An inventory of the mayors who were appointed to the city of Foolov at different times by the higher authorities. Several interesting essays

How can these contradictions be explained? Why did Saltykov need “a combination of the incompatible, a combination of the incompatible”? One of the experts on Shchedrin’s satire, D. Nikolaev, answers this question this way: “In “The History of One City,” as can be seen from the title of the book, we meet with one city, one image. But this is an image that has absorbed signs of all cities at once. And not only cities, but also villages and villages. Moreover, they were embodied in it. characteristic features the entire autocratic state, the entire country."

Working on “The History of a City,” Shchedrin draws on his rich and varied experience civil service, on the works of the largest Russian historians: from Karamzin and Tatishchev to Kostomarov and Solovyov. The composition “History of a City” is a parody of the official historical monograph such as “History of the Russian State” by Karamzin. The first part of the book gives a general outline of Foolov's history, and the second contains descriptions of the life (*11) and deeds of the most prominent mayors. This is exactly how many historians contemporary to Shchedrin structured their works: they wrote history “according to the kings.” Shchedrin's parody has a dramatic meaning: you can't write Foolov's story any other way, it all boils down to a change of tyrant authorities, the masses remain voiceless and passively submissive to the will of any mayors. Foolov's state began with a menacing mayor's cry: "I'll screw it up!" The art of managing Foolovites since then consists only in the variety of forms of this section: some mayors flog Foolovites without any explanation - “absolutely”, others explain the flogging as “the requirements of civilization”, and still others ensure that the inhabitants themselves want to be flogged. In turn, among the Foolov masses only the forms of submission change. In the first case, the inhabitants tremble unconsciously, in the second - with the consciousness of their own benefit, and in the third they rise to awe, filled with trust in the authorities!

The inventory of mayors provides brief characteristics of Foolov's statesmen and reproduces a satirical image of the most persistent negative features of Russian history. Basilisk Wartkin planted mustard and Persian chamomile everywhere, which is how he entered Foolov’s history. Onufriy Negodyaev placed the streets paved by his predecessors and built monuments for himself from the quarried stone. Intercept-Zalikhvatsky burned the gymnasium and abolished the sciences. The statutes and circulars, which the mayors became famous for writing, bureaucratically regulate the lives of ordinary people down to the smallest everyday details - the “Charter on Respectable Baking.”

Brudasty opens the biographies of Foolov's mayors. In the head of this figure, instead of a brain, there is something like a barrel organ, periodically playing two shouts: “I’ll ruin you!” and “I won’t tolerate it!” This is how Shchedrin ridicules the bureaucratic brainlessness of Russian state power. Brudasty is joined by another mayor with an artificial head - Pimple. His head is stuffed, so Pimple is not able to administer, his motto is “Relax, sir.” And although the Foolovites sighed under the new leadership, the essence of their life changed little: in both cases, the fate of the city was in the hands of brainless authorities.

When “The History of a City” was published, critics began to reproach Shchedrin for distorting life, for deviating from realism. But these reproaches were unfounded. Shchedrin's grotesque and satirical fiction do not distort reality, but only bring to the point of paradox the qualities that any bureaucratic regime conceals. Artistic exaggeration acts like a magnifying glass: it makes the secret obvious, reveals the essence of things hidden from the naked eye, and enlarges really existing evil. With the help of fantasy and the grotesque, Shchedrin often makes an accurate diagnosis of social diseases that exist in embryo and have not yet developed all the possibilities and “readiness” contained in them. Bringing these “readinesses” to their logical conclusion, to the extent of a social epidemic, the satirist acts as a seer and enters the realm of foresight and premonitions. It is precisely this prophetic meaning contained in the image of Gloomy-Burcheev, which crowns the biographies of Foolov’s mayors.

What is the despotic regime based on? What are the features folk life is it generated and nourished? “Fools” in the book is a special order of things, the integral element of which is not only the administration, but also the people - the Foolovites. "The History of a City" gives an unparalleled satirical picture of the weakest aspects of the people's worldview. Shchedrin shows that the masses are fundamentally politically naive, that they are characterized by inexhaustible patience and blind faith in the authorities, in the supreme power.

“We are accustomed people!” say the Foolovites. “We can endure. If we are now all piled up in a heap and set on fire at all four ends, we won’t say the opposite word!” They contrast energy and administration with the energy of inaction, “rebellion” on their knees: “Do what you want with us!” some said, “cut it into pieces, eat it with porridge, but we don’t agree!” “You can’t take anything from us, brother!” others said, “we’re not like the others who have grown over their bodies! There’s nowhere to prick us, brother.” And they stubbornly stood on their knees."

When the Foolovites come to their senses, then, “according to the seditious custom ingrained from time immemorial,” they either send a walker or write a petition addressed to the high authorities. “Look, she trudged along!” the old men said, watching the troika, which carried their request into the unknown distance, “now, well done atamans, we won’t have to endure it for long!” And indeed, the city became quiet again; The Foolovites did not undertake any new riots, but sat on the rubble and waited. When passers-by asked: how are you? - they answered: “Now our cause is correct! Now, my brother, we have submitted the paper!”

From the pages of Shchedrin’s (*13) book, “the history of Foolov’s liberalism” (free-thinking) appears in a satirical light in the stories about Ionka Kozyrev, Ivashka Farafontiev and Aleshka Bespyatov. Beautiful dreaminess and complete practical helplessness - these are the characteristic signs of Foolov's freedom lovers, whose fates are tragic. It cannot be said that the Foolovites did not sympathize with their intercessors. But even in their very sympathy, the same political naivety shows through: “I suppose, Evseich, I suppose!” they escort the lover of truth to prison, “with the truth you will live well everywhere!” “From that moment old Yevseich disappeared, as if he had never existed, disappeared without a trace, as only the “miners” of the Russian land can disappear.”

When, upon the publication of “The History of a City,” the critic A. S. Suvorin began to reproach the satirist for mocking the people, for his arrogant attitude towards them, Shchedrin replied: “My reviewer does not distinguish the historical people, that is, those operating in the field of history, from the people as the embodiment of the idea of ​​democracy. The first is assessed and acquires sympathy according to the extent of his deeds. If he produces Wartkins and Gloomy-Burcheevs, then there can be no talk of sympathy... As for the “people” in the sense of the second definition, then this people is not allowed. not to sympathize for the sole reason that it contains the beginning and end of all individual activity.”

Let us note that Shchedrin’s pictures of people’s life are nevertheless illuminated in a different tone than the pictures of mayor’s arbitrariness. The satirist's laughter here becomes bitter, contempt is replaced by secret sympathy. Based on the “folk soil”, Shchedrin strictly respects the boundaries of the satire that the people themselves created on themselves, and makes extensive use of folklore.

