hills.

In the novel “The History of a City,” the main part is occupied by a description of the mayors who were sent to govern the city. Here Saltykov-Shchedrin also approached with great exaggeration and a satirical note. Each of the mayors did nothing to make the city prosper, but only destroyed it and torn it down into logs. Some bosses had an empty head, and only an organ stood in the corner, while others had a head that smelled like minced meat, so much so that it had even been eaten.

But the novel also describes the inhabitants of this very city who are inactive. They do absolutely nothing to change the situation in their hometown and in their lives. The people simply watched as a myriad of bosses were replaced and how they destroyed the city and, at the same time, their lives. Residents of the city only adapt to each new boss and did not want to get out of this circle of injustice. One might think that the residents themselves do not want a good mayor for themselves, but are content with the ones they have.

Each boss is despotic towards the people in his own way, and the people, in turn, have already resigned themselves to their fate. The last mayor who decides to destroy the city and rebuild it. The gaze of Gloomy-Burcheev terrifies the townspeople, and they follow him unconditionally. Construction began just like that, and the townspeople were left with the ruins of their own city.

In his novel, Saltykov-Shchedrin was able to vividly describe the problems of society and the state.

Option 2

Most writers of one era or another tried to convey their dissatisfaction with a particular situation through their works, trying to convey them as best as possible to the general mass of people. Some tried to identify a problem that was unique to their period of life, while others tried to convey their experiences about a topic that was common not only to their generation, but also to previous ones. One of these writers was Saltykov-Shchedrin.

Many of his works were educational in nature, trying to help people see the problem and suggest ways to solve it. Reading such works, people realized what was happening around them and tried to do at least something, and this is what makes the works of Saltykov-Shchedrin good, they gave reason to think.

The work “The History of a City” told the reader about one city in which lived people who, without exaggeration, could be called the personification of a particular period in the life of our homeland. The city was called Foolov, and its inhabitants called themselves Foolovites; most likely, with this Saltykov-Shchedrin tried to convey their ignorance and limitations as strongly as possible. Further in the course of the story, we see that the city and its inhabitants are the literal personification of everything that a person would like to hide in himself and not let out. All the vices that are in him. The city is full of stupid people who try to obey rather than think for themselves.

The works reveal many problems that were inherent in a particular period. For example, the work clearly shows the problem of excessive corruption in the bureaucracy. Also in the work we see the problem of human rejection from society, the residents of the city don’t care about everyone except themselves, they only care about their loved ones, which makes us think about human indifference in our society.

Also in the work one can see the obvious comic superiority of officials over ordinary people, as it was in the time of the writer.

One way or another, the work tells us about the most important things in human life that we need to adhere to and follow. Saltykov-Shchedrin tells us that spiritual things are much more important for a person than material values. The author tells us to stick to ourselves and not be led by surrounding opinions, which can often be wrong. Saltykov-Shchedrin recommends that you be guided by this generalized opinion throughout your life, which is what he, in fact, did.

Also, for his works, he experienced pressure from the authorities for his seemingly revolutionary impulses and oppositional themes.

In this essay, I analyzed Saltykov-Shchedrin’s work “The History of a City,” from which I concluded that the work has a number of issues that the author reflected on in the work, and the problems of which are described above. The opinion described in the essay is subjective and does not claim to be truly correct.

Essay on the story The Story of a City

Mikhail Evgrafovich Saltykov-Shchedrin wrote his work over several years, from 1869 to 1870. Initially, the novel was called “The Foolov Chronicler.” Later it was renamed “The History of a City” and published in parts in the journal “Otechestvennye zapiski” and aroused strong emotions among readers.

Most readers compare a written book to a short story, but in reality it is not. The genre of “Stories of a City” is “Satirical Novel”, which describes the life of the fictional city of Foolov, but the chronological events taking place in it take place from the chronicles found by the writer.

The action of the novel takes place in the city of Foolov, whose name speaks for itself. The novel describes the life of the mayors, their “great deeds”: bribery, imposition of tribute, collection of various taxes and much more. Saltykov-Shchedrin in his work raised the main problem - the essence of the history of the Russian state. He assessed the past and present of Russia quite critically, since he considered the majority of the country’s inhabitants to be “Fools.” Which, translated from the language of the ancient people, means “head-scratchers.” Because of his ignorance and lack of understanding, he renamed them.

The novel begins with small warring tribes. Tired of the constant war among themselves, they decided to choose a person who would manage the affairs of the tribes and command their people. This is how the first prince in Rus' and the city of Foolov appeared.
With this he described the formation of Ancient Rus' and the reign of the Rurik dynasty.

At first, the prince called to power entrusted part of the affairs to his landowner. But he turned out to be a thief, the ruler had to take tough measures himself. Then the writer lists most of the rulers of the Russian state, their contributions to history and the deeds in which they distinguished themselves. The bosses changed one after another, their worldview and the absurdity of the government, which the author points out in his work, also changed.

