A. Solzhenitsyn "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich"

"One day of Ivan Denisovich" is associated with one of the facts
biographies of the author himself - by the Ekibastuz special camp, where
winter 1950–1951 this story was created at the common works.
The protagonist of Solzhenitsyn's story is Ivan Denisovich Shukhov,
prisoner of the Stalin camp. The author narrates on behalf of his hero
about one day out of three thousand six hundred and fifty three days deadline
Ivan Denisovich. But even this day is enough to understand what kind of
the camp reigned in the camp, what orders and laws existed,
learn about the life of prisoners, be horrified by it. The camp is special
the former world, existing separately, parallel to ours, freely
my world. Here are other laws, different from those familiar to us,
here everyone survives in their own way. Life in the zone is shown not with
side, but from the inside by a person who knows about it firsthand
ke, but from my personal experience. That is why the story is amazing.
with its realism.

Questions for analysis:
What is the role of exposure?
From the exposition we learn the life philosophy of the chief
swarm. What is it?
What episode of the story is the plot?
How do events develop further?
What moments in the development of action can be highlighted?
What is their role?
How does the character of the protagonist appear in these episodes?
What is artistic function details of individual
moments in the life of a camper?
Describing the “shmon” before going to work, the author builds
there is a semantic chain. Define her role for disclosure
the ideas of the whole work.
Which episode of the story can be designated as the culminating
ny? Why does the author make the wall masonry the highest point
in story development?
How does the story end? What is a disconnect?
Why does the hero consider the day depicted in the story to be happy?
you m?
Does Shukhov (and only Shukhov?) talk about only one day?
author?
How does the author achieve the expansion of time space?
What are the features of the composition of the story “One Day in the Life of Ivan De-
nisovich" can be noted?
What author's idea is expressed in the story?
What can be said about spatial organization lead?
Find the spatial coordinates in the work?

What parameters set the system of characters in the story?
What is the place of the protagonist in this system?
What heroes does the author single out from the general mass? Why?
What makes Ivan Denisovich stand out among these heroes?
According to what moral laws does the hero of the story live? Form-
pay attention to how he relates to everything that he created
but by the hands of man, keeps him alive. Find such
details that help characterize Ivan Denisovich.
How does Shukhov feel about those with whom he works in the brigade? How
members of the brigade belong to him: foreman Tyurin, bricklayer
Kildis, the deaf Klevshin, the young man Gopchik, and others? Is it possible to say
to say that Shukhov is "terribly lonely"?
What is Shukhov's attitude to work, to business? Compare to answer
episodes of washing the floors in the supervisory office and the storeroom
ki walls in the TEC (at the beginning and at the end of the story).
Why is the behavior of the hero so different? How do you feel about mind-
serve Niyu Shukhov?
Find the hero's thoughts about his military past, about
how he escaped from captivity and was accused of treason. (Epi-
zod: conversation with Kildis while working on construction
CHP). Is it possible to say that Shukhov is passive, weak in the war?
soul? Is it possible to blame him for the fact that during the investigation he was beaten out?
gives life (“if you sign it, you will live a little longer”)?
Shukhov remembers the words of the first camp foreman Kuzemin:
“In the camp, here’s who dies: who licks bowls, who goes to the medical unit
hopes that someone goes to the godfather [guard] to knock.” Prove-
those that Shukhov follows these rules.
On whose behalf is the story being told? Whose position expresses-
Xia: author or hero? What is the name of this way of depicting
zheniya? Why did the author choose him?

Additional:

Restore the past of Ivan Denisovich.

How did he get into the camp?

Why does the day described in the story seem to Shukhov

"almost happy"?

The day spent in the camp did not bring much trouble. This is already happiness in these conditions.

What "happy events" happen to

a hero?

"happy day"?

If such a day is happy, then what are unlucky ones?

What helps the hero to resist, to remain human?

Outline:

Analysis of the work "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich"

History of creation.

The 60s are known for the "classification" of Russian history. The first decades of Soviet power were replaced by the plump dullness of faceless textbooks, what was valuable was drowned in the general stream of sayings. Giant hydroelectric power stations, BAM were declared milestones in history, banners "Glory to the CPSU" became the main decoration of cities and villages. In schools and universities, it was interpreted that history is a sequence of party congresses similar to each other, like two drops of water. In such an environment, one author suddenly had an insight: "For twelve years I calmly wrote and wrote. Only at the thirteenth I shuddered." It was the summer of 1960. Then he handed over the story "Sch-854" to the editors of Novy Mir.

"One day..." was conceived at general work in the Ekibastuz Special Camp in the winter of 1950-1951. Implemented in 1959, firstly as "Sch-854 (One day of one convict)".

