The story “The Duel” was published in 1905. This is a story about the conflict between the humanistic worldview and the violence that flourished in the army of that time. The story reflects Kuprin’s own vision of army order. Many of the heroes of the work are characters from real life writers he encountered during his service.

Yuri Romashov, a young second lieutenant, is deeply affected by the general moral decay that reigns in army circles. He often visits Vladimir Nikolaev, with whose wife Alexandra (Shurochka) he is secretly in love. Romashov also maintains a vicious relationship with Raisa Peterson, the wife of his colleague. This romance ceased to give him any joy, and one day he decided to break off the relationship. Raisa set out to take revenge. Soon after their breakup, someone began to bombard Nikolaev with anonymous letters with hints of a special connection between his wife and Romashov. Because of these notes, Shurochka asks Yuri not to visit their house anymore.

However, the young second lieutenant had plenty of other troubles. He did not allow non-commissioned officers to start fights, and constantly argued with officers who supported moral and physical violence against their charges, which displeased the command. Romashov's financial situation also left much to be desired. He is lonely, service loses its meaning for him, his soul is bitter and sad.

During the ceremonial march, the second lieutenant had to endure the worst shame of his life. Yuri was simply daydreaming and made a fatal mistake, breaking the order.

After this incident, Romashov, tormenting himself with memories of ridicule and general censure, did not notice how he found himself not far from the railway. There he met soldier Khlebnikov, who wanted to commit suicide. Khlebnikov, through tears, talked about how he was bullied in the company, about the beatings and ridicule that had no end. Then Romashov began to realize even more clearly that each faceless gray company consists of separate destinies, and each fate matters. His grief paled against the background of the grief of Khlebnikov and others like him.

A little later, a soldier hanged himself in one of the mouths. This incident led to a wave of drunkenness. During a drinking session, a conflict broke out between Romashov and Nikolaev, which led to a duel.

Before the duel, Shurochka came to Romashov’s house. She began to appeal to the tender feelings of the second lieutenant, saying that they must definitely shoot, because refusal to duel could be misinterpreted, but none of the duelists should be wounded. Shurochka assured Romashov that her husband agreed to these conditions and their agreement would remain secret. Yuri agreed.

As a result, despite Shurochka’s assurances, Nikolaev mortally wounded the second lieutenant.

The main characters of the story

Yuri Romashov

The central character of the work. A kind, shy and romantic young man who does not like the harsh morals of the army. He dreamed of a literary career, often walked, immersed in thoughts and dreams of another life.

Alexandra Nikolaeva (Shurochka)

The object of Romashov's affection. At first glance, she is a talented, charming, energetic and intelligent woman; gossip and intrigue in which local ladies participate are alien to her. However, in reality it turns out that she is much more insidious than all of them. Shurochka dreamed of a luxurious metropolitan life; everything else did not matter to her.

Vladimir Nikolaev

Shurochka's unlucky husband. He does not shine with intelligence and fails the entrance exams to the academy. Even his wife, helping him prepare for admission, mastered almost the entire program, but Vladimir could not manage it.

Shulgovich

A demanding and stern colonel, often dissatisfied with Romashov’s behavior.

Nazansky

A philosophical officer who likes to talk about the structure of the army, about good and evil in general, is prone to alcoholism.

Raisa Peterson

Romashov's mistress, wife of Captain Peterson. She is a gossip and an intriguer, not burdened by any principles. She is busy playing at secularism, talking about luxury, but inside her there is spiritual and moral poverty.

In “The Duel,” A. Kuprin demonstrates to the reader all the inferiority of the army. The main character, Lieutenant Romashov, is becoming more and more disillusioned with his service, finding it pointless. He sees the cruelty with which officers treat their subordinates, witnesses assault that is not stopped by management.

Most of the officers resigned themselves to the existing order. Some find in it an opportunity to take out their own grievances on others through moral and physical violence, to show the cruelty inherent in their character. Others simply accept reality and, not wanting to fight, look for an outlet. Often this outlet becomes drunkenness. Even Nazansky, an intelligent and talented person, drowns in a bottle thoughts about the hopelessness and injustice of the system.

A conversation with soldier Khlebnikov, who constantly endures bullying, confirms Romashova in the opinion that this entire system is rotten through and through and has no right to exist. In his reflections, the second lieutenant comes to the conclusion that there are only three occupations worthy of an honest person: science, art and free physical labor. The army is a whole class, which in peacetime enjoys the benefits earned by other people, and in wartime it goes to kill warriors like themselves. This makes no sense. Romashov thinks about what would happen if all people unanimously said “no” to war, and the need for the army disappeared by itself.

The duel between Romashov and Nikolaev is a confrontation between honesty and deceit. Romashov was killed by betrayal. Both then and now, the life of our society is a duel between cynicism and compassion, loyalty to principles and immorality, humanity and cruelty.

You can also read, one of the most prominent and popular writers in Russia in the first half of the twentieth century.

Surely you will be interested summary in the opinion of Alexander Kuprin, his most successful, imbued with a fabulous, or even mystical atmosphere.

The main idea of ​​the story

The problems raised by Kuprin in “The Duel” go far beyond the army. The author points out the shortcomings of society as a whole: social inequality, the gap between the intelligentsia and the common people, spiritual decline, the problem of the relationship between society and the individual.

The story “The Duel” received a positive review from Maxim Gorky. He argued that this work should deeply touch “every honest and thinking officer.”

K. Paustovsky was deeply touched by the meeting between Romashov and soldier Khlebnikov. Paustovsky ranked this scene among the best in Russian literature.

However, “The Duel” received not only positive reviews. Lieutenant General P. Geisman accused the writer of slander and an attempt to undermine the state system.

• Kuprin dedicated the first edition of the story to M. Gorky. According to the author himself, he owes all the boldest thoughts expressed on the pages of “The Duel” to the influence of Gorky.
• The story “The Duel” has been filmed five times, the last time in 2014. “The Duel” was the last episode of a four-part film consisting of film adaptations of Kuprin’s works.

The outstanding Russian writer Alexander Ivanovich Kuprin dreamed of becoming an officer since childhood. The noble dream of becoming a defender of the Fatherland led him in 1880 to the Second Moscow Cadet Corps, and then in 1887 to Aleksandrovskoe military school. In 1890, Second Lieutenant Kuprin began serving in the 46th Dnieper Regiment. And in 1894, with the rank of lieutenant, he resigned and resigned. Obviously, the reason for the dismissal should be sought in bitter disappointment, in the discrepancy between the realities of military garrisons and the ambitious expectations of officers.

Knowing first-hand the ins and outs of the army, Kuprin thoroughly and truthfully recreates its deep analysis in his work. "The Duel" was published in 1905.

The deep crisis of the Tsarist army

The royal army of the late 19th - early 20th centuries was portrayed by court writers in an embellished manner. Kuprin had the courage to show its very underside, the unkemptness, and the indifference of those in power to its problems. On the one hand, the army represented powerless soldiers, subject to the commander. At the same time, he had sufficient power to flog a soldier to death with rods or rot in the guardhouse. The officers received a small salary and were engaged in dull drilling of the troops. Kuprin devotes his analysis to the extensive picture of neglect of the huge military economy. “The Duel” clearly shows that this flaw was not introduced from the outside, it was laid down from the very beginning, organizationally. In order to manage, the regiment commander Shulgovich has to match such a deformed army himself. He, in principle, is a caring commander, but in order to be adequate to the system, he is forced to raise his voice at his subordinates, and at times simply pretend to be an idiot. Drunkenness and unbridled cruelty flourish among officers. The life of military garrisons is isolated from the life of the rest of civil society. The lot of officers' wives is garrison gossip and mouse fuss around the house. The deep social analysis presented in the story paints such a hopeless picture for us. Kuprin wrote his “Duel” like an artist, from life. The city of Proskurov, where the 46th Dnieper Infantry Regiment was stationed, is shown in detail; many of Kuprin’s colleagues were transformed into heroes of the story.

Storyline of the story

“How do potentially its best officers feel in the army?” - Kuprin begins his topical analysis. “The Duel” introduces us to the main character, second lieutenant Georgy Alekseevich Romashov. This is a young officer who does not accept the pernicious garrison spirit, which cripples people and kills the best and most sublime in them. He is disgusted by both Lieutenant Vasily Nilovich Nazansky, who became a drunkard, and Archakovsky, who turned from an officer into a dishonest card sharper. True, Georgy Alekseevich also has a weakness: he started an affair with a married lady, Raisa Alexandrovna Peterson, a lover of adultery. But it’s time to end this, as Romashov himself believes. He thinks about what is wrong in the life around him, in the idiotic drill? At the same time, coming to the conclusion that free physical labor, science and art are worthy occupations for a person. According to the second lieutenant, officers are full-fledged and vocal members of society. Even if an unjust war is unleashed, the soldiers and officers of the opposing sides have the right to say: “I don’t want to!” - and go home. Anything easier, the war will stop immediately. It is characteristic that Kuprin came to these conclusions after making a similar analysis back in his army years. “Duel” is a creative space where the classic matches the main character with a thoroughly familiar prototype - himself. Romashov has the traits that the classic valued most in men: “noble silence” and “reckless nobility.”

The second lieutenant is a frequent guest of the Nikolaevs, a young family whose head, Vladimir Efimovich, a captain by rank, failed for the second time to enter the General Staff Academy. His wife Alexandra Petrovna (Shurochka), even more than her husband, sought to escape from the garrison. Shurochka is an educated lady. She has already mastered the sciences in which she will take the exams better than her husband. Second Lieutenant Romashov likes her. The vengeful Raisa Peterson decides to ruin Georgiy Alekseevich’s personal life and career by sending anonymous letters to Captain Nikolaev and all garrison officials about the connection between the second lieutenant and Shurochka.

