Character(from lat. persona - person, face, mask) - type of artistic image, subject of action, experience, statement in a work. In the same sense in modern literary criticism phrases are used literary hero, character(mainly in drama, where the list of persons traditionally follows the title of the play).
In this synonymous row the word character- the most neutral, its etymology (persona - a mask worn by an actor in the ancient theater) is hardly perceptible.
Hero(from the Greek heros - demigod, deified person) in some contexts it is awkward to call someone who is devoid of heroic traits (“It is impossible for a hero to be petty and insignificant,” Boileau wrote about the tragedy), and an active person is an inactive one (Podkolesin or Oblomov ).
The concept of character (hero, protagonist) is the most important in the analysis epic And dramatic works where characters forming a certain system and plot (system of events) form the basis of the objective world.
IN epic The narrator (storyteller) can also be a hero if he participates in the plot (Grinev in “The Captain’s Daughter” by A.S. Pushkin, Makar Devushkin and Varenka Dobroselova in F.M. Dostoevsky’s novel “Poor People”).
IN lyrics which, first of all, recreates inner world person, the characters (if they exist) are depicted fragmentarily, and most importantly - in inextricable connection with the experiences of the lyrical subject (for example, a peasant girl “greedily” looking at the road in the poem “Troika” by N.A. Nekrasov, an imaginary interlocutor in the poem by M. Tsvetaeva "Attempt of jealousy") Illusion own life characters in lyric poetry (compared to epic and drama) are sharply weakened by Chernets L.V. Introduction to literary criticism. M., 2006. P. 197..
Most often, a literary character is a person. The degree of concreteness of his portrayal can be different and depends on many reasons: on the place in the system of characters (for example, in Pushkin’s “ Stationmaster"Around the main character, Samson Vyrin, episodic faces change, in particular, in the finale a “crooked boy” appears, as if replacing his St. Petersburg grandchildren), depending on the type and genre of the work, etc.
But most of all, the principles of depiction, the very direction of detailing are determined by the concept of the work, the creative method of the writer: more can be said about a minor character in a realistic story (for example, about Gagin in “Ace” by I. S. Turgenev) in biographical and social terms than about the main character hero of a modernist novel.
Along with people, animals, plants, things, natural elements, fantastic creatures, robots, etc. can act and talk in a work (“ blue bird"M. Maeterlinck, "Mowgli" by R. Kipling, "Amphibian Man" by A. Belyaev, "War with the Newts" by K. Capek, "Solaris" by Art. Lema, “The Master and Margarita” by M. Bulgakov) Chernets L.V. Introduction to literary criticism. M., 2006. P. 198..
The variety of character types brings us close to the question of the subject of artistic knowledge: non-human characters act as bearers of moral, i.e. human qualities; the existence of collective heroes reveals the interest of writers in what is common in different persons, in social psychology.
No matter how broadly one interprets the subject of knowledge in fiction, its center is " human essences, those. first of all social” Burov A.I. Aesthetic essence of art. M., 1956. P. 59.. In relation to epic and drama, these are characters (from the gr. charakter - a sign, distinguishing feature), i.e. socially significant features, manifested with sufficient clarity in the behavior and state of mind of people; the highest degree of specificity is type (from the gr. typos - imprint, imprint). (Often the words character and type are used interchangeably.)
When creating a literary hero, a writer usually endows him with one or another character: one-sided or multi-sided, integral or contradictory, static or developing, arousing respect or contempt, etc.
The writer conveys his understanding and assessment of characters to the reader, conjecturing and implementing prototypes, creating fictional individuals. “Character” and “character” are not identical concepts, which was noted by Aristotle: “A character will have a character if<…>in speech or action will reveal any direction of the will, whatever it may be...” Aristotle. About the art of poetry. M., 1957. P. 87.
Thus, the character appears, on the one hand, as a character, on the other - as artistic image, embodying a given character with varying degrees of aesthetic perfection.
If the characters in a work are usually not difficult to count, then understanding the characters embodied in them and the corresponding grouping of persons is an act of interpretation and analysis. The number of characters and characters in a work usually does not coincide: there are much more characters.
There are persons who do not have a character, fulfilling only a plot role (for example, in “Poor Liza” by N.M. Karamzin, the heroine’s friend who informed her mother about the death of her daughter).
There are doubles, variants of the same type (the six Tugoukhovsky princesses in “Woe from Wit” by A.S. Griboedov, Dobchinsky and Bobchinsky in “The Government Inspector” by N.V. Gogol, Berkutov and Glafira, forming a contrasting pair in relation to Kupavina and Lynyaev, in comedy “Wolves and Sheep” by A.N. Ostrovsky) Chernets L.V. Introduction to literary criticism. M., 2006. P. 200..
According to their status in the structure of the work, character and character have different evaluation criteria. Unlike characters that evoke an ethically charged attitude towards themselves, characters are evaluated primarily from an aesthetic point of view, i.e. depending on how brightly, fully and concentratedly they embody the characters.
The means of revealing character in a work are various components and details of the objective world: plot, speech characteristics, portrait, costume, interior, etc. At the same time, the perception of a character as a character does not necessarily require a detailed structure of the image.
Off-stage characters are particularly economical in depiction (for example, in Chekhov’s play “Three Sisters” - Protopopov, who has a “romance” with Natasha; in the story “Chameleon” - a general and his brother, lovers of dogs of different breeds). The uniqueness of the category of character lies in its final, integral function in relation to all means of representation.
The character sphere of literature consists not only of isolated individuals, but also of collective heroes (their prototype is the chorus in ancient drama). Interest in problems of nationality and social psychology stimulated in literature XIX-XX centuries development of this image angle (the crowd in the “Cathedral Notre Dame of Paris» V. Hugo, the bazaar in “The Belly of Paris” by E. Zola, the workers’ settlement in M. Gorky’s novel “Mother”, “old women”, “neighbors”, “guests”, “drunkards” in L. Andreev’s play “The Life of a Man” and others) Chernets L.V. Introduction to literary criticism. M., 2006. P. 202..