Madness and unnecessary reforms created chaos and disorder in the country, people became beggars, and devastation set in. But the monarchs were in a constant state of either drunkenness or war, and they had nothing to do with the ordinary people. A gradual series of mistakes on the part of the authorities led to dire consequences, which the author narrates with sarcasm and satire. Ultimately, the death that overtook the last ruler of Ugryum-Burcheev, due to which the narrative ends, gives hope to the Russian people to change their lives for the better.

In the novel “The History of a City,” the writer touched on many topics important for the history of Russia, such as war, power, ignorance, religion, servility and fanaticism. Each topic is important in its own way and carries great meaning to the way of life of ordinary people.

The main problem described in the work, which Saltykov-Shchedrin wanted to emphasize, is the inaction and humility of the common people in relation to the authorities, their agreement with the fact that monarchs infringe and oppress their rights, infringe on them. The writer is inclined to believe that people are afraid of being without their ruler. The fear of falling into anarchy is so strong that they are driven by force and the desire to obey their boss.

The essence of the novel “The History of a City” is that society does not want to make responsible decisions on its own, placing everything on the shoulders of one person who cannot change the history of the country. The author wants to show that without the will of the people, their awareness and desire for a better life, nothing will change. The writer does not call for open rebellion or revolution, but he is trying to convince the people that one cannot have blind obedience, only people and their will can influence changes for the better, one cannot be afraid of power, but, on the contrary, turn to it with one’s problems.

Sample 4

Perhaps Saltykov-Shchedrin is one of the few satirical writers in Russia in the 19th century. Yes, there were many classical authors, but in such a way as to make caustic ridicule, to present reality from the other side, then, of course, this is for Saltykov-Shchedrin. “The History of a City” is the pinnacle of satire for that time. This novel will be discussed now.

At one time it caused a lot of controversy and controversy. Critics sometimes gave completely opposite assessments. Some did not hide their admiration for the author’s skill, others denounced him in every possible way, calling him a Russophobe. Which side should you take?

Rather, the side of the former, since it is known for sure that the writer loved his country. He simply described the current reality “without cuts” in a humorously absurd tone. The censors most often took pro-government positions, and they could not like the emphasis on the corruption and lawlessness that was then raging.

The novel has an interesting structure. It is based on a certain fictional chronicle of the city of Foolov. It carefully describes how the mayors and their mental and external characteristics were replaced. The work is replete with allusions to various rulers of Russia. That is, these leaders were presented in the form of one of the emperors.

Some bosses looked like robots. Their stupidity is emphasized. Someone constantly carried out reforms that only worsened life in the city. Someone's head looked like minced meat and one day it was eaten.

The novel contains a general outline of the description in that not a single boss has ever proven himself to be an intelligent official. All their activities boiled down to tyranny and arbitrariness. They dishonestly robbed the people, taking away their last. Corruption and bureaucracy have reached unprecedented proportions.

The worst thing is that the work had a real historical background, and a typical Foolov differed little from a typical Kostroma, for example. That’s why the censorship was so annoying to him: she perfectly understood what the author was trying to convey and who he was laughing at.

In fact, the city of Foolov is a collective image of any Russian provincial city of those years. And the author reminded between the lines that it is high time to take up reforms and destroy the negative consequences of Borocracy.

One of the main works of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin became his satirical novel “The History of a City”. It was written by him in the 70s of the XIX century. It is interesting that the work was originally called “The Foolov Chronicler”, but later the title “The History of a City” appeared. The work itself has the structure of a chronicle narrative by a chronicler-archivist about the past of the city being described, but the historical framework is limited - from 1731 to 1826. The fate of this city is written in chronicles, which the author finds and publishes, accompanying them with his own comments.

“The History of a City” and the series of satirical stories “Pompadours and Pompadours” were written at the same time: “The History...” was completed in 1869, and stories about pompadours were published from 1863 to 1973. Both works have a common concept, both depict the highest royal administration, its lawlessness and reprisals inflicted on the people. Many images of pompadours - major provincial officials - clearly contain the features of Foolov's future city rulers.

The author published his work in chapters (the “Organchik” chapter was written first, and the order of the parts was completely different), but the censors imposed bans on each of them, and only endless edits - concessions to the authorities - saved the book from vegetating in the writer’s desk drawer. The chapters found their place in the journal Otechestvennye zapiski.

However, the writer was not satisfied with the soft version that the censorship body approved, so in 1870 he published the entire novel in a form that would not have been missed in the magazine. However, this version was also modified by Saltykov-Shchedrin, and only in 1879 the very story that the reader holds in his hands comes out. What did the writer so furiously cross out and add? Contemporaries noted that he worked hard on the images of mayors to make them more capacious and “sharp.” However, this did not save him from reactionary criticism, and all sorts of sycophants began to accuse the writer of “distorting Russian history.”

Genre, direction, composition

“The Story of a City” is a satirical novel written in the direction of “realism.” The work is also called “dystopia,” which means the author’s intention to depict a parallel reality or a possible future scenario that frightens readers and at the same time warns against the mistakes that they are close to in real life. This is what we observe in the text: the writer reproduces an alternative history of the state, similar to the domestic chronicle. He uses the grotesque and reworks known facts in a different way, showing the essence of real Russia with its corruption, nepotism, ignorance and tyranny.

