The role of internal monologue in creating the character of the hero. (According to one of the works of the Russian literature of the 19th century centuries.)
IN work of art inner world hero in to a greater extent is revealed not through external speech, but through
internal, which, as a rule, results in the hero’s monologue. I would like to consider the work of A.S. Pushkin "Evgeniy"
Onegin" is the first Russian novel that begins with an internal monologue:
"My uncle has the most honest rules
When I seriously fell ill,
He forced himself to respect
And I couldn't think of anything better.
His example to others is science,
But, my God, what a bore
To sit with the patient day and night,
Without leaving a single step!
What low deceit
To amuse the half-dead,
Adjust his pillows
It's sad to bring medicine,
Sigh and think to yourself:
When will the devil take you?
Never before internal monologue was not placed at the beginning of the work. Pushkin did this for the first time. It is also interesting that
that the content of the monologue is incomprehensible and even mysterious, it seems to take us by surprise, because we do not understand what it is about
there is a speech. These are the properties of thought, in contrast to speech: it is not addressed to anyone and does not count on anyone’s understanding, it
emotional and inconsistent. This is the inner world of the person himself without any embellishment, which is often
are revealed in conversations with other people. Before us is the psychology of a nephew, expressed in a hypocritically caring
attitude towards a dying uncle. In this monologue, Onegin's character begins to reveal itself. In any case, we can say
that this young man is sincere to himself and in some ways even merciless. Reading the novel further, we are convinced that
that the hero is devoid of theatricality and does not show off to himself. So, for example, Onegin’s pre-duel reflections also
distinct and laconic.
He blamed himself for many things...
There is an undeniable difference between the monologues of Onegin and Lensky. Lensky's words are dominated by rhetorical questions and
exclamations. Lensky is a man of external, theatrical existence. His monologues are artificial. He can't be
in the present even with himself, reality is replaced by blind faith in his high romantic ideals. Onegin
capable of broad self-analysis. He assesses the situation not just soberly, but with intelligent versatility. Attitude
He calls Lensky for Olga “timid and tender love,” at the same time believing that “sometimes he’s fooling around,” Onegin feels for
to a younger friend and tenderness and condescension. He unconditionally condemns himself for his boyishness, immaturity and
stupidity. However, Onegin’s conscientious reflections and repentance turn out to be weaker than social conventions. He's afraid
gossip - Zaretsky can slander him. Evgeniy understands that slander deserves contempt, but the fear of being funny
outweighs. In Onegin's inner speech, suddenly!
a sharp, rude word appears: “the laughter of fools” - this is what determines the final decision.
And here is public opinion!
Spring of honor, our idol!
And this is what the world revolves on!
In this determination of public opinion, Onegin, as always, is merciless. However, it can be noted that his words, although
harsh at times, but always incredibly accurate and truthful. They are full of skepticism, but devoid of imitation of anyone.
The less we love a woman,
The more she likes us.
This is what Evgeny thought when he received a naive and passionate letter from Tatyana, who was in love with him. He doesn't love her, he's tired and
disappointed in life, he is not even able to appreciate it. In front of him is just a young village girl, to whom he gives cruel
a rebuke in response to a declaration of love. However, accustomed to flirting and being hypocritical with women, he does not cheat here either.
to your own rules.
I love you with the love of a brother,
Or maybe even more tender.
And then, in the internal monologue:
Who doesn't get bored of being a hypocrite!
But everything changes when Evgeniy and Tatiana meet a few years later in Moscow. Tatyana is already a married woman,
stately and quite beautiful. Onegin is still the same, “without service, without wife, without business.” And seeing Tatyana in the guise of a mistress
ball, indifferent and unapproachable, love flares up in Eugene’s soul for her. From an arrogant egoist he transforms into
a yearning lover.
“Is it really possible,” thinks Evgeniy, “
Is she really? But exactly... No...
How! From the wilderness of steppe villages..."
Pushkin conveys the hero’s mental turmoil, which is later again expressed in Onegin’s inner speech:
“Where, where is the confusion, compassion,
Where are the tear stains? They don’t exist, they don’t exist!”
At the very end, the author deprives the hero of direct expression of his thoughts and conveys them indirectly:
She left. Evgeniy stands,
As if struck by thunder.
What a storm of sensations
Now he's heartbroken!
What has been said about Onegin and Lensky is enough to come to some conclusions: internal speech, as opposed to external
conveys the emotional movements of the characters more deeply and accurately; The more a character’s internal speech differs from external speech, the more
the character is more psychologically meaningful. So, for example, Tatyana is deeper than Onegin in the texts of her internal monologues, in
In them, everything characteristic of Onegin is brought to the highest degree. Onegin is more meaningful and deeper than Lensky, and Lensky is more meaningful than Olga,
which is not characterized by any thought at all, which is why Olga’s monologues are not in the text.
Tasks and tests on the topic "The role of internal monologue in creating the character of a hero. (Based on one of the works of Russian literature of the 19th century.)"
- Speech is oral, written, internal. Monologue and dialogic speech. Replica - Our speech 2nd grade
An equally important technique of Stanislavsky and Nemirovich-Danchenko is the so-called “internal monologue”.
This technique is one of the cardinal ways to an organic sounding word on stage.
A person thinks constantly in life. He thinks, perceiving the surrounding reality, thinks, perceiving any thought addressed to him. He thinks, argues, refutes, agrees not only with those around him, but also with himself, his thought is always active and concrete.
On stage, actors to some extent master thought during their text, but not all still know how to think during their partner’s text. And it is precisely this aspect of acting psychotechnics that is decisive in the continuous organic process of revealing the “life of the human spirit” of the role.
Turning to examples of Russian literature, we see that writers, revealing the inner world of people, describe in more detail their train of thought. We see that thoughts spoken out loud are only a small part of the stream of thoughts that sometimes bubbles up in a person’s mind. Sometimes such thoughts remain an unspoken monologue, sometimes they are formed into a short, restrained phrase, sometimes they result in a passionate monologue, depending on the proposed circumstances of the literary work.
To clarify my point, I would like to turn to a number of examples of such “internal monologue” in literature.
L. Tolstoy, a great psychologist who knew how to reveal all the most hidden things in people, gives us enormous material for such examples.
Let's take a chapter from the novel “War and Peace” by L. Tolstoy.