"The History of a City" ends with a symbolic picture of the death of Ugryum-Burcheev. It comes at a moment when a feeling of shame began to speak in the Foolovites and something similar to civic consciousness began to awaken. However, the picture of the riot evokes an ambivalent impression. This is not a thunderous, refreshing element, but “it is full of anger,” rushing from the North and emitting “dull, croaking sounds.” Like a tornado that destroys everything, sweeps away everything, the terrible “it” plunges the Foolovites themselves into horror and awe, falling on their faces. This is a “Russian revolt, senseless and merciless,” and not a conscious revolutionary coup.

This ending convinces us that Saltykov-Shchedrin felt the negative aspects of the spontaneous revolutionary movement in a peasant country and warned against its destructive consequences. Gloomy-Burcheev disappears into thin air without finishing the phrase known to the reader: “Someone will come for me, who will be even more terrible than me.” This “someone,” judging by the “Inventory of Town Governors,” is Intercept-Zalikhvatsky, who rode into Foolov victorious (“on a white horse”!), burned the gymnasium and abolished the sciences! The satirist hints that spontaneous indignation could lead to an even more reactionary and despotic regime, capable of stopping the very “flow of history.”

Nevertheless, Shchedrin's book is optimistic at its core. The course of history can only be stopped for a while: this is evidenced by the symbolic episode of the curbing of the river by Ugryum-Burcheev. It seems that the ruling idiot managed to calm the river, but its flow, spinning in place, still triumphed: “the remains of the monumental dam floated downstream in disorder, and the river gurgled and moved in its banks.” The meaning of this scene is obvious: sooner or later, living life will make its way and sweep away from the face of the Russian land the despotic regimes of the gloomy-burcheevs and the interception-rolling ones.

Thanks to its cruelty and mercilessness, Shchedrin’s satirical laughter in “The History of a City” has a great purifying meaning. Far ahead of his time, the satirist exposed the complete failure of the police-bureaucratic regime that existed in Russia. Shortly before the first Russian revolution, another writer, Leo Tolstoy, speaking about his contemporary social system, declared: “I will die, perhaps, while it is not yet destroyed, but it will be destroyed, because it has already been destroyed to the main half in the minds of people.” ".

"Social" novel "Messrs. Golovlevs". In the late 60s and early 70s, Saltykov-Shchedrin, in a number of his critical works, argued for the need for a new “social” novel to appear in Russian literature. He believed that the old love, family romance had exhausted itself. In modern society, truly dramatic conflicts are increasingly found not in the love sphere, but in the “struggle for existence,” in the “struggle for unsatisfied pride,” “for offended and humiliated humanity.” These new, broader social questions are persistently knocking on the doors of literature. “The romance of a modern person is resolved on the street, in a public place - everywhere, just not at home; and, moreover, it is resolved in the most diverse, almost unexpected way. You see: the drama began in the cozy atmosphere of a family, and ended ... (*15) with getting a wonderful place , Siberia, etc." According to Saltykov-Shchedrin, “it has become unthinkable to continue to develop the landowner’s love affairs, and the reader is no longer the same. He demands that he be given a zemstvo figure, a nihilist, a justice of the peace, and perhaps even a governor.” If in the old novel “psychological” issues were in the foreground, then in the new one “social issues” were in the foreground.

Saltykov-Shchedrin came close to the “social” novel in “The Golovlev Gentlemen” (1880). In the collapse of the bourgeois family, the writer, at the same time as Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, saw the sure signs of a serious social illness that had gripped Russian society. The Golovlevs, as well as Dostoevsky's Karamazovs, are far from similar to the patriarchal nobles like the Rostovs or Bolkonskys in Tolstoy's War and Peace. These are people with a different, bourgeois-consumer psychology, which triumphs in all their thoughts and actions. Shchedrin gives the theme of noble impoverishment a new, unexpected twist. His contemporaries focused on the economic impoverishment of the nobles' nests. In "The Golovlev Gentlemen" the emphasis is different: they easily adapted to the post-reform bourgeois order and not only do not go bankrupt, but are rapidly getting richer. But as they achieve material success, a terrible process of internal devastation takes place in their possessive soul, which is what interests Shchedrin. Step by step he traces the stages of spiritual degradation of all his heroes and, first of all, Porfiry Golovlev, whose fate is at the center of the novel.

Well-intentioned eloquence has been characteristic of Porfiry Golovlev since childhood. This is a “mellow” ability to caress one’s “dear friend, mummy” with the help of unctuous, sticky, cobweb-like words. With them the hero, nicknamed Judas, covers up his selfish goals. Shchedrin explores in the novel the origins of Judushka’s idle talk, its various forms and internal evolution.

Language, designed to be a means of communication, is used by Judas as a means of deceiving and fooling its victims. His whole life is a complete outrage against the word, against the spiritual nature of man. Already in childhood, Arina Petrovna felt something ominous in Judushka’s kind words: he speaks tenderly, but with his gaze it’s like he’s throwing a noose. And indeed, the hero’s unctuous speeches are not disinterested: their internal source is the desire for personal gain, the desire to snatch the most tasty morsel from mummy.

(*16) As Judas grows rich, his idle talk also changes. From honey-drenching in childhood and adolescence it turns into tyrannical. Like an evil spider, Judas in the chapter “Kindly” experiences pleasure at the sight of how, in the web of his sticky words, another victim, the sick brother Paul, suffocates and gives up his soul to God.

But the hero achieves what he strived for. He becomes the sole and undivided owner of Golovlev's wealth. Now his idle talk is turning from tyrannical into protective. With habitual outbursts of words, the hero fences himself off from life, dissuades himself from the “encroachments” of his own son Peter. The son's hysterical plea for help and salvation is muffled and repelled by his father's idle talk.

There comes a moment when no amount of grief, even the most real, is able to make a hole in Judas’s merciless verbiage. “For him there is no grief, no joy, no hatred, no love. The whole world in his eyes is a coffin, which can only serve as an excuse for endless idle talk.” Protective chatter gradually degenerates into idle talk. Judas is so accustomed to lying, lies have become so fused with his soul that an empty word takes the entire hero captive, making him his slave. He engages in idle talk without any purpose; any trifle becomes an occasion for tedious verbal fluff. For example, when bread is served with tea, Judas begins to spread, “that there are different types of bread: visible, which we eat and through this body we support, and invisible, spiritual, which we eat and thereby acquire a soul for ourselves...”.

