Kashtanka is the main character of the work. The dog is a cross between a dachshund and a mongrel with a fox-like face.

This seemingly inconspicuous dog has an interesting fate. Living in a carpenter's house, she could not even imagine that there was another life. She divided all people into owners and customers. The owners are kind people who feed her, play with her, sometimes beat and scream, but they are allowed to. Customers are strangers who can be bitten on the legs.

Once, the owner took her with him to the customer. It so happened that Kashtanka got lost. Poor animal! Frozen and hungry, she ran through the streets, looking for her master, and did not find him. Exhausted, the dog ended up near someone else's entrance, where a stranger met her and took her to live with him.

Kashtanka enters another world. Here animals are not beaten, they are not shouted at, they are fed in plenty. She gets a new nickname - Aunt. In the new house, she meets other animals and she makes friends. But, despite all these benefits, the dog misses his master, his son Fedyushka.

Soon the new owner teaches her the circus business and takes her to the arena with a performance. To the incredible happiness of Kashtanka, a carpenter and his son come to her first performance, and they recognize her. She drops everything and runs to her old beloved owners.

The work is filled with sadness and joy. Funny scenes give way to sad ones. Reading the scenes of Fedyushka playing with Kashtanka, you get angry at this little boy because he mocks the poor animal. You involuntarily smile when making a pyramid, the animals fall, and you feel sad at the moment of the death of the goose Ivan Ivanovich.

What does this work teach us? What is the moral of the story of a simple dog?

With his work, A.P. Chekhov shows what devoted and faithful animals. Not every person has this quality. Even in the best conditions, she does not forget about her old masters and returns to them as soon as possible.

Thanks to this work, we learn to treat our smaller brothers with great attention and care. It should be understood that animals are defenseless creatures, you need to take care of them and protect them from adversity. What would happen to Kashtanka if she didn't meet a stranger? She could freeze or die of hunger.

It is not just that the author described the death of the goose Ivan Ivanovich. This scene suggests that at any moment it can happen that a dear and close person does not become. We need to appreciate every moment lived together, enjoy every moment.

The history of Kashtanka will not leave indifferent any reader. After reading this work, people will become a little kinder.

Analysis of the work Kashtanka 2

The story “Kashtanka” was written by Anton Pavlovich Chekhov in 1887. It was published in the New Times newspaper. The main character of the work is the little dog Kashtanka. A cute creature - a cross between a dachshund and a mongrel, with a fox muzzle. This is not just a story about the life of a dog. This is a description of the relationship between animal and man, the friendship of four-legged animals. A story about a dog's devotion.

Kashtanka lived in the house of the master carpenter Luka Alexandrovich and his son Fyodor. And although food was scarce, sometimes I had to be content with the remnants of carpentry glue, and Fedyushka's games were cruel - Kashtanka was very devoted to her owners, not understanding words, she knew how to understand their desires by facial expression and intonation. She had her own ideas about people. Divided them into customers and owners. She calmly grabbed customers by the legs, but from the owners she patiently endured even beatings. Often at night she had dreams, not always good ones. Kashtanka was content with her life and loved her hosts.

But once it all collapsed, following the drunk carpenter, Kashtanka got lost. She tried to find Luka Alexandrovich, but all attempts were in vain. The dog was very tired, cold and hungry. In this state, a passerby picked her up and brought her home. So she ended up in the house of a circus clown, where she was given a different name - Aunt. Kashtanka found a new family. In addition to her, the cat Ivan Ivanovich, the goose Fyodor Timofeevich lived in the house, and the pig Khavronya lived in the courtyard. All of them were circus performers. Kashtanka watched the clown and the animals rehearse every day. The dog was treated well in the house, the goose allowed him to eat from his bowl. But she missed her old life a lot.