Dolokhov received a refusal from Sonya, to whom he proposed. He understands that Sonya loves Nikolai Rostov. Two days after this event, Rostov received a note from Dolokhov.
“Since I no longer intend to visit your house for reasons known to you and am going to the army, this evening I am giving my friends a farewell party - come to the English Hotel.”
Upon arrival, Rostov found the game in full swing. Dolokhov metal bank. The whole game focused on Rostov alone. The record has long exceeded twenty thousand rubles. “Dolokhov no longer listened and did not tell stories; he followed every movement of Rostov’s hands and occasionally glanced briefly at his note behind him. Rostov, leaning his head on both hands, sat in front of a table covered with writings, covered in wine, and littered with cards. One painful impression did not leave him: these broad-boned, reddish hands with hair visible from under his shirt, these hands that he loved and hated, held him in their power.
“Six hundred rubles, ace, corner, nine. It's impossible to win back! And how fun it would be at home. Jack on p. It can't be. And why is he doing this to me? “- Rostov thought and recalled.
“After all, he knows what this loss means to me. He can't want my death, can he? After all, he was my friend. After all, I loved him. But it’s not his fault either; What should he do when he is lucky? And it’s not my fault, he told himself. I didn't do anything wrong. Have I killed someone, insulted someone, wished harm? Why such a terrible misfortune? And when did it start? Just recently I approached this table with the thought of winning a hundred rubles, buying my mother this box for her name day and going home. I was so happy, so free, cheerful! And I didn’t understand then how happy I was! When did this end and when did this new, terrible state begin? What marked this change? I was still sitting in this place, at this table, and I was still choosing and pushing out cards and looking at these big-boned, dexterous hands. When did this happen, and what happened? I am healthy, strong and still the same, and still in the same place. No, it can't be! It’s true, this won’t end in anything.”
He was red and covered in sweat, despite the fact that the room was not hot. And his face was scary and pitiful, especially due to his powerless desire to appear calm.”
Here is a whirlwind of thoughts that rush through Nikolai’s mind during the game. A whirlwind of thoughts expressed in specific words, but not spoken out loud.
Nikolai Rostov, from the moment he picked up the cards until the moment when Dolokhov said: “Forty-three thousand is behind you, Count,” did not say a word. The thoughts that crowded in his head were formed into words, into phrases, but did not leave his lips.
Let's take another, familiar example from Gorky's work "Mother". After the court sentenced Pavel to settlement, Nilovna tried to concentrate all her thoughts on how to fulfill the large, important task she had taken upon herself - to disseminate Pasha’s speech.
Gorky talks about the joyful tension with which his mother prepared for this event. How she, cheerful and happy, holding the suitcase entrusted to her in her hands, came to the station. The train was not ready yet. She had to wait. She looked at the audience and suddenly felt the gaze of a person on her, as if familiar to her.
See also
TECHNIQUE
You can't teach directing, but you can learn it! Stanislavsky...
What makes a person an effective leader
This question has long interested scientists. One of the most famous and simple answers is provided by the great man theory. Its supporters can be found among historians, political scientists, psychologists and sociologists. Theory...
Conclusion
In atheistic literature, it seems, not without reason, the fact was noted that forgiveness in Christianity can be excessive, dangerous for everyday morality. Eat...
INTERNAL MONOLOGUE
We know that thoughts spoken out loud are only part of the thoughts that arise in a person’s mind. Many of them are not pronounced, and the more compressed the phrase, caused by large thoughts, the richer it is, the stronger it is.
We'll cite it for confirmation. literary example. Let's take it from Gorky's well-known work "Mother".
After the court sentenced Pavel to settlement, Nilovna tried to concentrate all her thoughts on how to fulfill the large, important task she had taken upon herself - to disseminate her son’s speech.
Gorky talks about the joyful tension with which his mother prepared for this event. How she, cheerful and happy, holding the suitcase entrusted to her in her hand, sat at the station. The train was not ready yet. She had to wait. She looked at the audience, then got up and went to another bench, closer to the exit to the platform, and suddenly felt the gaze of a man on her, as if she knew it.
“That attentive eye pricked her, the hand in which she was holding the suitcase trembled, and the burden suddenly became heavy.
“I saw him somewhere!” - she thought, suppressing with this thought the unpleasant and vague feeling in her chest, not allowing other words to define the feeling that was quietly but powerfully squeezing her heart with cold. And it grew and rose to her throat, filling her mouth with dry bitterness, and she had an unbearable desire to turn around and look again. She did this - the man, carefully moving from foot to foot, stood in the same place, it seemed that he wanted something and was hesitating... She slowly walked up to the bench and sat down, carefully, slowly, as if afraid that - to break within yourself. Memory, awakened by an acute premonition of trouble, placed this man in front of her twice - once in a field, outside the city, after Rybin's escape, another - in court...
They knew her, they were watching her - that was clear. “Gotcha?” - she asked herself. And the next moment she answered, shuddering:
“Maybe not yet...”
And then, making an effort, she said sternly:
“Gotcha!”
She looked around and saw nothing, and thoughts, one after another, sparkled and went out in her brain. “Leave the suitcase, leave?” But another spark flashed more brightly: “Should I throw away my filial word? In such hands...” She clutched the suitcase to her. “And - leave with him?.. Run away...”
These thoughts seemed foreign to her, as if someone from the outside was forcefully sticking them into her. They burned her, their burns painfully pierced her brain, lashed through her heart like fiery threads...
Then, with one big and sharp effort of her heart, which seemed to shake her whole, she extinguished all these cunning, small, weak lights, commandingly saying to herself:
"Shame on you!"
She immediately felt better and became completely stronger, adding:
“Don’t disgrace your son! Nobody is afraid..."
A few seconds of hesitation seemed to solidify everything in her. My heart beat calmer.
“What will happen now?” - she thought, watching.
The spy called the watchman and whispered something to him, pointing at her with his eyes...
She moved further into the bench.
“If only they didn’t beat...”
He [the watchman] stopped next to her, paused and quietly asked sternly:
What are you looking at?
Nothing.
That's it, thief! It’s too old, and there you go!
She felt as if his words had hit her in the face, once and twice; angry, hoarse, they hurt, as if they were tearing out the cheeks, tearing out the eyes...
