Help on Tele2, tariffs, questions

Moral problems in the novel "The Rout"
The novel "Rout" is called the first and last success of Fadeev. The fate of the writer was dramatic: after a successful literary debut, he became a Soviet functionary, wasted his strength and talent in the service of the party. However, The Rout, published in 1927, is a truly talented work. The novel showed that it is also possible to create psychological prose on the material of the civil war, that Soviet writers have much to learn from the classics.

The action in the novel "The Rout" takes place in a partisan detachment in the Far East. However, although Fadeev's heroes are on the side of the Bolsheviks, the writer does not at all introduce their arguments about power, God, old and new life into the novel. The entire historical and cultural context is limited to the mention of Mikolashka, Kolchak, the Japanese and Maxim -

Sheets. The main thing that occupies the writer is the image of the partisans' life itself: small and large incidents, experiences, reflections. The heroes of Fadeev do not seem to be fighting for a bright future at all, but live by immediate, concrete interests. However, along the way, they solve complex moral problems of choice, they are tested for the strength of the inner core.

Since the main thing for the author is the inner world of the characters, there are very few events in the novel. The plot of the action appears only in the sixth chapter, when the commander of the detachment Levinson receives a letter from Sedoy. The detachment sets in motion, they receive an explanation of the words of the narrator in the third chapter: "The difficult way of the cross lay ahead." On these “roads-roads” (the title of the twelfth chapter), water, fire, night, taiga, enemies, both external barriers and internal obstacles and conflicts, await the partisans. The action of the novel is based on the plot of overcoming and the plot of the test.

In the plot of the test, two episodes are given in close-up with a Korean and a wounded Frolov. Feeling 150 hungry mouths behind him, Levinson confiscates the Korean's pig with pain in his heart, realizing that he and his family are doomed to starvation. This is not the first time in Russian literature that the question arises of what is heavier on the scales of humanity: the life of one or the life of many. Raskolnikov in Dostoevsky's novel "Crime and Punishment" tried to reduce the problems of morality to simple arithmetic and made sure that no one has the right to deprive another of his life, even if the death of the most insignificant and useless would entail the well-being of many. Fadeev again refers to this situation and puts his hero in the place of Raskolnikov, giving him the right to choose.

By order of Levinson, the doctor Stashinsky gives poison to the mortally wounded partisan Frolov. He perceives death as a long-awaited deliverance, as the last human act in relation to himself. When describing the poisoning of Frolov, Fadeev captures the nervous, hysterical reaction of Mechik, who does not accept such an open murder. In both episodes, Fadeev reproduces an ethically insoluble situation. The novel is governed by the laws of war. Frolov is doomed: he will either die or be killed by the enemy. The choice that Levinson makes, in this case, is not between good and evil, but between two types of evil, and it is not even clear which of them is less. The same can be said about the episode with the Korean pig. Sword's pity is understandable, but unconstructive. A romantic, an intellectual, he feels where something needs to be done, to choose.

Perhaps it is the inability to choose, to take responsibility for an act that leads Mechik to betrayal. In a critical situation of meeting the enemy face to face, it is the Mechik, and not the reckless slob Morozka, who cannot sacrifice his life and save his comrades. Frost dies heroically, as Snowstorm does before, and Swordsman saves himself. No fine phrases will now justify him in his own eyes.

So, it took Fadeev only one and a half hundred pages to recreate in his novel the eternal situations of moral choice, to show in what difficult ways a person strives for the best. The border between good and evil lies in the heart of every Fadeev hero. And the moral life of the partisans depicted by him turns out to be as complex as the life of the noble intellectuals of Leo Tolstoy.