After the 22nd Congress, the writer for the first time decided to propose something to the open press. The choice fell on " New world" A. Tvardovsky, where the manuscript went with an addition: "The camp through the eyes of a peasant, very folk thing". Tvardovsky, who lay down to "read" with her in the evening, got up after two or three pages, got dressed, re-read twice for a sleepless night and immediately began the struggle for its publication.

It was not by chance that Solzhenitsyn chose Tvardovsky as the publisher: “I had a true hunch-foreboding: to this peasant, Ivan Denisovich, the upper peasant A. Tvardovsky and the riding peasant N. Khrushchev cannot remain indifferent. And so it came true: not even poetry and It wasn’t even politics that decided the fate of my story, but this ultimate peasant essence of it, so much ridiculed, trampled and cursed with us since the Great Break and even earlier.

The story appeared in the eleventh issue of the same year. The author explains his idea as follows: "How was it born? Just such a camp day, hard work, I dragged a stretcher with a partner and thought how to describe the whole camp world - in one day. And everything will be. This thought was born to me in 52 For seven years she lay so simply. I'll try - I write one day one prisoner. I sat down, and how it poured! With terrible tension. "

The image of Ivan Denisovich was formed from the soldier Shukhov, who fought with the author in the Soviet-German war (and never sat), the general experience of the captives and the personal experience of the author, who was a bricklayer in the Special Camp. The rest of the faces are all camp life, with their true biographies, - this is how Solzhenitsyn told about his heroes. At that time, he, being a teacher, modest, but knowing his own worth, firm, but not arrogant, complaisant, worried that the text would not be cut down in the editorial office: "I value the integrity of this thing more than its printing."

On November 16, 1962, a signal version was received. In two or three days, the whole city was talking about the story of an unknown author, in a week - the country, in two - the whole world. The story obscured many political and everyday news: they talked about it in the subway and on the streets. In libraries, the eleventh issue of Novy Mir was torn out of hand, enthusiasts copied the text by hand. Tvardovsky wanted to please the author with such success, but Solzhenitsyn replied: "They wrote about me before. In the Ryazan newspaper, when I won the championship in athletics ..."

It was important for Solzhenitsyn not to become famous, but to say a truthful word about a page in the history of society. And if we are talking about studying the story at school, then the best epigraph to the topic "Lessons of Solzhenitsyn", perhaps, you will not pick up: "The word of truth will outweigh the whole world."

The book carried not only new and terrible things about Russian reality, not only gave a portrait of one day of the country. It is about the internal confrontation between man and the Gulag.

The theme of this book is affirmation of the victory of the human spirit over camp violence. The story answered the tormenting question of an anxious age: what needs to be done so that, in the words of B. Pasternak, "... not a single slice of the face."

Plotis built on the resistance of the living - inanimate, Man - Camp: "Here, guys, the law is the taiga. But people live here too. In the camp, that's who dies: who licks the bowls, who hopes for the medical unit, and who goes to knock on the godfather" (A. I. Solzhenitsyn, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, Moscow, 1990, p.

With Chekhov's conciseness and accuracy of the Russian word, the story conveys the essence of camp philosophy, which drives the plot of a person's internal resistance to the Gulag.

In obedience to the plot, a grouping of images is also organized: every day a drama of resistance to the Camp is played out: Alyoshka is a Baptist, Senka Klevshin, Pavlo is a pombrigade leader, Tyurin. Others lose and are doomed to death: Tsezar Markovich, the jackal Fetyukov, foreman Der, fools. Those who protect themselves "on someone else's blood" also perish. This is the conflict in the story.

Problem, i.e. the most important question that

Starting to work on the text, at the same time we find out the problems of the work.

1. The camp is like, the embodiment of malice, thoughtlessness, dirt taken into service system. - one of the leading problems of Solzhenitsyn's work.

At A.T. Tvardovsky is a reflection on the "wrong side" of a person, which prevails in moments of clouding of the soul and mind:

/TABLE>

The Solzhenitsyn Camp in the fate of millions of people is also a sign of the clouding of the soul and mind, a dangerous and cruel machine that grinds the weak. The camp is presented not as an exception to life, but as its order. A person can, having tempered his heart with courage, fight against extraordinary circumstances, but how to deal with what has become a long-term habit? By the time of imprisonment, a person is already developing skills for cleanliness, food culture, reading, and hobbies. In the camp "habits are temporary" and you can survive here only by resisting them. The camp pursues the main goal - to destroy the inner world of a person, many turn into "camp dust" here. And is it smart? There is quite a lot of description of camp life in the text: "A camper lives for himself only in the morning for ten minutes at breakfast, five at lunch, five at dinner..." you can’t, you have to try so that no warder sees you alone, but only in the crowd ... Maybe he is looking for a man to send to work, maybe there is no one to take evil away. Hungry convicts carried pieces of bread that had been bitten for reference in a suitcase, fought each time, because "the pieces are still similar, all from the same bread." Prisoners could only send two letters home a year.