I? I'm not a thief, you're lying! “she shouted with all her heart, and everything before her began to spin in a whirlwind of her indignation, intoxicating her heart with the bitterness of resentment.”
A false accusation of theft raised a violent protest in her, an old, gray-haired mother devoted to her son and his cause. She wanted to tell all people, everyone who had not yet found the right path, about her son and his struggle. Proud, feeling the strength of the fight for the truth, she no longer thought about what would happen to her later. She was eager to tell the people the truth about her son’s speech.
“...She wanted, she was in a hurry to tell people everything she knew, all the thoughts the power of which she felt.”
The pages on which Gorky describes his mother’s passionate faith in the power of truth, convey the power of the impact of the word, and are for us a great example of “revealing the life of the human spirit.” Gorky with stunning power describes Nilovna’s unspoken thoughts, her struggle with herself. This is why her words, violently bursting out from the depths of the heart, have such an impressive effect on us.
Is it possible to limit oneself on stage to only those words suggested by the author?
After all, the hero of the work, if this were in life, listening to his partner, would mentally argue with him or agree with him, he would definitely have certain thoughts.
Is it possible to assume that by creating the “life of the human spirit” on stage, striving for the organic existence of the image in the proposed circumstances, we will achieve our goal by abandoning the internal monologue? Of course not.
But in order for such unspoken thoughts to arise, the actor must penetrate deeply into the inner world of his character. An actor on stage must be able to think the way the image he creates thinks.
To do this, you need to imagine internal monologues. You should not be embarrassed by the fact that you will have to compose these monologues. We must penetrate deeper and deeper into the train of thought created image, it is necessary that these thoughts become close and dear to the performer, and over time they will spontaneously appear on their own during the performance.
Vl.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko says that what to say depends on the text, and how to say it depends on the internal monologue.
It is wrong to think that the process of mastering internal monologue is a quick and easy process. All this is acquired gradually and as a result great job performer.
The mental “cargo” that an actor must bring with him to the stage, as we have already said, requires deep penetration into the inner world of the image being created. It is necessary for the actor to learn to treat the image he creates not as “literature”, but as a living person, endowing him with all characteristic of man psychophysical processes.
Only in the case when an actor on stage, like every person in life, in addition to the words that he utters, will have words and thoughts that are not expressed out loud (and they cannot help but arise if a person perceives his surroundings), - only in this case will the actor achieve a truly organic existence in the proposed circumstances of the play.
Let's take as an example the third act of Ostrovsky's "Dowry".
The performer of the role of Larisa must wait until it is time for her to say the words: “Are you forbidding? So I will sing, gentlemen!
But can she be passive while taking part in this scene? Of course not.
She silently compares Karandyshev with Paratov with his clowning and cowardly vanity.
Larisa is silent, but internally she is not silent; she thinks about how insignificant her fiancé is, how petty all his emotional movements are, thinks about why, for what sins this dinner was sent to her, where she is forced to experience such burning shame, thinks about Paratov, compares, juxtaposes, secretly admits to himself that even now everything could have turned out differently...
A person’s actions may be sudden, but if the soil for them is not ripe in the person’s soul, they will not arise, be it the murder of Desdemona or the mad impulse of Larisa, who drove off across the Volga with Paratov. In order to say this fateful, single “Let’s go!”, you need to change your mind a thousand thoughts, imagine this or a similar possibility a thousand times, pronounce these or similar words to yourself a thousand times. Otherwise, they will remain strangers, dead, not warmed by living human feeling. In the works of our classics and modern writers internal monologue plays a significant role.
In Tolstoy's novels, for example, internal monologues are unusually common. Anna, and Levin, and Kitty, and Pierre Bezukhov, and Nikolai Rostov, and Nekhlyudov, and the dying Ivan Ilyich have them. For all of them, these unspoken monologues are part of their inner life. Take, for example, a chapter from War and Peace, where Dolokhov received a refusal from Sonya, to whom he proposed. He writes a note to Rostov, whom Sonya loves. Dolokhov invites Rostov to a farewell party at an English hotel. And Rostov is drawn into the game, and he gradually loses a lot of money.
Tolstoy describes the internal monologue of Nikolai Rostov with extraordinary force.
“And why is he doing this to me?.. After all, he knows what this loss means to me. He can't want my death, can he? After all, he was my friend. After all, I loved him... But it’s not his fault either; What should he do when he is lucky? And it’s not my fault, he told himself. I didn't do anything wrong. Have I killed someone, insulted someone, wished harm? What is this misfortune for? And when did it start?..”, etc.
It should be noted that Rostov pronounces all these thoughts to himself. He doesn't say any of them out loud.
An actor, having received a role, must himself dream up dozens of internal monologues, then all the places in his role in which he is silent will be filled with deep content.
The great Russian actor Shchepkin said: “Remember that there is no complete silence on stage, except in exceptional cases when the play itself requires it. When they tell you, you listen, but you don’t remain silent. No, you must respond to every word you hear with your gaze, every feature of your face, your whole being: you must have a silent game here, which is more eloquent than the words themselves, and God forbid you to look at this time for no reason to the side or look at what some foreign object - then everything is gone! This look will kill the living person in you in one minute, will erase you from the characters in the play, and you will have to be thrown out the window right away, like unnecessary rubbish...”
A few words should be said about vision, this very important element of Stanislavsky’s system. Konstantin Sergeevich believed that the presence of visions keeps the role eternally alive.
The technique of creating a vision was one of Stanislavsky’s most important practical techniques in working on the word.
An equally important technique of Stanislavsky and Nemirovich-Danchenko is the so-called “internal monologue”.
This technique is one of the cardinal ways to an organic sounding word on stage.
A person thinks constantly in life. He thinks, perceiving the surrounding reality, thinks, perceiving any thought addressed to him. He thinks, argues, refutes, agrees not only with those around him, but also with himself, his thought is always active and concrete.
On stage, actors to some extent master thought during their text, but not all still know how to think during their partner’s text. And it is precisely this aspect of acting psychotechnics that is decisive in the continuous organic process of revealing the “life of the human spirit” of the role.