The composition in “The History of a City” is chronicle and fragmentary, consisting of historical fragments, some of which have not survived, but are only guessed in the chronicler’s mentions. The structure of the book can be divided into several parts:

1. Introduction by the author who allegedly found the ancient chronicle of the city of Foolov.
2. The introductory part of the chronicler himself, who talks about the origin of the Foolovites.
3. Next come individual chapters connected by a single narrative. Each of them is dedicated to a specific era in the life of the city.

Meaning of the name

The grotesque is present even in the very title of the work. It is “History”, not a story. After all, the author - an archivist - does not just chronicle, but tells a story, clearly demonstrating all the patterns and the system of education and development of the city. He considers these pitiful records to be chronicles worthy of respect, if not to say admiration, before his superiors, and proudly calls them “History.” And in the continuation of the name: “one city” (not Foolov, but it is still unknown which one) one can notice a certain generalization. Everything that has been said applies not only to Foolov, but also to other places. The malicious hint is addressed specifically to Russia. This grotesque meaning is contained in the title of the work.

The city itself was named by the first mayor, called to rule there at the request of the residents themselves - the bunglers (they were so named because they “pulled” their heads on the ground). This name was given to the city because of the stupidity of its inhabitants, who could not rule themselves due to ignorance and deliberately limited their freedom.

The essence

The author chronicles a city where a stupid but obedient people of slaves live, who tolerate any whims of tyrants. Unable to rule the state, the Foolovites asked a foreigner to lead them. At first he sent governors to them, then, convinced of the corruption, greed and ineffectiveness of the leadership, he came to rule on his own.

These tribes had neither a religion nor a form of government, replacing all this with the fact that they were constantly at enmity with each other. They made alliances, declared wars, made peace, swore friendship and fidelity to each other, but when they lied, they added “let me be ashamed,” and were sure in advance that “shame will not eat away at the eyes.” Thus, they mutually ruined their lands, mutually violated their wives and maidens, and at the same time prided themselves on being cordial and hospitable.

Over time, the people did not change much and adapted to every vice of a superior person. For example, under Grustilov and Mikaladze, people became immoral and vulgar, they were only interested in love affairs. Under Ugryum-Burcheev, the same gentlemen put on identical robes and lined up the houses as if in a formation. Under the Pimple, they overfed themselves and became ossified in idleness. These metamorphoses can be listed endlessly, but the important thing is that the residents of Foolov tried so hard to win the sympathy of the next mayor that they were ready to abandon their originality and even centuries-old moral principles. These are a chameleon people who, in order to avoid danger, change color, adapting to the situation. But in these countless changes, people lost themselves and their mentality, so in the end “history stopped flowing.” The meaning of the ending is simple: a people who have lost their historical appearance, their uniqueness and authenticity are doomed to death. The author issued a warning to all fellow citizens, because, judging by the events mentioned in the book, in the image of the Foolovites he embodied many of the features of the Russian people: humble, ignorant and subject to the influence of vices.

Themes

The themes of this dystopia are very multifaceted: it presents socio-political and moral themes.

• The theme of the people fully revealed by the author from many angles. The satirist is convinced that the Foolovites, despite all the trials, knew how to withstand and even rebel when they were forced to do so. But the inhabitants of those places were in no way inferior to the mayors in their depravity; on the contrary, sometimes they even anticipated their desires (remember Grustilov, who came across a procession of half-naked maidens). The citizens themselves wanted to become subjects, because they could not organize their lives on their own. It is obvious that a people who have refused freedom out of stupidity are worthy of a despot ruler. And so the destructive activity of the tyrants turned the city into a desert, and out of people into animals. Saltykov-Shchedrin negatively assesses the inaction of the people in the work, because the author is a supporter of the concept: “The people should not be afraid of the authorities, the authorities should be afraid of the people.” However, the comical and greatly exaggerated worship of the mayors, which is demonstrated by the residents, runs counter to the opinion of the satirist. Despite the obvious weakness and injustice of power, people remain dumb puppets in the hands of their superiors. In the image of the people, the author ridiculed the obedience of fellow citizens, who not only endure the yoke of slavery, but also actively flatter their bosses, catering to the slightest whim of the master.
• Theme of morality. The heroes of “The Story of a City” change their attitude to morality over time, becoming more and more corrupted by the influence of city governors (although they themselves were distinguished by terrible rules in ancient times). If the story with Ferdyshchenko and Alenka first shocked them, and people were dissatisfied with the ruler’s adventures with a married woman, then under Du Chario they wallowed in voluptuousness and behaved in the most indecent manner. Thus, the author draws a parallel between the moral character of the official and the people, drawing a conclusion that can be summed up in the saying: “The fish rots from the head.” If the ruler demonstrates frivolity, then the courtiers will repeat after him.
• Theme of responsibility. Rulers are responsible to the people and history for what happened during their reign. But, alas, this simple truth is alien to tsarism, because the essence of the monarch lies in absolute and infallible power, which cannot be criticized, alienated or questioned. The writer sees this as a drawback of the tsarist regime of government, demonstrating it in all its glory in “The History of a City.” Thus, the Negodyaevs and the Warts shamelessly ruin the city with their rash actions, Brudasty and Pyshch are not at all capable of answering for their actions, since they literally have no brains, and Mikaladze and Grustilov simply corrupt the people and use them to satisfy their own desires.
• Theme of historical memory. The chronicler recorded the events taking place in Foolov, but his description reveals a subjective assessment. He seeks to justify many historical figures, thereby distorting history and coloring it in the shades he needs. That is, what reaches contemporaries is not what happened, but what the chronicler himself saw and believed.
• Nature theme. Only the elements resist the deathly statehood that destroys all living things. For example, Organchik’s head was detained and spoiled along the way by the forces of nature who fought against the artificial suppression of people. Natural reflexes prompted the leader of the nobility to eat Pimple's head. In the finale, the conflict reached its climax when Ugryum-Burcheev declared war on the river and lost.