The camp was created to kill a person: "The local life ruffled him from getting up to the end, leaving no empty memories ..." But Shukhov has the strength to resist the power of the Camp. He immediately separates "his" free time from hours of captivity, official time, dead and wretched. From these lines, thinking about the main thing begins, the competition between will and captivity, "one's own" and "official" begins. This competition is difficult, because in the camp everything is mixed up and often one’s own is also not one’s own. Through all this "longer-lasting day" there is a drama of resistance to the Camp.

In the morning, Ivan Denisovich has been unwell: "At least one side took it - either it would have scored in a chill, or the aches had passed. Otherwise, neither this nor that." But, as A. Tvardovsky wrote: "It's one thing - just a body, and then both the body and the soul." And this state of internal struggle runs through the whole story.

The camp renders any reasonable human action meaningless. Here the guard Ivan Denisovich is leading to wash the floors in the guard's room. But the guards themselves do not need cleanliness: "Hey, listen, 854th! You just wipe it off so that it's only wet, and get out of here." Ivan Denisovich is savvy: “Work is like a stick, there are two ends in it: if you do it for people, give quality, if you do it for a fool, give it a show. Otherwise, everyone would have died long ago, it’s a known thing.”

2. Attitude to work becomes one of the main facets of human evaluation in the story. This determines the relationship of people in the camp, in the Shukhov brigade. "Outside, the brigade is all in the same black pea coats and in the same numbers, but inside it is very uneven - they are walking on steps." On the bottom step - Fetyukov, on the middle - Ivan Denisovich. The hierarchy in the camp is more true than in the wild. "Jackal" Fetyukov, an opportunist and a hack, drove a car there, was a big boss. Ivan Denisovich "there" - a gray man from the point of view of the boss. Here they were equalized, and then rebuilt by another life, where there are fewer illusions that prevent you from seeing the essence of what is happening. Tyurin's brigade works conscientiously, skillfully, quickly, with this they resist captivity. (The laying of the wall is in progress; it is here that the real human values. "Whoever pulls hard, he becomes like a brigadier above his neighbors.") It's one thing - Katorang, who stubbornly, panting, drags a stretcher with mortar, and quite another thing - Fetyukov, who, hack-work, according to the precepts of the system, "tilts the stretcher and the mortar slurps , to make it easier to carry ... Shukhov stabbed him in the back once: "Oh, vile blood! And he was the director - I suppose he demanded from the workers? ”The masonry episode is described as if we are free workers, virtuosos in their field. Everything is alive in the hands of the bricklayer Shukhov:“ Cinder blocks are not all one to one. One with a broken corner, with a crumpled rib or a tide - Shukhov immediately sees this, and sees which side this cinder block wants to lie down on, and sees the place on the wall that the cinder block is waiting for.

And when the work was completed - Ivan Denisovich is experiencing his "moment of truth", and no one in the world can interfere with him: "Shukhov, even though there is now an escort with dogs, he ran back along the site, looked. Nothing. Now he ran up - and through the wall , left, right. Eh, the eye is a spirit level! Exactly! The hand is not getting old yet. "

This is the legitimate pride of an inwardly free person for the work that he has done as a master should: “This is how Shukhov is arranged in a stupid way, and for eight years in the camps they can’t wean him in any way: he regrets every thing and work, so that he doesn’t perish in vain.” And at work, everything else settled in Shukhov: when the day was already over, Shukhov decided to wet himself without doctors: "These doctors will heal in a wooden pea jacket." So it's over with the reliable that others can solve your problems - whether doctors, bosses ... They won't solve it. For everything, only the person himself is responsible.

To defend freedom in a hard labor camp means to depend as little as possible on its regime. This is difficult for the open and conscientious Shukhov. Peasant life, its custom, embedded in the genes, whether in the soul, do not give the hero hope for the medical unit. The imaginary care of the state about the health of the camper is expressed in the image of an imaginary paramedic, a student of the Literary Institute.

3. Another problem - waste of the people. The young poet Kolya Vdovushkin, in the camp hospital, is finishing the poems he had not finished in the wild; the peasant Shukhov has to “rewind” eight years at the logging site; artists "paint free paintings for the bosses, and they also go to divorce rooms to paint in turn." (Is this the purpose of the artist? "By the command of God, O muse, be obedient..."); the foreman of the 104th "has been sitting for nineteen years"; the first Shukhov brigadier by 1943 had already served twelve; the guards, too, "not butter in such a frost to stomp on the towers," the hard workers are at least busy with business, but are they? Together they are the people! Some were forcibly taken out of life during the years of "complete collectivization", others from the military stream. The indefinite, endless absurdity that our long-suffering people went through is presented in detail on the pages of the story.