Turning to examples of Russian literature, we see that writers, revealing the inner world of people, describe in great detail the course of their thoughts. We see that thoughts spoken out loud are only a small part of the stream of thoughts that sometimes bubbles up in a person’s mind. Sometimes such thoughts remain an unspoken monologue, sometimes they are formed into a short, restrained phrase, sometimes they result in a passionate monologue, depending on the proposed circumstances of the literary work.
To clarify my point, I would like to turn to a number of examples of such “internal monologue” in literature.
L. Tolstoy, a great psychologist who knew how to reveal all the most hidden things in people, gives us enormous material for such examples.
Let's take a chapter from the novel “War and Peace” by L. Tolstoy.
Dolokhov received a refusal from Sonya, to whom he proposed. He understands that Sonya loves Nikolai Rostov. Two days after this event, Rostov received a note from Dolokhov.
“Since I no longer intend to visit your house for reasons known to you and am going to the army, this evening I am giving my friends a farewell party - come to the English Hotel.”
Upon arrival, Rostov found the game in full swing. Dolokhov metal bank. The whole game focused on Rostov alone. The record has long exceeded twenty thousand rubles. “Dolokhov no longer listened and did not tell stories; he followed every movement of Rostov's hands and occasionally glanced briefly at his note behind him... Rostov, leaning his head on both hands, sat in front of a table covered with writings, covered in wine, and littered with cards. One painful impression did not leave him: these broad-boned, reddish hands with hair visible from under his shirt, these hands that he loved and hated, held him in their power.
“Six hundred rubles, ace, corner, nine... it’s impossible to win back!.. And no matter how fun it would be at home... Jack on p... this can’t be... And why is he doing this to me?.. “- Rostov thought and recalled...
“After all, he knows what this loss means to me. He can't want my death, can he? After all, he was my friend. After all, I loved him... But it’s not his fault either; What should he do when he is lucky? And it’s not my fault, he told himself. I didn't do anything wrong. Have I killed someone, insulted someone, wished harm? Why such a terrible misfortune? And when did it start? Just recently I approached this table with the thought of winning a hundred rubles, buying my mother this box for her name day and going home. I was so happy, so free, cheerful! And I didn’t understand then how happy I was! When did this end and when did this new, terrible state begin? What marked this change? I was still sitting in this place, at this table, and I was still choosing and pushing out cards and looking at these big-boned, dexterous hands. When did this happen, and what happened? I am healthy, strong and still the same, and still in the same place. No, it can't be! It’s true, this won’t end in anything.”
He was red and covered in sweat, despite the fact that the room was not hot. And his face was scary and pitiful, especially due to his powerless desire to appear calm...”
Here is a whirlwind of thoughts that rush through Nikolai’s mind during the game. A whirlwind of thoughts expressed in specific words, but not spoken out loud.
Nikolai Rostov, from the moment he picked up the cards until the moment when Dolokhov said: “Forty-three thousand is behind you, Count,” did not say a word. The thoughts that crowded in his head were formed into words, into phrases, but did not leave his lips.
Let's take another, familiar example from Gorky's work "Mother". After the court sentenced Pavel to settlement, Nilovna tried to concentrate all her thoughts on how to fulfill the large, important task she had taken upon herself - to disseminate Pasha’s speech.
Gorky talks about the joyful tension with which his mother prepared for this event. How she, cheerful and happy, holding the suitcase entrusted to her in her hands, came to the station. The train was not ready yet. She had to wait. She looked at the audience and suddenly felt the gaze of a person on her, as if familiar to her.
This attentive eye pricked her, the hand in which she held the suitcase trembled, and the burden suddenly became heavier.
“I saw him somewhere!” - she thought, suppressing with this thought the unpleasant and vague feeling in her chest, not allowing other words to define the feeling that was quietly but powerfully squeezing her heart with cold. And it grew and rose to her throat, filling her mouth with dry bitterness, and she had an unbearable desire to turn around and look again. She did it - the man, carefully moving from foot to foot, stood in the same place, it seemed that he wanted something and was hesitating...
She slowly walked up to the bench and sat down, carefully, slowly, as if afraid of tearing something inside herself. Memory, awakened by an acute premonition of trouble, placed this man in front of her twice - once in a field, outside the city, after Rybin's escape, another - in court... They knew her, they were watching her - that was clear.
“Gotcha?” - she asked herself. And the next moment she answered, shuddering:
“Maybe not yet...”
And then, making an effort, she said sternly:
“Gotcha!”
She looked around and saw nothing, and thoughts, one after another, flared up and went out like sparks in her brain. “Leave the suitcase and leave?”
But another spark flashed more brightly:
“A filial word to throw away? In such hands..."
She clutched her suitcase. “And - leave with him?.. Run away...”
These thoughts seemed foreign to her, as if someone from the outside was forcefully sticking them into her. They burned her, their burns painfully pierced her brain, lashed through her heart like fiery threads...
Then, with one big and sharp effort of the heart, which seemed to shake her whole. she extinguished all these cunning, small, weak lights, commandingly saying to herself:
"Shame on you!"
She immediately felt better and became completely stronger, adding:
“Don’t disgrace your son! Nobody is afraid..."
A few seconds of hesitation seemed to solidify everything in her. My heart beat calmer.
“What will happen now?” - she thought, watching.
The spy called the watchman and whispered something to him, pointing at her with his eyes...
She moved further into the bench.
“If only they didn’t beat me...”
He (the watchman) stopped next to her, paused and quietly, sternly asked:
What are you looking at?
That's it, thief! It’s too old, and there you go!
She felt as if his words had hit her in the face, once and twice; angry, hoarse, they hurt, as if they were tearing out the cheeks, tearing out the eyes...
I? I'm not a thief, you're lying! “she shouted with all her heart, and everything before her began to spin in a whirlwind of her indignation, intoxicating her heart with the bitterness of resentment.”
Feeling the lie of accusing her of theft, a stormy protest arose in her, an old, gray-haired mother devoted to her son and his cause. She wanted to tell all people, everyone who had not yet found the right path, about her son and his struggle. Proud, feeling the strength of the fight for the truth, she no longer thought about what would happen to her later. She burned with one desire - to have time to inform the people about her son’s speech.
“...She wanted, she was in a hurry to tell people everything she knew, all the thoughts the power of which she felt”
The pages on which Gorky describes his mother’s passionate faith in the power of truth, convey the power of the impact of the word, and are for us a great example of “revealing the life of the human spirit.” Gorky with stunning power describes Nilovna’s unspoken thoughts, her struggle with herself. This is why her words, violently bursting out from the depths of the heart, have such an impressive effect on us.