Service in the garrison is not only nervous and dull, but also downright cruel. Soldiers who are in the position of powerless slaves sometimes cannot stand the abuse. Romashov literally pulls the soldier Khlebnikov, exhausted by mockery, from the rails by the hand, who has decided to commit suicide.

After a soldier in Captain Osadchy’s company hanged himself, the regiment’s officers started drinking. Between mournful speeches interspersed with obscenities, Captain Nikolaev quarreled with Second Lieutenant Romashov. Just the day before, by decree from above, officers were allowed a duel as a way to radically eliminate interpersonal contradictions. The captain initiated this action.

The tragic ending was largely predetermined by Shurochka’s baseness. On the eve of the duel, she secretly met with Romashov, misinformed that the duel would be formal, Vladimir Efimych would shoot in the air and called on the second lieutenant to do the same. In response to Romashov’s safe shot, Captain Nikolaev, enraged by the anonymous messages, mortally wounded him in the stomach.

Why did Kuprin choose such a title for his favorite story - “The Duel”? Analysis shows the reason: the ideological conflict between the personality of an educated person and the suffocating atmosphere of a provincial garrison.

conclusions

It is significant that it was after the creation of this work that a new classic was “born” in Russia - Alexander Ivanovich Kuprin. The story “The Duel” was highly appreciated among officers. The best representatives of this part of Russian society (for example, Lieutenant Schmidt) personally expressed their deep recognition of Kuprin for the deep truthfulness of the story. Maxim Gorky considered “The Duel” the most significant work about the life of the army.

Even being a recognized master of the pen, Kuprin, in his worldview, remained a noble defender of the Fatherland. His relationship with the new Bolshevik government did not go smoothly. Individual perceptions of officer honor were not consistent with official propaganda. In 1919, with the rank of second lieutenant, the fifty-year-old writer took part in Yudenich’s attack on St. Petersburg. After the defeat of the North-Western Army, he emigrated to Paris. And only a year before his death, in 1937, at the invitation of the Soviet government, the classic man came to the USSR to die on his native soil. Until the end of his life, he cherished the officer's shoulder straps as the most expensive relic.

Appearing during the Russo-Japanese War and in the context of the growth of the first Russian revolution, the work caused a huge public outcry, since it undermined one of the main pillars of the autocratic state - the inviolability of the military caste.
The problems of “The Duel” go beyond the scope of a traditional military story. Kuprin also touches on the issue of the causes of social inequality among people, on possible ways to liberate a person from spiritual oppression, and raises the problem of the relationship between the individual and society, the intelligentsia and the people.
The plot of the work is built on the vicissitudes of the fate of an honest Russian officer, whom the conditions of army barracks life make him think about the wrong relationships between people. The feeling of spiritual decline haunts not only Romashov, but also Shurochka.
The comparison of two heroes, who are characterized by two types of worldviews, is generally characteristic of Kuprin. Both heroes strive to find a way out of the impasse. At the same time, Romashov comes to the idea of ​​​​protesting against bourgeois prosperity and stagnation, and Shurochka adapts to it, despite the outward ostentatious rejection. The author’s attitude towards her is ambivalent; he is closer to Romashov’s “reckless nobility and noble lack of will.” Kuprin even noted that he considers Romashov to be his double, and the story itself is largely autobiographical.
Romashov is a “natural man,” he instinctively resists injustice, but his protest is weak, his dreams and plans are easily destroyed, since they are immature and ill-conceived, often naive. Romashov is close to Chekhov's heroes. But the emerging need for immediate action strengthens his will for active resistance. After meeting with the soldier Khlebnikov, “humiliated and insulted,” a turning point occurs in Romashov’s consciousness; he is shocked by the man’s readiness to commit suicide, in which he sees the only way out of a martyr’s life. The sincerity of Khlebnikov’s impulse especially clearly indicates to Romashov the stupidity and immaturity of his youthful fantasies, which only aimed to prove something to others. Romashov is shocked by the intensity of Khlebnikov’s suffering, and it is the desire to sympathize that makes the second lieutenant think for the first time about the fate of the common people. However, Romashov’s attitude towards Khlebnikov is contradictory: conversations about humanity and justice bear the imprint of abstract humanism, Romashov’s call for compassion is in many ways naive.
In “The Duel,” A. I. Kuprin continues the traditions of psychological analysis of L. N. Tolstoy: in the work, in addition to the protesting voice of the hero himself, who saw the injustice of a cruel and stupid life, one can hear the author’s accusatory voice (Nazansky’s monologues). Kuprin uses Tolstoy’s favorite technique - the technique of substituting a reasoner for the main character. In “The Duel,” Nazansky is the bearer of social ethics. The image of Nazansky is ambiguous: his radical mood (critical monologues, romantic premonition of a “radiant life”, anticipation of future social upheavals, hatred of the lifestyle of the military caste, the ability to appreciate high, pure love, feel the beauty of life) conflicts with his own way of life. The only salvation from moral death is for the individualist Nazansky and for Romashov to escape from all social ties and obligations.

Moral and social problems in A. Kuprin’s story “The Duel”

Kuprin's biography was full of various events that gave the writer rich food for his literary works. The story “The Duel” is rooted in that period of Kuprin’s life when he acquired the experience of a military man. The desire to serve in the army was passionate and romantic in my youth. Kuprin graduated from the cadet corps and the Moscow Alexander Military School. Over time, service and the ostentatious, elegant side of an officer’s life turned out to be its wrong side: tiresomely monotonous classes in “literature” and practicing gun techniques with soldiers dull from drill, drinking in a club and vulgar affairs with regimental libertines. However, it was these years that gave Kuprin the opportunity to comprehensively study provincial military life, as well as get acquainted with the impoverished life of the Belarusian outskirts, the Jewish town, and the morals of the “low-ranking” intelligentsia. The impressions of these years were, as it were, a reserve for many years to come (Kuprin gleaned material for a number of stories and, first of all, the story “The Duel” during his officer service). Work on the story “The Duel” in 1902-1905 was dictated by the desire to carry out a long-conceived plan - to “enough” of the tsarist army, this concentration of stupidity, ignorance and inhumanity.
All the events of the work take place against the backdrop of army life, without ever going beyond it. Perhaps this was done in order to emphasize the real need to at least think about the problems that are shown in the story. After all, the army is a stronghold of autocracy, and if there are shortcomings in it, then we must strive to eliminate them. Otherwise, all the importance and exemplary character of the existing system is a bluff, an empty phrase, and there is no great power.
The main character, Second Lieutenant Romashov, will have to realize the horror of army reality. The author’s choice is not accidental, because Romashov is in many ways very close to Kuprin: both of them graduated from military school and enlisted in the army. From the very beginning of the story, the author sharply immerses us in the atmosphere of army life, painting a picture of company exercises: practicing service at the post, the lack of understanding by some soldiers of what is required of them (Khlebnikov, carrying out the orders of the arrested; Mukhamedzhinov, a Tatar who poorly understands Russian and , as a result, incorrectly executing orders). It is not difficult to understand the reasons for this misunderstanding. Khlebnikov, a Russian soldier, simply does not have any education, and therefore for him everything said by Corporal Shapovalenko is nothing more than an empty phrase. In addition, the reason for such misunderstanding is a sharp change in the situation: just as the author abruptly immerses us in this kind of situation, many recruits had no idea about military affairs before, did not communicate with military people, everything is new for them: “ ...they still did not know how to separate jokes and examples from the real requirements of the service and fell first to one extreme and then to the other.” Mukha-medzhinov does not understand anything due to his nationality, and this is also a big problem for the Russian army - they are trying to “bring everyone under the same brush,” without taking into account the characteristics of each people, which are, so to speak, innate and cannot be eliminated no training, much less shouting or physical punishment.
In general, the problem of assault appears very clearly in this story. This is the apotheosis of social inequality. Of course, we must not forget that corporal punishment for soldiers was abolished only in 1905. But in in this case we are no longer talking about punishment, but about mockery: “The non-commissioned officers brutally beat their subordinates for an insignificant mistake in literature, for a lost leg during marching - they beat them bloody, knocked out teeth, broke their eardrums with blows to the ear, knocked them to the ground with their fists.” " Would a person with a normal psyche behave this way? The moral world of everyone who joins the army changes radically and, as Romashov notes, not for the better. Even Captain Stelkovsky, commander of the fifth company, the best company in the regiment, an officer who always “possessed patient, cold-blooded and confident persistence,” as it turned out, also beat soldiers (as an example, Romashov cites how Stelkovsky knocks out a soldier’s teeth along with his horn, incorrectly who gave the signal through this same horn). In other words, there is no point in envying the fate of people like Stelkovsky.
The fate of ordinary soldiers causes even less envy. After all, they do not even have the basic right to choose: “You cannot hit a person who cannot answer you, who does not have the right to raise his hand to his face to protect himself from a blow. He doesn’t even dare to tilt his head.” The soldiers must endure all this and cannot even complain, because they know perfectly well what will happen to them then.
In addition to the fact that the privates are subjected to systematic beatings, they are also deprived of their livelihood: the small salary they receive, they give almost all of it to their commander. And this same money is spent by the gentlemen officers on all sorts of gatherings in bars with drinking, dirty games (again with money), and in the company of depraved women.
Having officially left the serfdom system 40 years ago and having sacrificed a huge number of human lives for it, Russia at the beginning of the 20th century had a model of such a society in the army, where the officers were exploiting landowners, and ordinary soldiers were serf slaves. The army system is destroying itself from within. It does not sufficiently perform the function assigned to it.
Those who try to go against this system will face a very difficult fate. It is useless to fight such a “machine” alone; it “absorbs everyone and everything.” Even attempts to understand what is happening plunges people into shock: Nazansky, who is constantly ill and goes on a drinking binge (obviously, thereby trying to hide from reality), is finally the hero of the story, Romashov. For him, every day the glaring facts of social injustice, all the ugliness of the system, become more and more noticeable. With his characteristic self-criticism, he also finds in himself the reasons for this state of affairs: he became part of the “machine”, mixed with this common gray mass of people who do not understand anything and are lost. Romashov is trying to isolate himself from them: “He began to retire from the company of officers, dined most of the time at home, did not go to dance evenings at all in the meeting and stopped drinking.” He “has definitely matured, become older and more serious in recent days.” This kind of “growing up” was not easy for him: he went through a social conflict, a struggle with himself, he even had close thoughts about suicide (he clearly imagined a picture depicting his dead body and a crowd of people gathered around).
Analyzing the position of the Khlebnikovs in the Russian army, the way of life of the officers and looking for ways out of such a situation, Romashov comes to the idea that an army without war is absurd, and, therefore, in order for this monstrous phenomenon to not exist, “the army”, and it is not it must be necessary for people to understand the uselessness of war: “... Let’s say, tomorrow, let’s say, this very second this thought came to everyone’s minds: Russians, Germans, British, Japanese... And now there’s no more war, no more officers and soldier, everyone went home.” I am also close to a similar thought: to solve such global problems in the army, to solve global problems in general, it is necessary that the need for change is understood by the majority of people, since small groups of people, and even more so a few, are unable to change the course of history.