Idle talk pushes away the last people close to him from Judushka, he is left alone, and at this stage of his existence his idle talk turns into idle talk. Judas locks herself in her office and tyrannizes imaginary victims, taking the last pieces from destitute men. But now this is nothing more than an empty game of a corrupted, dying, decaying soul. The binge of idle thinking completely decomposes his personality. A person becomes a fake, a slave to deception. Like a spider, he becomes entangled in his own sticky web of words. Judas’s desecration of the word now turns into a desecration of the word against Judas’s soul.

The final stage begins - the limit of the fall: the binge of idle thinking is replaced by alcohol. It would seem that Shchedrin should have put an end to this purely physical decomposition of the hero. But he didn't put it on. The writer believed (*17) that it is precisely at the last stage of the fall that life takes revenge on a person for what he has done, and such a decomposed subject does not die on his own - conscience awakens in him, but only in order to kill him with his fiery sword.

At the end of Holy Week, while listening to the “Twelve Gospels” in the church, something suddenly breaks through in the soul of Judas. It suddenly dawns on him true meaning high divine words. “Finally, he could not stand it, got out of bed and put on a dressing gown. It was dark in the yard, and not the slightest rustle could be heard from anywhere. Porfiry Vladimirych walked around the room for some time, stopped in front of the illuminated icon of the Redeemer in a crown of thorns and peered into it. Finally he made up his mind. It is difficult to say how conscious he was of his decision, but after a few minutes he stealthily reached the front door and clicked the hook that locked the front door.

The wind howled outside and a wet March snowstorm swirled, sending showers of melted snow into our eyes. But Porfiry Vladimirych walked along the road, walking through puddles, feeling neither snow nor wind and only instinctively tucking the hem of his robe around him.

The next day, early in the morning, a horseman galloped up from the village closest to the churchyard where Arina Petrovna was buried with the news that the stiff corpse of the Golovlevsky master had been found a few steps from the road.”

"Fairy Tales". Saltykov-Shchedrin worked on the book “Fairy Tales” from 1882 to 1886. This book is considered the writer’s final work: it includes all the main satirical themes of his work. The satirist’s appeal to the fairy-tale genre is due to many reasons. By the 80s, Shchedrin's satire took on an increasingly generalized character, striving to soar above the topic of the day to extremely broad and capacious artistic generalizations. Since social evil in the era of the 80s shredded and penetrated into all pores of life, dissolving into everyday life and growing into everyday life, a special satirical form was required that overcomes the everyday life, the little things of everyday existence. The fairy tale helped Shchedrin to enlarge the scale of artistic depiction, to give satire a universal scope, to see behind Russian life the life of all humanity, behind the Russian world - the world within its universal human boundaries. And this “universality” was achieved by growing into the “folk soil,” which the writer considered “the only fruitful” for satire.

It is impossible not to notice that at the heart of Shchedrin’s fantasy and grotesque lies a folk humorous view of life, (*18) that many of his fantastic images are expanded folk metaphors. Both Brudasty’s “organ” and Pimple’s “stuffed head” in “The History of a City” go back to common folk proverbs and sayings: “You can’t fit a hat on a body without a head,” “It’s hard for a head without shoulders, it’s hard for a body without a head,” “His head is full of dust,” “Losing his head,” “Even though his head is thick, his head is empty.” Folk sayings, rich in satirical meaning, without any alteration, find their way into Saltykov-Shchedrin’s descriptions of Foolov’s riots and civil strife. The satirist often addresses the folk fairy tale fantasy until, at the end of his life, he finds in it a laconic form for his satirical generalizations.

The satirical fantasy of Shchedrin's final book is based on folk tales about animals. The writer uses ready-made content, honed by age-old folk wisdom, freeing the satirist from the need for detailed motivations and characteristics. In fairy tales, each animal is endowed with stable character traits: the wolf is greedy and cruel, the fox is treacherous and cunning, the hare is cowardly, the pike is predatory and voracious, the donkey is hopelessly stupid, and the bear is stupid and clumsy. This plays into the hands of satire, which by its nature shuns details and depicts life in its most dramatic manifestations, exaggerated and enlarged. Therefore, the fairytale type of thinking organically corresponds to the very essence satirical typification. It is no coincidence that among folk tales about animals meet satirical tales: “About Ruff Ershovich, son of Shchetinnikov” - a bright folk satire on court and legal proceedings, “About the toothy pike” - a fairy tale that anticipates the motifs of “The Wise Minnow” and “Crucian the Idealist”.

Borrowing from the people ready-made fairy tales and images, Shchedrin develops the satirical content inherent in them. And the fantastic form is for him a reliable way of “Aesopian” language, at the same time understandable and accessible to the widest, democratic strata of Russian society. With the advent of fairy tales, the addressee of Shchedrin's satire changes significantly; the writer now addresses the people. It is no coincidence that the revolutionary intelligentsia of the 80-90s used Shchedrin’s tales for propaganda among the people.

Conventionally, all of Saltykov-Shchedrin’s tales can be divided into four groups: satire on government circles and the ruling class; satire of the liberal intelligentsia; folk tales; fairy tales that expose selfish (*19) morality and affirm socialist moral ideals.

The first group of fairy tales includes: “The Bear in the Voivodeship”, “The Eagle-Patron”, “The Bogatyr”, “ Wild landowner" and "The Tale of How One Man Fed Two Generals." The fairy tale "The Bear in the Voivodeship" unfolds a merciless criticism of autocracy in all its forms. It tells about the reign of three bear voivodes in the forest, different in character: the evil one is replaced by the zealous one, and zealous - kind. But these changes do not in any way affect the general state of forest life. It is no coincidence that the tale says about Toptygin: “he, strictly speaking, was not evil, but evil does not lie in the private abuses of individual governors.” and in the bestial, bearish nature of power. It is accomplished with some kind of naive bestial innocence: “Then he began to look for roots and threads, and by the way, he uprooted a whole forest of foundations. Finally, he climbed into the printing house at night, smashed the machines, mixed up the type, and dumped the works of the human mind into a waste pit. Having done this, the son of a bitch squatted down and waited for encouragement." In the fairy tale "The Eagle Patron" Shchedrin shows the hostility of the despotic government to enlightenment, and in "Bogatyr" the history of the Russian autocracy is depicted in the image of a rotting hero and ends with his complete collapse and decomposition.