Let's take another example - from Alexei Tolstoy's novel “Walking Through Torment.”
Roshchin is on the white side.
“The task that tormented him like a mental illness since Moscow itself - to take revenge on the Bolsheviks for their shame - was completed. He took revenge."
Everything seemed to be happening exactly the way he wanted it. But the thought of whether he is right begins to painfully haunt him. And in one of them Sundays Roshchin finds himself in the old church cemetery. A chorus of children's voices and "the thick cries of the deacon" can be heard. Thoughts burn and sting him.
“My homeland,” thought Vadim Petrovich... “This is Russia... What was Russia... None of this exists anymore and will not happen again... The boy in the satin shirt became a murderer.”
Roshchin wants to free himself from these painful thoughts. Tolstoy describes how he “got up and walked across the grass, putting his hands behind his back and cracking his fingers.”
But his thoughts took him to the place “where he seemed to have slammed the door backhand.”
He thought he was going to his death, but it didn't turn out that way. “Well,” he thought, “it’s easy to die, it’s hard to live... This is the merit of each of us - to give to our dying homeland not just a living bag of meat and bones, but all our thirty-five years of life, affections, hopes. .. and all its purity...”
These thoughts were so painful that he groaned loudly. All that came out was a groan. The thoughts running through my head could not be heard by anyone. But the mental tension caused by this train of thought was reflected in his behavior. He not only could not support Teplov’s conversation that “the Bolsheviks are already scurrying out of Moscow with suitcases through Arkhangelsk”, that ... “all of Moscow is mined”, etc., but he barely restrained himself from slapping him in the face.
And in one of the most amazing, most powerful places in the novel, Alexei Tolstoy pits Roshchin against Telegin, the closest person to Roshchin, whom he always thought of as a brother, as a dear friend. And now, after the revolution, they found themselves in different camps: Roshchin with the Whites, Telegin with the Reds.
At the station, while waiting for the train to Ekaterinoslav, Roshchin sat down on a hard wooden sofa, “closed his eyes with his palm - and so remained motionless for many hours...”
Tolstoy describes how people sat down and left, and suddenly, “apparently for a long time,” someone sat down next to him and “began to shake his leg, his thigh, the whole sofa was shaking. He didn’t leave and didn’t stop shaking.” Roshchin, without changing his position, asked the uninvited neighbor to forward: shake his leg.
- “Sorry, it’s a bad habit.”
“Roshchin, without taking his hand away, glanced sideways at his neighbor through his spread fingers. It was Telegin.”
Roshchin immediately realized that Telegin could only be here as a Bolshevik counterintelligence officer. He was obliged to immediately report this to the commandant. But in Roshchin’s soul there is a fierce struggle going on. Tolstoy writes that Roshchin’s “throat constricted with horror,” he cowered and rooted himself to the sofa.
“...To give it away, so that in an hour Dasha’s husband, my, Katya’s brother, would be lying without boots under the fence on a garbage heap... What should I do? Get up, leave? But Telegin might recognize him, get confused, and call out to him. How to save?
These thoughts are boiling in my brain. But both are silent. Not a sound. Outwardly, nothing seems to be happening. “Motionless, as if sleeping, Roshchin and Ivan Ilyich sat close on an oak sofa. The station was empty at this hour. The watchman closed the platform doors. Then Telegin said without opening his eyes: “Thank you, Vadim.”
One thought possessed him: “Hug him, just hug him.”
And here is another example - from “Virgin Soil Upturned” by M. Sholokhov.
Grandfather Shchukar, on the way to Dubtsov’s brigade, deflated by the midday heat, spread out his zipunishka in the shade.
Again, outwardly, nothing seems to be happening. The old man was tired, he settled down in the cold under a bush and took a nap.
But Sholokhov penetrates into a sphere closed to our eyes. He reveals to us Shchukar’s thoughts when he is alone, thinking with himself. The living truth of the image cannot but delight us, because Sholokhov, creating his Shchukar, knows everything about him. And what he does, and how he speaks and moves, and what he thinks about at different moments in his life.
“You can’t pick me out of this luxury until the evening with an awl. I’ll sleep to my heart’s content, warm my ancient bones in the sun, and then go to Dubtsov’s for a visit and have some porridge. I’ll say that I didn’t have time to have breakfast at home, and they’ll definitely feed me, it’s like I’m looking at water!”
Shchukar's dreams from porridge come to meat that has not been tried for a long time...
“Wouldn’t it be nice to grind up a piece of lamb for about four pounds for dinner?” Especially - fried, with fat, or, at worst, eggs with lard, just to your heart's content...”
And then to your favorite dumplings.
“...Dumplings with sour cream are also holy food, better than any communion, especially when they, my darlings, are put in your plate, even more, like a heap, and then they gently shake this plate so that the sour cream goes to the bottom, so that every dumpling is covered in it from head to toe. And it’s nicer when they don’t put these dumplings on your plate, but in some deep bowl, so that the spoon has room to roam.”
Hungry, constantly hungry Shchukar, can you understand him without this dream of food, without his dreams in which he, “hurrying and burning himself, tirelessly slurps... rich noodles with goose giblets...” And waking up, he says to himself: “I’ll dream of such a rush either to the village or to the city! It’s just mockery, not life: in a dream, if you please, rejoice, you make such noodles that you can’t eat, but in reality, an old woman shoves a prison under your nose, be it three times, anathema, cursed, this prison!
Let us recall Levin’s reflections about the unhealthy, idle, meaningless life that he and his loved ones live many times in the novel Anna Karenina. Or the road to Obiralovka, filled with stunning drama, when Anna’s cruel mental anguish pours out in a whole stream of words that arises in her inflamed brain: “My love is becoming more and more passionate and selfish, but his is fading away and extinguishing, and that’s why we are drifting apart. And this cannot be helped... If I could be anything other than a mistress, passionately loving only him, but I cannot and do not want to be anything else... Aren't we all thrown into the world only to hate each other? friend and therefore torment yourself and others?..
I can’t think of a situation in which life would not be torture...”