Moral problems in the novel "Rout"; Defeat Fadeev A. A

Other essays on the topic:

1. The idea of ​​the novel is revealed on the example of the fate of one of the revolutionary partisan detachments that operated in 1919 in the taiga of Primorye. Squad core...
2. Oles Gonchar is a complex figure in our literature. He was not afraid to respond to the most controversial problems that the time raised, because ...
3. However, it is impossible not to notice that already from the first chapters of the first volume to the last chapters of the epilogue of the novel, the theme of war develops...
4. Bulgakov's talent as an artist was from God. And the way this talent was expressed was largely determined and...
5. Valentin Savvich Pikul was born in Leningrad. In 1928 in the family of a military sailor Savva Mikhailovich Pikul. This man belonged to...
6. The novel "War and Peace" is a large-scale work both for the number and depth of the images of the characters, and for the importance of historical events,...
7. Once, in the workshop of his friend, Oscar Wilde saw a sitter who impressed him with the perfection of his appearance. The writer exclaimed: “What a pity that ...
8. Essays on Literature: Moral Lessons from Tolstoy's Novel War and Peace. An excellent source of spiritual perfection is the Russian classics of the second half of the 19...
9. The story of L. N. Tolstoy “After the Ball” develops the theme of “tearing off all and sundry masks” from the carefree, washed, festive life of some, contrasting ...
10. Fadeev did not come into literature by accident. He was a gifted man. And his talent declared itself in the very first story ...
11. Tatyana Larina, the heroine of the novel by A. S. Pushkin "Eugene Onegin", opens a gallery of beautiful images of Russian women. She's morally blameless, looking for...
12. In the novel "Anna Karenina" Tolstoy appears not only as a great artist, but also as a moral philosopher and social reformer. He puts...
13. The content of "Hamlet" and the ideological and psychological problems arising from it have always occupied criticism so much that the artistic side of the tragedy received much more ...
14. It would seem that the story of Osip Nazaruk "Roksolana" reflects the times that have long passed, and the amazing figure of a Ukrainian girl who has become the most powerful...
15. W. Shakespeare's tragedy "Hamlet, Prince of Denmark": a variety of psychological types, problems of good and evil, honor and dishonor W. Shakespeare's tragedy "Hamlet, ...
16. Teacher. Dear children, the age in which you are now is very important and at the same time difficult. The years between childhood and...
17. F. M. Dostoevsky belongs to those writers whose importance for the development of world literature does not decrease over the years. Again and...
18. Historicism is combined in Pushkin's realism with a deep understanding of the role of social differences. Historicism is a category that contains a certain methodological ...
19. Composition on the theme - Allegorical-Moral content of the plot of the drama "The Old Lady's Living Room". In his essay The Problems of the Theatre, Friedrich Dürrenmatt argued that the most...
20. Who is to blame for the fall of Guskov? In other words, what are the ratios of objective circumstances and human will, what is the measure of a person's responsibility for ...

What is betrayal? What are the reasons why people become traitors? Betrayal is a perfidious, treacherous act, when a person, wanting to save himself, showing cowardice, betrays the principles of goodness and mercy, fidelity and devotion, endangers others. The reasons for betrayal are selfishness, individualism, selfishness, cowardice, cowardice, lack of love for other people and readiness to sacrifice oneself for the sake of others. Weakness of character, isolation from the team, alienation often push on the path of betrayal. The problem of betrayal is revealed in the novel by A.A. Fadeev "The Rout" on the example of the image of the Mechik.

To understand the origins and causes of Mechik's betrayal of the cause of the working class, let us trace the path of this hero to the revolution.

For the first time, Mechik is shown through the eyes of the orderly of the commander of the Far Eastern partisan detachment Levinson - Morozka. Frost goes with a package to Shaldyba's detachment and sees that the partisans are fleeing in a panic, firing back.