4. This is how the problem arises moral, spiritual judgment over everything that happens. Awareness of real human life opposes the monstrous in its habitual outrage against people: the convoy conducts a thorough recount "by the heads", "a person is more precious than gold. If one head is missing behind the wire - you will add your own head there." What could be a greater mockery of the very concept of human value?

5. Sad news from the house of Ivan Denisovich reveals the problem transformations of "WILL" in a kind "ZONE".

It turns out that there is also no proper order in the wild, but there is system, in essence, little different from the camp. The fellow villagers are not busy with the real business; there is no one to work on the collective farm. Hacks - "dyes" flourish. Ridiculous, like in the camp. Shukhov feels himself mentally more secure in the camp than in this will, incomprehensible to him, where the “free” have to prevaricate and dodge day after day, while the camp resident Shukhov “never gave or took from anyone in the camp didn't learn." Personal spiritual resistance, protection by a person of his frailty inner peace can resist the absurdity of the "will" or "zone" spirit. The hero finds the source of spiritual strength in useful work.

6. Work as opposition to the camp. In Shukhov, the "gene" of industriousness has been preserved, he cannot work, like all the generations of his ancestors, through the sleeves. The work began - and "how all thoughts were swept out of my head. Shukhov did not remember anything now and did not care, but only thought - how to make pipe elbows and remove them so that they do not smoke." Shukhov can agree when he hears the words of Senka Klevshin: "If you mess up, you'll be lost." But he reinterprets them in his own way: "That's right. Groan and rot. But if you resist, you will break." To bend so as not to break requires more strength and stamina than to resist.

7. Decay and decay at the very foundation of the Camp:"They steal here, and they steal in the zone, and even earlier they steal in the warehouse. And all those who steal do not work themselves with a pick." This infection, cultivated in the bowels of the Gulag, spreads everywhere, giving metastases far beyond the barbed wire, asserting itself in the wild: in production, culture and other areas of human life. The camp system, as in a mirror, reflects the policy of the state, aimed at depriving a person of independent thinking and behavior. "In the camps and prisons, Ivan Denisovich has lost the habit of laying out what's for tomorrow, what in a year and how to feed his family. The authorities think about everything for him - it seems to be easier" ...

Year after year there was a great ruin of common sense and the very ability to think.

8. Art as a source of human spiritual strength.

People in the camp remain people, help each other to master the science of survival, support the weak as best they can. Shukhov, having "cut down" two bowls of porridge, notes with satisfaction that one of them went to Kavtorang. “And according to Shukhov, it’s right that they gave it to the captain. The time will come, and the captain will learn to live, but for now he doesn’t know how.” In the next episode, the conversation is about the same urgency of spiritual bread.

In the foreman's room between Caesar Markovich, a film director, and X-123, "a convict by sentence, a twenty-year-old, a wiry old man," there is an argument about Eisenstein's film "Ioann the Terrible." “Antics,” X-123 says with contempt and anger. “There is so much art that it’s no longer art ... Geniuses do not adjust the interpretation to the taste of tyrants ...” To Caesar’s objection that art is not “what”, but “ how", exclaims with fervor: "No, to hell with your "how", if it does not awaken good feelings in me!" Art cannot isolate itself from the world of people into its delights.

Another episode: Caesar and Pyotr Mikhailovich are discussing a review in the fresh Moscow "Vechorka" for Zavadsky's premiere. Why did she interest the zeks?

It's January 1951. In literature, on the stage, in the cinema, the lacquered ball of socialist everyday life rolls. Zavadsky did not escape the embellishment of reality.

It was about this time that A. Tvardovsky wrote in the poem "Beyond the distance - the distance": "And everything around is dead and empty, / And it's scary in this emptiness." Heroes-intellectuals in the story did not see false pathos in the review. They continue to "go past life."

9. Liberation from illusions many come too late.

Tyurin talks about his life "without pity, if not about himself." He comprehended the essence of the system that drove him, a Red Army soldier, "out of the ranks" in 1930, pursued him at every turn, overtook him and forever hid him in the camp. He recalls the Leningrad student trainees who treated him kindly: "they are passing by life, the semaphores are green" ... The bitter and sympathetic smile of an experienced prisoner, already free from universal lies. One of the main tools for liberation is Truth. People who bring the truth to others are visible everywhere and always.

Here is the old man Yu-81: “of all the camp backs, his back was excellently straight, and at the table it seemed as if he had put something over the bench under him. they didn’t squirm after everything that was going on in the dining room, but on top of Shukhov they unseeingly rested on their own. he was all exhausted, but not to the weakness of a wick - an invalid, but to a hewn, dark stone. , will not reconcile: he does not lay down his three hundred grams, like everyone else, on an unclean table in splashes, but on a washed rag.

The old man is distinguished from all by his unbending firmness, integrity, fidelity to some idea. Forgot nothing. Didn't back down from anything.

10. Spiritual dispute of characters The story is accompanied by the power of the arguments of each of the outstanding people. The camp gathered many of them, with their own voices and faces.