Studying major works Russian classics and Soviet writers - be it L. Tolstoy, Gogol, Chekhov, Gorky, A. Tolstoy, Fadeev, Sholokhov, Panova and a number of others, everywhere we find extensive material to characterize the concept of “internal monologue”.
“Internal monologue” is a deeply organic phenomenon in Russian literature.
The requirement of "inner monologue" in the art of theater raises the question of a highly intelligent actor. Unfortunately, it often happens with us that an actor only pretends to think. Most actors' "inner monologues" are not imaginary, and few actors have the willpower to silently think through their unspoken thoughts that push them to action. We often falsify thoughts on stage, often the actor does not have a genuine thought, he is inactive during his partner’s text and perks up only for his last line, because he knows that now he must answer. This is the main obstacle to organic mastery of the author's text.
Konstantin Sergeevich persistently suggested that we carefully study the process of “internal monologue” in life.
When a person listens to his interlocutor, an “internal monologue” always arises in him in response to everything he hears, so in life we always conduct a dialogue within ourselves with the one we are listening to.
It is important for us to clarify that “internal monologue” is entirely related to the process of communication.
In order for a reciprocal train of thought to arise, you need to truly perceive the words of your partner, you need to truly learn to perceive all the impressions of the events that arise on the stage. The reaction to the complex of perceived material gives rise to a certain train of thought.
“Internal monologue” is organically connected with the process of assessing what is happening, with heightened attention to others, with comparing one’s point of view with the expressed thoughts of partners.
“Internal monologue” is impossible without true composure. Once again I would like to turn to an example from literature that reveals to us the process of communication that we need to learn in the theater. This example is interesting because in it L. Tolstoy, in contrast to the examples I gave above, does not describe the “inner monologue” with direct speech, but rather uses a dramatic technique - he reveals the “inner monologue” through action.
This is the declaration of love between Levin and Kitty Shcherbatskaya from the novel Anna Karenina:
“I have long wanted to ask you one thing...
Please ask.
“Here,” he said and wrote the initial letters: k, v, m, o: e, n, m, b, z, l, e, n, i, t? These letters meant: “When you answered me: this cannot be, did that mean never, or then?” There was no possibility that she could understand this complex phrase; but he looked at her with such an expression that his life depended on whether she understood these words.
Occasionally she glanced at him, asking him with her gaze: “Is this what I think?”
“I understand,” she said, blushing.
What word is this? - he said, pointing to n, which meant the word never.
This word means never, she said, but it’s not true!
He quickly erased what he had written, handed her the chalk and stood up. She wrote: t, i, n, m, i, o...
He looked at her questioningly, timidly.
Only then?
Yes, - answered her smile.
And... And now? - he asked.
Well, read it. I'll say what I wish. I would really like to! - She wrote the initial letters: ch, v, m, z, i, p, ch, b. This meant: “so that you can forget and forgive what happened.”
He grabbed the chalk with tense, trembling fingers and, breaking it, wrote the initial letters of the following: “I have nothing to forget and forgive, I never stopped loving you.”
She looked at him with a paused smile.
“I understand,” she said in a whisper.
He sat down and wrote a long sentence. She understood everything and, without asking him: did she? - She took the chalk and answered immediately.
For a long time he could not understand what she wrote, and often looked into her eyes. An eclipse of happiness came over him. He could not put in the words that she understood; but in her lovely eyes, shining with happiness, he understood everything he needed to know. And he wrote three letters. But he had not yet finished writing, and she was already reading behind his hand and finished herself and wrote the answer: Yes. ...In their conversation everything was said; it was said that she loved him and that she would tell her father and mother that he would arrive tomorrow morning.”
This example has absolutely exceptional psychological significance for understanding the communication process. Such an accurate guessing of each other's thoughts is possible only with the extraordinary, inspired composure that possessed Kitty and Levin at those moments. This example is especially interesting because it was taken by L. Tolstoy from life. In exactly this way, Tolstoy himself declared his love to S. A. Bers, his future wife. It is important not only to understand the meaning of “inner monologue” for an actor. It is necessary to introduce this section of psychotechnics into rehearsal practice.
Explaining this situation at one of the lessons at the Studio, Stanislavsky turned to a student who was rehearsing Varya in The Cherry Orchard.
“You complain,” said Konstantin Sergeevich, “that the scene of explanation with Lopakhin is difficult for you, because Chekhov puts into Varya’s mouth a text that not only does not reveal Varya’s true experiences, but clearly contradicts them. Varya expects with all her being that now Lopakhin will propose to her, and he talks about some insignificant things, is looking for some thing that she lost, etc.
To appreciate Chekhov's work, you first need to understand what a huge place internal, unspoken monologues occupy in the lives of his characters.
You will never be able to achieve real truth in your scene with Lopakhin if you do not reveal for yourself the true train of thought of Varya in every single second of her existence in this scene.
“I think, Konstantin Sergeevich, I think,” the student said with despair. - But how can my thought reach you if I have no words to express it?
This is where all our sins begin,” answered Stanislavsky. - Actors do not trust that, without saying their thoughts out loud, they can be intelligible and infectious for the viewer. Believe me, if an actor has these thoughts, if he really thinks, it cannot help but be reflected in his eyes. The viewer will not know what words you say to yourself, but he will guess your inner well-being actor, his state of mind, he will be captured by an organic process that creates a continuous line of subtext. Let's try to do an internal monologue exercise. Remember the proposed circumstances preceding the scene of Varya and Lopakhin. Varya loves Lopakhin. Everyone in the house considers the issue of their marriage resolved, but for some reason he hesitates, day after day passes, month after month, and he remains silent.
The Cherry Orchard has been sold. Lopakhin bought it. Ranevskaya and Gaev leave. Things are folded. There are only a few minutes left before leaving, and Ranevskaya, who feels infinitely sorry for Varya, decides to talk to Lopakhin. It turned out that everything was resolved very simply. Lopakhin is glad that Ranevskaya herself started talking about this, he wants to make an offer now.
Lively and happy, Ranevskaya leaves to fetch Varya. Now something will happen that you have been waiting for so long,” says Konstantin Sergeevich to the performer of the role of Varya. “Evaluate this, get ready to listen to his proposal and agree.” I will ask you, Lopakhina, to speak your text according to the role, and you, Varya, in addition to the author’s text, to speak out loud everything you think about during your partner’s text. Sometimes it may happen that you will speak at the same time as Lopakhin, this should not interfere with both of you, speak own words quieter, but so that I can hear them, otherwise I won’t be able to check whether your thought is flowing correctly; speak the words in the text in a normal voice.