An unprecedented satire of the Russian intelligentsia is unfolded in fairy tales about fish and hares. In "The Selfless Hare" a special type of cowardice is reproduced: the hare is cowardly, but this is not his main feature. The main thing is different: “I can’t, the wolf didn’t order.” The wolf postponed eating the hare for an indefinite period, left him sitting under a bush, and then even allowed him to go on a date with his bride. What was driving the hare when he doomed himself to be eaten? Cowardice? No, not really: from the hare’s point of view - deep nobility and honesty. After all, he gave his word to the wolf! But the source of this nobility turns out to be obedience elevated to a principle - selfless cowardice! True, the hare also has some secret calculation: the wolf will admire his nobility and suddenly show mercy.

Will the wolf have mercy? This question is answered by another fairy tale (*20) called "Poor Wolf." The wolf is cruel not of his own free will, and “his complexion is tricky”; he cannot eat anything but meat. Thus, in the book, the satirist’s thought matures about the futility of hopes for mercy and generosity of authorities, predatory by nature and by their position in the world of people.

The “sane hare,” in contrast to the selfless one, is a theorist who preaches the idea of ​​a “wolf’s meal civilization.” He is developing a project for intelligently eating hares: it is necessary that the wolves do not immediately kill the hares, but only tear off part of the skin from them, so that after some time the hare could imagine another one. This "project" is evil parody Shchedrin on the theories of liberal populists, who, in the reactionary era of the 80s, retreated from revolutionary principles and switched to preaching “small deeds,” gradual concessions, and petty reformism.

The “sane hare,” unlike the selfless one, preaches his theoretical principles. Dried roach does the same thing in comparison with the wise gudgeon. The wise minnow lived and trembled. Dried roach translates this life practice into a reasonable theory, which boils down to the formula: “ears do not grow higher than the forehead.” From this formula she derives the following principles: “You will not touch anyone, and no one will touch you.” But the time comes - and the dried roach, which preaches “moderation and accuracy,” is accused of unreliability and given up as a sacrifice to “hedgehogs.”

“Crucian Crucian Idealist” is related to the tales about liberals; it has a sad, satirical tone. In this tale, Shchedrin debunks the dramatic misconceptions of the Russian and Western European intelligentsia adjacent to the socialist movement. The idealistic crucian professes high socialist ideals and is inclined to self-sacrifice for the sake of their implementation. But he considers social evil a simple delusion of minds. It seems to him that even pikes are not deaf to goodness. He believes in achieving social harmony through moral regeneration, the re-education of pikes.

And so the crucian carp develops its socialist utopias in front of the pike. Twice he manages to talk with the predator, escaping with minor injuries. The third time the inevitable happens: the pike swallows the crucian carp, and how it does it is important. The first question of the idealist crucian "What is virtue?" makes the predator open its mouth in surprise, automatically draw water into itself, and with it also automatically swallow the crucian carp.

(*21) With this detail, Shchedrin emphasizes that the point is not in “evil” and “unreasonable” pikes: the very nature of predators is such that they swallow crucian carp involuntarily - they also have a “tricky build”!

So, all illusions about the peaceful reconstruction of society, about the re-education of predatory pikes, eagles, bears and wolves are in vain. The satirist was faced with the question of what force would decide the outcome of the liberation struggle. The writer understood that this force should be the people's force. However, the Russian peasantry of the 80s did not give reason for optimistic hopes. Shchedrin always looked at the peasant soberly and critically; he was far from both Slavophile and populist idealization of him. Rather, he exaggerated the political naivety and civic passivity of the peasant. The satirist's sympathy for the people was based on a sober understanding of the laws historical development, in which the people had the final say. This understanding forced Shchedrin to make the highest demands on the people and to be bitterly disappointed that they were not yet feasible.

In “The Tale of How One Man Fed Two Generals,” Shchedrin’s two approaches to assessing the people as a “historical” phenomenon and as “the embodiment of the idea of ​​democracy” are combined. This tale is a witty version of Robinsonade. The generals, finding themselves on a desert island, only take the cannibalistic principles of their lives to their logical conclusion, literally starting to eat each other. Only a man is Shchedrin’s fundamental principle and source of life, a true Robinson. Shchedrin poetizes his dexterity and resourcefulness, his hardworking hands and sensitivity to the land-nurse. But here, with bitter irony, the satirist speaks of the peasant habit of obedience. A contradiction is revealed between the potential strength and civil passivity of the peasant. He himself twists a rope for the generals, with which they tie him to a tree so that he does not run away. The knot of all the dramatic experiences of the satirist is in this as yet insoluble contradiction.

These experiences were reflected with particular force in the fairy tale "The Horse". A driven peasant horse is a symbol of folk life. “There is no end to work! Work exhausts the whole meaning of his existence; for it he was conceived and born, outside of it he is not only of no use to anyone, but, as prudent owners say, he is a detriment.” The conflict in the tale is based on folk proverb about “idlers”, pampered master’s horses: “A workhorse is on straw, an empty dancer is (*22) on oats.” The people put a broad meaning into the proverb: it was about hungry workers and well-fed idlers.

“The History of a City” is a novel by the famous Russian writer Mikhail Evgrafovich Saltykov-Shchedrin, who has always been and will be a unique representative of his genre in Russian XIX literature century.

Throughout the novel, the chronicler tells readers that in the city of Foolov there were twenty-two mayors. And prototyping begins with this figure. In the history of Russia, starting with Ivan the Terrible, the state was ruled by twenty-two kings. The city of Foolov, in turn, is experiencing a series of numerous riots and continuous changes of rulers. Let's consider existing at the moment prototypes.

Ferapontov. From the story it turns out that Ferapontov is the former barber of the Duke of Courland. Thus, the author hints at such historical character like Ivan Kutaisov. He was close to Paul I and at one time became the founder of the Rozhdestveno estate.

Pfeiffer. This mayor is a “Holstein native” and was later removed from office in 1762. This is how Mikhail Saltykov-Shchedrin hints at Peter III. He was Duke of Holstein from the Gottorp family and died in the summer of 1762.

Ferdyshchenko. Mayor Ferdyshchenko was the “former orderly” of Prince Grigory Potemkin. This makes an allusion to Alexander Danilovich Menshikov. Young Menshikov served as an orderly for Emperor Peter I, and then became his closest ally and famous statesman.
6 “beautiful” mayors. A new period in the life of the city of Foolov is marked by battles for power between six different mayors. This is another hint from the author. As you know, after the death of Peter I, the country was ruled by women. The prototypes of the six mayors were: the second wife of Peter I - Catherine I, the daughter of Ivan V - Anna Ioannovna, the granddaughter of Ivan V - Anna Leopoldovna, the daughter of Peter I - Elizaveta Petrovna, the wife of Peter III - Catherine II and Princess Tarakanova, who pretended to be the Empress's married daughter Elizaveta Petrovna and her favorite Alexei Razumovsky.