Most works have off-stage characters who expand its space-time framework and enlarge the situation (“The Misanthrope” by Moliere, “Woe from Wit” by Griboyedov). This concept applies not only to drama, but also to epic, where a direct (i.e., given not in the retelling of some hero) image of faces can be considered an analogue of a scene. So, in the story of A.P. Chekhov's "Chameleon" off-stage persons include the general and his brother - lovers of dogs of different breeds. There are works where the off-stage hero is the main one.
This is M. Bulgakov’s play “Alexander Pushkin” ( Last days), which takes place after the death of the poet. According to the memoirs of E.S. Bulgakova, V.V. Veresaev at first “was stunned that M.A. I decided to write a play without Pushkin (otherwise it would be vulgar), but after thinking about it, I agreed.” Waiting for a hero or heroine who never appears can be symbolic (Godo in S. Beckett’s play “Waiting for Godot”, Tanchor in V. Rasputin’s story “The Deadline”).
Another type of character - borrowed those. taken from the works of other writers and usually bearing the same name. Such heroes are natural if the plot is borrowed (Phaedra and Hippolytus in the tragedies “Hippolytus” by Euripides, “Phaedra” by Seneca, “Phaedra” by Racine). But the hero known to the reader (and to the unknown ones in similar cases are not addressed) can be introduced into a new ensemble of characters, into a new plot (the play “Don Quixote” in England” by G. Fielding, Molchalin in the Saltykov-Shchedrin cycle “In the midst of moderation and accuracy”, Chichikov, Nozdryov and other heroes of “Dead Souls” in “The Adventures of Chichikov” by Bulgakov).
In modern mass literature widespread genre remake, where this technique is played out in every possible way. In such cases, borrowing a character, on the one hand, exposes the conventionality of art, on the other hand, it contributes to the semiotic richness of the image and its laconicism: after all, the names of “alien” heroes, as a rule, have long become common nouns, the author does not need to characterize them in any way.
So, in “Eugene Onegin”, “The Skotinins, a gray-haired couple, / With children of all ages, counting / From thirty to two years old,” and also “My cousin, Buyanov, / In down, in a cap with a visor, come to Tatiana’s name day / (As you know him, of course)” Chernets L.V. Introduction to literary criticism. M., 2006. P. 201.. The lines from Tatiana’s letter become clear: “Imagine: I’m here alone, / Nobody understands me...”. Her loneliness is the loneliness of a romantic heroine, which is helped to understand by the revived heroes of “The Minor” and the mischievous poem “Dangerous Neighbor” (Buyanov’s literary “father” is V.L. Pushkin).
Other types of characters can be distinguished. For example, enter double, whose phantom existence is generated duality consciousness of the hero (a tradition that has deep roots in mythology, religion): such are the companion of the protagonist in “The Tale of Savva Grudtsyn”, the shadow in “The Adventures of Peter Shlemil” by A. Chamisso, the devil of Ivan Karamazov in Dostoevsky, the black monk in the story of the same name by A.P. Chekhov. The ancient motive is no less conventional transformations, metamorphoses of the hero (“The Invisible Man” by H. Wells, “The Bedbug” by Mayakovsky, “ Heart of a Dog"Bulgakov, "A Clockwork Orange" by E. Burgess).
CHARACTER SYSTEM - “the correlation of characters with each other in the composition work of art; the most important aspect of composition. Being a component of the “meaningful form”, C<истема>n<ерсонажей>in literature performs two functions: constructive (forms the structural unity of the work) and meaningful (reveals the logic artistic design, is the conductor of the author’s concept).” A system is a community of elements in which the whole more than the amount parts. An element taken in a system is not equal to itself, taken in isolation or in another system. “Like any system, the character sphere of a work is characterized through its constituent elements (characters) and structure...”. If the novel about Bazarov had not included the Kirsanov family, it could not have been called “Fathers and Sons,” it would have not only had a different plot, but also different themes and ideas.
In “Crime and Punishment” it was developed complex system“doubles” of the main character, “light” and “dark”, with their own “ideas”: firstly, one way or another they “step over” universal human norms, Raskolnikov, Sonya and Marmeladov become “outcasts” in his “vile” incarnation; secondly, Raskolnikov, after his crime, finds himself on a par with the hated Luzhin and Svidrigailov; thirdly, Raskolnikov, who knows in advance what he is dooming himself to by realizing his idea, sacrifices himself, which his sister Dunya is also ready for in her own way; The suffering brother and sister are paralleled by the quiet, unrequited Lizaveta, who is somewhat reminiscent of Sonya, the twitched Katerina Ivanovna, and even Marmeladov in his other incarnation, as someone who deliberately condemns himself to suffering (“I drink, because I really want to suffer!”). The simple and kind Razumikhin is needed in the novel as a person who is fundamentally alien to extreme “ideas”; he becomes a worthy couple for Dunechka. He is also needed for the development of the plot; Raskolnikov meets his relative, investigator Porfiry Petrovich, thanks to him. And Svidrigailov, who could not bear his own baseness and spiritual emptiness, nevertheless, before committing suicide, did the kindest deed in the entire novel, arranging for the children of the deceased Katerina Ivanovna and thereby giving Sonya the opportunity to carry out her moral feat - to help Raskolnikov be spiritually reborn in hard labor. In fact, Raskolnikov is saved by Porfiry Petrovich, who exposes him. “Enemies” become saviors. Evil did not become an instrument of good according to Raskolnikov’s theory, but good appeared from the most unexpected sources.
The novel by M.A. is distinguished by its sophisticated system of characters. Bulgakov “The Master and Margarita”. Many figures in the main storyline correspond to figures in the Master's novel about Pilate. These are the pairs Master - Yeshua, “disciples” Ivan Bezdomny - Levi Matvey, traitors Aloysius Mogarych (and also Baron Maigel) - Judas of Kiriath, the chairman of MASSOLIT Mikhail Berlioz - the Jewish high priest Joseph Kaifa, etc.