Story by A.I. Kuprin's "Duel" as a protest against depersonalization and spiritual emptiness

In Kuprin’s “Duel” we are talking about a very conservative and stagnant social environment - the environment of career Russian officers of the late 19th - early 20th centuries. The writer depicted the life of the officers of the regiment in the provincial outback. Here he used his own experience of military service as an army second lieutenant in an infantry regiment in the Podolsk province. After the publication of “The Duel,” answering a question from a correspondent of one of the newspapers about how he knew army life so well, Kuprin readily explained: “How could I not know... I myself went through this “school”, was an army officer, a battalion adjutant ... If it weren’t for the censorship conditions, I wouldn’t have had enough.” But even adjusted for censorship, the picture of morals in the fictional garrison of the M regiment in the city turned out to be extremely gloomy. The main activities of officers are drunkenness, drill, intrigue, flirting with the wives of colleagues. Officers are not interested in anything that does not relate to military service. Company commander Captain Sliva, for example, in his entire life “has not read a single book or a single newspaper, except for the official part of the military ministry organ, the newspaper Russian Invalid.” The boredom of provincial life not only stupefies, but also embitters. Gentlemen, the officers take out their anger on the lower ranks, rewarding them with punches for any reason or no reason, and on civilians (“shpaki”), whom they mock in every possible way. For one of the characters in the story, Lieutenant Vetkin, even the great poet Pushkin is just “some kind of shpak.” The overwhelming majority of the regiment's officers had become accustomed to their life, "monotonous as a fence and gray as a soldier's cloth." Their spiritual and cultural needs have long since atrophied.
Second Lieutenant Romashov, main character story, is only in its second year. And he is still trying to rise above the routine of everyday life in the army, to maintain at least some interests that go beyond the scope of his military career. “Oh, what are we doing! - Romashov exclaims, - today we’ll get drunk, tomorrow we’ll go to the company - one, two, left, right - in the evening we’ll drink again, and the day after tomorrow we’ll go back to the company. Is this really what life is all about? Kuprin endowed Romashov with autobiographical features. The writer himself endured the army burden for only four years, leaving the service after failing to enter the General Staff Academy. And he doomed his hero to quick death during a ridiculous duel. Honest and conscientious people like Romashov had little chance of surviving among army officers
“The Duel” was published in 1905, during the days of heavy defeats suffered by the Russian army in the war with Japan. Many contemporaries saw in Kuprin's story a truthful depiction of those vices of army life that led to the tragedy of Tsushima and Port Arthur. The official and conservative press accused the writer of slandering the army. However, the later failures of the Russian troops in the First World War were the revolutionary disaster of 1917. confirmed that Kuprin did not exaggerate at all. The deep gap between the officers and the mass of soldiers, the lack of education and spiritual callousness of the officers predetermined the subsequent collapse of the Russian army, which could not withstand the difficult trials of the World War.
However, it was not only the exposure of army disorders that worried the writer when he created “The Duel.” Kuprin also posed a more global problem of the origins of spiritual unfreedom. He forces Romashov to stand up for the soldier, Tatar Sharafutdinov, for which the second lieutenant is even put under arrest. Romashov gradually begins to worry about the fate of the mass of soldiers, thousands of “downtrodden Khlebnikovs.” He, however, does not have time to understand why in the army even an educated person can easily turn into a stupid executor of any, even the most absurd, orders of his superiors. Kuprin himself denounced militarism from the position of a “natural man” who refuses to kill his own kind. The fact that Sliva, and Romashov, and Vetkin, and Nikolaev, and hundreds and thousands of their subordinates are ultimately intended by their profession to kill people, according to the writer, leaves an indelible imprint on their inner world, ^makes them flawed in spiritually. It is no coincidence that one of the few positive heroes of “The Duel,” Romashov, dies in a duel from the bullet of the careerist Nikolaev, largely because he is morally unable to shoot a person. The intrigue of Nikolaev’s wife Shurochka, for the sake of her husband’s admission to the academy, in order to get the opportunity to enjoy the benefits of metropolitan life, ready to destroy even the second lieutenant who sympathized with her, could only succeed because of Romashov’s inherent properties of a “natural person”. Kuprin considered the main values ​​of the human personality to be the ability to breathe, feel, and think. Another character in “The Duel” that the writer liked, Nazansky, who among most officers has a reputation as an inveterate person and is about to leave the service due to illness, convinces
Romashova: “...Who is dearer and closer to you? Nobody! You are the king of the world... You are the god of all living things. Everything you see, hear, feel belongs to you. Do what you want. Take whatever you like...” Nazansky, like Kuprin himself, dreamed of a “huge, new, radiant life.” Of course, the army collective and army discipline greatly limit the individual in the manifestations of his individuality. However, in The Duel, Kuprin fell into anarchism to some extent. He did not think then about the question to what extent the freedom to do whatever he wants and take whatever he likes for one person will practically limit the same freedom for other members of society. But in this case, the rights of different people will inevitably come into conflict with each other, which will inevitably lead to a conflict of interests and the creation of various kinds of social institutions to resolve them, again limiting the freedom of individuals. Nevertheless, this clearly erroneous position of Kuprin’s philosophy does not at all detract from the significance of the criticism of army orders contained in “The Duel”, which suppress human nature and deforming the personalities of those who are forced to perform military service for many years.

The author and his characters in A. I. Kuprin’s story “The Duel”

Source: http://www.litra.ru/

Critical portrayal of army society in A. I. Kuprin’s story “The Duel”

The story takes place in the mid-90s of the 19th century. Contemporaries saw in it a condemnation of the army order and an exposure of the officers. And this opinion will be confirmed by history itself a few years later, when the Russian army suffers a crushing defeat in the battles of Mukden, Liaoliang, and Port Arthur. Why did this happen? It seems to me that “The Duel” clearly and clearly answers the question posed. Can an army be combat-ready where an anti-human, corrupting and stultifying atmosphere reigns, where officers are at a loss when it comes to showing resourcefulness, intelligence and initiative, where soldiers are driven to stupor by senseless drills, beatings and bullying?
“With the exception of a few ambitious and careerists, all officers served as forced, unpleasant, disgusting corvée, languishing in it and not loving it. Junior officers, just like schoolboys, were late for classes and slowly ran away from them if they knew that they would not get punished for it... At the same time, everyone drank heavily, both in the meeting and when visiting each other... On The company officers went to service with the same disgust as the subaltern officers...” we read. Indeed, the regimental life that Kuprin depicts is absurd, vulgar and desolate. There are only two ways to break out of it: go into the reserves (and find yourself without a specialty and means of subsistence) or try to enter the academy and, after graduating, climb to a higher level on the military ladder, “make a career.” However, only a few are capable of this. The fate of the bulk of the officers is to pull an endless and tedious burden with the prospect of retiring with a small pension.
The daily life of officers consisted of leading drill exercises, monitoring the study of “literature” (i.e., military regulations) by soldiers, and attending an officers’ meeting. Drunkenness alone and in company, cards, affairs with other people's wives, traditional picnics and “balki”, trips to the local brothel - these are all the entertainments available to officers. “The Duel” reveals the dehumanization, mental devastation to which people are subjected in the conditions of army life, the crushing and vulgarization of these people. But sometimes they see the light for a while, and these moments are terrible and tragic: “Occasionally, from time to time, days of some kind of general, general, ugly revelry would come in the regiment. Maybe this happened in those strange moments when people, accidentally connected with each other, but all together condemned to boring inactivity and senseless cruelty, suddenly saw in each other’s eyes, there, far away, in a confused and oppressed consciousness, some mysterious spark of horror, melancholy and madness, and then calm , well-fed like breeding bulls, life seemed to be thrown out of its channel." Some kind of collective madness began, people seemed to lose their human appearance. "On the way to the meeting, the officers did a lot of mischief. They stopped a passing Jew, called him over and, tearing off his hat, "They drove the cab driver forward; then they threw this hat somewhere over the fence, onto a tree. Bobetinsky beat the cab driver. The rest sang loudly and shouted stupidly."
Army life, cruel and senseless, also gives rise to its own kind of “monsters.” These are degraded and stupefied people, ossified in prejudices - campaigners, vulgar philistines and moral monsters. One of them is Captain Plum. This is a stupid campaigner, a narrow-minded and rude person. “Everything that went beyond the boundaries of the system, regulations and company and which he contemptuously called nonsense and mandrake, certainly did not exist for him. Wearing the harsh burden of service all his life, he did not read a single book or a single newspaper...” Although Sliva is attentive to the needs of soldiers, this quality is negated by his cruelty: “This lethargic, degraded-looking man was terribly stern with the soldiers and not only allowed the non-commissioned officers to fight, but he himself beat him brutally, until there was blood, so much so that the offender fell off his feet under his blows.” Even more terrible is Captain Osadchy, who inspires “inhuman awe” in his subordinates. Even in his appearance there is something bestial, predatory. He is so cruel to the soldiers that every year someone in his company committed suicide.
What is the reason for such spiritual devastation and moral ugliness? Kuprin answers this question through the mouth of Nazansky, one of the few positive characters in the story: “... and so all of them, even the best, the most tender of them, wonderful fathers and attentive husbands - all of them in the service become base, cowardly, evil , stupid animals. You will ask why? Yes, precisely because none of them believes in the service and does not see the reasonable purpose of this service”; “...for them, service is a complete disgust, a burden, a hated yoke.”
Fleeing from the deadening boredom of army life, officers try to come up with some kind of side activity for themselves. For most, this, of course, is drunkenness and cards. Some are engaged in collecting and handicrafts. Lieutenant Colonel Rafalsky indulges his soul in his home menagerie, Captain Stelkovsky has turned the corruption of young peasant women into a hobby.
What makes people rush into this pool and devote themselves to military service? Kuprin believes that the ideas about the military that have developed in society are partly to blame for this. Thus, the main character of the story, Second Lieutenant Romashov, trying to comprehend the phenomena of life, comes to the conclusion that “the world was divided into two unequal parts: one - the smaller one - the officers, which is surrounded by honor, strength, power, the magical dignity of the uniform and together with the uniform for some reason and patented courage, and physical strength, and arrogant pride; the other - huge and impersonal - civilians, otherwise shpak, shtafirka and hazel grouse; they were despised...” And the writer pronounces a verdict on military service, which, with its illusory valor, was created by “a cruel, shameful, universal misunderstanding.”