Scoundrels. The mayor is a former stoker worker. This description becomes another hint from the author about Alexei Milyutin. He was a worker involved in lighting stoves and boilers in the palace, but in the end he received nobility and glorified his family.

Benevolensky. This mayor is compared to a Russian public figure Mikhail Mikhailovich Speransky. They were united by a love of writing and the removal from office that followed after the heroes were suspected of having connections with Napoleon.

Sad. Here the mayor is compared with Alexander I. He, too, was of a melancholic nature. Erast Grustilov is prone to apathy and writes poetry. But at the same time, he is a cunning and calculating person, ready to betray loved ones for his own benefit.

Gloomy-Burcheev. He is compared to two historical figures: Emperor Nicholas I and statesman Alexei Andreevich Arakcheev. The mayor's horizons were limited. He was a terrible person and terrified those around him.

Interception-Zalikhvatsky. According to the observations of critics and researchers, this character combines many features from the image of Emperor Paul I. The mayor tried to take steps to improve the life of the city, but they were not successful.

The images of mayors are so different, but also so similar. No one has ever done anything good for the residents of the city and the development of spheres of life. It is impossible not to notice the largest and most obvious prototype. The history of the city of Foolov is the history of the Russian state. Throughout the novel there are traces historical events, what actually happened. The characters, the stories that happened to them - everything is so similar. It is safe to say that it is precisely this format of constructing the work that makes it interesting and relevant to this day.

Several interesting essays

• Essay February 14 Valentine's Day

  In many schools and beyond, Valentine's Day is regularly celebrated and this holiday is considered a special day on which you should definitely confess your feelings to someone or exchange pleasant cards.

One day we went with my parents and my brother to pick mushrooms. The weather was magnificent, the sun was shining, the birds were singing, and the grass was lush and green. I was in a great mood and I wanted to run through the forest and collect the most mushrooms.

• The image and characteristics of Katerina Izmailova in the story Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk District by Leskov

  Lady Macbeth is definitely strong personality, which would be better off directing its power to something better.

• The history of the creation of Pushkin's poem The Bronze Horseman

  One of the most famous poems by Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin “ Bronze Horseman"was written in the fall of 1833. It was created in Boldin, but not in that creative period Pushkin, which is commonly called

• The history of the creation of the story Kuprin's Garnet Bracelet (prototypes of heroes, history of writing)

  The work, the key theme of which is the eternal love question, is a story written on the basis real events, experienced by the mother of a friend of the writer Lyubimov.

Composition

M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin is one of the most famous literary satirists of the 19th century. The novel The Story of One City is the pinnacle of it artistic creativity. Despite the name, behind the image of the city of Glupoza lies an entire country, namely Russia. Thus, in figurative form, Saltykov-Shchedrin reflects the most terrible aspects of the life of Russian society that required increased public attention. The main idea of ​​the work is the inadmissibility of autocracy. And this is what unites the chapters of the work, which could become separate stories.

Shchedrin tells us the history of the city of Foolov, what happened in it for about a hundred years. Moreover, he focuses on the mayors, since it was they who expressed the vices of city government. In advance, even before the start of the main part of the work, an inventory of the mayors is given. The word inventory is usually referred to things, so Shchedrin uses it deliberately, as if emphasizing the inanimate nature of the mayors, who are the key images in each chapter.

The essence of each of the mayors can be imagined even after simple description appearance. For example, the tenacity and cruelty of Gloomy-Burcheev are expressed in his wooden face, which obviously has never been illuminated by a smile. The more peaceful Pimple, on the contrary, was rosy-cheeked, had scarlet and juicy lips, his gait was active and cheerful, his gesture was quick.

Images are formed in the reader’s imagination with the help of such artistic techniques as hyperbole, metaphor, allegory, etc. Even facts of reality acquire fantastic features. Shchedrin deliberately uses this technique to enhance the feeling of an invisible connection with the true state of affairs in feudal Russia.

The work is written in the form of chronicles. Some parts, which, according to the author’s intention, are considered found documents, are written in heavy clerical language, and in the chronicler’s address to the reader there are colloquialisms, proverbs, and sayings. The confusion in dates and the anachronisms and allusions often made by the chronicler (for example, references to Herzen and Ogarev) enhance the comedy.

Shchedrin most fully introduces us to the mayor Ugryum-Burcheev. There is a clear analogy with reality here: the surname of the mayor is similar in sound to the surname of the famous reformer Arakcheev. In the description of Gloomy-Burcheev there is less comic, and more mystical, terrifying. Using satirical means, Shchedrin endowed him with a large number of the most striking vices. And it is no coincidence that the story ends with a description of the reign of this mayor. According to Shchedrin, history has stopped flowing.

The novel The Story of a City is certainly an outstanding work; it is written in colorful, grotesque language and figuratively denounces the bureaucratic state. The story has still not lost its relevance, because, unfortunately, we still meet people like Foolov’s mayors.

History itself is built by the creator in a deliberately illogical and inconsistent manner. Great satirist prefaced the main content with an appeal from the publisher (in the role of which he himself acts) and an appeal to the readers of the supposedly last Foolov archivist. The inventory of city governors, which supposedly gives the book a historiographical nature and a special meaning, consists of 21 names (from the pasta-traitor Clement to Major Interkhvat-Zalikhvatsky, who burned the gymnasium and abolished the sciences). In History itself, attention to the commanding persons is clearly unequal: a lot is devoted to some (Benevolensky, Brudasty, Wartkin, Gloomy-Bur-cheev) literary pages, others (Mikeladze, Du-Chario) were less fortunate. This can be seen in the structure of History; three introductory sections, one final Appendix (Supporting documents containing city-government thought and legislative exercises) and a total of 5 main sections for the narration of the exploits of 21 rulers.

Never been in Russian Empire city ​​called Foolov, no one has met such outlandish, implausible bosses (with a stuffed head, like Ivan Panteleevich Pyshch).

M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin showed himself to be a brilliant connoisseur of Aesopian language, putting it in a supposedly chronicle form (the chronicle of the city's successes covers about a century, and the years of reign are indicated, albeit approximately). This parody of presentation allowed the writer to talk about modernity and denounce officials without causing censorship interference or the wrath of his superiors. It’s not for nothing that Shchedrin himself called himself a graduate of the censorship department. Of course, the intelligent reader guessed the life around him behind Foolov’s ugly paintings. The power of Shchedrin’s satirical denunciation of the reactionary foundations on which Russian monarchical power rested was so powerful that the grotesque and fantastic images of the book were perceived as the most true picture life.