The word “system” is poorly applicable to works with chronicle story. Chichikov’s visit to each of the landowners is in many ways a self-sufficient picture; there could have been more such pictures (in the second volume of “Dead Souls” Gogol tried to expand his portrait gallery), but, on the other hand, the incompleteness of the “poem” due to its chronicle nature did not become too great disadvantage. In “A Hero of Our Time,” each of the component parts has its own plot and its own system of characters, but all of them are necessary to reveal the character of Pechorin and the patterns of his fate. In the story by I.A. Bunin's “Sunstroke” has only two main characters: the lieutenant and “she,” and “she” appears as the lieutenant remembers it. Although the “sunstroke” struck two people, this is a kind of mono-story, in the center of it is one person whose whole consciousness was suddenly turned upside down. There is no need to talk about the character system here.
A character is a type of artistic image, a subject of action, experience, and statement in a work. Characters + plot are the basis of the objective world. Most often the character is human. But! Non-human characters are carriers of moral qualities.
Character (an artistic image that embodies a given character with varying degrees of aesthetic perfection) vs character (socially significant traits that manifest themselves quite clearly in the behavior and state of mind of people). The number of characters and characters usually does not coincide. There are people who have no character.
Type is a higher degree of generalization than character. When assessing character, its national, universal significance is important. The means of revealing character are components of the objective world. Characters are judged from an aesthetic point of view - how fully they express character.
Off-stage characters - saving image resources; borrowed characters.
The character sphere includes 1) individuals 2) group images (seven temporary men) 3) collective heroes (crowd).
A character system is made up of constituent elements (characters) and structure (a relatively stable way of connecting elements). This or that image receives character status precisely as an element of the system. At least two subjects are required to form a system. The most important property of the structure is hierarchy.
Connection between characters: plot vs character relationship. Most often, the plot roles of the heroes correspond to their importance as characters. Minor characters highlight the various properties of the main problematic character.
Creative concept creates unity of compositions.
Off-stage image vs split, transformation - a commemoration of different principles in a person. The character's non-participation in the main action is needed as a symbol, a sounding board.
Study of the character as an actor.
Characters in lyrics are people - objects of perception of the lyrical subject. Pospelov: the character exists in those works where the object of lyrical meditation becomes an individual personality, embodying the characteristics of social existence, possessing individual traits. A broader concept is any person who falls into the subject’s perception zone. Lyrics - character and non-character. The character in the lyrics is revealed through the attitude of the lyrical subject. The most important way to create characters is through nominations: primary (names, nicknames, pronouns) and secondary (qualities, attributes). In the lyrics, the importance of pronoun nominations increases. Characters rarely appear in lyrics - there are few means of revealing them. But there are character systems.
A character (literary hero) is a character in a plot-driven work of art.
The organization of characters in a literary work appears as a system of characters.
The character system should be viewed from two perspectives:
- as a system of relationships between characters (struggle, clashes, etc.) - that is, from the point of view of the content of the work;
- as the embodiment of the principle of composition and a means of characterization characters- that is, as the position of the author.
Like any system, the character sphere is characterized through its constituent ELEMENTS (characters) and STRUCTURE (a relatively stable method = the law of connection of elements).
Elements of the character sphere
MAIN- are at the center of the plot, have independent characters and are directly related to all levels of the content of the work,
SECONDARY- also quite actively participating in the plot, having their own character, but who receive less authorial attention; in some cases their function is to help reveal the images of the main characters,
EPISODIC- appearing in one or two episodes of the plot, often without their own character and standing on the periphery of the author’s attention; their main function is to give impetus to the plot action at the right moment or to highlight certain features of the main and secondary characters).
In addition, there are also so-called OFF-STAGE characters about we're talking about, but they do not participate in the action (for example, in “Woe from Wit” by A. S. Griboyedov it is Princess Marya Alekseevna, whose opinion everyone is so afraid of, or Famusov’s uncle, a certain Maxim Petrovich).
For example, Defoe's novel Robinson Crusoe seems to be about the life of one person. However, the novel is densely populated. Robinson's memories and dreams live different faces(=off-stage characters): father who warned his son against the sea; dead companions, with whose fate he often compares his own; the basket maker he watched as a child; a desirable companion is “a living person with whom I could talk.” The role of off-stage characters, seemingly mentioned in passing, is very important: after all, Robinson is both lonely and not alone on his island, since he personifies the total human experience, hard work and enterprise of his contemporaries and compatriots.
Character category definition options
- - the degree of participation in the plot and, accordingly, the volume of text that this character is given;
- - the degree of importance of this character for revealing aspects of artistic content.
Character system of the work
The basis of the objective world of epic and dramatic works usually make up character system and the plot. Even in works main topic which is a person alone with wild, virgin nature (“Robinson Crusoe” by D. Defoe, “Walden, or Life in the Woods” by G. Thoreau, “Mowgli” by R. Kipling), the character sphere, as a rule, is not limited to one hero. Thus, Defoe’s novel is densely populated at the beginning and at the end, and in the memories and dreams of Robinson the hermit, different people live: the father who warned his son against the sea; dead companions, with whose fate he often compares his own; the basket maker he watched as a child; a desirable companion - “a living person with whom I could talk.” In the main part of the novel, the role of these and other off-stage characters, seemingly mentioned in passing, is very important: after all, Robinson on his island is both alone and not alone, since he personifies the total human experience, hard work and enterprise of his contemporaries and compatriots, including Defoe himself ( “fountain of energy” - that’s what biographers called him).