Main themes of creativity (“Moloch”, “Olesya”, “Duel”)

A. I. Kuprin, in his best works, reflected the existence of various classes of Russian society at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. Continuing the humanistic traditions of Russian literature, especially L.N. Tolstoy and A.P. Chekhov, Kuprin was sensitive to modernity, to its current problems. Kuprin's literary activity began during his stay in cadet corps. He writes poetry, where notes of despondency and melancholy are heard, or heroic motifs (“Dreams”) are heard. In 1889, a student of the cadet school Kuprin published in the magazine “Russian satirical leaflet” short story, which is called “First Debut”. For publishing the story without permission from his superiors, Kuprin was arrested in the guardhouse.
Having retired and settled in Kyiv, the writer collaborates in Kyiv newspapers. An interesting literary phenomenon was the series of essays “Kyiv Types”. The images he created reflected the essential features of the motley urban philistine and people of the “bottom”, characteristic of all of Russia. Here you can find images of a “white-lined” student, a landlady, a pious pilgrim, a fireman, a failed singer, a modernist artist, and slum dwellers.
Already in the 90s, based on the material of army life in the stories “Inquiry” and “Overnight”, the writer puts sharp points moral problems. In the story “Inquiry”, the outrageous fact of punishing Tatar soldier Mukhamet Bayguzin with rods, who could not even understand why he was being punished, makes Second Lieutenant Kozlovsky feel in a new way the deadening, soulless atmosphere of the royal barracks and his role in the system of oppression. The officer's conscience awakens, a feeling of spiritual connection with the hunted soldier is born, dissatisfaction with his position is born, and as a result - an explosion of spontaneous discontent. In these stories one can feel the influence of L. Tolstoy in questions about the moral responsibility of the intelligentsia for the suffering and tragic fate of the people.
In the mid-90s, a new theme, prompted by time, powerfully entered into Kuprin’s work. In the spring, he travels as a newspaper correspondent to the Donetsk basin, where he gets acquainted with the working and living conditions of workers. In 1896 he wrote a long story “Moloch”. The story gives a picture of the life of a large capitalist plant, shows the wretched life of workers' settlements, and spontaneous protests of workers. The writer showed all this through the perception of an intellectual. Engineer Bobrov reacts painfully and acutely to other people's pain and to injustice. The hero compares capitalist progress, which creates factories and factories, with the monstrous idol Moloch, demanding human sacrifices. The specific embodiment of Moloch in the story is the businessman Kvashnin, who does not disdain any means in order to make millions. At the same time, he is not averse to acting as a politician and leader (“the future belongs to us,” “we are the salt of the earth”). Bobrov watches the scene of groveling before Kvashnin with disgust. The subject of the deal with this businessman is Bobrov's fiancee Nina Zinenko. The hero of the story is characterized by duality and hesitation. At the moment of a spontaneous outbreak of protest, the hero seeks to blow up the factory boilers and thereby avenge his own and others’ suffering. But then his determination fades, and he refuses to take revenge on the hated Moloch. The story ends with a story about a workers' revolt, the arson of the plant, Kvashnin's escape and the calling of punitive forces to deal with the rebels.
In 1897, Kuprin served as estate manager in Rivne district. Here he becomes close friends with the peasants, which is reflected in his stories “Wilderness”, “Horse Thieves”, “Silver Wolf”. Writes a wonderful story “Olesya”. Before us is a poetic image of the girl Olesya, who grew up in the hut of an old “witch”, outside the usual norms of a peasant family. Olesya’s love for the intellectual Ivan Timofeevich, who accidentally visited a remote forest village, is a free, simple and strong feeling, without looking back or obligations, among tall pines, painted with the crimson glow of the dying dawn. The girl’s story gets a tragic end; here Olesya’s free life is invaded by the selfish calculations of village officials and the superstitions of dark peasants. Beaten and ridiculed, Olesya is forced to flee her forest nest.
Looking for strong man Kuprin sometimes waxes poetic about people at the bottom of the social spectrum. Horse thief Buzyga (“Horse Thieves”) is depicted as a powerful character, the author gives him traits of generosity - Buzyga takes care of his boy Vasil. The stories about animals are amazing (“Emerald”, “White Poodle”, “Barbos and Kulka”, “Yu-Yu” and others.) Often strong and beautiful animals become victims of money-grubbing and base human passions.
In 1899, Kuprin met Gorky in Gorky’s magazine “Knowledge” and in 1905 Kuprin’s story “The Duel” was published. The timeliness and social value of the work lay in the fact that it truthfully and vividly showed the internal decay of the Russian army. The hero of the story “The Duel,” the young lieutenant Romashov, unlike Bobrov (“Moloch”), is shown in the process of spiritual growth, gradual insight, liberation from the power of traditional concepts and ideas of his circle. At the beginning of the story, despite his kindness, the hero naively divides everyone into “people of black and white bones,” thinking that he belongs to a special, higher caste. As false illusions dissipate, Romashov begins to reflect on the depravity of army orders, on the injustice of his whole life. He develops a feeling of loneliness, a passionate denial of an inhumanly dirty, wild life. The cruel Osadchy, the violent Bek-Agamalov, the sad Leshchenko, the dapper Bobeinsky, the army servant and the drunkard Sliva - all these officers are shown as alien to the truth-seeker Romashov. In conditions of arbitrariness and lawlessness, they lose not only their true idea of ​​honor, but also their human appearance. This is especially reflected in their attitude towards soldiers.
The story goes through a whole series of episodes of soldier drill, “literature” lessons, preparation for a review, when officers beat soldiers especially brutally, tear eardrums, knock them to the ground with their fists, and force people exhausted from the heat and nervous to “have fun.” The story truthfully depicts the mass of soldiers, shows individual characters, people of different nationalities with their inherent traditions. Among the soldiers are Russian Khlebnikov, Ukrainians Shevchuk, Boriychuk, Lithuanian Soltys, Cheremis Gainan, Tatars Mukhamettinov, Karafutdinov and many others. All of them - awkward peasants, workers, artisans - have a hard time being separated from their homes and their usual work, the author especially highlights the images of the orderly Gainan and the soldier Khlebnikov.
Khlebnikov, recently torn from the ground, does not organically perceive the army “sciences,” and therefore he has to bear the brunt of the position of a frightened soldier, defenseless against the rudeness of his superiors. The fate of the soldiers worries Romashov. He is not alone in this internal protest. A unique philosopher and theorist, Lieutenant Colonel Kazansky sharply criticizes the order in the army, hates vulgarity and ignorance, dreams of freeing the human “I” from the shackles of a rotten society, he is against despotism and violence. Romashov knows that the soldiers are oppressed by their own ignorance, and by general slavery, and by arbitrariness, and by violence on the part of officers. Paustovsky rightly refers to the scene of Romashov’s meeting with the tortured Khlebnikov, who was trying to throw himself under a train, and their frank conversation as “one of the best scenes in Russian literature.” The officer recognizes the soldier as a friend, forgetting about caste barriers between them. Having sharply posed the question of Khlebnikov's fate, Romashov dies without finding an answer as to which path to liberation should be taken. His fatal duel with officer Nikolaev is, as it were, a consequence of the growing conflict between the hero and the military officer caste. The reason for the duel is connected with the hero’s love for Alexandra Petrovna Nikolaeva - Shurochka. To ensure her husband’s career, Shurochka suppresses the best human feelings in herself and asks Romashov not to shy away from the duel, because this will harm her husband, who wants to enter the academy. “The Duel” became extremely popular in Russia and was soon translated into European languages.
Kuprin’s excellent story “Tambrinus” breathes the atmosphere of revolutionary days. The theme of all-conquering art is intertwined here with the idea of ​​democracy, the bold protest of the “little man” against the black forces of arbitrariness and reaction. Meek and cheerful Sashka, with his extraordinary talent as a violinist and sincerity, attracts a diverse crowd of longshoremen, fishermen, and smugglers to the Odessa tavern. They greet with delight the melodies that reflect the scene of social moods and events - from the Russian-Japanese War to the Revolution, when Sashka’s violin sounds with the cheerful rhythms of “La Marseillaise”. In the days of the onset of terror, Sashka challenges the disguised detectives and the Black Hundred “scoundrels in a fur hat,” refusing to play the monarchical anthem at their request, openly denouncing them of murders and pogroms. Crippled by the tsarist secret police, he returns to his port friends to play for them on the outskirts of the deafeningly cheerful “Shepherd”. Free creativity and the power of the people's spirit, according to Kuprin, are invincible.
In emigration, in the works of A. I. Kuprin, one begins to encounter a sentimental embellishment of the past of Russia, the very past to which he had previously pronounced judgment. Such, for example, is the autobiographical novel “Junker”. Kuprin could no longer live without his homeland. He returns to Russia in 1937, but writes nothing more and soon dies.