The students prepared everything they needed for work, and the rehearsal began.
“Now, now what I want will happen,” the student said quietly, entering the room where she was waiting
Lopakhin. “I want to look at him... No, I can’t... I’m scared...” And we saw how she, hiding her eyes, began to examine things. Hiding an awkward, confused smile, she finally said: “It’s strange, I can’t find it…”
"What are you looking for?" - asked Lopakhin.
“Why did I start looking for something? - the quiet voice of the student was heard again. “I’m doing the wrong thing at all, he probably thinks that I don’t care about what should happen now, that I’m busy with all sorts of little things.” I’ll look at him now, and he’ll understand everything. No, I can’t,” the student said quietly, continuing to look for something in her things. “I put it away myself and I don’t remember,” she said loudly.
“Where are you going now, Varvara Mikhailovna?” - asked Lopakhin.
"I? - the student asked loudly. And again her quiet voice sounded. - Why is he asking me where I’m going? Does he doubt that I will stay with him? Or maybe Lyubov Andreevna made a mistake, and he did not decide to get married? No, no, it can't be. He asks where I would have gone if the most important thing in life had not happened, what is about to happen.”
“To the Ragulins,” she answered loudly, looking at him with happy, shining eyes. “I agreed with them to look after the household, to be housekeepers or something.”
“Is this in Yashnevo? It will be seventy versts,” said Lopakhin and fell silent.
“Now, now he will say that I don’t need to go anywhere, that it is pointless to go to strangers as a housekeeper, that he knows that I love him, he will tell me that he loves me too. Why is he silent for so long?
“So life in this house has ended,” Lopakhin finally said after a long pause.
“He didn't say anything. Lord, what is this, is it really the end, is it really the end? - the student whispered barely audibly, and her eyes filled with tears. “You can’t, you can’t cry, he’ll see my tears,” she continued. - Yes, I was looking for something, some thing when I entered the room. Stupid! How happy I was then... We have to look again, then he won’t see that I’m crying.” And, making an effort, trying to hold back her tears, she began to carefully examine the packed things. “Where is this...” she said loudly. “Or maybe I put it in the chest?.. No, I can’t introduce myself, I can’t,” she said again quietly, “why?” What did he say? Yes, he said: “Life in this house has ended.” Yes, it's over." And giving up searching, she said quite simply:
“Yes, life in this house is over... There will be no more...”
Well done,” Konstantin Sergeevich whispered to us, “you feel how in this phrase everything that she had accumulated during the scene poured out.
“And I’m leaving for Kharkov now... with this train. There's a lot to do. And here I leave Epikhodov in the yard... I hired him,” said Lopakhin, and Varya, during his words, barely audibly said again: “Life in this house is over... There won’t be any more...”
“Last year it was already snowing at this time, if you remember,” continued Lopakhin, “but now it’s quiet and sunny. It’s just cold... Three degrees below zero.”
“Why is he saying all this? - the student said quietly. “Why doesn’t he leave?”
“I didn’t look,” she answered him and, after a pause, added: “And our thermometer is broken...”
“Ermolai Alekseevich,” someone called Lopakhin from behind the scenes.
“This minute,” Lopakhin responded instantly and quickly left.
“That’s all... The end...” the girl whispered and sobbed bitterly.
Well done! - said a satisfied Konstantin Sergeevich. - You have achieved a lot today. You yourself understood the organic connection between the internal monologue and the author’s remark. Never forget that a violation of this connection inevitably pushes the actor to play and to formally pronounce the text.
Now I will ask your teacher to do this experiment not only with the performer Varya, but also with the performer Lopakhin. When you achieve the desired results, I will ask the participants in the scene not to pronounce their own text out loud, but to say it to themselves so that their lips are completely calm. This will make your inner speech even richer. Your thoughts, in addition to your desire, will be reflected in your eyes, they will flash across your face. Look at how this process happens in reality, and you will understand that we are striving to transfer into art a deeply organic process inherent in the human psyche.
K. S. Stanislavsky and Vl. I. Nemirovich-Danchenko constantly talked about the great expressiveness and infectiousness of the “internal monologue”, believing that the “internal monologue” arises from the greatest concentration, from truly creative well-being, from sensitive attention to how external circumstances respond in the actor’s soul. “Inner monologue” is always emotional.
“In the theater, a person in his constant struggle with his “I” occupies a huge place,” said Stanislavsky.
In the “internal monologue” this struggle is especially noticeable. She forces the actor to put into words the most intimate thoughts and feelings of the embodied image.
“Internal monologue” cannot be pronounced without knowing the nature of the person being portrayed, his worldview, attitude, his relationships with people around him.
“Internal monologue” requires the deepest penetration into the inner world of the person being depicted. It requires the most important thing in art - that the actor on stage be able to think the way the image he creates thinks.
The connection between the “internal monologue” and the end-to-end action of the image is obvious. Let's take for example the actor playing Chichikov in Gogol's Dead Souls.
Chichikov came up with the “brilliant idea” of buying up dead peasants from the landowners, who were listed as living in the audit tale.
Knowing clearly his goal, he visits one landowner after another, carrying out his fraudulent plan.
The more clearly the actor playing Chichikov masters his task - to buy dead souls as cheaply as possible - the more subtly he will behave when faced with the most diverse land owners, whom Gogol describes with such satirical power.
This example is interesting because the actor’s action in each of the scenes of visiting the landowners is the same: buy dead souls. But how different each time it seems to be the same action.
Let's remember how many different characters Chichikov meets.
Manilov, Sobakevich, Plyushkin, Korobochka, Nozdrev - these are the ones from whom you need to get what will bring money, wealth, position in the future. Each of them must be approached with a psychologically precise approach that will lead to the desired goal.
This is where the fun begins in the role of Chichikov. It is necessary to guess the character, the peculiarities of the train of thought of each of the landowners, to penetrate into his psychology in order to find the most reliable devices for achieving his goal.