Like any system, the character sphere of the work is characterized through its components elements(characters) and structure- “a relatively stable way (law) of connecting elements.” This or that image receives the status of a character precisely as an element of the system, a part of the whole, which is especially clearly visible when comparing images of animals, plants, things, etc. various works. In Defoe's novel, the goats bred by Robinson, his parrot, dogs and cats, the sprouted stalks of barley and rice, and the pottery he made consistently represent the “fayna”, “flora” created before our eyes “ material culture" For Defoe, according to one English critic (presumably W. Badget), “a tea rose is nothing more than a tea rose,” nature is “only a source of drought and rain” (W. Woolf). But in the conventional world of such genres as fairy tales, legends, fables, parables, ballads, personification of natural phenomena and things is common. In "The Tale of the Toad and the Rose" Sun. M. Garshina's rose - “more than a rose”, this is an allegory of a beautiful, but very short life. In works of a life-like style, higher animals are often introduced into the series of characters, in which, in the stable traditions of animalistic literature, what brings them closer to man is emphasized. “Does it matter who we talk about? Each of those who lived on earth deserves it,” begins I.A. Bunin his story “Dreams of Chang”, where the two main characters are the captain and his dog Chang. Synecdoche (“each of those who lived on earth”) unites the captain and Chang, and throughout the entire narrative the psychological parallel is maintained: both are aware of fear and melancholy, as well as delight and jubilation. After all, Chang’s heart “beat exactly the same as the captain’s....
To form a character system, at least two subjects are required; their equivalent may be a “split” character (for example, in the miniature by D. Kharms from the series “Cases” - Semyon Semenovich with glasses and without glasses). In the early stages of narrative art, the number of characters and the connections between them were determined primarily by logic plot development.“The single hero of a primitive fairy tale once demanded his antithesis, an opposing hero; Even later, the idea of heroine appeared as a reason for this struggle - and the number three for a long time became the sacred number of the narrative composition.” The main characters are grouped around the secondary ones, participating in the struggle on one side or the other ( most important property structures - hierarchy). At the same time, the variety of specific characters in archaic plot genres can be classified. Numerous characters in Russian fairy tale(“There are miracles there: a goblin wanders there, / A mermaid sits on the branches...”) V.Ya. Propp reduced it to seven invariants, based on the plot functions they perform (absence, prohibition, violation, etc.—a total of 31 functions, according to the scientist’s calculations). This “seven-character” scheme included saboteur, giver, helper, princess (the desired character) and her father, sender, hero, false hero.
IN ancient Greek theater the number of actors simultaneously on stage increased gradually. The pre-Aeschylus tragedy was the song of a choir, to which Thespis added one actor-reciter, who periodically left the stage and returned with reports of new events. “... Aeschylus was the first to introduce two instead of one; He also reduced the chorus parts and put dialogue in the first place, and Sophocles introduced three actors and scenery.” This established the custom of performing a play by three actors (each could play several roles), which was also observed by the Romans. Aeschylus's innovation created "the precondition for depicting a clash between the two sides"; the presence of a third actor included minor persons in the action.
Plot connections as a system-forming principle can be very complex, branched and cover a huge number of characters. In Homer’s Iliad, not only Achilles and his anger are glorified (“Wrath, goddess, sing to Achilles, son of Peleus...”), but also many heroes and their patron gods involved in the Trojan War. According to some estimates, in “War and Peace” L.N. Tolstoy has about six hundred characters, and in O. Balzac’s “Human Comedy” there are about two thousand. The appearance of these individuals is in most cases motivated by the plot.
However, plot connection is not the only type of connection between characters; in literature that has said goodbye to its mythological cradle, it is usually not the main one. The character system is a definite character ratio. Given the diversity of understandings of “character,” typification itself and the associated individualization of depicted persons is the principle artistic creativity, uniting writers of different times and peoples. “...People are not alike, some love one thing, and others another,” says Homer through the mouth of Odysseus (“Odyssey.” Canto 14).
Most often, the plot roles of the heroes more or less correspond to their importance as characters. Antigone from tragedy of the same name Sophocles' main, passive role is prepared by myth. The conflict between her and Creon, reflecting “different understandings of the essence of the law” (as a traditional religious and moral norm or as the will of the king), its bloody denouement (three deaths: Antigone, Haemon, Eurydice, Creon’s later repentance) - this is the mythological plot, “the basis and, as it were, the soul of tragedy...", according to Aristotle. But by developing and dramatizing this “woven” plot, with twists and turns and recognitions, Sophocles “captures the characters...”. Of the ways in which the playwright creates a heroic and tragic aura around Antigone, the general relationship of characters, their opposition, is very important. “Antigone appears before us even more heroic and courageous,” writes A.A. Taho-Godi, when you see the quiet, timid Yemena next to her. Haemon's passionate, youthful audacity underscores Kreong's firm, conscious decision. The wise knowledge of the truth in the speeches of Tiresias proves the complete inconsistency and meaninglessness of Creon’s act.” Sophocles even “captures” the characters of episodic persons, especially the “guard.” “...This cunning cleverly shields himself by betraying Antigone into the hands of Creon.”
In the aesthetics of most directions European literature characters are more important than the plot, which is assessed primarily in its characterological function. “Action is the clearest revelation of man, the revelation of both his state of mind and his goals,” Hegel believed. Usually the main characters of the works through whom the creative concept is revealed occupy a central position in the plot. The author composes, builds a chain of events, guided by his hierarchy of characters, depending on the chosen topic.
To understand the main problem character(s) can play a big role minor characters, highlighting various properties of his character; as a result, a whole system of parallels and contrasts, dissimilarities in similarities and similarities in dissimilarities arises. In the novel by I.A. Goncharov’s “Oblomov”, the type of the main character is explained by both his antipode, the “German” Stolz, and Zakhar (who forms a psychological parallel to his master), but especially by Olga, demanding in her love, and the undemanding, quiet Agafya Matveevna, who created an idyllic pool for Ilya Ilyich. A.V. Druzhinin found the figure of Stolz even unnecessary in this series: “The creation of Olga is so complete - and the task she performed in the novel was fulfilled so richly that further explanation of the Oblomov type through other characters becomes a luxury, sometimes unnecessary. One of the representatives of this excessive luxury is Stolz.<...>to his share, in the author’s previous idea, fell the great work of understanding Oblomov and Oblomovism through a clear contrast between the two heroes. But Olga took matters into her own hands<.. .>the dry, ungrateful contrast was replaced by drama, full of love, tears, laughter and pity."