Problems

The work's problematics are rich in problematic issues from the political, social and moral spheres of human existence.

• The main problem in "The Story of a City" is power and people. Tyranny never arises without slavery, they are two sides of the same coin. The writer emphasized this by depicting the call to reign in the first chapters. The Foolovites themselves gave themselves up to be torn to pieces by dictators; they always supported any whim of the mayor. That is, initially the relationship between the government and the people was incorrect and unnatural. This is proven by those periods in history when the mayors did nothing, and the city became richer. Only then did people prosper, because they were not prevented from doing so. Revealing this main problem of the book, the author placed responsibility for what was happening precisely on the people, who could have endured the force that oppressed them, but preferred to blindly follow its lead. Power is a product of society itself; it responds to its social needs.
• Ignorance. People did not rebel against poverty and injustice because they did not know that things could be different. They lacked the education to feel the need for freedom. The author emphasizes this in every possible way, depicting the grotesque manifestations of ignorance of the inhabitants of Foolov: the prince, who took custody of the petitioners, gave them such a telling name, reproaching them for seeking bondage, deliberately abandoning independence.
• Cruelty and violence. During periods of riots and unrest, death invaded the distraught city: dozens of residents died, but other people passed by their corpses calmly. Aggression and its victims became common occurrences for Foolovites. This is the social consequence of tyranny: if city leaders do not put the well-being and safety of the people at a penny, then the citizens themselves will exterminate their own kind without pity, because the price of human life will drop to a minimum.

The wise Litrekon can describe other problems, but his work is already swollen with details. If you really need additions to this section, write about your wishes in the comments.

main idea

The main idea (a kind of didactics) of the work is to further protect the people from blindly indulging their superiors and to expose the arbitrariness of power, while reducing the possibility of popular unrest and preparing people for dramatic changes within themselves and in the socio-political system of the country. The author shows not so much history as modernity, and even today you can find much of what he described in such detail. This is the essence of his plan: to burn out with satire those aspects and manifestations of state life that did not interfere, but are hindering the development of the country right now. Therefore, the relevance of his book is undeniable.

Saltykov-Shchedrin was a supporter of the evolutionary model of social progress; he did not believe in the saving fire of riots, which was clearly reflected in his work. His beliefs reveal to us the meaning of the book: to prepare change from within, from below, by showing people the ugly features of an authoritarian regime and rethinking the history of his native country. His chronicle contains caustic allusions to the events that we study as part of the history course. By this he demonstrates the persuasiveness of his concerns and arguments. For example, Rurik’s calling to reign and the Tatar-Mongol yoke are ridiculed in the first chapters dedicated to the prince and his thieving governors. The period of palace coups is reflected in the chapter on the six mayors. The chapter on Grustilov exposed the era of German favoritism. Thus, the satirist rethought the history of his native country, highlighting shameful pages, the repetition of which cannot be allowed, as well as admiration for them.

Comic Creation Tools

The author hoped to expose the upper strata of society (city governors) in extortion, scams and other frauds that are destroying the city. He ridiculed the vices of such people: greed, bloodthirstiness, selfishness, narrow-mindedness, cruelty, immorality, laziness and dishonesty. Saltykov-Shchedrin did not count on good humor, but used sarcasm (sarcastic ridicule, evil irony). His task was to ridicule and destroy with ridicule what was hindering the development of his homeland. Therefore, satirical techniques are presented in abundance.

Saltykov-Shchedrin considered grotesque (an artistic technique of exaggeration, a fantastic, ugly-comic style) and satirical hyperbole (exaggeration of reality) to be techniques that help achieve a more realistic disclosure of the essential aspects of reality, as well as psychotypical characters. The author identified grotesque, sarcasm, irony, hyperbole, Aesopian language, fantastic elements, and parody as the prevailing means of artistic expression. He emphasized that the grotesque type of depiction of reality is not always accurate, but in its ultimate essence it is quite real and carries the most defining, characteristic features of the type.