In the house of the new owner, Auntie knew not only joy, but also the bitterness of loss. Fyodor Timofeevich died, a horse stepped on him in the circus. Mr. Georges began to teach the little dog tricks, to prepare him for a performance in the arena. She was a talented student, she carried out all the commands with pleasure. The day of the premiere came, the owner took her to the circus, where there were many strange, unfamiliar animals. Once in the arena, Auntie was at first confused, a new unusual world opened up to her, where there was a lot of light and strangers. Hearing the calm voice of the owner, she calmed down and began to perform tricks. The audience applauded. And suddenly, among the applause and laughter, a voice was heard that could not be confused with any other. It was Fedyushka, who came to the performance with Luka Alexandrovich. Beside herself with joy, Aunt rushed to such relatives and friends. The little dog regained her name and old friends. They returned home together, Kashtanka ran at the feet of the owner. Life in the clown's house left pleasant memories in her soul, but she was devoted to Fedor and Luka Alexandrovich.

Some interesting essays

• Composition based on the painting by Shishkin Winter in the forest (Hoarfrost) 3, Grade 2

  Feels like it's cold in there. The snow is so beautiful. And the frost is especially beautiful. Black branches are almost invisible, everything is silver with frost. There is also a lot of snow. Sky is blue! Not a cloud. It would be very nice to walk in this picture. There frost crunches, snow shines. Winter!

• The theme of love in Bunin's story Caucasus

  Ivan Alekseevich Bunin is rightfully recognized by time itself as one of the masters of Russian prose. His stories are small, but continue to enjoy crazy popularity among readers even today.

• Composition How does a dream affect a person?

  Each of us has dreams. Someone has big dreams, going far ahead, while someone has very small ones, but no less significant. From early childhood, we dream first of some kind of toy, then of a five for a quarter

• What makes Bazarov a hero of his time? writing

  What makes Bazarov a hero of our time? What is his personality? How did he stand out in his time? Now I will try to answer all these questions, and then it will be clear what makes him a hero.

• Composition Life in the depths of space

  The stars are incredibly beautiful. Sometimes you just want to reach out to the sky and touch them, but... They are so far away... Maybe that's why I would like to go to them?

1. Independent parts of speech:

• nouns (see morphological norms of nouns);
• Verbs:
• • sacraments;
  • gerunds;
• adjectives;
• numerals;
• pronouns;
• adverbs;

2. Service parts of speech:

• prepositions;
• unions;
• particles;

3. Interjections.

None of the classifications (according to the morphological system) of the Russian language fall into:

• the words yes and no, if they act as an independent sentence.
• introductory words: so, by the way, total, as a separate sentence, as well as a number of other words.

Morphological analysis of a noun

• the initial form in the nominative case, singular (with the exception of nouns used only in the plural: scissors, etc.);
• own or common noun;
• animate or inanimate;
• gender (m, f, cf.);
• number (unit, plural);
• declination;
• case;
• syntactic role in a sentence.

Plan of morphological analysis of a noun

"The baby is drinking milk."

Kid (answers the question who?) - noun;

• initial form - baby;
• permanent morphological features: animate, common noun, concrete, masculine, 1st declension;
• inconstant morphological features: nominative case, singular;
• in the syntactic analysis of the sentence, it plays the role of the subject.

Morphological analysis of the word "milk" (answers the question of whom? What?).

• initial form - milk;
• constant morphological characteristic of the word: neuter, inanimate, real, common noun, 2nd declension;
• variable morphological features: accusative, singular;
• in a sentence with a direct object.

Here is another example of how to make a morphological analysis of a noun, based on a literary source:

"Two ladies ran up to Luzhin and helped him get up. He began to knock the dust off his coat with his palm. (Example from: Luzhin's Defense, Vladimir Nabokov)."

Ladies (who?) - noun;

• the initial form is a lady;
• permanent morphological features: common noun, animate, specific, feminine, 1st declension;
• fickle morphological noun characteristic: singular, genitive;
• syntactic role: part of the subject.