Alyoshka the Baptist finds solace in his God, thus moving away from the majority of atheist convicts. He is right in that “we should not pray for a parcel to be sent or for an extra portion of gruel to be. What is high among people is an abomination before God! We need to pray for the spiritual, so that the Lord removes scale from our hearts ...” Prayers make life easier this people, but they won’t make common life easier, they won’t “remove” the evil scum of the Camp from it: “In general, Ivan Denisovich decided, no matter how much you pray, they won’t throw off the deadline.

This idea, in its own way, also looks "above" the person, also "unseeingly rested on its own." Many different things came together in the Gulag.

It is the many faces and polyphony of the Camp that deprive any of the characters in the story of the right to be the authoritative and sole spokesman for the truth about the Camp and about human resistance to it. Solzhenitsyn is an epic artist. He needed all the voices put together to express the truth, to be heard.

Gleb Nerzhin, the hero of the novel "In the First Circle", thought that over time, people who passed through the camp "would easily trample on their prison past ... and even say that it was reasonable, not ruthless - and, perhaps, none of them is going to remind today's executioners what they did with human hearts! But Nerzhin felt his duty and his calling all the more for them all. He knew in himself the meticulous ability to never stray, never cool down, never forget. "

Such a person wrote "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich".

[in the camp]? [Cm. summary of the story "One day of Ivan Denisovich" .] After all, is it not just the need to survive, not the animal thirst for life? This need alone breeds people like canteens, like cooks. Ivan Denisovich is at the other pole of Good and Evil. That is Shukhov's strength, that with all the inevitable moral losses for a prisoner, he managed to keep his soul alive. Moral categories such as conscience, human dignity, decency determine his life behavior. Eight years of hard labor did not break the body. They didn't break their souls either. So the story about the Soviet camps grows to the scale of the story about the eternal strength of the human spirit.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn. One day of Ivan Denisovich. The author is reading. Fragment

The hero of Solzhenitsyn himself is hardly aware of his spiritual greatness. But the details of his behavior, seemingly insignificant, are fraught with deep meaning.

No matter how hungry Ivan Denisovich was, he ate not greedily, attentively, he tried not to look into other people's bowls. And although his shaved head was freezing, he certainly took off his hat while eating: “no matter how cold, but he could not allow himself is in the hat. Or - another detail. Ivan Denisovich smells the perfumed smoke of a cigarette. “... He was all tense in anticipation, and now this cigarette tail was more desirable to him than, it seems, the will itself, - but he wouldn't hurt himself and, like Fetyukov, he would not look into his mouth.

Deep meaning lies in the words highlighted here. Behind them lies a huge inner work, struggle with circumstances, with oneself. Shukhov "forged his own soul, year by year", managing to remain a man. "And through that - a particle of his people." With respect and love speaks of him

This explains the attitude of Ivan Denisovich towards other prisoners: respect for those who survived; contempt for those who have lost their human form. So, he despises the goner and jackal Fetyukov because he licks bowls, because he “dropped himself”. This contempt is aggravated, perhaps also because “Fetyukov, you know, in some office he was a big boss. I went by car." And any boss, as already mentioned, is an enemy for Shukhov. And now he does not want this goner to get an extra bowl of gruel, he rejoices when he is beaten. Cruelty? Yes. But one must also understand Ivan Denisovich. It cost him considerable spiritual effort to preserve human dignity, and he suffered the right to despise those who have lost their dignity.

However, Shukhov not only despises, but also feels sorry for Fetyukov: “To figure it out, so sorry for him. He won't live to see his time. He doesn't know how to put himself." Convict Shch-854 knows how to put himself. But his moral victory is expressed not only in this. After spending long years in hard labor, where the cruel "law-taiga" operates, he managed to save the most valuable asset - mercy, humanity, the ability to understand and pity the other.

All sympathy, all Shukhov's sympathy is on the side of those who survived, who have a strong spirit and mental fortitude.

Like a fairy-tale hero, Ivan Denisovich imagines brigadier Tyurin: “... the brigadier has a steel chest /... / it’s scary to interrupt his high thought /... / Stands against the wind - he won’t wince, the skin on his face is like oak bark" (34) . The prisoner Yu-81 is the same. "... He sits in the camps and in prisons innumerable, how much Soviet power costs ..." The portrait of this man matches the portrait of Tyurin. Both of them evoke images of heroes, like Mikula Selyaninovich: “Of all the hunched camp backs, his back was excellently straight /... / His face was all exhausted, but not to the weakness of a disabled wick, but to a hewn, dark stone” (102).

This is how “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich” reveals “human fate” – the fate of people placed in inhuman conditions. The writer believes in the unlimited spiritual powers of man, in his ability to withstand the threat of bestiality.