All these and other characters, who also highlight Oblomov’s type in their own way (Alekseev, Tarantyev, etc.), are introduced into the plot very naturally: Stolz is a childhood friend who introduces Oblomov to Olga; Zakhar has been with his master all his life; Agafya Matveevna is the owner of the rented apartment, etc. All of them make up the protagonist’s inner circle and are illuminated by the even light of the author’s attention.
However, there may be significant disproportions between the hero’s place in the plot of the work and in the hierarchy of characters. Their formal premises are numerous. In the plot itself, along with the events that form the causal-time chain (it is often called plot), there may be so-called free motives. Their appearance, shaking the rigid structure of events characteristic of archaic genres, is recorded very early. Thus, comparing the fables of the Roman poet Phaedrus (1st century AD) and ancient Greek poet Babria (2nd century AD), M.L. Gasparov points to a much greater thoroughness and freedom of presentation in Babriy. “Among the images and motifs of a work of art, a distinction is made between structural, organically included in the plot scheme, and free, not directly related to it: if you remove a structural motif from a work, the entire plot will collapse; if you remove a free motif, then the work will retain its harmony and meaning, but will become paler and poorer. And so, one can notice that Phaedrus develops almost exclusively structural images and motifs, while Babrius pays main attention to free images and motifs.” The introduction of free motives (deviations from the main plot), the combination in a work of non-overlapping or weakly connected plot lines, the very detailing of the action, its inhibition by descriptive, static episodes (portrait, landscape, interior, genre scenes, etc.) - these and others complications in the composition of epic and dramatic works open up various ways for the writer to embody a creative concept, including the possibility of revealing character not only due to his participation in the plot.
In the novel “Oblomov” there is an introductory episode - “Oblomov’s Dream”, where time seems to stop; critics of different directions (Druzhinin, Dobrolyubov, Ap. Grigoriev) saw in it the key to the entire novel, since it is here that the rootedness of “Oblomovism” in national life is revealed. Comparing Goncharov with the Flemish painters who poeticized their region, Druzhinin emphasized deep meaning details of description and occasional persons: “There is nothing superfluous here, here you will not find an unclear feature or a word spoken in vain, all the little details of the situation are necessary, all are legal and beautiful. Onisim Suslov, whose porch could only be reached by grasping the grass with one hand and the roof of the hut with the other, is dear to us and necessary in this matter of clarification.” Ap. Grigoriev saw in “Oblomov’s Dream” “the grain from which the whole “Oblomov” was born”; It is here that “the author becomes a true poet...”. N.A. Dobrolyubov, in his analysis of “Oblomovism,” also refers to the material from “The Dream,” in which the most important thing for him is the upbringing of Ilyusha. “...The vile habit of receiving satisfaction of his desires not from his own efforts, but from others, developed in him an apathetic immobility and plunged him into a pitiful state of moral slavery.”
Ariadne's thread, which allows us to see the character system behind the characters, is, first of all, creative concept, idea works; It is she who creates the unity of the most complex compositions. In understanding this concept, the main idea of the work, differences are, of course, possible and even inevitable: any interpretation is subjective to one degree or another. But both in adequate and in interpretations that are polemical in relation to the author’s concept, the characters and their arrangement are considered not naively realistically, but in the light general idea, unity of meaning of the work.
V.G. Belinsky in the analysis of “Hero of Our Time” by M.Yu. Lermontov saw the connection between the five parts of this novel-cycle, with their different heroes and plots, in “one thought” - in the psychological riddle of Pechorin’s character. All the other faces, “each so interesting in itself, so fully educated, stand around one face, form a group with him, the center of which is this one face, look at him together with you, some with love, some with hatred... " Having examined “Bela” and “Maxim Maksimych,” the critic notes that Pechorin “is not the hero of these stories, but without him these stories would not exist: he is the hero of a novel, of which these two stories are only parts.” In Anna Karenina the main storylines(Anna - Karenin - Vronsky, Kita - Vronsky - Levin, Dolly - Steve) are united primarily by the family theme, in Tolstoy’s understanding and assessments. The writer’s words are well known: “I am proud of... the architecture - the vaults are built in such a way that it is impossible to even notice where the castle is. And this is what I tried most of all. The connection of the building is made not on the plot and not on the relationships (acquaintance) of persons, but on an internal connection.” “Internal connection”, a complex roll call of eras and values is the basis of the composition of “The Master and Margarita” by M.A. Bulgakov.
In the light of one or another concept of the work, covering it as a whole, and taking into account the diversity of image structures, the meaning of the character as a character is determined. It turns out that approximately equal employment in the plot does not mean a similar status of the characters. In Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice, Shylock is far superior - in terms of the potential for polysemy of the image - to his debtor Angonio, as well as to other persons (in spite of or thanks to the author's intention?). In Tolstoy’s “War and Peace,” Tikhon Shcherbaty is incomparable with Platon Karataev—the symbol “ swarm life”, Pierre’s mental judge in the epilogue (although both Shcherbaty and Karataev are episodic persons in the plot). Main troubled hero hidden in the depths of the story (“ special person“Rakhmetov in the secret writing of Chernyshevsky’s novel “What is to be done?”), his image may even be “off-stage, as in Bulgakov’s play “The Last Days (Pushkin).” According to the memoirs of B.S. Bulgakova, V.V. Veresaev “at first... was stunned that MA. I decided to write the play without Pushkin (otherwise it would be vulgar), but after thinking about it, I agreed.” In the “absurdist” plays by E. Ionesco “The Chairs” and S. Beckett “Waiting for Godot,” images of the vainly expected are created in the dialogue of those present on stage.