Tools for creating comics with examples from the text:

• Grotesque: Gloomy-Burcheev kept his family in the basement, starving them, because he fed them once a day with bread and water. The mother and children were so wild that they could not speak, growled at people, and even “died” when they ate too much cabbage soup.
• Fantastic: Pimple's head was stuffed with truffles, Organchik lived with a mechanism instead of brains, and one of the prince's governors stabbed himself to death with a cucumber.
• Hyperbola: Mikaladtse increased the population of Foolov several times, obeying the call of an irrepressible passion for local women.
• Irony: The author used Church Slavonic figures of speech of the prince, which sound weighty and serious, but are absurd in nature: “There is no such thing as stupidity!”
• Sarcasm: The description of Wartkin’s activities can be called an evil mockery: “He led a campaign against arrears, and he burned thirty-three villages and, with the help of these measures, collected arrears of two rubles and a half.”
• Parody. The author parodied the era of palace coups, describing it in a reduced style of rude ridicule in the chapter “On the Six City Leaders.” Stupid and vulgar women vied with each other to seize power without having any rights to it. The same situation was observed in the above-mentioned era: the wives, distant relatives and regents of emperors, originating from foreign powers, were in power, but the results of their reign could not be called brilliant, nor were the methods of achieving them.
• Aesopian language. To save “The History of a City” from censorship, the writer resorted to allegory. Thus, he described the internecine struggle of the ancient Russian tribes (Polyans, Drevlyans, Radimichi, etc.) and their subsequent unification in the first chapters, when the bunglers were at enmity with neighboring tribes - cannibals, frogmen, and rukosuyami. Having changed the names of the tribes, he still described all the historical events that happened to them, so the reader quickly realized that this was a political satire on Russia.

What does the work teach?

“History...” teaches readers to be responsible for their actions and their destiny. We observe the mayors, we see their obvious shortcomings and vices, we see how horribly they treat their people, and we draw the appropriate conclusion: the people themselves should not allow such treatment towards themselves. The government needs to be criticized and directed in the right direction, otherwise it will turn into a soulless machine that suppresses all kinds of initiative.

Criticism

Critics' opinions, as always, were divided. I.S. Turgenev said that this work is nothing more than “a satirical history of Russian society.” (I. Turgenev, critical article in the English magazine “The Academy”, March 1, 1870). In a personal letter to the author, he enthusiastically assessed his work.

Turgenev's opinion was confirmed by reviews of some reviewers in newspapers of the nineteenth century, for example, a critic from St. Petersburg Vedomosti noted the positive features of the book:

The History of One City” belongs, in our opinion, to one of the most successful works of Mr. Saltykov in recent years. This humorous “history” will, perhaps, provide more material for understanding certain aspects of our history than other works of sworn historians.

However, most contemporary authors had a sharply negative attitude towards the work. Thus, S. T. Hertso-Vinogradsky wrote that satire is aimed at a small circle of society and is often not justified (newspaper “Novorossiysk Telegraph”, 1869, No. 219).

A. S. Suvorin in the famous magazine “Bulletin of Europe” generally denied everything that happened in the work:

...Neither history nor the present tell us anything at all similar to the pictures that Mr. Saltykov painted... (magazine "Bulletin of Europe", article "Historical Satire" by A.S. Suvorin, 1871).

Moreover, not even all critics understood what Saltykov-Shchedrin wanted to say. Thus, a reviewer from the magazine “Week” in a review dated 1870 said:

This is an excellent, masterfully written satire on city governors, and we would advise our influential people to get acquainted with this new work of a talented storyteller before they decide to vote for a project to expand the power of the governor.

Soviet literary critics highly appreciated the work of the satirist; this assessment was politically motivated. They emphasized the political significance of the book for the liberation of Russia from tsarism:

It would be... completely wrong... to conclude that "The Story of a Town" is a historical satire. Of course, there are historical elements in its content, but Shchedrin uses them in order to stigmatize not only the past, but especially the present of the autocratic-monarchical state. It is impossible to imagine a greater debunking of absolutism, a greater mockery of those who called themselves “God’s anointed ones”! (“M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin in portraits and illustrations”, compiled by E. F. Gollerbach and V. E. Evgeniev-Maksimov, Leningrad, 1939)

The idea for the book was formed by Saltykov-Shchedrin gradually, over several years. In 1867, the writer composed and presented to the public a new fairy-tale-fiction “The Story of the Governor with a Stuffed Head” (it forms the basis of the chapter known to us called “The Organ”). In 1868, the author began work on a full-length novel. This process took a little over a year (1869-1870). The work was originally entitled “Foolish Chronicler.” The title “The History of a City,” which became the final version, appeared later. The literary work was published in parts in the journal Otechestvennye zapiski.

Due to inexperience, some people consider Saltykov-Shchedrin’s book to be a story or a fairy tale, but this is not so. Such voluminous literature cannot claim the title of short prose. The genre of the work “The History of a City” is larger and is called a “satirical novel.” It represents a kind of chronological review of the fictional town of Foolov. His fate is recorded in chronicles, which the author finds and publishes, accompanying them with his own comments.