Rereading Solzhenitsyn's story now, one involuntarily compares it with " Kolyma stories» V. Shalamova. The author of this terrible book draws the ninth circle of hell, where suffering reached such an extent that, with rare exceptions, people could no longer retain their human appearance.

“Shalamov’s camp experience was bitter and longer than mine,” writes A. Solzhenitsyn in The Gulag Archipelago, “and I respectfully admit that it was he, and not me, who got to touch that bottom of brutality and despair, to which the whole camp life was pulling us ". But paying tribute to this mournful book, Solzhenitsyn disagrees with its author in his views on man.

Addressing Shalamov, Solzhenitsyn says: “Perhaps anger is not the most durable feeling after all? With your personality and your poems, do you refute your own conception? According to the author of The Archipelago, “... even in the camp (and everywhere in life) there is no corruption without ascent. They are close".

Noting the steadfastness and fortitude of Ivan Denisovich, many critics, nevertheless, spoke of his poverty and earthiness. spiritual world. So, L. Rzhevsky believes that Shukhov's horizons are limited by "one bread". Another critic argues that Solzhenitsyn's hero "suffers as a person and a family man, but to a lesser extent from the humiliation of his personal and civic dignity"

The idea of ​​the story came to the mind of the writer when he was serving time in the Ekibastuz concentration camp. Shukhov - main character“One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich” is a collective image. He embodies the features of the prisoners who were with the writer in the camp. This is the first published work of the author, which brought Solzhenitsyn worldwide fame. In his narrative, which has a realistic direction, the writer touches on the topic of the relationship of people deprived of their freedom, their understanding of honor and dignity in inhuman conditions of survival.

Characteristics of the heroes of "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich"

Main characters

Minor characters

Brigadier Tyurin	In Solzhenitsyn's story, Tyurin is a Russian peasant who cheers for the brigade with his soul. Fair and independent. The life of the brigade depends on his decisions. Smart and honest. He got into the camp as the son of a fist, he is respected among his comrades, they try not to let him down. This is not the first time in the Tyurin camp, he can go against the authorities.
Captain of the second rank Buinovsky	A hero of those who do not hide behind the backs of others, but impractical. He has recently been in the zone, so he still does not understand the intricacies of camp life, the prisoners respect him. Ready to stand up for others, respects justice. He tries to stay cheerful, but his health is already failing.
Film director Cesar Markovich	A person who is far from reality. He often receives rich parcels from home, and this gives him the opportunity to get a good job. Likes to talk about cinema and art. He works in a warm office, so he is far from the problems of cellmates. There is no cunning in him, so Shukhov helps him. Not spiteful and not greedy.
Alyosha - Baptist	Calm young man, sitting for the faith. His convictions did not waver, but were further strengthened after the conclusion. Harmless and unpretentious, he constantly argues with Shukhov about religious issues. Clean, with clear eyes.
Stenka Klevshin	He is deaf, so he is almost always silent. He was in a concentration camp in Buchenwald, organized subversive activities, smuggled weapons into the camp. The Germans brutally tortured the soldier. Now he is already in the Soviet zone for "treason against the motherland."
Fetyukov	The description of this character is dominated only by negative characteristics: weak-willed, unreliable, cowardly, does not know how to stand up for himself. Causes contempt. In the zone, he is engaged in begging, does not disdain to lick plates, and collect cigarette butts from a spittoon.
Two Estonians	Tall, thin, even outwardly similar to each other, like brothers, although they met only in the zone. Calm, not warlike, reasonable, capable of mutual assistance.
Yu-81	Significant image of an old convict. He spent his whole life in camps and exiles, but he never caved in to anyone. Causes universal respectful respect. Unlike others, bread is placed not on a dirty table, but on a clean rag.

This was an incomplete description of the heroes of the story, the list of which is much larger in the work “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich” itself. This table of characteristics can be used to answer questions in literature lessons.

useful links

See what else we have:

Artwork test

Sections: Literature

Lesson type: problem-developing

Lesson form: seminar

Lesson Objectives:

Educational:

• To reveal the essence of the image of Ivan Denisovich with the help of the main elements of Solzhenitsyn's artistic style;
• Show the fundamental novelty of the hero for Russian literature of the XX century;
• Reveal key features language style of the writer.

Developing:

• Improve the ability to analyze and evaluate piece of art and his heroes;
• To promote the development of oral and written speech in students;
• Strengthen the skills of generalization and the ability to draw conclusions.

Educational:

• Arouse interest in the work of Solzhenitsyn, the desire to learn about the tragic pages in the history of our state;
• Follow human behavior who found himself in inhuman conditions;
• To improve the moral qualities of students;
• To cultivate the ability to defend one's own point of view, respect for the opinion of classmates.