Debunking the romance of military service (based on the story “The Duel”)

Alexander Ivanovich Kuprin is an honest and selfless artist, a patriot of Russia. In his critical works, the writer tried to show the “ulcers” of modern society in order to quickly cure them. The story "Duel", published in 1905, at the height of the Russo-Japanese War, explained the reasons for the defeat of Russia in this war.
The writer, with pain and bitterness, shows the senseless drill and cruelty that prevail in the tsarist army, and the army, as a result, which is incapable of combat, the decomposed officers, and the downtrodden soldiers.
Through the eyes of the hero of the story, Yuri Alekseevich Romashov, a picture of classes on the parade ground is given, when “... they overdo it, they pull a soldier, they torture him, zaturk, and at the review he will stand like a stump ...”
But the officers do not see any sense in the daily exhausting exercises on the parade ground, accompanied by the shouting and poking of the officers. Such activities give rise to only one desire - to finish them as soon as possible and forget in a drunken stupor.
Romashov's dreams of education, the academy are just fantasies that are not destined to turn into reality. “Nonsense! My whole life is in front of me! thought Romashov, and, carried away by his thoughts, he walked more cheerfully and breathed more deeply. “Well, to spite them all, tomorrow morning I’ll sit down for books, get ready and enter the academy ... Labor! Oh, with hard work you can do whatever you want. Just pull yourself together.” It’s just that something that is possible in dreams becomes unattainable in reality. Yuri Alekseevich is a fruitless dreamer, an idealist who will not lift a hand to achieve those goals. wonderful plans, which he builds endlessly in his imagination.
Love for Shurochka Nikolaeva - Alexandra Petrovna - is the only bright feeling of his gray and hopeless life in the garrison. Romashov understands that he is acting basely, caring for the wife of a colleague, but this is stronger than him. Yuri Alekseevich, as usual, builds castles in the air on the theme of “love”. But the more magnificent and unbridled his imagination, the more insignificant the hero. Both he himself and the readers understand that the hero goes into the world of illusions due to helplessness and fear of life. He is not able to change his life, but only “goes with the flow,” tearing his soul with fruitless dreams. The hero is not devoid of nobility, compassion for weak and humiliated soldiers. But this is the compassion of a “friend in misfortune” for someone like himself.
Drunk Kazansky explains to Romashov what he himself always secretly knew and felt: “Why do I serve? ...Because I was told since childhood and now everyone around me says that the most important thing in life is to serve and to be well-fed and well dressed. And so I do things for which I have absolutely no soul, I carry out orders for the sake of animal fear of life, which sometimes seem cruel to me, and sometimes senseless...” Nazansky calls the time of binge drinking “a time of freedom.”
Loving Shurochka, Romashov understands that this love is out of hopelessness. This woman is capable of any meanness. For the sake of her ambitious goals, she stepped over Kazansky, over Romashov... Who's next?
So gradually the story, written, it would seem, on an army theme, outgrows its narrow framework, touching upon universal human problems.
The democratic public and the critics, welcoming the “Duel”, sought first of all to reveal its revolutionary meaning. “The military estate is only a part of the huge bureaucratic estate that has flooded the Russian land...” When reading the story, “you begin to intensely feel the oppression of the surrounding life and look for a way out of it,” wrote the Bulletin and Library of Self-Education for 1905. But the phenomenon of the story lies in the fact that it has not lost its significance even today, no matter how sad it may be to admit.

Russia in the works of A. I. Kuprin (based on the story “The Duel”)

The time when humanity is entering a new century raises the question of the fate of Russia with particular acuteness. At the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. this issue was hotly discussed in all levels of society. This could not but be reflected in the literature of that time, and therefore many writers paid attention to this topic. Kuprin's story "Duel" poses such burning questions to the reader.
The army is always associated with the concept of the Motherland, so Kuprin in the story depicted the life of an ordinary regiment through the eyes of the main character, Second Lieutenant Romashov. “The Duel” was released in May 1905, as the war with Japan approached its ignominious end. Soldiers died in the thousands due to the mediocrity and stupidity of the generals when the Pacific Fleet was completely destroyed at Tsushima. And the work, in which Kuprin exposed the whole essence of army life, all its vices, caused a massive wave of anger.
The story makes a painful impression on the reader. Almost all the officers in “The Duel” are nonentities, stupid people, drunkards, cowardly careerists and ignoramuses. The author shows the disgusting drinking bouts of the officers, their entire lives mired in vulgarity. The army school of humiliation is especially vividly depicted, where officers ultimately took out all their failures and anger on the soldiers. The entire method of training in the regiment was based on punishment. This method was most clearly demonstrated at the regiment review. Describing this scene, Kuprin questions the combat effectiveness of the Russian army. In contrast to this, Kuprin brings up the fifth company of Captain Stelkovsky, showing how this vicious circle can be broken.
The character of Nazansky, a drunken officer with extraordinary intelligence and spiritual qualities, stands apart in the story. Nazansky opens our eyes to everything that is happening. The army destroys everything good in a person, making him a complete nonentity. Nazansky says about this: “Everything that is talented and capable is drunk.”
In “The Duel,” Kuprin expressed his opinion about why Russia lost the war, but the author expresses hope that it is possible to eradicate these torques. This is evidenced by the scene of general drunkenness, in which a moment of universal insight occurs - normal human feelings awaken in the officers, although, unfortunately, not for long. The interesting thing is that the story remains relevant

The strength and weakness of the nature of Second Lieutenant Romashov (based on the story “The Duel” by A. I. Kuprin)

Second Lieutenant Romashov - the main thing actor story “The Duel”. In the work of A. I. Kuprin “Duel”
245 is the most significant work of the beginning of the century. In the story, the writer synthesized his observations of army life. He had repeatedly addressed this topic before, but in smaller works. Since Kuprin himself served in the regiment, the atmosphere recreated in the book reflects reality.
Kuprin said about his story: “The main character is me.” Indeed, the biographies of the author and the hero have a lot in common. It can be assumed that Kuprin put some of his thoughts into Romashov’s mouth. However, the hero is an independent person.
Romashov's character is shown in constant development, in dynamics. This distinguishes him from all the other heroes who “entered” the story with already fully developed characters, views, and concepts.
The story about the fate of the main character begins after he served in the regiment for a year and a half, since cardinal, significant changes began to occur to Romashov not from the very beginning of his service. When he first arrived at the garrison, he was overwhelmed by dreams of glory. Then for him, officer and human honor were synonymous. In his fantasies, the newly-minted officer saw how he pacifies a riot, inspires soldiers to fight by his example, receives awards, but all this is just a figment of the imagination. In fact, he participates in daily drinking bouts, plays cards, and enters into a long-term and unnecessary relationship with an insignificant woman. All this is done out of boredom, since this is the only entertainment in the garrison, and the service is monotonous and causes nothing but boredom.
Daydreaming and lack of will are traits of Romashov’s nature that immediately catch the eye. Take, for example, his habit of mentally speaking about himself in the third person with some cliched phrases, like the hero of a novel. Then the author introduces us closer to the hero, and the reader learns that Romashov is characterized by warmth, gentleness, and compassion. However, all these wonderful qualities cannot always manifest themselves because of the same weak will.
In Romashov’s soul there is a constant struggle between a man and an officer. It is changing before our eyes. Gradually he banishes caste prejudices from himself. He sees that all the officers are stupid, embittered, but at the same time they boast of “the honor of their uniform.” They allow themselves to beat soldiers, and this happens every day. As a result, the rank and file turn into faceless, obedient slaves. Whether they are smart or stupid, whether they are workers or peasants, the army makes them indistinguishable from each other.
Romashov never had to raise his hand against soldiers, taking advantage of his position and superiority. As a deeply impressionable nature, he cannot remain indifferent to what is happening around him. He learns to see a friend, a brother in a soldier. It is he who saves Private Khlebnikov from suicide.
His colleague Nazansky, a drunken officer-philosopher, has a significant influence on Romashov. Kuprin put into his mouth own ideas: about freedom of spirit, about peaceful existence, about the need to fight against tsarism (the stronghold of which is the army). At the same time, Nazansky slides into the ideas of Nietzscheanism, into the glorification of individualism and the denial of the collective. Thus, although this drunken officer conveys many of the author’s ideas and moods, at the same time he serves as an example of the detrimental influence of an officer’s life on an intelligent and promising person. It should be noted that intellectually Nazansky is much higher than Romashov, and he considers him his teacher.
Romashov, like a sponge, absorbs Kazansky's ideas about a free person. He thinks about it a lot. The turning point in Romashov’s spiritual development was his internal monologue in defense of the Personality. It is then that he realizes not only his own, but also the individuality of each person individually. Seeing that army life suppresses the Personality, the second lieutenant tries to look for those to blame, but does not find them and even begins to grumble at God.
The fact that Romashov does not succumb to the influence of a destructive atmosphere is his strength. He has his own opinion, he protests internally.
The seeds sown by Nazansky sprout in Romashov’s soul. All the time thinking about the order existing in the garrison, he comes to the idea of ​​​​the complete abolition of the army. As for the danger of war, Romashov believes that all people on earth can simply agree on peace and the issue will disappear by itself. This only speaks of the second lieutenant’s complete isolation from earthly realities. He lives his fantasies.
In the end, the hero comes to the only correct conclusion, in his opinion. He wants to leave the service and devote himself either to science, or art, or physical labor. Who knows what would have happened to Second Lieutenant Romashov if not for the duel that interrupted all his dreams. He was sacrificed for the career of another officer. Romashov was never able to do anything; his life was tragically cut short at the beginning of his journey.
Kuprin presented the image of the main character of “The Duel” very vividly and psychologically believable. He did not idealize Romashov at all, despite his obvious sympathy and sympathy, he did not ignore either his merits or his shortcomings. Romashov is a weak person in himself, but strong because he was able to resist the influence of the environment, not to subordinate his mind, thoughts, ideas to it. It wasn't his fault that it came to nothing.
The image of Second Lieutenant Romashov is an undoubted achievement of the writer, this is one of his most memorable characters, thanks to which “The Duel” not only after its first edition, but even to this day enjoys the love of readers.