“In the back of a group of people running in panic, in a scarf bandage, in a short-haired city jacket, clumsily dragging a rifle, a lean boy ran, limping.” Frost saves the wounded man by throwing him over the saddle and delivers him to Levinson's squad. Frost did not like the saved one, because he did not like “clean” people, knowing from life experience that these are mostly fickle, worthless people who cannot be trusted. The sword was taken to the hospital. The path to the revolution of this hero is as follows. Three weeks ago, Mechik was walking from the city to the partisan detachment with a ticket in his boot and a revolver in his pocket, he wanted to fight and move. People in the hills appeared to him in clothes made of powder smoke and heroic deeds. But the very first meeting with reality brought him disappointment. The sailor did not read his ticket to the end and, without understanding, beat him. Mechik explained that the regional committee issued him a ticket not just for socialists-revolutionaries hostile to the Bolsheviks, but for maximalists who are at one with the communists. The surrounding people did not at all resemble those he had created in his fervent imagination. They were "dirtier, lousier, tougher and more direct." These were not bookish, but living, real people. In the hospital, Mechik met Varya, Morozka's wife, who cared for the wounded, of whom there were only two: Mechik and Frolov, who was wounded in the stomach. Mechik commits his first betrayal when he forgets about his girlfriend, a high school student who has remained in the city. Mechik showed Varya a photograph of a girl in blond curls. At this time, Frost appeared. Varya dropped the card and, while talking to her husband, accidentally stepped on the card. And Mechik was ashamed to ask that the card be raised. Left alone, he tore the portrait to shreds. It would seem trifles, but is it possible to trust a person who betrays his love. Varya fell in love with Mechik, as she had never loved anyone, and there was something maternal in her feeling, but the timid intellectual avoided being alone with her, dragging the old Pika around with him, as he experienced a “mixture of fear and consciousness of his unrequited debt” to Frosty. In the hospital, Mechik felt his loneliness, he got along only with Pika, a former beekeeper. The "Kolchaks" ruined the apiary, and the son from the Red Guard went to Chita to the White Czechs. In the detachment, Mechik also did not get along with anyone, everyone considered him useless and lazy.

He did not pass the test for "good attitude towards horses." Mechik was given a horse named Zyuchikha. “It was a tearful mournful mare, dirty white, with a sagging back and a chaff belly - a submissive peasant horse that plowed more than one tithe in her life. On top of that, she was a foal”, suffered from foot and mouth disease. The platoon leader Kubrak explained how to take care of the horse. After the trip, do not immediately unsaddle, wipe the horse's back either with the palm of your hand or with hay. But Mechik did not listen, it seemed to him that he had been given this "offensive mare with sloppy hooves" on purpose. Although Mechik realized that the life of this mare was entirely in his hands, he still did not know "how to manage the simple horse life." He could not even properly tie this resigned mare. She wandered through all the stables, poking into someone else's hay, irritating horses and orderlies. The swordsman, touchily pursing his lips, thought that he would not take care of the horse, let it die. “Zyuchikha was overgrown with scabs, went hungry, not drunk, occasionally taking advantage of someone else’s pity, and Mechik won universal dislike as “a lazybones and a pushover.”

Sword got along only with Pika and Chizh, but they were not close to him. Chizh, a former student, slippery type, gossip, envious, slanders Levinson, Baklanov, boasts of his "military knowledge." Chizh claims,

that it would be better than Baklanov to cope with the position of assistant commander. Levinson, seeing the state of Zyuchikha, ordered Mechik to ride with pack horses until he cured his horse, not listening to any excuses from Mechik.

One day at midnight, Mechik was on guard alone with his thoughts, the main of which was to leave the detachment as soon as possible. Here he had a "frank conversation" with Levinson. The swordsman complains that he cannot get along with anyone, he does not see support from anyone. It even seems to him that if the partisans got to Kolchak, they would also serve Kolchak. Levinson tried to explain to Mechik that he was thinking wrong, but soon realized that he was wasting his words.

At the end of the novel, Mechik goes on patrol ahead of Frost. Having stumbled upon the Cossacks, the “impenetrable confusion” experiences a feeling of incomparable animal horror. Sliding off the saddle and making several humiliating gestures, he quickly rolled down the slope. He committed an unheard of vile betrayal both in relation to Morozka, who had once saved him and who rode calmly, knowing that there was a sentinel ahead of him, and in relation to the partisans who trusted him. Having committed a betrayal, the Sword feels sorry for himself: how could he, so good and honest and who did not wish harm to anyone, could do such a thing. He automatically pulled out a revolver, but immediately realized that he could never kill himself. He decides to go to the city, does not go out on the road for a long time, being afraid of the whites, and then he thinks: “Is it all the same?”

In the socio-psychological novel Defeat, the author talks about the years of the Civil War. The composition and plot of the work are constructed in such a way that it is possible to vividly and fully show the sprouts of a new consciousness in the souls of the fighters of the partisan detachment. According to the author, this is the inevitable result of revolutionary events. Fadeev, proving this idea, combined two different genres - the epic and the novel. Therefore, the plot of the work turned out to be very branched, in which various characters and events are intertwined.