Lesson equipment:

• Portrait of A.I. Solzhenitsyn;
• The text of the story "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich";
• Handout (for each desk) with a statement by the critic N. Sergovantsev;
• Sheets for each student for graphic design of lesson material (Annex 1).

Two weeks before the lesson, the students were divided into groups (5 groups), each of which received its own task.

When compiling the tasks, the material of the practical textbook "Russian literature of the 20th century" grade 11 / ed. Yu.I. Lyssogo. M. "Mnemosyne". 2001, p.458.

Task for the 1st group:

1. Restore the hero's past. How did he get into the camp?
2. Is it possible to say that Shukhov was passive in the war, weak in soul?
3. Is it possible to blame him for choosing life during the investigation?

Task for the 2nd group:

1. Pay attention to how Shukhov treats everything that is created by human hands, supports his life? How does this characterize him?
2. What is the originality of Shukhov's portrait?

Task for the 3rd group:

1. By what moral laws does Shukhov live?
2. Prove that Shukhov is faithful to these precepts.
3. What is Shukhov's attitude to work, to business? (Compare the episodes of mopping in the supervisor's room and masonry walls at the CHP). Why is the character's behavior so different?
4. How do you feel about Shukhov's ability to "serve"? (Remember the discussion about the work of dyeers in his native village of Temgenevo). How does the attitude to work characterize Ivan Denisovich?

Task for the 4th group:

1. What are the parameters of the character system? Determine the main steps of the camp hierarchy (guards and prisoners; a strict hierarchy among prisoners - from the foreman to jackals and informers).
2. What is the hierarchy of heroes in their relation to captivity? What is Shukhov's place in these coordinate systems? (An attempt to rebel against the camp system - Buinovsky; naive non-resistance - Alyoshka; Shukhov's "middle" position in the system of characters).
3. How does Shukhov feel about those with whom he works in the brigade?
4. How do the team members feel about him? Is it possible to say that Shukhov is "terribly lonely"?
5. Is there a contrast between Shukhov and Tsezar Markovich (peasant and intellectual) in the story? If yes, what is it?

Task for the 5th group:

1. Why does the author use indirect speech as the main narrative device?
2. Is it possible to say that the whole story of Solzhenitsyn is an internal monologue of the hero? Show this with an example.
3. How is the author's assessment expressed?
4. Find and write down the proverbs used by Solzhenitsyn. Explain any 5. For what purpose does Solzhenitsyn introduce them into the text?

Epigraph to the lesson:

Do you want to know who am I? what am I? Where am I going? -
I am the same as I was and will be all my life:
Not cattle, not a tree, not a slave, but a man!
A. Radishchev. Ode "Liberty"

Lesson steps:

I. Organizational and motivational-target exposition of the lesson.

(Message topic, lesson objectives)

Teacher:

Moral problems traditionally remain in the center of attention of Russian literature. Good and evil, honor and conscience, devotion and betrayal - these are far from all the questions that Russian writers solve in their works.

Sometimes a person faces terrible, even cruel trials when he finds himself on the verge of life and death. But even in the most extreme conditions, a person always has a choice, which everyone determines in accordance with his moral ideal. Sometimes the fear of death becomes stronger, and a person crosses the line that separates him from the animal. But it also happens differently. A person, despite everything, remains a person, retains the human in himself, does not lose respect for himself - "is saved by dignity" - and this, probably, is the only correct choice (Reading the epigraph).

Today our conversation is about a man who, by the will of fate, found himself in inhuman conditions - in a prison camp. This is the main character of Solzhenitsyn's story - Ivan Denisovich Shukhov. (Announcement of the topic of the lesson. Students make notes in notebooks).

The main goal of the lesson is to understand and reveal the essence of the hero Solzhenitsyn, to determine with what elements artistic style writer this image is created.

II. Creating conditions for an independent search for patterns, information (acquaintance with a fragment of an article by critic N. Sergovantsev, derivation of a problematic issue)

And now I suggest you get acquainted with the statement of one critic. Read it (the material is printed for each desk).

"I want to know how ordinary person, put forward by the author as a deeply folk type, will comprehend the amazing environment that surrounds him.

And from life itself, and from the entire history of Soviet literature, we know that the typical folk character, forged by our whole life, is the character of a fighter, active, inquisitive, effective. But Shukhov is completely devoid of these qualities. He does not resist tragic circumstances in any way, he submits to them with his soul and body. Not the slightest internal protest, not a hint of a desire to understand the reasons for his plight, not even an attempt to learn about them from more knowledgeable people - Ivan Denisovich has none of this. His whole life program, his whole philosophy is reduced to one thing: to survive! Some critics were touched by such a program: they say, a person is alive! But after all, a terribly lonely person is alive, in his own way, adapted to hard labor conditions, truly not even understanding the unnaturalness of his position. Yes, Ivan Denisovich was muzzled. In many ways, the extremely cruel conditions dehumanized - this is not his fault. But the author of the story is trying to present him as an example of spiritual fortitude. And what kind of steadfastness is there when the hero's circle of interests does not extend beyond an extra bowl of "baland", "left" earnings and a thirst for warmth:

No, Ivan Denisovich cannot apply for the role folk type our era."