"Duel" (1905)

The purpose of the lesson: show the significance of Kuprin’s story for society’s awareness of the crisis of all Russian life; humanistic, anti-war pathos of the story.

Methodical techniques:analytical conversation, commented reading.

During the classes

1. Teacher's word. The revolutionary era confronted all writers with an urgent need to understand the historical destinies of Russia, its people, and national culture. These global issues led to the creation of large “numerous” canvases. Writers interpreted the pace of the world in a contradictory time. This is how Bunin’s stories “The Duel”, “Sukhodol” and “The Village” were written; “Judas Iscariot” by L. Andreev; “Movements”, “Little Bear” by Sergeev-Tsensky.

At first glance, the story (any of them) is simple in its content. But according to the author’s generalizations, it is multi-layered, reminiscent of a “casket within a casket” containing a jewel.

The story "The Duel" published in May 1905, during the days of the defeat of the Russian fleet at Tsushima. The image of a backward, incapacitated army, decayed officers, and downtrodden soldiers had an important socio-political meaning: it was an answer to the question about the causes of the Far Eastern catastrophe. With harsh strokes, as if reckoning with the past, Kuprin draws the army to which he devoted his youth.

This story can be defined as psychological and philosophical. There hasn't been a work like this since Fathers and Sons.

1. Conversation on the novel:

1. What is the theme of the story?The main theme is the crisis of Russia, of all spheres of Russian life. Gorky noted the critical orientation of the story, classifying “The Duel” as civic, revolutionary prose. The story had a wide resonance, brought Kuprin all-Russian fame, and became a reason for controversy in the press about the fate of the Russian army. The problems of the army always reflect the general problems of society. In this sense, Kuprin’s story is still relevant today.
2. Having dedicated “The Duel” in its first publication to Gorky, Kuprin wrote to him: “Now, finally, when it’s all over, I can say that everything bold and violent in my story belongs to you. If you knew how much I learned from Vasya, how grateful I am to you for it.”
3. What, in your opinion, in “The Duel” can be defined as “ bold and exuberant"? From the denial of petty rituals (keeping your hands at your sides and your heels together in a conversation with your superiors, pulling your toe down when marching, shouting “On your shoulder!”, Chapter 9, p. 336.), the main character of “The Duel,” Romashov, comes to denying that that in a rationally organized societythere shouldn't be wars: « Maybe this is all some kind of common mistake, some kind of worldwide delusion, insanity? Is it natural to kill? “Let’s say, tomorrow, let’s say, this very second, this thought occurred to everyone: Russians, Germans, British, Japanese... And now there’s no more war, no more officers and soldiers, everyone has gone home.”Romashov naively believes that to eliminate war it is necessary for all people to suddenly see the light and declare with one voice:“I don’t want to fight!” and threw down their weapons. "What courage ! - said admiringly L. Tolstoy about Romashov. – And how did the censorship miss this and how did the military not protest?”

The preaching of peacekeeping ideas caused strong attacks in the fierce magazine campaign unleashed around the "Duel", and military officials were especially indignant. The story was a major literary event that sounded topical.

1. What thematic lines can be identified in the story?There are several of them: the life of officers, the combat and barracks life of soldiers, relationships between people. It turns out that not all people hold the same pacifist views as Romashov.

1. How does Kuprin paint images of officers?Kuprin knew the army environment very well from his many years of experience. The images of the officers are given accurately. Realistic, with merciless authenticity. Almost all the officers in “The Duel” are nonentities, drunkards, stupid and cruel careerists and ignoramuses.

Moreover, they are confident in their class and moral superiority, and treat civilians with contempt, whom they call “hazel grouse", "shpak", "shtafirka". Even Pushkin for them" some kind of shpak ". Among them, it is considered “youthful to scold or beat up a civilian for no apparent reason, to put out a lit cigarette on his nose, to pull a top hat over his ears.” Unfounded arrogance, perverted ideas about the “honor of the uniform” and honor in general, rudeness are a consequence of isolation, isolation from society, inactivity, and dull drills. In ugly revelries, drunkenness, and absurd antics, some kind of blind, animalistic expression was expressed.a senseless rebellion against mortal melancholy and monotony.Officers are not used to thinking and reasoning; some seriously believe that in military service in general “you're not supposed to think"(similar thoughts visited N. Rostov).

Literary critic Yu. V. Babicheva writes: “The officers of the regiment have a single “typical” face with clear signs of caste limitations, senseless cruelty, cynicism, vulgarity and arrogance. At the same time, as the plot develops, each officer, typical in his caste ugliness, is shown at least for a moment as what he could have become if not for the destructive influence of the army».

1. Do you agree that the officers in the story “The Duel” have a single “typical” face? If so, how does this unity manifest itself?The writer shows the officer environment in a vertical section: corporals, junior officers, senior officers, senior officers. "With the exception of a few ambitious and careerists, all officers served as forced, unpleasant, disgusting corvée, languishing with it and not loving it". Scary picture "ugly general revelry" officers. 406, ch. 18 .

1. In addition to the common features characteristic of most officers, each of them hasindividual traits,depicted so vividly and expressively that the image becomes almost symbolic:

A) Regimental commander Shulgovich, under his thunderous bourbonism, hides his concern for the officers.

B) What can you say about Osadchy’s image?The image of Osadchy is ominous. "He's a cruel man."- Romashov says about him. Osadchy's cruelty was constantly experienced by the soldiers, who trembled from his thunderous voice and the inhuman force of his blows. In Osadchy’s company, suicides of soldiers occurred more often than in others. The bestial, bloodthirsty Osadchy, in disputes about the duel, insists on the need for a fatal outcome of the duel - “otherwise it will only be a stupid pity... a comedy.”At the picnic he makes a toast "for the joy of former wars, for the cheerful bloody cruelty". In a bloody battle he finds pleasure, he is intoxicated by the smell of blood, he is ready to chop, stab, shoot all his life - no matter who and for what ( ch. 8, 14)

Q) Tell us about your impressions of Captain Plum. « Even in the regiment, which, due to the conditions of wild provincial life, was not distinguished by a particularly humane direction, he was some kind of outlandish monument to this ferocious military antiquity.”He did not read a single book, not a single newspaper, and despised everything that went beyond the boundaries of the system, regulations and company. This is a lethargic, dejected man, he brutally beats soldiers until they bleed, but he is attentive."to the soldiers' needs: does not withhold money, personally monitors the company boiler"(chapter 10, 337)

D) What is the difference between Captain Stelkovsky,commander of the 5th company? Perhaps only the image of Captain Stelkovsky - patient, cool-blooded, persistent - does not cause disgust, "soldiers are loved truly: an example, perhaps, the only one in the Russian army"(chapter 15. 376 - 377). “In his company they didn’t fight or even swear, although they weren’t particularly gentle, and yet the company was magnificently appearance and the training was not inferior to any guards unit.”It was his company at the May review that brought tears to the corps commander’s eyes.

D) Lieutenant Colonel Rafalsky (Brem) loves animals and devotes all his free and non-free time to collecting a rare domestic menagerie.352.

E) What are the distinctive features of Bek-Agamalov? He boasts about his ability to chop, and says with regret that he probably won’t cut a person in half: “I’ll blow my head to hell, I know that, but so that it’s askew... no.” My father did it easily…» (« Yes, there were people in our time..."). With his evil eyes, his hooked nose and bared teeth, he "looked like some kind of predatory, angry and proud bird"(chapter 1)

8) Bestiality generally distinguishes many officers. During the scandal in brothel this bestial essence emerges especially clearly: in Bek-Agamalov’s rolling eyes “the exposed round whites sparkled terribly,” his head" was lowered low and menacingly,” “an ominous yellow shine lit up in her eyes». “And at the same time, he bent his legs lower and lower, shrank all over and drew his neck into himself, like an animal ready to make a jump.”. After this scandal, which ended in a fight and a challenge to a duel, “everyone dispersed, embarrassed, depressed, avoiding looking at each other. Everyone was afraid to read in the eyes of others their own horror, their slavish, guilty melancholy - the horror and melancholy of small, evil and dirty animals"(chapter 19).