Also, terms such as “political pamphlet” and “satirical chronicle” can be applied to this book, but it only absorbed some features of these genres, and is not their “purebred” literary embodiment.

What is the work about?

The writer allegorically conveyed the history of Russia, which he assessed critically. He called the inhabitants of the Russian Empire “Foolovites.” They are residents of the city of the same name, whose life is described in the Foolov Chronicle. This ethnic group originated from an ancient people called “bunglers”. For their ignorance they were renamed accordingly.

The Headbangers were at enmity with neighboring tribes, as well as with each other. And so, tired of quarrels and unrest, they decided to find themselves a ruler who would establish order. After three years they found a suitable prince who agreed to rule over them. Together with the acquired power, people founded the city of Foolov. This is how the writer outlined the formation of Ancient Rus' and Rurik’s calling to reign.

At first, the ruler sent them a governor, but he stole, and then he arrived in person and imposed strict order. This is how Saltykov-Shchedrin imagined the period of feudal fragmentation in medieval Russia.

Next, the writer interrupts the narrative and lists the biographies of famous mayors, each of which is a separate and complete story. The first was Dementy Varlamovich Brudasty, in whose head there was an organ that played only two compositions: “I won’t tolerate it!” and “I’ll ruin you!” Then his head broke, and anarchy set in - the turmoil that came after the death of Ivan the Terrible. It was his author who portrayed him in the image of Brudasty. Next, identical twin impostors appeared, but they were soon removed - this is the appearance of False Dmitry and his followers.

Anarchy reigned for a week, during which six mayors replaced each other. This is the era of palace coups, when the Russian Empire was ruled only by women and intrigue.

Semyon Konstantinovich Dvoekurov, who established mead making and brewing, is most likely a prototype of Peter the Great, although this assumption runs counter to historical chronology. But the reformist activities and iron hand of the ruler are very similar to the characteristics of the emperor.

The bosses changed, their conceit grew in proportion to the degree of absurdity in the work. Frankly insane reforms or hopeless stagnation were ruining the country, the people were sliding into poverty and ignorance, and the elite either feasted, then fought, or hunted for the female sex. The alternation of continuous mistakes and defeats led to horrific consequences, satirically described by the author. In the end, the last ruler of the Gloomy-Burcheev dies, and after his death the narrative ends, and because of the open ending, there is a glimmer of hope for changes for the better.

Nestor also described the history of the emergence of Rus' in The Tale of Bygone Years. The author draws this parallel specifically to hint who he means by the Foolovites, and who are all these mayors: a flight of fantasy or real Russian rulers? The writer makes it clear that he is not describing the entire human race, but rather Russia and its depravity, reshaping its fate in his own way.

The composition is arranged in chronological sequence, the work has a classic linear narrative, but each chapter is a container for a full-fledged plot, which has its own heroes, events and results.

Description of the city

Foolov is in a distant province, we learn about this when Brudasty’s head deteriorates on the road. This is a small settlement, a county, because they come to take away two impostors from the province, that is, the town is only a small part of it. It doesn’t even have an academy, but thanks to the efforts of Dvoekurov, mead making and brewing are thriving. It is divided into “settlements”: “Pushkarskaya settlement, followed by the settlements Bolotnaya and Negodnitsa.” Agriculture is developed there, since the drought, which occurred due to the sins of the next boss, greatly affects the interests of the residents, they are even ready to rebel. With Pimple, harvests increase, which pleases the Foolovites immensely. “The History of a City” is replete with dramatic events, the cause of which is the agrarian crisis.

Gloomy-Burcheev fought with the river, from which we conclude that the district is located on the shore, in a hilly area, since the mayor is leading the people in search of a plain. The main place in this region is the bell tower: unwanted citizens are thrown from it.