Background to the creation of the novel

Alexander Fadeev became a writer of the "new time". To reflect reality, he tried to show the appropriate mood and introduced new images into literature. The writer's task was to create a hero of the revolution who would be understandable to a new, mostly illiterate, reader. By design, the thoughts and language of the book were to be accessible to people who do not have sufficient education. It was necessary to approach the issues of spiritual values ​​in a different way, to present such concepts as humanism, love, loyalty, duty, struggle, heroism from a different perspective.

date of writing

At this turning point for the country, from 1924 to 1926, Alexander Fadeev wrote the novel "Rout", which "grew" from the story "Snowstorm". The writers who dedicated their creations to the Civil War tried to somehow “smooth out” sharp corners, restrained their heroes, preventing them from sinking to the limit. In Fadeev, on the contrary, the heroes are merciless, dishonorable and cruel. The terrible conditions in which they are, his characters justify by the fact that this serves to protect and win the revolution. By serving a higher idea, they justify all actions and crimes, assuring themselves that the end justifies the means. The heroes of Fadeev are guided by such moral principles.

novel idea

Fadeev defined the main idea of ​​the work “The Defeat” something like this: “In the war, people are hardened. Those unable to fight are weeded out.” Of course, from the position of today, such an assessment of the Civil War is unfair. But the undoubted merit of the author is that he was able to show the Civil War from the inside. And in the foreground of his novel is not military action, but a person. It is no coincidence that the author chose the time when the detachment was defeated for the description. Fadeev wanted to show not only the successes, but also the failures of the Red Army. In dramatic events, the characters of people are revealed most deeply. Such is the history of the creation of Fadeev's "Rout".

Theme of the work

The action of the novel takes place in the Far East, where the author himself fought in those years. But in the foreground is not the historical component, but socio-psychological problems. Partisan detachment, war - only a background for displaying the inner world of heroes, internal conflicts and psychology. The plot of the novel is very complex, and in a short period - from the beginning of the defeat to the breakthrough - various characters of the characters, as well as the attitude of the author towards them, emerge. Several figures - Levinson, Morozka, Metelitsa and Mechik - occupy a central place in Fadeev's work "The Rout".

Let's take a closer look at the characteristics of the characters. All of them are in equal conditions, which most accurately allows you to judge the characters of these characters and their actions.

Squad leader

Levinson is a true hero of the times. He is the epitome of the heroic in the novel. Born and raised in a working-peasant environment, he devoted his entire life to serving the people. In the soul of this man lives the dream of a bright and strong man - this, in his opinion, should be the new man of the revolution. The commander of the detachment is a man of duty, "special", cold and unshakable, "of the right breed", putting only business above all else. He knew that people would follow a strong and confident man. And he knew how to be.

Levinson makes decisions quickly, acts confidently, does not share his feelings and thoughts with anyone, "presents ready-made yes or no." His heroism is based on an unwavering belief in his ideals; the end goal justifies "even death". This confidence gives him the moral right to cruel orders. For the sake of a great idea, many things can be allowed: to take away the only pig from a Korean family with six children (after all, isn’t the squad fighting for their future?); poison a wounded comrade, otherwise he will slow down the retreat of the detachment ...

But it is not easy for Levinson to remain cold and impregnable: he suffers when he learns about the murder of Frolov, does not hide his tears when he learns about the death of young Baklanov. He feels sorry for the Korean, and his children, and his own, suffering from scurvy and anemia, but he stops at nothing, the main thing for him is to fulfill the task of the Bolshevik center. He thinks about the future and the present: “How can you talk about a wonderful person if millions of people are forced to live an unbearably poor and miserable life?”

Snowstorm

The former shepherd Metelitsa also stands out in the work. The pride of the entire detachment is the platoon Metelitsa, whom the commander appreciates for his "extraordinary tenacity" and "vitality." He became one of the main characters only towards the middle of the novel. The author explained this by the fact that he saw the need to reveal in more detail the character of this hero. It was too late to reshape the novel, and the episode with this character somewhat disturbed the harmony of the narrative. The snowstorm is clearly sympathetic to the author of the work "Rout" - Alexander Alexandrovich Fadeev. Firstly, this can be seen from the appearance of the hero: a slender hero, he was beaten by "extraordinary value" and "vital force". Secondly, the hero's lifestyle - he lives as he wants, does not limit himself in anything, a hot, brave and determined person. Thirdly, the actions of Metelitsa prove the positive individuality of this hero: he fearlessly goes on reconnaissance, behaves with dignity in captivity, and accepts death for the sake of others. He is bold and determined.