9) Let us pay attention to the contrast of this description with the following description of the dawn “with a clear, childlike sky and still cool air. Trees, wet, shrouded in barely visibleferry, silently woke up from their dark, mysterious night dreams". Romashov feels “short, disgusting, ugly and infinitely alien among this innocent beauty of the morning, smiling awake».

As Kuprin’s mouthpiece Nazansky says,“all of them, even the best, the most tender of them, wonderful fathers and attentive husbands - all of them in the service become base, cowardly, stupid animals. You will ask why? Yes, precisely because none of them believes in the service and does not see a reasonable goal for this service».

10) How are the “regimental ladies” depicted?Officers' wives are just as predatory and bloodthirsty as their husbands. Evil, stupid, ignorant, hypocritical. Regimental ladies are the personification of extreme squalor. Their everyday life is woven from gossip, the provincial game of secularism, boring and vulgar connections. The most repulsive image is Raisa Peterson, the wife of Captain Talman. Evil, stupid, depraved and vindictive. "Oh, how disgusting she is!”- Romashov thinks about her with disgust. "And from the thought of his previous physical intimacy with this woman, he felt as if he had not washed for several months and had not changed his linen” (chapter 9).

The rest of the “ladies” are no better. Even the outwardly charmingShurochka Nikolaevafeatures of Osadchy, who seem to be unlike him, appear: she advocates fights with a fatal outcome, says: “I would shoot such people like rabid dogs". There is no truly feminine thing left in her: “I don't want a child. Ugh, what disgusting! - she admits to Romashov (chapter 14).

1. What role do images play? soldier? They are depicted as a mass, motley in national composition, but gray in essence. The soldiers are completely powerless: the officers take their anger out on them, beat them, crush their teeth, and break their eardrums.
2. Kuprin gives and customized looks(there are about 20 of them in the story). A whole series of ordinary soldiers - in chapter 11:

A) poorly thinking, slow-witted B Ondarenko,

B) intimidated, deafened by shouts Arkhipov, who " does not understand and cannot learn the simplest things»,

B) loser Khlebnikov. 340, 375, 348/2.His image is more detailed than others. A ruined, landless and impoverished Russian peasant, “shaved into a soldier."Khlebnikov's lot as a soldier is painful and pitiful. Corporal punishment and constant humiliation are his lot. Sick and weak, with a face " in the fist ", on which a dirty nose stuck up absurdly, with eyes in which "frozen in dull, submissive horror“, this soldier became a general ridicule in the company and an object for mockery and abuse. He is driven to thoughts of suicide, from which Romashov saves him, who sees a human brother in Khlebnikov. Feeling sorry for Khlebnikov, Romashov says: “Khlebnikov, are you feeling bad? And I don’t feel good, my dear... I don’t understand anything that’s going on in the world. Everything is some kind of wild, senseless, cruel nonsense!But we must endure, my dear, we must endure.…» Khlebnikov, although he sees in Romashov a kind person who has a humane attitude toward a simple soldier, but, first of all, sees in him master The cruelty, injustice, and absurdity of life become obvious, but the hero sees no way out of this horror other than patience.

G) educated, smart, independent Fokin.

Depicting gray, depersonalized, oppressed « own ignorance, general slavery, bosses’ indifference, arbitrariness and violence» soldiers, Kuprin evokes compassion in the reader for them, shows that in fact these are living people, and not faceless “cogs” of a military machine.

So Kuprin goes for one more, very important topic – the theme of personality.

D. z. 1) Prepare messages based on the images of Romashov and Nazansky (in groups) (portrait characteristics, relationships with people, views, attitude towards service, etc.)

2) Answer the questions:

How is the theme of love resolved in the story?

What is the meaning of the title of the story?

Lesson 2

Subject: The metaphorical nature of the title of A. I. Kuprin’s story “The Duel.”

The purpose of the lesson: analyze the images of heroes expressing the author’s position in the story.

Methodical techniques:student messages, work on text, analytical conversation.

1. Checking the house. tasks.The author's ideals are expressed by heroes opposed to the bulk - Romashov and Nazansky. These heroes are represented by several students (in groups)
2. Characteristics of the image of Nazansky.The conversations between Romashov and Nazansky contain the essence of the story.

A) We learn about Nazansky from a conversation between the Nikolaevs and Romashov ( ch. 4): this is an “inveterate man”, he “ goes on leave for one month due to domestic circumstances... This means he started drinking”; “Such officers are a disgrace to the regiment, an abomination!”

B) Chapter 5 contains a description of the meeting between Romashov and Nazansky. We see first "a white figure and a golden-haired head"Nazansky, we hear his calm voice, we get acquainted with his dwelling:" 288", ch. 5. All this, and even a direct look "thoughtful, beautiful blue eyes”contradicts what the Nikolaevs said about him. Nazansky argues “about sublime matters”, philosophizes, and this, from the point of view of others, is“nonsense, idle and absurd chatter". He thinks about "289". This is for him "290/1 ". He feels someone else's joy and someone else's sorrow, feelsinjustice exists good with Troy, the aimlessness of your life, looking for and not finding a way out of the impasse. 431-432.

Description of the landscape, the mysterious night that opens from the window, according to hissublime words: "290/2".

Nazansky's face seems to Romashov "beautiful and interesting": golden hair, high, clear forehead, neck of noble design, massive and graceful head, similar to the head of one of the Greek heroes or sages, clear Blue eyes, looking "lively, smart and meek". True, this description of an almost ideal hero ends with a revelation: “ 291/1".

Dreaming of " future godlike life", Nazansky glorifies the power and beauty of the human mind, enthusiastically calls for respect for man, speaks passionately about love - and at the same time expresses the views of the author himself: " 293/1 ". Love according to Kuprin is a talent akin to a musical one. Kuprin will develop this theme later in the story " Garnet bracelet”, and much of what Nazansky said will go directly into the story.

B) “435 - underlined” (chapter 21 ). Preaches equality and happiness, glorifies the human mind.

In the passionate speeches of Nazanskya lot of bile and anger, thoughts about the need to fight against"two-headed monster" - the tsarist autocracy andpolice regime in the country, premonitions of the inevitability of deep social upheavals: « 433/1 ". Believes in the future life.

He anti-military and armies in general, condemns the brutal treatment of soldiers(ch.21, 430 – 432 ). Nazansky’s accusatory speeches are filled with open pathos. This is peculiar hero's duel with a senseless and cruel system. Some of the statements of this hero, as Kuprin himself later said, “sound like a gramophone"but they are dear to the writer, who invested in Nazansky a lot that worried him.

D) Why do you think such a hero was needed next to Romashov in “The Duel”?Nazansky asserts: there is only man, complete freedom of man. Romashov embodies the principle of human unfreedom. The door is not closed, you can go out. Romashov recalls that his mother tied him to the bed with the thinnest thread. It aroused mystical fear in him, although it could have been broken.

1. Characteristics of Romashov.

Lieutenant Romashov, the main character of “The Duel,” becomes infected with Nazansky’s moods and thoughts. This is a typical Kuprin image of a truth-seeker and humanist. Romashovgiven in constant movement, in the process of his internal change and spiritual growth. Kuprin reproduces not the entire biography of the hero, and the most important pointin it, without a beginning, but with a tragic end.

Portrait the hero is outwardly expressive: “ 260, ch. 1 ”, sometimes simple-minded. However, in Romashov’s actions one can feel inner strength , coming from a sense of rightness and justice. For example, he unexpectedly defends the Tatar Sharafutdinov, who does not understand Russian, from the colonel who insults him (chapter 1, 262-263 )

He stands up for the soldier Khlebnikov when a non-commissioned officer wants to beat him ( Chapter 10, 340/1).

He even prevails over the bestial Bek-Agamalov, when he almost hacked to death with a saber a woman from a brothel where officers were carousing: “ Chapter 18, 414" . Bek-Agamalov is grateful to Romashov for not letting him, who had become brutal from drunkenness, hack a woman to death

In all these fights Romashov rises to the occasion.

- What kind of life does he lead?? (bored, drunk, lonely, in a relationship with an unloved woman)

There are plans ? Extensive in self-education, study of languages, literature, art. But they remain only plans.

What does he dream about? About a brilliant career, he sees himself as an outstanding commander. His dreams are poetic, but are wasted. 267-269.

- Where Romashov likes to go? Meet trains at the station, 265. chapter 2. His heart strives for beauty. Wed. from Tolstoy (“Resurrection”), Nekrasov (“Troika”), Blok (“On the Railroad”, 439) Direct reminiscence ( echo, the influence of someone's creativity in a work of art). The railway is read as the theme of the distance, the theme of life's way out

Romashov is a romantic, subtle nature. Him " 264 ". Attractive in the herospiritual gentleness, kindness , innate sense of justice. All this sharply distinguishes him from the rest of the officers of the regiment.

Painful, boring army situation in a provincial regiment. Senseless, sometimes idiotic military practice. His disappointments are painful.

- Why is Kuprin's hero young?The soul-deadening bureaucracy reigns over blooming youth. By choosing a young hero, Kuprin intensified the torment "absurdity, incomprehensibility».

What feeling does Romashov evoke in the reader?Deep sympathy.

Romashov has evolutionary tendency. Moves towards knowledge of life.Collision between man and officerfirst happens in Romashov himself, in his soul and consciousness. This internal struggle gradually turns into an open one. duel with Nikolaev and with all the officers. P. 312 (7 chapters), 348, 349, 419.