All this is impossible without an “internal monologue,” since each remark, connected without strictly taking into account all the circumstances, can lead to the collapse of the entire undertaking.
If we trace how Chichikov managed to charm all the landowners, we will see that Gogol endowed him with a fantastic ability to adapt, and that is why Chichikov is so varied in achieving his goal with each of the landowners.
Revealing these character traits of Chichikov, the actor will understand that in his “internal monologues” he will look for both at rehearsals and performances (depending on what he receives from his partner) an increasingly more precise train of thought leading to the spoken text.
“Internal monologue” requires genuine organic freedom from the actor, in which that magnificent improvisational feeling arises when the actor has the power at each performance to saturate the ready-made verbal form with ever new shades.
All the deep and complex work proposed by Stanislavski leads, as he himself said, to the creation of “the subtext of the role.”
“What is subtext?..” he writes. - This is an obvious, internally felt “life of the human spirit” of the role, which continuously flows under the words of the text, all the time justifying and reviving them. The subtext contains numerous, varied internal lines of the role and the play... The subtext is what makes us say the words of the role...
All these lines are intricately woven together, like individual threads of a tourniquet, and stretch through the entire play towards the final ultimate task.
As soon as the entire line of subtext, like an undercurrent, permeates the feeling, the “through action of the play and the role” is created. It is revealed not only by physical movement, but also by speech: you can act not only with your body, but also with sound and words.
What in the realm of action is called through action, in the realm of speech we call subtext.”
What is a monologue in literature? This is a fairly important writing technique, with the help of which you can clearly place emphasis, express your position, and demonstrate your beliefs. Many writers use monologue in their works to express their most cherished thoughts, putting them into the mouth of the hero.
The difference between a monologue and a dialogue
If people communicate together, this is a dialogue. If a person speaks to himself, it is a monologue. This is how we can briefly describe the difference between dialogue and monologue.
But if you approach the issue academically, trying to figure out what a monologue is in literature, then this topic requires a more substantive study. A monologue is a certain way of constructing artistic speech. It is, as a rule, a form of reflection, an assessment of certain actions or a person, a call to one or another action. The reader can agree or internally argue with the main character, but there is no opposition in the text itself.
Dialogue involves an argument or discussion; the interlocutors can either complement each other with their remarks or express completely opposite views and ideas, trying to find the truth.
General patterns of monologue
This one has been used by authors for a very long time. If you carefully study what a monologue is in literature and analyze the most various works, then you come to the conclusion that despite all the diversity of approaches, there are common patterns.
No matter from which monologue we take, its text will always obey certain rules:
- This is the speech of a speaking person who does not expect an answer and does not imply objections, clarifications or additions. Essentially, this is the protagonist’s internal manifesto.
- The monologue is always directed at the intended interlocutor. The hero mentally addresses either one person, or a group of people, or all of humanity.
- This is not a method of communication, but rather verbal self-expression. The hero delivering the monologue does not set out to communicate. His main task- express painful issues and express yourself.
- From a stylistic point of view, there are also specific features of what a monologue is. In literature, it is a single speech fragment both in its structure and in its semantic load. If the dialogue consists of replicas, then it is possible to compose a monologue so that it turns out beautiful and correct only from a solid, coherent text.
Own experiences and general idea
To construct a monologue, a wide variety of literary devices. The list of them is quite wide, but, as a rule, this is speech in the first person, which has semantic completeness.
In Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit" main character- Chatsky - quite often resorts to monologues:
I won’t come to my senses... it’s my fault,
And I listen, I don’t understand,
It’s as if they still want to explain it to me.
Confused by thoughts... waiting for something.
This is the beginning of a monologue, which from the first lines characterizes the general mood of the hero - confusion, bewilderment, an attempt to find the truth. Next, the hero talks about human feelings, talks about deception and his own delusions, and in the end comes to the understanding that he needs to escape from this society:
Get out of Moscow! I don't go here anymore.
I’m running, I won’t look back, I’ll go looking around the world,
Where is there a corner for an offended feeling! -
Carriage for me, carriage!
This monologue contains not only personal experiences. The author managed to compose a monologue in such a way that he put the main idea of the work into the mouth of the main character.
Stylistic devices
The author always tries to ensure that the monologue, the test of which is very important for understanding the essence of the work, is included organically and justifiably. Well, he won’t just declare some values or ideas out of the blue. Therefore, the approach to constructing a monologue is very serious. There are certain lists of which are known even to novice writers:
- The presence of pronouns, addresses and verbs of the 2nd person. Heroes often mentally address their imaginary interlocutor, sometimes simply as “you,” sometimes even by name.
- Depending on the purpose of the monologue, its speech types are distinguished. This could be a story about an event, confession, reasoning, self-characterization, and so on.
- The authors often use expressively colored vocabulary, sometimes even talking to the intended interlocutor.
Inner monologue
A monologue, the definition of which can be briefly expressed as a detailed statement by one person, can also be internal. Writers such as James Joyce first began to actively use this technique.
Internal monologue in literature is also called stream of consciousness. It was first used by Proust in 1913 in the novel Towards Swann. And J. Joyce began to use internal monologues more thoroughly in the novel “Ulysses,” which was published in 23 issues of the American magazine from 1918 to 1920. The main character's stream of consciousness is constructed in the same way as an internal monologue with himself. A person dives into reality and mixes it with his own inner experiences. Internal monologue, as a rule, describes thinking processes, conveys the subtlest movements of thoughts, and demonstrates feelings. Sometimes it is difficult to separate reality from fiction, experiences from fantasies.
The most famous monologues in world literature
Anton Chekhov was excellent at the art of monologue in his works. In the play “The Seagull,” the heroine Masha delivers a touching monologue, the text of which is dedicated to her future husband. The conflict is that he loves her, but she doesn’t love him.
Another hero of this play, Konstantin, talks out loud about how his relationship with his mother developed. This monologue is sad and tender.
William Shakespeare often used monologues in his plays. In the play The Tempest, the hero Trinculo, who has an excellent sense of humor, delivers a passionate appeal. He tries to hide from the storm, while interspersing his speech with such piquant details and funny turns that the reader acutely understands his disgust with reality.
Lermontov, Ostrovsky, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Nabokov organically integrated monologues into their works. Very often, the monologues of the main characters reflect the personal position of the author, which is why they are so valuable in works.