Being in captivity, Metelitsa calmly reflects on death and wants only one thing - to die with dignity. He holds himself proudly and independently and rushes to save the shepherd boy, who did not want to give the scout to the whites. Metelitsa's courage admires those around her. He was like that even before the war, in his working life, and the revolution helped the hero not to lose his best qualities. In the novel, he is like Levinson's addition: Metelitsa's determination, as it were, complements the commander's doubts and experience. This can be seen from how cleverly the commander replaces Metelitsa's impetuous plan with a more cautious and calm one. Having been captured, he understands the hopelessness of his situation. But he behaves like a real hero and wants to show those who will kill him that "he is not afraid and despises them." According to the author, the new hero must be imbued with class hatred, which is capable of making a real hero out of an ordinary fighter.

Frost

Ivan Morozov or, as he is called, Morozka, did not look for easy ways in life. This is a broken and talkative guy of about twenty-seven, a miner. He always walked long-established paths. Frost feels compassion for Mechik and saves him. Frost showed courage, but still considered Mechik somehow "clean" and despised this person. The guy is very offended that Varya falls in love with Mechik, he indignantly asks: “And with whom? In entogo, mother's? And with contempt calls the opponent "yellow-mouthed", from pain and anger. In personal relationships, he fails. Ivan has no one closer to Varya, so he seeks salvation in the detachment, with his comrades.

When he steals melons, he is very afraid that for this offense he will be kicked out of the squad. For him, even the thought of this is unbearable, he lives the life of the detachment so closely, he has become accustomed to these people. And he has nowhere to go. At the meeting, he says that for each of them "a drop" of his blood would "give" without hesitation. He respects his commanders - Levinson, Dubov, Baklanov - and tries to imitate them. They also saw in the guy not only a good fighter, but also a good-natured, sympathetic person, and they supported and trusted him in everything. It was he who was sent to the last reconnaissance. And Frost justifies their trust - at the cost of his life, he warns his comrades about the danger. Even in his last moments, he thinks of others. That's why Fadeev loves the main character of "Rout" - for devotion and courage, for kindness, because Morozka did not take revenge on Mechik for Varya.

sword

The heroic images of Frost and Snowstorm are opposed to the image of the Sword. This is a nineteen-year-old boy who came to the detachment voluntarily to amuse his vanity. To prove himself at least somehow, he rushes to the hottest places. He fails to get close to the members of the detachment, because he loves himself first of all. He had the idea of ​​desertion, although no one drove him to the detachment - he came himself. This means only one thing: he did not come here to serve the cause, but simply to show off his valor. He stands apart from the rest. And when he deserts, the reader is not surprised.

Levinson calls Mechik weak and lazy, a "worthless hollow flower". He deserved that attitude. An egoist who values ​​himself highly does not confirm this by his actions. At decisive moments, he, without realizing it, acts vilely. His selfish nature was revealed already when he allowed to step on a photo of a girl, and then he himself tore it up. He became angry with his horse for its unattractive appearance and stopped caring for the animal, dooming it to unsuitability. It is the Sword that is to blame for Frost's death. The terrible thing is that after the betrayal, he is tormented by the thought not of the death of his friends, but that he, the Mechik, “soiled” his spotless soul.

And yet in Alexander Fadeev's novel "The Rout" he is not the embodiment of evil. Most likely, the reason for his failures is that Mechik comes from a different social stratum, a representative of the "rotten intelligentsia." He was not instilled with the features inherent in other members of the detachment, who for the most part come from the people - rude, courageous, devoted to the people and loving him. In Mechik, the desire for beauty is alive. He was shocked by the death of Frolov. He is inexperienced, young and afraid of not being liked by those among whom he will live. Perhaps this makes him act so unnaturally.