Luzhin (to whom?) - noun;

• initial form - Luzhin;
• faithful morphological characteristic of the word: proper name, animated, concrete, masculine, mixed declension;
• non-permanent morphological features of a noun: singular, dative case;

Palm (what?) - noun;

• initial form - palm;
• constant morphological features: feminine, inanimate, common noun, concrete, I declension;
• unstable morphos. signs: singular, instrumental;
• syntactic role in context: complement.

Dust (what?) - noun;

• initial form - dust;
• main morphological features: common noun, real, feminine, singular, animate not characterized, III declension (noun with zero ending);
• fickle morphological word characteristic: accusative;
• syntactic role: complement.

(c) Coat (Why?) - noun;

• the initial form is a coat;
• constant correct morphological characteristic of the word: inanimate, common noun, concrete, neuter, indeclinable;
• morphological features are unstable: the number cannot be determined from the context, the genitive case;
• syntactic role as a member of a sentence: addition.

Morphological analysis of the adjective

The adjective is a significant part of speech. Answers questions What? Which? Which? Which? and characterizes the features or qualities of an object. Table of morphological features of the adjective name:

• initial form in the nominative case, singular, masculine;
• constant morphological features of adjectives:
• • rank, according to the value:
  • • - quality (warm, silent);
    • - relative (yesterday, reading);
    • - possessive (hare, mother's);
  • degree of comparison (for qualitative, in which this feature is constant);
  • full / short form (for quality, in which this feature is permanent);
• non-permanent morphological features of the adjective:
• • quality adjectives change according to the degree of comparison (in comparative degrees, a simple form, in superlatives - complex): beautiful-beautiful-most beautiful;
  • full or short form (only qualitative adjectives);
  • genus sign (only in the singular);
  • number (consistent with the noun);
  • case (consistent with the noun);
• syntactic role in the sentence: the adjective is a definition or part of a compound nominal predicate.

Plan of morphological analysis of the adjective

Suggestion example:

The full moon rose over the city.

Full (what?) - adjective;

• initial form - complete;
• permanent morphological features of the adjective: qualitative, full form;
• inconstant morphological characteristic: in a positive (zero) degree of comparison, feminine (consistent with the noun), nominative case;
• according to syntactic analysis - a minor member of the sentence, performs the role of a definition.

Here is another whole literary passage and a morphological analysis of the adjective, using examples:

The girl was beautiful: slender, thin, blue eyes, like two amazing sapphires, looked into your soul.

Beautiful (what?) - adjective;

• the initial form is beautiful (in this sense);
• constant morphological norms: qualitative, short;
• non-permanent signs: positive degree of comparison, singular, feminine;

Slender (what?) - adjective;

• initial form - slender;
• permanent morphological features: qualitative, complete;
• inconstant morphological characteristics of the word: full, positive degree of comparison, singular, feminine, nominative;
• syntactic role in the sentence: part of the predicate.

Thin (what?) - adjective;

• the initial form is thin;
• morphological permanent features: qualitative, complete;
• inconstant morphological characteristic of the adjective: positive degree of comparison, singular, feminine, nominative;
• syntactic role: part of the predicate.

Blue (what?) - adjective;

• initial form - blue;
• table of constant morphological features of the adjective: qualitative;
• inconsistent morphological characteristics: complete, positive degree of comparison, plural, nominative;
• syntactic role: definition.

Amazing (what?) - adjective;

• initial form - amazing;
• permanent signs in morphology: relative, expressive;
• inconsistent morphological features: plural, genitive;
• syntactic role in the sentence: part of the circumstance.

Morphological features of the verb

According to the morphology of the Russian language, the verb is an independent part of speech. It can denote an action (to walk), a property (to limp), an attitude (to equal), a state (to rejoice), a sign (to turn white, show off) of an object. Verbs answer the question what to do? what to do? what is he doing? what have you been doing? or what will it do? Different groups of verbal word forms are characterized by heterogeneous morphological characteristics and grammatical features.