Consider, for example, the description of the causes of death of the mayors: Ferapontov was torn to pieces by dogs; Lamvrokakis is eaten by bedbugs; The cormorant is broken in half by the storm; Ferdyshchenko died from overeating; Ivanov struggled to comprehend the Senate Decree; Mikeladze from exhaustion, etc.

In History, Shchedrin skillfully uses satirical hyperbole: the facts of true reality take on fantastic shapes in him, which allows the satirist to most vividly reveal one or another side of the image. But the writer does not avoid realistic sketches. Thus, the fire in the Pushkarskaya settlement of the straw town was described very naturalistically: people could be seen swarming in the distance, and it seemed that they were unconsciously milling around in one place, and not rushing about in melancholy and despair. One could see scraps of lit straw, torn from the roofs by the whirlwind, circling in the air. Gradually we did one after another wooden buildings and seemed to melt.

The chronicle of city government is written in a colorful, but also complex language. It also widely uses the blunt bureaucratic syllable: let everyone bake pies on holidays, without forbidding themselves from such baking on weekdays (Charter on respectable baking of pies performed by Benevolensky). There is also an old Slavic speech: I want to tickle the Foolovites, who are dear to me, by showing the world their glorious deeds and the good root from which this famous tree grew and stole the whole earth with its branches. There was a place and time for popular proverbs: but I’ll say a word to you: it’s better... to sit at home with the truth than to bring trouble upon yourself (Ferdyshchenko).

The portrait gallery of Shchedrin's favorites of Foolov's mayors is immediately and strongly remembered. One after another they pass before the reader, absurd and disgusting in their cruelty, stupidity, and malicious hatred of the people. Here are the brigadier Ferdyshchenko, who starved the Foolovites, and his successor Borodavkin, who burned thirty-three villages in order to use these measures to collect arrears of two rubles and a half, and Major Perekhuvat-Zalikhvatsky, who abolished science in the city, and Feofilakt Benevolensky, obsessed with a passion for the writing of laws (already on the benches of the seminary he inscribed several wonderful laws, among which the most famous are the following: let every man have a contrite heart, let every soul tremble, let every cricket know the pole corresponding to its rank).

It is in the description of the main characters that M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin uses a wide variety of artistic media. Thus, the utmost cruelty of Gloomy-Burcheev is recorded in his wooden face, apparently never illuminated by a smile, with a narrow and sloping forehead, sunken eyes and developed jaws, ready to crush or bite in half. On the contrary, the liberal-minded Pimple, the mayor with a stuffed head, was rosy-cheeked, had scarlet and juicy lips, from behind which a row of white teeth showed; His gait was active and cheerful, his gestures were quick. External characteristics similar to theirs psychological images: the ferocious Bruddety, aka Organchik, does not look like a native of France, the aristocrat Du-Chariot, having fun with pleasure and entertainment, and Karamzin’s friend Sad-tilov, distinguished by his tenderness and sensitivity of heart, is no less far from the fantastic traveler foreman Ferdyshchenko ...

The townspeople and people in History evoke an ambivalent feeling. On the one hand, according to the author himself, they are characterized by two things: ordinary Foolovian enthusiasm and ordinary Foolovian frivolity. It's scary to live in the city of Foolov. The book makes you laugh, but not funny, but bitter and gloomy. The writer himself said that he hoped to arouse in the reader a bitter feeling, and not at all a cheerful disposition. It’s scary for Foolov not only because it is ruled by limited officials appointed by the Russian government. It is scary that people endure their misfortunes meekly and patiently.

However, this silent, painful reproach of the writer did not at all mean mockery of the people. Shchedrin loved his contemporaries: All my works, he later wrote, are full of sympathy. Deep meaning The history of one city lies not only in the images of the mayors, brilliant in their accusatory power, but also in that general characteristic of the Foolovites, which inevitably suggested the future awakening of the people suppressed by the authorities. The great satirist calls for the inner life of Russian cities like Foolov to once break out and become bright and worthy of a person. Not by chance historical chronicle ends with the flight of the last mayor; Ug-ryum-Burcheev disappeared, as if melting into thin air. Mighty movement true history The power of humanity was unable to hold back for another century: the river did not subside. As before, it flowed, breathed, gurgled and wriggled….
It turns out that Shchedrin looked far ahead. He believed in the collapse of Foolov's system of life, in the victory of the ideals of reason, human dignity, democracy, progress, civilization. His works, including the History of a City, were predicted to have a great future. Turgenev compared Saltykov-Shchedrin with Swift, Gorky admitted exactly what this work he fell in love with the writer very much. And so it happened. Mikhail Evgrafovich Saltykov-Shchedrin became one of the most readable writers in our country and abroad.

Other works on this work

“Shchedrin The Story of a City” - Philosophical novel about the paradoxes of human existence? What common features can be identified when describing mayors? Assignment: characteristics of the rulers of the city (syncwine). "The History of a City" - in essence satirical story Russian society. History of creation. What is “The History of a City” in terms of genre?

“Satire in the tales of Saltykov-Shchedrin” - La-la they scoured, la-la they flew, la-la they crawled, but no one wanted to march in la-la. The main themes of fairy tales are: Objectives: In the world of “Fairy Tales” by Saltykov - Shchedrin. General features fairy tales: Arrange the types of laughter according to the degree of intensification of negation: Find out what opportunities the fairy tale genre opened up for Saltykov-Shchedrin.

“The History of One City Saltykov-Shchedrin” - Of the 32 fairy tales, 28 were created within four years: 1882-1886. Techniques used. What does the river symbolize? Pimple Ivan Panteleich with a stuffed head. Why? Which government structure creates Gloomy-Burcheev? Images of mayors. In V. Dahl's dictionary: Cormorant - blockhead, block of wood, block of wood. Mikhail Evgrafovich Saltykov-Shchedrin (1826 - 1889).

“Biography of Saltykov-Shchedrin” - Resumption of literary activity. Stories: Anniversary kind soul Spoiled Children of the Neighbors Chizhikovo Mountain (1884). The story of one city. Mikhail Evgrafovich Saltykov-Shchedrin. V.F. Korsha), in 1862 - several scenes and stories in the magazine “Time”). Works. Vyatka. Nagibin thus reflected only one small corner of the author’s inner life.

“Biography of Shchedrin” - House in St. Petersburg, where M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin lived since 1876. until the end of life. Study at the Moscow Noble Institute. The decomposition of the foundations of an exploitative society is shown: property, family and state. Met his future wife Lisa Boltina. The story is full of “a lively, painfully heartfelt attitude towards poor humanity.”