N. Sergovantsev. The tragedy of loneliness and "continuous life". 1963.

Here is such a point of view. Is the critic correct in his assessment?

What makes Ivan Denisovich the main character of the story? - this is a problematic question, which we can answer only based on the text of the work itself. Let's turn to the text.

III. Analytical work with text. Report of creative groups (checking d / z).

(During the performances, students work through the material, highlight the main thing, select and draw it up graphically)

You know that the image of any character is created using various means. Name them. (Portrait, behavior and actions of the hero, his speech, landscape, interior, assessment of the hero by other characters, etc.). We will consider those that will help us better understand the image of the hero of the story: the background of the hero, the portrait, everyday details, actions and deeds, relationships with other characters, the attitude of the author to the hero. Preparing for the lesson, you worked in groups, collecting material in your direction. Now the "commanders" of your groups will report on the work done. During performances, be careful, select the main thing and fix it in the table. The word is given to the "commander" of the first group. (Speech by the "commander" of group No. 1)

Teacher: Group No. 2 worked on revealing the image through the details of the portrait, household items. In fact, the text of the story is distinguished by a high degree of detail, each fact, as it were, is divided into the smallest components, each of which is presented in close-up. Solzhenitsyn loves such "cinematic" techniques. What seems to us a trifle, for the hero is a matter of life and death. (Speech by the "commander" of group No. 2)

Teacher: The third group considered the actions and deeds of the hero. (Speech by the "commander" of group No. 3)

Teacher: And now let's consider what place the hero occupies in the system of images. (Group Report #4)

Let's get back to the criticism. Do you agree with his assessment of the hero of the story?

What traditions of Russian literature can be traced in the image of Ivan Denisovich?

(A.I. Solzhenitsyn continues the traditions of L. Tolstoy: Ivan Denisovich Shukhov, like Platon Karataev, is the embodiment of the unlimited ability of the Russian people to endure and believe, contrary to personal fate. Love for work also makes Shukhov related to the characters of Nekrasov’s poem. He is just as talented and is happy at work, like a stonemason from Olonchan, who is able to "crush a mountain." Ivan Denisovich is not unique. He is a real, moreover, a typical character).

IV. Generalization of the material. An answer to a problematic question.

Summarizing. The uniqueness and significance of Solzhenitsyn's story lies in the fact that the author painted a tragic picture of people's lives under the conditions of a totalitarian regime and at the same time showed a truly folk character asserting itself in these circumstances. Shukhov's strength lies in the fact that despite all the inevitable moral losses for a prisoner, he managed to keep a living soul. Shukhov's high degree of adaptability has nothing to do with opportunism, humiliation, loss of "self." Such moral categories as conscience, human dignity, decency determine his life behavior. Almost on every page we read that the years of penal servitude did not make Shukhov embittered, hardened. In spite of everything, kindness, responsiveness, a cordial, benevolent attitude towards people were preserved in him, for which he is paid the same in the brigade.

Ivan Denisovich does not resist the camp conditions of life. The hero firmly remembered the words of his first foreman Kuzemin: "Here, guys, the law is the taiga." Shukhov perfectly understands the futility of fighting the camp: he is great and resistance to him robs a person of the last strength necessary for life, it is better "... groan and rot. But if you resist, you will break." The Russian people have always perceived power as an inevitable evil that must be endured, since power is temporary, fickle, and the peasant has been living on earth unchanged for several centuries. The hero, whose name and patronymic the story is respectfully named, is the most ordinary ordinary peasant, a truly folk character.

We see that, in principle, even in terrible camp conditions, a person has a choice - you can sink to the bottom, lose a person in yourself; You can keep a person in yourself, or you can rise above yourself. In the story, these options are represented by different characters. On their example, we were convinced that the choice always remains with the person himself. We are not finishing this conversation today.

V. Suggestion of homework.

1. Answer the following question in writing: How can one remain a free person in conditions of lack of freedom?
2. Read " Kolyma stories" V. Shalamova. Compare 2-3 stories with the story of A.I. Solzhenitsyn.

Literature used in the preparation of the lesson:

1. A.I. Solzhenitsyn. One day of Ivan Denisovich. M., 2004
2. Lakshin V.Ya. Ivan Denisovich, his friends and enemies.//In the book. "Shores of Culture"/Sb.st. M., 1994
3. Niva J. Solzhenitsyn. M., 1992
4. Chalmaev V.A. Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Life and creativity./Kn. for students. M., 1994
5. Kamensky G.L. A.I. Solzhenitsyn "One day of Ivan Denisovich" / Prince. for students. M., 2005