The eccentricity of the reception is not inferior to the off-stage image bifurcation character, signifying different beginnings in a person (“ kind man from Szechwan" by B. Brecht, "Shadow" by E. Schwartz, developing a motif coming from A. Chamisso), as well as his transformation(into an animal, an insect: “The Metamorphosis” by F. Kafka, “The Heart of a Dog” by M.A. Bulgakov, “The Bedbug” by V. Mayakovsky). The complex, double plot here reveals essentially one character.
The non-participation of a character in the main action of a work is often a kind of sign of his importance as a spokesman for public opinion, a symbol, an author’s sounding board, etc. artistic realism, with his attention to socio-historical circumstances, such persons usually embody these circumstances, helping to understand the motives of the actions of the main characters. In Flaubert’s “Madame Bovary,” the symbol of vulgarity is the pharmacist Homais, a local educator, correspondent for the newspaper “Latern de Rouen,” whose reasoning is reminiscent of the “Lexicon of common truths” compiled by the writer; the eternal presence of the smug Homais and Emma's boredom are closely linked. The role of the grotesque Ippolit Ippolitych in Chekhov’s story “The Literature Teacher” is similar, saying in his dying delirium that “The Volga flows into the Caspian Sea...”; his commonplaces exaggerate the mechanical, ritualistic nature of the remarks of the Shelestovs and their guests, which was not immediately revealed to Nikitin. In “The Thunderstorm” by A.N. Ostrovsky's plays Feklush and Kuligin, which do not participate in the intrigue, are like two poles of the spiritual life of the city of Kalinoy. According to Dobrolyubov, without the so-called “unnecessary” faces in “The Thunderstorm,” “we cannot understand the heroine’s face and can easily distort the meaning of the entire play...”.
The freedom of a realist playwright in constructing a system of characters is especially obvious against the backdrop of the classicist rule unity of action- guidelines for the selection of persons [for example, Corneille was condemned for introducing the Infanta into the Cid, “for this character in no way contributes or hinders the conclusion of the said marriage...” (Rodrigo and Jimena)].
However, freedom is not arbitrariness. And in the post-classical era, a critical filter was in effect, revealing “extra” characters. “...The play would have won,” advises E.P. Chekhov. Goslavsky, - if you eliminated some of the characters altogether, for example, Nadya, who for some unknown reason is 18 years old and for some unknown reason she is a poetess. And her fiance is superfluous. And Sophie is superfluous. To save money, the teacher and Kachedykin (professor) could be merged into one person. The tighter, the more compact, the more expressive and brighter.” Saltykov-Shchedrin vehemently reviews F. Ustryalov’s comedy “Word and Deed”: “The second act in the Martov house. This family consists of the old woman Martova, daughter Nadenka and Mrs. Repina, who was introduced by the author into the play solely to show that aunts can exist in nature.”
At the same time, the principle of “economy” in building a character system is perfectly combined, if the content requires it, with the use doubles(two characters, but one type: Rosencrantz and Guildestern in Shakespeare’s “Hamlet”; Dobchinsky and Bobchinsky in “The Government Inspector” by N.V. Gogol; Chibisov and Ibisov, Shatala and Kachala in “The Death of Tarelkin” by A.V. Sukhovo-Kobylin) , collective images and the corresponding “crowd scenes”, in general with the multi-heroic nature of the works. While working on “Three Sisters,” Chekhov ironized himself: “I’m not writing a play, but some kind of confusion. There are a lot of characters - it’s possible that I’ll get lost and give up writing.” And upon completion of the play he recalled: “It was terribly difficult to write Three Sisters.” After all, there are three heroines, each should be like their own model, and all three are the general’s daughters!” The crowdedness of Chekhov's drama of the 1900s emphasizes the general, stable conflict situation, “hidden dramas and tragedies in each figure of the play." Authors of epics, morally descriptive panoramas and other genres that assume a wide scope of reality naturally gravitate towards multi-characterism. In Tolstoy's "War and Peace", according to AA. Saburov, the character system includes four categories (main, secondary, episodic, introductory persons), while “the significance of the lower categories is incomparably greater than in the novel.”
Collective images are a feature of the style of many works of early Soviet literature(“Iron Stream” by A. Serafimovich, “Mystery-bouffe” by Mayakovsky, etc.). Often this technique was also a tribute to fashion, the fulfillment of a social order, in connection with a kind of “sacralization” of the theme of the people. Extras on stage are the target of Bulgakov’s satire in “The Crimson Island,” where “red natives and natives (positive and countless hordes)” are introduced into the play of “Citizen Jules Verne,” as well as I. Ilf and Evg. Petrova: in their story “How Robinson was Created,” the editor advises the craftsman novelist writing about the “Soviet Robinson” to show “broad layers of working people.” In the parodies of satirists, thanks to comic hyperbole, iconicity techniques characteristic of normative genres in general.
But, unlike the clichés of opportunistic crafts, the “language” of the genre canons of the literature of the past evokes the joy of recognition, of meeting with the childhood of culture. This “language” includes a stable ensemble of characters bearing traditional (often “talking”) names. Already the list of characters gives rise to very specific expectations, ideas about the type of work, its conflict and characters, the denouement. For example, such heroes of the play as the braggart Helicopter, his uncle Prostodum, the rich noblewoman Chvankina and her daughter Milena, the adviser from the viceroy Cheston and his son Zamir, clearly promise a classic comedy (this is “The Braggart” by Ya.B. Knyazhnin).
Studying character systems in aspect historical poetics, their symbolic, very bright in some genres (commedia dell'arte, mystery, morality play, chivalric, pastoral, gothic novels, hagiography, etc.), also prepares for a deeper perception of modern literature, which makes sophisticated and widespread use of the wealth accumulated by culture.