Comrades in arms

Continuing the analysis of Fadeev's "Defeat", let's get acquainted with the members of the detachment. Those who surround Levinson are just as dedicated to the idea. His assistant Baklanov imitates the commander in everything. Platoon Dubov, a former miner, is an honest and loyal person who can be sent to the most critical areas. Demoman Goncharenko is a shrewd and reliable Red Army soldier.

Levinson's rank-and-file comrades know their inner strength, but, burdened with daily bustle, "feel their weakness" and "entrust" themselves to stronger comrades like Baklanov, Dubov, Levinson. As the analysis of "The Rout" showed, Fadeev, in order to highlight the heroic in the characters more clearly, creates anti-heroic images, such as Chizh and Mechik. They are happy to shirk "from the slumber, from the kitchen", retreat or betray, they are always so "clean" and "with the right speech."

The plot of the novel

We continue the analysis of Fadeev's "Defeat". The epic plot of the novel is based on the story of the defeat of a partisan detachment. The exposition features a respite in the war in the Far East, when a partisan detachment settled down to rest. The plot of the work is the receipt of a package from the headquarters with the instruction - "keep small but strong combat units." The development of the action in the work is the maneuvers of the detachment, which breaks away from the Kolchak and Japanese pursuing it. The ring of encirclement shrinks irreparably, and the climactic scene in the novel is a night fight in the swamp, which tests who and what is. Immediately after the climax, the denouement follows - the remnants of the detachment, having got out of the swamps, are ambushed and almost all of them die under machine-gun fire. Only nineteen fighters remain alive.

Composition of the work

Concluding the analysis of Fadeev's "Defeat", let's consider the composition of the novel, which has some peculiarities. One of them is the slow unfolding of events. Almost the entire work is, as it were, a development of the action, and only in the last two chapters is there a climax and a denouement. This construction is explained by the genre feature of the work. "The Rout" is a socio-psychological novel, the purpose of which is to depict human characters and significant changes in the minds of the characters during the revolutionary struggle. The peculiarity of the novel is also that Fadeev skillfully intertwines the epic plot and individual storylines of the characters.

For example, he introduces Frost's backstory at the moment when he is traveling with a package to Shaldyba's detachment. It is this pause in events, while the orderly is driving, that the author fills in with a story about the hero's past life. In the same way, the author depicted many significant details from the former life of Mechik, Baklanov, Levinson, Vari, Metelitsa, Dubov. Thanks to this construction, Fadeev's heroes turned out to be bright and convincing. The author chose the direct order of the narrative, where each chapter is an independent story, in the center of which is a separate character.

The novel "The Rout" is built very well and has a dynamic plot. At the same time, the author does not confine himself to the chronicle of the defeat of Levinson's detachment, Fadeev reveals the characters of the characters and problems in "The Rout" not only through the general plot, but also through their interaction and comparison.

Essay *

330 rub.

Description

Composition of a school type based on the novel by A. Fadeev "Defeat". The issues of humanism during the war period and the evolution of the concept of "humanism" are considered on the example of this work. ...

Introduction

There is nothing more terrible and inhumane than war, especially civil war. War denies such universal human values ​​as compassion, tolerance, the right to life, freedom and happiness, that is, those values ​​that form the basis of humanism. Humanism is a belief in the personality of a person, respect for others; in war, human life loses its value.
The Civil War of 1918 - 1920 was one of the most tragic periods in the history of the Fatherland. The author of the novel "Rout" (1927) A.A. Fadeev personally experienced the horrors of the civil war. And, despite the fact that Fadeev adhered to revolutionary views and remained faithful to the Bolshevik ideology to the end, he, like any real artist, endowed his characters with a contradictory and complex inner life. So, in the episode of the expropriation of a pig from a Korean peasant, the author plays out a complex moral dilemma: on the one hand, Levinson and the partisans take away a pig from a poor peasant, on the other, Levinson’s inner feelings, who does not raise the Korean who threw himself at his feet, not out of cruelty, but , as Fadeev himself wrote, because "he was afraid that having done this, he would not stand it and cancel his order."