Main characters

1. The prince is a foreign ruler who agreed to take power over the Foolovites. He is cruel and narrow-minded, because he sent thieving and worthless governors, and then led with only one phrase: “I’ll screw it up.” The history of one city and the characteristics of the heroes began with it.
2. Dementy Varlamovich Brudasty is a withdrawn, gloomy, silent owner of a head with an organ that plays two phrases: “I won’t tolerate it!” and “I’ll ruin you!” His apparatus for making decisions became damp on the road, they could not repair it, so they sent for a new one to St. Petersburg, but the working head was delayed and never arrived. Prototype of Ivan the Terrible.
3. Iraida Lukinichna Paleologova is the wife of the mayor, who ruled the city for a day. An allusion to Sophia Paleolog, the second wife of Ivan IIII, grandmother of Ivan the Terrible.
4. Clémentine de Bourbon is the mother of the mayor, she also happened to rule for one day.
5. Amalia Karlovna Shtokfish is a pompadour who also wanted to stay in power. German names and surnames of women - the author’s humorous look at the era of German favoritism, as well as a number of crowned persons of foreign origin: Anna Ioanovna, Catherine the Second, etc.
6. Semyon Konstantinovich Dvoekurov is a reformer and educator: “He introduced mead making and brewing and made it mandatory to use mustard and bay leaves. He also wanted to open the Academy of Sciences, but did not have time to complete the reforms he had begun.
7. Pyotr Petrovich Ferdyshchenko (a parody of Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov) is a cowardly, weak-willed, loving politician, under whom there was order in Foolov for 6 years, but then he fell in love with a married woman Alena and exiled her husband to Siberia so that she would succumb to his onslaught. The woman succumbed, but fate struck a drought on the people, and people began to die of hunger. There was a riot (referring to the salt riot of 1648), as a result of which the ruler’s mistress died and was thrown from the bell tower. Then the mayor complained to the capital, and they sent him soldiers. The uprising was suppressed, and he found himself a new passion, because of which disasters occurred again - fires. But they also dealt with them, and he, having gone on a trip to Foolov, died from overeating. It is obvious that the hero did not know how to restrain his desires and fell into their weak-willed victim.
8. Vasilisk Semenovich Wartkin, an imitator of Dvoekurov, imposed reforms with fire and sword. Decisive, likes to plan and organize. Unlike my colleagues, I studied the history of Foolov. However, he himself was not far off: he instituted a military campaign against his own people, in the darkness “friends fought with their own.” Then he carried out an unsuccessful transformation in the army, replacing the soldiers with tin copies. With his battles he brought the city to complete exhaustion. After him, Negodyaev completed the plunder and destruction.
9. Cherkeshenin Mikeladze, a passionate hunter of the female sex, was only concerned with arranging his rich personal life at the expense of his official position.
10. Feofilakt Irinarkhovich Benevolensky (a parody of Alexander the First) is a university friend of Speransky (the famous reformer), who composed laws at night and scattered them around the city. He loved to be clever and show off, but did nothing useful. Dismissed for high treason (relations with Napoleon).
11. Lieutenant Colonel Pimple is the owner of a head stuffed with truffles, which the leader of the nobility ate in a hungry fit. Under him, agriculture flourished, since he did not interfere in the lives of his charges and did not interfere with their work.
12. State Councilor Ivanov is an official who arrived from St. Petersburg, who “turned out to be so small in stature that he could not contain anything spacious” and burst from the strain of comprehending the next thought.
13. The emigrant Viscount de Chariot is a foreigner who, instead of working, just had fun and threw balls. Soon he was sent abroad for idleness and embezzlement. It was later discovered that he was female.
14. Erast Andreevich Grustilov is a lover of carousing at public expense. Under him, the population stopped working in the fields and became interested in paganism. But the wife of the pharmacist Pfeiffer came to the mayor and imposed new religious views on him, he began to organize readings and confessional gatherings instead of feasts, and, having learned about this, the higher authorities deprived him of his post.
15. Gloomy-Burcheev (a parody of Arakcheev, a military official) is a martinet who planned to give the whole city a barracks-like appearance and order. He despised education and culture, but wanted all citizens to have the same homes and families on the same streets. The official destroyed the entire Foolov, moved it to a lowland, but then a natural disaster occurred, and the official was carried away by a storm.

This is where the list of heroes ends. The mayors in Saltykov-Shchedrin’s novel are people who, by adequate standards, are in no way capable of managing any populated area and being the personification of power. All their actions are completely fantastic, meaningless and often contradict one another. One ruler builds, the other destroys everything. One comes to replace the other, but nothing changes in people's life. There are no significant changes or improvements. The politicians in “The Story of a City” have common features - tyranny, pronounced depravity, bribery, greed, stupidity and despotism. Outwardly, the characters retain an ordinary human appearance, while the inner content of the personality is fraught with a thirst for suppression and oppression of the people for the purpose of profit.

Themes

• Power. This is the main theme of the work “The History of a City,” which is revealed in a new way in each chapter. Mainly, it is seen through the prism of a satirical image of Saltykov-Shchedrin’s contemporary political structure in Russia. The satire here is aimed at two aspects of life - to show how destructive autocracy is and to reveal the passivity of the masses. In relation to autocracy, it is a complete and merciless denial, but in relation to ordinary people, its goal was to correct morals and enlighten minds.
• War. The author focused on the destructiveness of bloodshed, which only ruins the city and kills people.
• Religion and fanaticism. The writer is ironic about the readiness of the people to believe in any impostor and in any idols, just to shift responsibility for their lives onto them.
• Ignorance. The people are not educated and not developed, so the rulers manipulate them as they want. Foolov's life is not getting better not only due to the fault of political figures, but also because of the reluctance of people to develop and learn to master new skills. For example, none of Dvoekurov’s reforms took root, although many of them had a positive result for enriching the city.
• Servility. The Foolovites are ready to endure any arbitrariness, as long as there is no hunger.