“Lessons from Saltykov-Shchedrin” - Memoirs of E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. Lesson objectives, visual aids, epigraph, lesson progress. Childhood and youth of the future writer. The progressive ideas in the first stories angered the reactionary circles of society. Saltykov-Shchedrin's attitude to the peasant reform of 1861 is complex. 5. The work of M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin in the “contemporary” and “domestic notes”.

There are a total of 35 presentations in the topic

For the first time -- OZ, 1869, No. 1, pp. 284-287 (published January 12). A draft manuscript has survived ( IRLI) and proofs with the author's proofreading ( TsGALI).

As he worked on the chapter, the order of the mayors gradually underwent the following changes for the writer:

Manuscript "Fatherland notes " 1870 edition 1. Clementiy Clementiy Clementiy 2. Ferapontov Ferapontov Ferapontov 3. Velikanov Velikanov Velikanov 4. Urus-Kugush... Urus-Kugush... Urus-Kugush... 5. Lamvrokakis Lamvrokakis Lamvrokakis 6. Cormorant Cormorant Cormorant 7. Pfeiffer Pfeiffer Pfeiffer 8. Dvoekurov Brudasty Brudasty 9. De Sanglot Dvoekurov Dvoekurov 10. Ferdyshchenko De Sanglot De Sanglot 11. Wartkin Ferdyshchenko Ferdyshchenko 12. Scoundrels Borodavkin Borodavkin 13. Busty Scoundrels Scoundrels 14. Interception-Zolikhvatsky Interception-Zalikhvatsky Mikaladze 15. Benevolensky Benevolensky Evolensky 16. Mikaladze Mikaladze Pimple 17. Gruzdev Pimple Ivanov 18. Pimple Ivanov Du-Shario 19. Ivanov Du-Shario 20. Du-Shario Grustilov Grustilov 21. Grustilov Ugryum-Burcheev 22. Stolpakov Intercept-Zalikhvatsky

Already in the manuscript of the chapter, the number 8 (Dvoekurov) was transferred by Saltykov to 9, the number 13 (Brudasty) - to 8, 15 (Gruzdev) - to 17 (the same number - 15 - was Benevolensky), 18 (Ivanov ) - on 19, 19 (du-Chariot) - on 20, 20 (Grustilov) - on 21, 21 (Stolpakov) - on 22. Against the name of Pryshch, whose characterization came after the characterization of Stolpakov, Saltykov put the number 18 In the proofs with the author's proofreading of the journal text "Inventory..." Gruzdev (No. 17) was replaced by Pryshch, and in the first separate edition of "The History of a City" Stolpakov (his description is still in the proof) by Intercept-Zalikhvatsky. At the same time, in the proofs with the author's proofreading, after Ivanov (No. 18), there was immediately du Chariot (No. 20), the same omission - the absence of the mayor with serial number 19 - after the appearance in the "History of a City" by Ugryum-Burcheev and another the reshuffle of mayors also appeared in the text of a separate publication in 1870. Perhaps, as the first commentator on “The History of a City” R.V. Ivanov-Razumnik suggested at one time and as it is argued based on an analysis of the complex edits in the autograph of “Inventory...” S.A. Makashin, this omission was the result of a simple author’s "view"; It is possible, which is also not excluded by researchers, that “censorship reasons could also have taken place here” (see: R.V. Ivanov-Razumnik. "The history of one city." Comments and notes. -- In the book: M.E. Saltykov (Shchedrin). Works, vol. I, M.-L. 1926, pp. 605-606. WITH. Makashin. Preface "From the text editor" to the publication "The History of a City", "Academia", M. 1935).

Deliberately interrupting his story about the development of Foolov’s “history” and moving on to brief description Foolov’s all-powerful “rulers”, Saltykov in his “Inventory of the mayors...” shows the common ground that underlies the activities of most of these “rulers” (“made campaigns against arrears”, “imposed tribute on the inhabitants in his favor”, “once took by storm the city of Foolov”, etc.) and which, in essence, determines the content of his further narrative. At the same time, the publisher’s transparent hint about the connection between Foolov’s “epic” and the life of the “higher spheres,” carefully made by the writer in the first chapter of the work, clearly receives here a kind of “historical justification,” since the “various changes” that took place in these “spheres” immediately entailed very noticeable “changes” in the destinies of Foolov’s mayors, which is especially evident in the example of Pfeiffer, Negodyaev and Grustilov.

An inventory for the mayors... appointed by the higher authorities.- It is possible that in in this case By “higher authorities,” using Aesopian language, the writer does not mean the royal government and its head, the emperor, but divine power. ("...IN modern language“,” states the “Dictionary of the Russian Language, compiled by the second department of the Imperial Academy of Sciences” in 1895, “the word highest is used almost only in relation to God; in other cases it is mostly replaced by the adjective compare. and first, step." (Vol. I, St. Petersburg, 1895). The Tsar, as it was believed and instilled in the people, is “God’s anointed,” power is given to the Tsar “from God.” Consequently, speaking about Foolov’s mayors as rulers, to whom power was given by the “higher authorities” (or “god”), Saltykov once again emphasizes the autocratic character of the twenty-two heirs of the first Foolov prince (However, Saltykov uses the word “supreme” as a synonym for the word “supreme” (see, for example, in “ Gentlemen of Tashkent": Khmylov "submitted to the provincial government a request for a determination ... "anywhere, at the discretion of the higher authorities"). Ed.}.

Brigadier- a military rank, average between colonel and general, established by Peter I and abolished by Paul I. In the civil service it corresponded to a state councilor.

Former barber... of the Duke of Courland...- “Former barber” (Ferapontov), ​​“former orderly” (Ferdyshchenko), “former stoker” (Negodyaev) - an allusion to the “political career” of some real persons, at one time widely known in Russia. Thus, A.D. Menshikov turned from an orderly into a “most serene prince.” “The stoker who fired the stoves in the empress’s chambers,” writes P.V. Dolgorukov in his notes, “was one of the most devoted people to Biron<...>This stoker was granted nobility on March 3, 1740.<...>His name was Alexey Milyutin. One of his great-grandsons is now the Minister of War - another minister, State Secretary of the Kingdom of Poland" ("From the notes of Prince P.V. Dolgorukov. The time of Emperor Peter II and Empress Anna Ioannovpa", 1909, p. 107). "Kutaisov's favoritism, - writes N.I. Grech, - was even more amazing, although he had an example in the barber of Louis XI. The captive little Turkish little by little became a chief of horsemen, a count, a Knight of St. Andrew's and never stopped shaving the sovereign" (Paul I. - G.I.) (N.I. Grech. Notes on my life, M. - L. 1930, p. 156).