Character system. A character (literary hero) is a character in a plot-driven work of art.
the organization of the characters in a literary work appears as a system of characters.
The character system should be viewed from two perspectives:
1. As a system of relationships between characters (struggle, clashes, etc.) - that is, from the point of view of the content of the work;
2. As the embodiment of the principle of composition and a means of characterizing the characters - that is, as the position of the author.
like any system, the character sphere is characterized through its constituent elements (characters) and structure (a relatively stable method = the law of connection of elements).
elements of the character sphere
the main ones are at the center of the plot, have independent characters and are directly related to all levels of the content of the work,
secondary - also quite actively involved in the plot, having their own character, but which receive less authorial attention; in some cases their function is to help reveal the images of the main characters,
episodic - appearing in one or two episodes of the plot, often without their own character and standing on the periphery of the author’s attention; their main function is to give impetus to the plot action at the right moment or to highlight certain features of the main and secondary characters).
In addition, there are also so-called off-stage characters in question, but they do not participate in the action (for example, in “Woe from Wit” by A. S. Griboyedov, this is Princess Marya Alekseevna, whose opinion everyone is so afraid of, or Famusov’s uncle, a certain Maxim Petrovich).
for example, Defoe's novel Robinson Crusoe seems to be about the life of one person. However, the novel is densely populated. In Robinson's memories and dreams there live different persons (= off-stage characters): the father who warned his son against the sea; dead companions, with whose fate he often compares his own; the basket maker he watched as a child; a desirable companion - “a living person with whom I could talk.” The role of off-stage characters, seemingly mentioned in passing, is very important: after all, Robinson is both lonely and not alone on his island, since he personifies the total human experience, hard work and enterprise of his contemporaries and compatriots.
What parameters are used to determine the category of characters?
there are two of them. This:
– the degree of participation in the plot and, accordingly, the volume of text that this character is given;
– the degree of importance of a given character for revealing aspects of artistic content.
most often these parameters coincide. So, in “Fathers and Sons” of the bazaars, the main character in both respects, Pavel Petrovich, Nikolai Petrovich, Arkady, Odintsova are secondary characters in all respects, and Sitnikov or Kukshina are episodic.
example - " captain's daughter» Pushkin.
“It would seem impossible to imagine a more episodic character than Empress Catherine: she seems to exist only to bring the rather complicated story of the main characters to a successful conclusion. But for the problems and ideas of the story, this is an image of paramount importance, because without it it would not have received a semantic and compositional completion. the most important idea the story is the idea of mercy. Just as Pugachev, in his time, despite all the circumstances, had mercy on Grinev, so Catherine has mercy on him, although the circumstances of the case seem to point against him. Just as Grinev meets Pugachev as person to person, and only later does he turn into an autocrat, so Masha meets with Catherine, not suspecting that this is the empress in front of her, also like person to person. And if it weren’t for this image in the system of characters in the story, the composition would not be closed, and therefore, the idea of the human connection of all people, without distinction of classes and positions, would not sound artistically convincing, the idea that “giving alms” is one of the best manifestations of humanity spirit, and the solid foundation of human coexistence is not cruelty and violence, but kindness and mercy.”
and it also happens that the question of dividing characters into categories generally loses all meaningful meaning.
for example, in the composition “ dead souls“Episode characters differ from the main ones only quantitatively, and not qualitatively: in the volume of the image, but not in the degree of the author’s interest in them.
the number of characters in the poem is literally off the charts. Uncle Minya and Uncle Mityai, son-in-law of Nozdryov Mizhuev, the boys begging Chichikov for alms at the hotel gates, and especially one of them, “a great hunter of getting on the heels,” and the captain of kisses, and a certain assessor Drobyazhkin, and Fetinya, a mistress of whipping featherbeds, some lieutenant who had come from Ryazan, apparently a big hunter of boots, because he had already ordered four pairs and was constantly trying on the fifth, and further, further, further.
These figures do not give impetus to the plot action and do not characterize Messrs. Chichikov in any way. Moreover, the detailing of these figures is clearly excessive - let us remember the men who talked about manilovka and zamanilovka, Ivan Antonovich's jug's snout, the dog's wife, the daughter of the old foreman, who had threshing peas on her face at night, the box's late husband, who loved to have someone... I would scratch his heels at night, but I couldn’t fall asleep without it.
however, this is not excess and certainly not the author’s inability to construct a plot. On the contrary, it is thin compositional technique, with the help of which Gogol created a special installation. He showed not just images of individual people, but something broader and more significant - the image of a population, a people, a nation. Peace, finally.
Almost the same composition of the character system is observed in Chekhov's plays, and the matter is even more complicated: the main and secondary characters cannot be distinguished even by the degree of participation in the plot and the volume of the image. With the help of this system, the Czechs show “a certain set of ordinary people, ordinary consciousness, among which there are no outstanding, extraordinary heroes, on whose images one can build a play, but for the most part they are nevertheless interesting and significant. To do this, it is necessary to show a multitude of equal characters, without singling out the main and minor ones; This is the only way that something common is revealed in them, namely, the drama of a failed life inherent in everyday consciousness, a life that has passed or is passing in vain, without meaning and even without pleasure” (c)
character sphere structure
How many characters are necessary and sufficient?
While working on “Three Sisters,” Chekhov sneered at himself: “I’m not writing a play, but some kind of confusion. There are a lot of characters - it’s possible that I’ll get lost and give up writing.” And upon completion he recalled: “It was terribly difficult to write “Three Sisters.” After all, there are three heroines, each should be like their own model, and all three are the general’s daughters!”
like the classic, where “red natives and natives (positive and countless hordes)” are introduced into the play “Citizen Jules Verne.” (Bulgakov. Crimson Island).
So, the number of characters.
To form a character system, at least two subjects are required.
as an option, there may be a split of the hero - Semyon Semenovich with glasses and without glasses (kharms, “cases”).