Romashov graduallyfreed from false understanding of honorofficer's uniform. The turning point was the hero’s reflections on the position of the human person in society, his internal monologue in defense of human rights, dignity and freedom. Romashova "I was stunned and shocked by the unexpectedly bright consciousness of my individuality.”and he rebelled in his own way against depersonalization of a person in military service, in defense of the ordinary soldier. He is indignant at the regimental authorities, who maintain a state of hostility between soldiers and officers. But his impulses to protest are replaced by complete apathy and indifference, his soul is often overwhelmed by depression: “My life is gone!

The feeling of absurdity, confusion, and incomprehensibility of life depresses him. During a conversation with a sick, disfigured Khlebnikov Romashov is experiencingdeep pity and compassion for him(ch. 16 ). He, brought up in the spirit of superiority over the mass of soldiers, indifference to the difficult fate of soldiers, begins to understand that Khlebnikov and his comrades are depersonalized and oppressed by their own ignorance, general slavery, arbitrariness and violence, that soldiers are also people who have the right to sympathy. 402/1, 342 .

A. And Kuprin recalled that the scene near the railroad bed made a great impression on Gorky: " When I read the conversation between Second Lieutenant Romashov and the pitiful soldier Khlebnikov, Alexey Maksimovich was moved, and it was scary to see this big man with wet eyes.”

Unexpectedly for himself, he suddenly rebels against God himself, who allows evil and injustice (another duel perhaps the most important)."402". He withdrawn into himself, focused on his inner world, firmly decided to break with military service in order to start a new life:"403"; "404/1 ”- this is how Romashov defines for himself the worthy purpose of life.

A modest person grows spiritually and discovers the eternal values ​​of existence. Kuprin sees in the hero’s youth hope for the future transformation of the world. The service makes a repulsive impression on him precisely because of its unnaturalness and inhumanity. However, Romashov does not have time to fulfill his dream and dies as a result of betrayal.

4. Thoughts about the possibility of another life are combined with thoughts about love forShurochka Nikolaeva. Sweet, feminine Shurochka, with whom Nazansky is in love, essentiallyguilty of the murder of Romashov in a duel. Self-interest, calculation, lust for power, double-mindedness, « some kind of evil and proud force", Shurochka’s resourcefulness is not noticed by the loving Romashov. She demands: "You definitely have to shoot tomorrow“- and Romashov agrees for her sake to a duel that could have been avoided.

Types of business people have already been created in Russian literature (Chichikov. Stolz). Shurochka is a business man in a skirt. She strives to break out of her environment. The only way is for her husband to enter the academy; he strives to leave for the capital from the petty-bourgeois province. 280, 4 ch.

In order to gain her place in the world, she rejects the passionate love of Nazansky, and sacrifices Romashov for the sake of preserving her husband’s reputation and career. Outwardly charming and smart, she appears disgusting in a conversation with Romashov on the eve of the duel. 440/2.

1. Discussion of the meaning of the story's title.

A) The title itself conveys the personal and social conflict at the heart of the plot.

Plot aspect. P fights , which we have already talked about, inevitably and naturally lead to a denouement - to the last fight.

Final Feature. The duel between Romashov and Nikolaev is not described in the story. ABOUT death of Romashov communicate dry, official, soulless lines report Staff Captain Dietz ( Chapter 23, 443 ). The ending is perceived as tragic because Romashov’s death is meaningless. This last chord is filled with compassion. This fight and the death of the hero are predetermined:Romashov is too different from everyone else,to survive in this society.

Mentioned several times in the story duels , a painful, stuffy atmosphere is intensified. Chapter 19 describes how drunken officers pullfuneral chant,(in Vetkin’s stupid eyes this motive brings tears), but pure sounds funeral services suddenly interrupt"a terrible, cynical curse" Osadchy, 419. Offended Romashov is trying to reason with people. After this, a scandal breaks out, leading to Romashov challenging Nikolaev to a duel, 420, 426.

B) The meaning of the title is in Romashov’s duel with the bad that is in him. This conflict is presented as philosophical, the hero’s comprehension of freedom and necessity.

B) Theme of the fight –a sign of reality itself, the disunity of people, the misunderstanding of one person by another.

G) Civilians - officers, 411-412. Caste officer prejudices.

D) Officers and soldiers(Humiliated, let us remember the Tatar, Romashov’s orderly, finishing his coffee behind him, finishing his lunches)

E) But the name is also metaphorical, symbolic meaning. Kuprin wrote: “with all the strength of my soul I hate the years of my childhood and youth, the years of the corps, the cadet school and service in the regiment. About everything. What I have experienced and seen, I must write. And with my novel I will challenge the royal army to a duel". The name also has another, much greater social aspect. The story is a duel between Kuprin and the entire army, with the entire system that kills the individual in a person and kills the person himself. In 1905, this story, of course, was perceived by revolutionary forces as a call to fight. But almost a hundred years after it was written, the story remains a call for respect for the human person, for reconciliation and brotherly love.

5. So, traditions of Russian literature:

1) Kuprin’s hero is closely related to the concept of an extra person, Tolstoy’s hero.

2) Subtle psychological drawing (Dostoevsky, Tolstoy). Like L. Tolstoy, he explores in depth the struggle of feelings, the contradictions of the awakening consciousness, their collapse. Romashov is close to Chekhov's characters. Kuprin's approach to his hero is akin to Chekhov's. An embarrassed, short-sighted and baggy second lieutenant, thinking of himself in the third person in the words of stilted novels, 375, 380. 387., evokes a mocking and compassionate attitude. This is exactly how the figure of Petya Trofimov is illuminated.

3) Spontaneous democracy, sympathy for the little person. (Pushkin, Gogol, Dostoevsky)

4) Social and philosophical definition of good and evil.

5) Orientation towards some kind of doctrine. Tolstoy is looking for his “green stick”. Kuprin does not know how to rebuild the world. His work contains a rejection of evil.

Agenosov's textbook, part 1, p. 26.

V. Lilin, With. 64 - reviews of the "Duel" by Gorky, L. Tolstoy.

The Russian army has repeatedly become the object of depiction by Russian writers. At the same time, many of them experienced all the “delights” of army life. Alexander Ivanovich Kuprin in this sense can give a hundred points ahead. Having spent his early childhood in an orphanage, the boy was so inspired by the victory of the Russian army in the Russian-Turkish War that he passed the exam for the Moscow Military Academy, which was soon transformed into a cadet corps. Then he will describe all the ugliness of the system of educating future officers in the story “At the Turning Point (Cadets)”, and shortly before his death he will say: “Memories of the rods in the cadet corps remained with me for the rest of my life.”

These memories were reflected in the writer’s further work, and in 1905 the story “The Duel” was published, the features of which this analysis will be devoted to.

A. Kuprin's story is not just sketches of the life of a provincial garrison: before us is a huge social generalization. The reader sees the everyday life of the tsarist army, drill, being pushed around by subordinates, and in the evening drunkenness and debauchery among the officers, which, in fact, is a reflection of the whole picture of life in tsarist Russia.

The story centers on the lives of army officers. Kuprin managed to create a whole gallery of portraits. These are also representatives of the older generation - Colonel Shulgovich, Captain Sliva and Captain Osadchy, who are distinguished by their inhumanity towards soldiers and recognize exclusively cane discipline. There are also younger officers - Nazansky, Vetkin, Bek-Agamalov. But their life is no better: having resigned themselves to the oppressive order in the army, they try to escape from reality by drinking. A. Kuprin depicts how in the conditions of the army there is a “dehumanization of man - a soldier and an officer”, how the Russian army is dying.

The main character of the story is Second Lieutenant Yuri Alekseevich Romashov. Kuprin himself will say about him: “He is my double.” Indeed, this hero embodies the best features of Kuprin’s heroes: honesty, decency, intelligence, but at the same time a certain dreaminess, a desire to change the world for the better. It is no coincidence that Romashov is lonely among officers, which gives Nazansky the right to say: “You... have some kind of inner light. But in our den it will be extinguished".

Indeed, Nazansky’s words will become prophetic, just like the title of the story itself, “The Duel.” At that time, duels were again allowed for officers as the only opportunity to defend honor and dignity. For Romashov, such a fight will be the first and last in his life.

What will lead the hero to this tragic outcome? Of course, love. Love for a married woman, the wife of a colleague, lieutenant Nikolaev, - Shurochka. Yes, among the “boring, monotonous life”, among rude officers and their wretched wives, she seems to Romashov to be perfection itself. She has traits that the hero lacks: determination, willpower, perseverance in implementing her plans and intentions. Not wanting to vegetate in the provinces, i.e. “to descend, become a regimental lady, go to these wild evenings, gossip, intrigue and get angry about various daily allowances and running orders...”, Shurochka is making every effort to prepare her husband for entry into the General Staff Academy in St. Petersburg, because “They returned to the regiment twice in disgrace”, which means this is the last chance to get out of here to shine with intelligence and beauty in the capital.

It is for this reason that everything is at stake, and Shurochka quite prudently uses Romashov’s love for her. When, after a quarrel between Nikolaev and Romashov, a duel becomes the only possible form of preserving honor, she begs Yuri Alekseevich not to refuse the duel, but to shoot to the side (as Vladimir supposedly should do) so that no one gets hurt. Romashov agrees, and the reader learns about the outcome of the duel from the official report. Behind the dry lines of the report lies the betrayal of Shurochka, so beloved by Romashov: it becomes clear that the duel was a set-up murder.

Thus, Romashov, who seeks justice, lost in his duel with reality. Having forced his hero to see the light, the author did not find a further path for him, and the death of the officer became salvation from moral death.