Fragment of the work for review

He always faces a moral choice, but the conditions of fratricidal war in which the decision is made cannot wait. Fadeev's humanistic position in "The Rout" is manifested mainly in the fact that he demonstrates that his heroes do not and cannot, in principle, justify their actions, but the worst thing is that they have no other way out. In the novel "The Defeat" are hidden complex moral problems that do not have an unambiguous assessment, the problems of humanism. On the one hand, we are shown the heroism of the partisans (Frolov is aware of the situation and voluntarily drinks the poison), their humanity, because they do not just fight for ideals, ready to kill and commit violence indiscriminately, but feel remorse for the evil done, believing that this is being done for the benefit of the future. On the other hand, we see Mechik, an intelligent, romantically inclined person, whose morality does not coincide with the morality of the partisan, but rather is a common Christian, rejecting violence. And Mechik, like other characters in the novel, faces a difficult choice. He deserts, but flight seems painful to him. He opposes the poisoning of Frolov, the murder of a peasant "in a vest", but, nevertheless, he eats a pig on an equal basis with everyone else, because he is hungry. It is obvious that Fadeev, by depicting the heroes as vacillating and doubting individuals, placing them in a situation of tragic choice in inhuman circumstances of wartime, demonstrates the so-called "historical" humanism, which is different from universal humanism.

Bibliography

A. Fadeev "Defeat"

Please carefully study the content and fragments of the work. Money for purchased finished works due to non-compliance of this work with your requirements or its uniqueness is not returned.

* The category of work is estimated in accordance with the qualitative and quantitative parameters of the material provided. This material, neither in its entirety, nor any of its parts, is a finished scientific work, final qualification work, scientific report or other work provided for by the state system of scientific certification or necessary for passing an intermediate or final certification. This material is a subjective result of processing, structuring and formatting the information collected by its author and is intended primarily to be used as a source for self-preparation of the work on this topic.

The problem of humanism in A. Fadeev's novel defeat is central. The author in his work showed two concepts of humanism: Mechik's bourgeois humanism and Levinson's proletarian humanism.

Let's take everything in order. Pavel Mechik is the protagonist of the novel. Analyzing his actions and thoughts, we immediately conclude that he is a true humanist and a preacher of the ideas of humanism: he is against any violence, very peaceful and vulnerable. From his dialogues with other characters, for example, with Varya or Pika, and his internal monologues, we see that he misses his home, his beloved girl, peaceful life. But the reader's impression is rather misleading. For his pseudo-humanism always led to sad consequences: because of his, as he believes, humanistic actions, Frolov found out that they wanted to put him to sleep.

It was so hard for everyone to go for this act, and after the truth surfaced and he drank the prepared poison, it became even more difficult for the detachment. At the end of the novel, Mechik's humanism leads to the death of almost the entire detachment: he was appointed sentinel and his task was to scout the road ahead and report the discovery of the enemy. He discovered the enemy, but the detachment did not warn. And cowardly ran away. Substituting the entire squad under heavy fire. Almost all the fighters knew that they would die, but they bravely gave their last fight. Think about it, are Sword's actions humanistic or selfish? Levinson is the opposite of Mechik. His actions really correspond to humanistic ideas: he thought about himself in the last place, about the detachment - in the first place. Life constantly confronted him with a choice: to act for himself or for the sake of his partisan detachment. The decision to put Frolov to sleep was hard for Levinson, but it was solely for the well-being of the entire detachment. The eyes of a local resident, full of tears, when the last pig was taken from him, I think, Levinson remembered for a long time. But he, again, acted for the benefit of others, so that the detachment would not die of hunger. Levinson's constant internal conflict, when he did not want to get up in the morning, but he did it and continued to command the detachment. And now let's return to the image of the Sword and think about his actions. He always acted for his own sake and thought only of himself, which is contrary to the ideas of humanism. Even after the betrayal, he cried not because he had betrayed, but because he loved himself and his pseudo-humanistic ideas very much, into which the detachment's betrayal did not fit at all. And Levinson always acted for the benefit of the people around him, and he thought about himself last. This, I believe, is true humanism.

Updated: 2019-04-26

Attention!
If you notice an error or typo, highlight the text and press Ctrl+Enter.
Thus, you will provide invaluable benefit to the project and other readers.

Thank you for your attention.

Useful material on the topic