The maximum number of characters is not limited.
According to some estimates, in Tolstoy’s “War and Peace” there are about 600 characters, in Balzac’s “Human Comedy” - about 2,000 (for comparison, the population of a medieval Western European city was 1-3 thousand inhabitants).
the numbers are impressive.
and the immediate question is: can you create a work with a similar number of characters? No, it’s easy to cram characters into a plot. But then you will have to manage them so that your thing does not look like a telephone directory.
characters are required to interact with each other.
some people succeed. For example, King’s multi-character things – “needful things”, “Armageddon” (another translation is “confrontation” the stand), “under the dome”
or a classic example - Homer, "Odyssey". Philologists have established more than 1,700 connections between the 342 characters in the poem. There is a connection between the characters if they meet in the story, talk to each other, quote each other’s words to a third character, or it is clear from the text that they know each other. The structure of the “odyssey” surprisingly resembles a social network - such as Facebook or Twitter. Is history repeating itself?))
So, the system of characters is the interconnections and relationships between the characters, that is, a concept related to the composition of the work.
The most important property of the character system is hierarchy.
We already talked about this here:
in most cases the character is at the intersection of the three rays.
the first is friends, associates (friendly relationships).
the second is enemies, ill-wishers (hostile relations).
third - others strangers(neutral relationship)
these three rays (and the people in them) create a strict hierarchical structure http://proza.ru/2013/12/17/1652
Let's continue the conversation.
“The plot in its formation is, first of all, the creation of a system of characters. An important stage is the establishment of the central figure and then the establishment of the remaining characters, who are located on a descending ladder around this figure” (G.A. Shengeli)
There are two types of connections between characters - according to the plot (thesis-antithesis) and according to the relationship of characters.
the simplest and most common case is the opposition of two images to each other.
Mozart and Salieri, Grinev and Shvabrin, Oblomov and Stolz, boy-kibalchish and boy-bad.
A slightly more complex case is when one character is opposed to all the others, as, for example, in Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit,” where even quantitative relationships are important: it was not for nothing that Griboyedov wrote that in his comedy “there are twenty-five fools for one smart person.”
“The characters in the work are grouped. The simplest case is the division of all characters into two camps: friends and enemies of the protagonist. In more complex works There may be several such groups, and each of these groups is connected by various relationships with other persons” (Tomashevsky B.V. poetics)
Thus, in Anna Karenina the main compositional grouping of characters follows the thematic principle stated at the beginning of the novel: “all happy families are similar to each other, each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.” Different families in the novel develop this theme in different ways.
In “Fathers and Sons”, in addition to the obvious and implemented in the plot contrasting Bazarov with all other characters, another, more hidden and not embodied in the plot, compositional principle is implemented, namely the comparison by similarity of two groups of characters: on the one hand, this is Arkady and Nikolai Petrovich, on the other - Bazarov and his parents. “In both cases, these characters embody the same problem - the problem of intergenerational relationships. Turgenev shows that, whatever individuals, the problem essentially remains the same: this is an ardent love for children, for whom, in fact, the older generation lives, this inevitable misunderstanding, the desire of children to prove their “maturity” and superiority, dramatic internal conflicts as a result of this, and all nevertheless, in the end, the inevitable spiritual unity of generations" (c)
There are also more complex compositional connections between characters.
an example is “crime and punishment.”
“the character system is organized around the main character Raskolnikov; the other characters are in complex relationships with him, and not only plot ones; and it is in extra-plot connections that the richness of the novel’s composition is revealed.
First of all, Raskolnikov is compositionally connected with Sonya. In their life position, they are primarily opposed. But not only that. They also have something in common, primarily in pain for a person and in suffering, which is why Sonya Raskolnikova understands so easily and immediately. In addition, as the schismatic himself emphasizes, they are both criminals, both murderers, only Sonya killed herself, and the schismatics killed the other. Here the comparison ends and the contrast begins again: for Dostoevsky, these two “murders” are not at all equivalent; moreover, they have a fundamentally opposite ideological meaning. And yet, both are criminals, united by the gospel motif of sacrifice for humanity, the cross, and atonement. It is no coincidence that Dostoevsky emphasized the strange juxtaposition of “a murderer and a harlot who came together to read the eternal book.” So, Sonya is both an antipode and a kind of double of Raskolnikov.
the remaining characters are also organized around Raskolnikov according to the same principle; it is, as it were, reflected many times in its counterparts, but reflected with distortions, or incompletely.
So, Razumikhin comes close to Raskolnikov with his rationality and confidence that life can be arranged without God, relying only on himself, but is sharply opposed to him, since he does not accept the idea of “blood according to conscience.”
Porfiry Petrovich is the antipode of Raskolnikov, but there is also something Raskolnikov in him, because he understands the main character faster and better than anyone else.
Luzhin takes the practical part of Raskolnikov’s theory about the right to crime, but completely emasculates all the sublime meaning from it. In “new trends” he sees only a justification for his boundless egoism, believing that the new morality gives him the sanction to try only for his own benefit, without stopping at any moral prohibitions. Luzhin reflects Raskolnikov’s philosophy in the distorting mirror of cynicism, and Raskolnikov himself looks with disgust at Luzhin and his theory - thus, we have before us another double, another antipodean twin.
Svidrigailov, as is typical of an ironist, brings Raskolnikov’s ideas to their logical conclusion, advising him to stop thinking about the good of humanity, about the issues of “man and citizen.” But, like everyone, Svidrigailov does not accept Raskolnikov’s theory for himself personally, being skeptical of any philosophy. And Svidrigailov disgusts Raskolnikov; they again turn out to be mismatched twins, antipodal twins.
such a composition of the character system is caused by the need to pose and resolve complex moral and philosophical questions, to consider the theory of the main character and its implementation in practice in a variety of applications and aspects. The composition here, therefore, works to reveal the problematic” (c) L.V. Chernets. Character system.