Morphological forms of verbs:

• the initial form of the verb is the infinitive. It is also called the indefinite or invariable form of the verb. Variable morphological features are absent;
• conjugated (personal and impersonal) forms;
• non-conjugated forms: participles and participles.

Morphological analysis of the verb

• the initial form is the infinitive;
• constant morphological features of the verb:
• • transitivity:
  • • transitive (used with accusative nouns without a preposition);
    • intransitive (not used with a noun in the accusative case without a preposition);
  • returnability:
  • • returnable (there are -sya, -sya);
    • irrevocable (no -sya, -sya);
  • • imperfect (what to do?);
    • perfect (what to do?);
  • conjugation:
  • • I conjugation (do-eat, do-et, do-eat, do-et, do-yut / ut);
    • II conjugation (sto-ish, sto-it, sto-im, sto-ite, sto-yat / at);
    • conjugated verbs (want, run);
• non-permanent morphological features of the verb:
• • mood:
  • • indicative: what did you do? What did you do? what is he doing? what will he do?;
    • conditional: what would you do? what would you do?;
    • imperative: do it!;
  • time (in the indicative mood: past / present / future);
  • person (in the present/future tense, indicative and imperative: 1st person: I/we, 2nd person: you/you, 3rd person: he/they);
  • gender (in the past tense, singular, indicative and conditional);
  • number;
• syntactic role in a sentence. The infinitive can be any part of the sentence:
• • predicate: To be a holiday today;
  • Subject: Learning is always useful;
  • addition: All the guests asked her to dance;
  • definition: He has an overwhelming desire to eat;
  • circumstance: I went out for a walk.

Morphological analysis of the verb example

To understand the scheme, we will conduct a written analysis of the morphology of the verb using the example of a sentence:

Crow somehow God sent a piece of cheese ... (fable, I. Krylov)

Sent (what did you do?) - part of speech verb;

• initial form - send;
• permanent morphological features: perfective, transitional, 1st conjugation;
• inconstant morphological characteristic of the verb: indicative mood, past tense, masculine, singular;

The following online example of the morphological parsing of a verb in a sentence:

What silence, listen.

Listen (what to do?) - verb;

• the initial form is to listen;
• morphological constant features: perfect form, intransitive, reflexive, 1st conjugation;
• inconstant morphological characteristics of the word: imperative, plural, 2nd person;
• syntactic role in the sentence: predicate.

Plan for the morphological analysis of the verb online for free, based on an example from a whole paragraph:

He needs to be warned.

No need, let him know another time how to break the rules.

What are the rules?

Wait, I'll tell you later. Has entered! (“The Golden Calf”, I. Ilf)

Warn (what to do?) - verb;

• initial form - warn;
• morphological features of the verb are constant: perfective, transitive, irrevocable, 1st conjugation;
• non-permanent morphology of the part of speech: infinitive;
• syntactic function in a sentence: an integral part of the predicate.

Let him know (what is he doing?) - part of speech verb;

• the initial form is to know;
• inconstant morphology of the verb: imperative, singular, 3rd person;
• syntactic role in the sentence: predicate.

Violate (what to do?) - the word is a verb;

• the initial form is to violate;
• permanent morphological features: imperfective, irrevocable, transitional, 1st conjugation;
• non-permanent signs of the verb: infinitive (initial form);
• syntactic role in the context: part of the predicate.

Wait (what to do?) - part of speech verb;

• initial form - wait;
• permanent morphological features: perfect form, irrevocable, transitional, 1st conjugation;
• inconstant morphological characteristic of the verb: imperative, plural, 2nd person;
• syntactic role in the sentence: predicate.

Entered (what did?) - verb;

• initial form - enter;
• permanent morphological features: perfective, irrevocable, intransitive, 1st conjugation;
• inconstant morphological characteristic of the verb: past tense, indicative mood, singular, masculine;
• syntactic role in the sentence: predicate.