Issues

• Of course, the author touches on issues related to government. The main problem in the novel is the imperfection of power and its political techniques. In Foolov, rulers, also known as mayors, are replaced one after another. But at the same time, they do not bring anything new into the life of the people and into the structure of the city. Their responsibilities include caring only about their well-being; the mayors do not care about the interests of the residents of the county.
• Personnel issue. There is no one to appoint to the position of manager: all candidates are vicious and not fit for selfless service in the name of an idea, and not for the sake of profit. Responsibility and the desire to eliminate pressing problems are completely alien to them. This happens because society is initially unfairly divided into castes, and none of the ordinary people can occupy an important position. The ruling elite, feeling the lack of competition, lives in idleness of mind and body and does not work conscientiously, but simply squeezes out of the rank everything that it can give.
• Ignorance. Politicians do not understand the problems of mere mortals, and even if they want to help, they cannot do it right. There are no people in power; there is a blank wall between classes, so even the most humane officials are powerless. “The History of a City” is only a reflection of the real problems of the Russian Empire, where there were talented rulers, but due to their isolation from their subjects, they were unable to improve their lives.
• Inequality. The people are defenseless against the arbitrariness of managers. For example, the mayor sends Alena’s husband into exile without guilt, abusing his position. And the woman gives up because she doesn’t even expect justice.
• Responsibility. Officials are not punished for their destructive acts, and their successors feel safe: no matter what you do, nothing serious will happen for it. They will only remove you from office, and then only as a last resort.
• Reverence. The people are a great power; there is no point in it if they agree to blindly obey their superiors in everything. He does not defend his rights, does not protect his people, in fact, he turns into an inert mass and, by his own will, deprives himself and his children of a happy and fair future.
• Fanaticism. In the novel, the author focuses on the theme of excessive religious zeal, which does not enlighten, but blinds people, dooming them to idle talk.
• Embezzlement. All the prince’s governors turned out to be thieves, that is, the system is so rotten that it allows its elements to carry out any fraud with impunity.

the main idea

The author's intention is to depict a political system in which society comes to terms with its eternally oppressed position and believes that this is in the order of things. The society in the story is represented by the people (the Foolovites), while the “oppressor” is the mayors, who replace each other at an enviable speed, while managing to ruin and destroy their possessions. Saltykov-Shchedrin ironically notes that the residents are driven by the force of “love of authority,” and without a ruler they immediately fall into anarchy. Thus, the idea of ​​the work “The History of a City” is the desire to show the history of Russian society from the outside, how people for many years transferred all responsibility for organizing their well-being onto the shoulders of the revered monarch and were invariably deceived, because one person cannot change the whole country. Change cannot come from outside as long as the people are ruled by the consciousness that autocracy is the highest order. People must realize their personal responsibility to their homeland and forge their own happiness, but tyranny does not allow them to express themselves, and they ardently support it, because as long as it exists, nothing needs to be done.

Despite the satirical and ironic basis of the story, it contains a very important essence. The point of the work “The History of a City” is to show that only if there is a free and critical vision of power and its imperfections, changes for the better are possible. If a society lives by the rules of blind obedience, then oppression is inevitable. The author does not call for uprisings and revolution, there are no ardent rebellious lamentations in the text, but the essence is the same - without popular awareness of their role and responsibility, there is no path to change.

The writer not only criticizes the monarchical system, he offers an alternative, speaking out against censorship and risking his public office, because the publication of “History ...” could lead to not only his resignation, but also imprisonment. He not only speaks, but through his actions calls on society not to be afraid of the authorities and to speak openly to them about painful issues. The main idea of ​​Saltykov-Shchedrin is to instill in people freedom of thought and speech, so that they can improve their lives themselves, without waiting for the mercy of mayors. It fosters an active citizenship in the reader.

Artistic media

What makes the story special is the peculiar interweaving of the world of the fantastic and the real, where fantastic grotesquery and journalistic intensity of current and real problems coexist. Unusual and incredible incidents and events emphasize the absurdity of the depicted reality. The author skillfully uses such artistic techniques as grotesque and hyperbole. In the life of the Foolovites, everything is incredible, exaggerated, funny. For example, the vices of city governors have grown to colossal proportions; they are deliberately taken beyond the scope of reality. The writer exaggerates in order to eradicate real-life problems through ridicule and public disgrace. Irony is also one of the means of expressing the author's position and his attitude to what is happening in the country. People love to laugh, and it is better to present serious topics in a humorous style, otherwise the work will not find its reader. Saltykov-Shchedrin’s novel “The History of a City” is, first of all, funny, which is why it was and is popular. At the same time, he is ruthlessly truthful, he hits hard on topical issues, but the reader has already taken the bait in the form of humor and cannot tear himself away from the book.

What does the book teach?

The Foolovites, who personify the people, are in a state of unconscious worship of power. They unquestioningly obey the whims of the autocracy, the absurd orders and tyranny of the ruler. At the same time, they experience fear and reverence for the patron. The authorities, represented by the mayors, use their instrument of suppression to the fullest extent, regardless of the opinions and interests of the townspeople. Therefore, Saltykov-Shchedrin points out that the common people and their leader are worth each other, because until society “grows up” to higher standards and learns to defend its rights, the state will not change: it will respond to primitive demand with a cruel and unfair supply.

The symbolic ending of “The Story of a City,” in which the despotic mayor Gloomy-Burcheev dies, is intended to leave a message that the Russian autocracy has no future. But there is also no certainty or constancy in matters of power. All that remains is the tart taste of tyranny, which may be followed by something new.