Savings Director- director of the institution in charge of economic issues.

...during the reign of the meek Elizabeth, having been caught in a love affair with Avdotya Lopukhina, she was beaten with a whip...- “Despite the exaggerated praise for Elizabeth’s kindness and mercy, the terrible secret office was not idle even in her time: many victims died for some indiscreet judgment about the actions of the empress or her favorites. She<...>she was overly preoccupied with her beauty, and woe to those who dared to compete with her in bodily advantages. She condemned the famous beauty, maid of honor Lopukhina, to be flogged with a whip, her tongue cut out, and exiled to Siberia, and her whole guilt consisted in her beauty, which aroused a jealous feeling in the heart of Elizabeth" (" Notes of Fonvizin", page 37). Saltykov has a contamination: the real Lopukhina's name was Natalya.

Captain-lieutenant from the Life Campanians.- Life Campans - soldiers and officers of one of the companies of the Preobrazhensky Regiment, who contributed to the accession to the throne of Empress Elizabeth Petrovna and were then generously awarded land and serfs.

... in 1745 he was dismissed with publication-- with broad notice of dismissal.

Baklan, Ivan Matveevich...- "Cormorant", - according to Dahl's definition, - "a blockhead, a block of wood, a block of wood... The mind is not like a cormorant. The cormorant is great, but it has a flaw..." ( Dictionary living Great Russian language, vol. I, M. 1955, p. 40).

...Holstein native...replaced in 1762 for ignorance.— Before becoming the Grand Duke and then the Russian Emperor (killed in 1762), Peter III bore the title of “Duke of Holstein-Gottorp.”

...Brudasty, Dementy Varlamovich.- “Brassy” is a breed of Russian hounds, distinguished by their “grumpy” character and malice. About Brudast in the manuscript it was said:

He found himself with a stuffed head, which did not stop him from tidying up the arrears left behind by his predecessor. Had a wife and children. This outlandish matter would have remained a secret to everyone if the provincial leader of the nobility had not revealed it, as will be described below. During this reign there occurred a disastrous anarchy that lasted three weeks and three days" ( corrected to"seven days")

Subsequently, the writer gave Brudasty the nickname of the mayor Gruzdev, about whom the manuscript said:

Gruzdev, Major, Ivan Panteleich, nicknamed "Organchik". This remarkable ruler deserves a special description. Crushed to dust in a fall from the stairs in 1816.

At Isler's mineral waters.-- See note above. to page 7.

This is an obvious mistake. -- Approx. ed.- the first case of anachronism specified by the writer, emphasizing the general convention of the entire “Foolovo” chronology.

Wartkin, Vasilisk Semenovich.- "Basilisk" - the fabulous "serpent that kills with its gaze" (I.P. Sakharov, Tales of the Russian people, vol. 2, book. 5, St. Petersburg. 1819, p. 23).

Lamush game-- a card game that came into use in Russia in early XIX century.

moving out house-- a special police room in which, by order of the administration, corporal punishment was carried out.

Scoundrels.-- See note. to the chapter “The era of dismissal from wars”, p. 575.

...built monuments from the quarried stone.- After these words in the text of Otech. Notes and in the 1870 edition it followed:

He had legs facing backwards, as a result of which, once walking on foot to the city government, he not only did not arrive at his goal, but, gradually moving away from it, almost ran away from the borders completely, when he was caught in the pasture by the police captain, and again installed in residence.

Benevolensky.-- See note. to the chapter “The era of dismissal from wars”, p. 576.

He predicted public courts and zemstvo.-- Public courts and zemstvos arose in Russia in 1864.

Pimple, Major, Ivan Panteleevich... caught by the local leader of the nobility.— The text in the manuscript was different:

Pryshch, Alexander Arkadyevich, state councilor. - Former groom of Count Arakcheev. He had a completely round head and seven daughters, who constantly looked out the windows. Moreover, being a slobber, he tried to lick everyone. He did not believe in public courts and zemstvos and willingly borrowed money. He reported. His wife, Polina Alexandrovna, was a great gossip and ate printed gingerbread. He died in 1818 from stupidity.

Grustilov, Erast Andreevich... He was distinguished by his tenderness and sensitivity of heart...-- Wed. with the following description of Alexander I after the murder of his father, Emperor Paul I: “The memory of this terrible night haunted him all his life and poisoned him with secret sadness. He was kind and sensitive, the lust for power could not drown out the burning reproaches of his conscience in his heart even at the most happy and important time of his reign after Patriotic War" ("Notes of Von-Vizin", p. 76). The manuscript about Grustilov said that he was not only “a friend of Karamzin,” but also “Turgenev’s home tutor.”

Interception-Zalikhvatsky.— In the journal text “History of a City” it was said about Intercept-Zalikhvatsky:

Intercept-Zalikhvatsky, Arkhistrateg Stratilatovich, major. Nicknamed “Well done” by the Foolovites, and he really was. Had an idea about the constitution. He pacified all the disturbances, collected all the arrears, paved all the streets and petitioned for the founding of a cadet corps, which he succeeded in doing. He rode around the city with a whip in his hands, and loved that the townsfolk had cheerful faces. Provided for 1812. Slept under open air, with cobblestones in his head, smoked shag and ate horse meat. He burned down up to sixty villages, and during voyages he flogged coachmen without any mercy. Claimed to be his mother's father. He again banished mustard, bay leaves and oil of Provence from use and invented the game of grandmothers. Although he did not patronize the sciences, he willingly engaged in strategic writings and left behind many treatises. He was the second example of a mayor who died during execution (1809).

It seems that this characteristic- with all its satirical capacity - is directly related to Emperor Paul I. First of all, Intercept-Zalikhvatsky is brought closer to Paul I by the fact that he “foresaw the year 1812,” since it was Paul I who sent Suvorov to fight Napoleon, thus thus, as it were, “foreseeing” the year 1812. Further, Intercept-Zalikhvatsky argued that “he is the father of his mother,” while Paul I “was told from childhood that Catherine had stolen the throne that belonged to him, that he had to reign, and she had to obey” (“The Death of Paul I" -- " Historical collection Free Russian Printing House in London", book 2, London, 1861, p. 23). The tsar, according to a common expression, is not only the “ruler”, but also the “father” of his subjects. Consequently, having become tsar during Catherine’s life, Pavel at the same time he would have become her “father.” Finally, Paul I, like Peter III, “represented the second example” of an emperor who died from the conspirators, the satirist sometimes followed such a complex path, showing what kind of “city governors” ruled his “Fool.” .

Archangel- military leader.