"Chestnut". The history of the creation of the work has several versions, each of which can be considered real. But it is known for certain that first publication of the story happened in 1887. On the wonderful holiday of Christmas, a new work by Anton Pavlovich was published in the Novoye Vremya newspaper. Immediately, the opinion of critics about the story in the learned society was divided.

In contact with

History of creation

To date, there are several versions of how the work of Anton Chekhov was created. Each of them has the right to exist:

Main idea of ​​the story

Kashtanka, according to Chekhov, like people, is able to feel and experience. Therefore, the main theme of Chekhov's work "Kashtanka" is a description of the dog's life and its relationship with the outside world. The author shows how people treat animals.

The main idea that will need to be reflected in the reader's diary, and which should be understood, is that animal loyalty and devotion has no limits, but only a person must be responsible for those whom he has tamed. It is worth remembering this when you start reading Kashtanka online.

The work helps readers understand that any animal is able to feel, suffer and experience. And people should be held responsible for these sufferings of the dog. For retelling, knowledge of "Kashtanka" is also suitable for the summary, which is given in this article. All the content of the story by chapters is reflected in the plan:

1. Misconduct.
2. A mysterious stranger.
3. New, very pleasant acquaintance.
4. Miracles in the sieve.
5. Talent! Talent!
6. Restless night.
7. Bad debut.

main characters

There are few characters in Chekhov's short work:

Kashtanka is the main character of Chekhov's work. Even as a puppy, she found herself in a carpenter's family and loved them faithfully and devotedly. But they did not always do well with her: they offended, did not feed, kicked. The fate of the dog is difficult and complicated. This is what Chekhov says in his work. Kashtanka, which is hard, difficult and sad to read about for a small reader, once got lost, and, having experienced grief, she was able to get to a new owner, where she lived well. She even began performing in the circus. But there she met her former owners.

And, despite the fact that Kashtanka was talented, she still chooses her masters, whom she loves infinitely and is ready for anything for them.

Chapter "Bad Behavior" begins with a description of a dog that was still so young that he was able to get lost right on the sidewalk. Kashtanka was very similar to a dachshund, although her cross with a mongrel did not allow talking about the breed. She perfectly remembered how she ended up on this sidewalk.

In the morning, its owner, Luka Alexandrych, dressed warmer, took some kind of box and went on business. He also took Kashtanka with him, who until then had been sleeping peacefully on the shavings. The carpenter went to his customers, who lived very far away. On the way, the owner kept stopping by the tavern to refresh himself a little. The dog, rejoicing that it was taken for a walk, jumped and had fun, chased the dogs and often lagged behind its owner.

The carpenter was still visiting his acquaintances, although he was very drunk. Suddenly, a regiment with music was walking past them, which greatly frightened Kashtanka. The dog began to thrash about, running across to another sidewalk. When everything calmed down and she returned to the place where her master was, then he was not there. She ran up and down the sidewalk, but she couldn't find the carpenter.

It began to get dark. People passed by. And soon despair and horror seized the dog. She, clinging to some strange entrance, began to cry. She was cold and hungry.

In "The Mysterious Stranger" In her sleep, Kashtanka heard a man come out of the entrance. He bent down to her and began to talk sincerely, feeling sorry for the lost dog. A short and fat man called her with him and she went. Half an hour later she was already sitting in the warm room where the stranger was having dinner, and eating those pieces that he threw to her.

Having eaten, the dog dozed off. But falling asleep, she sadly remembered the carpenter himself, his workshop, and his son Fedyushka, who constantly played with her.

The chapter "A New, Very Pleasant Acquaintance" tells about the first day in the house of a circus performer. Kashtanka woke up late and went to inspect the house. While the customer was sleeping, the dog was able to find the room where the trained animals lived. Immediately a fight broke out with a cat and a goose. But just in time, a new owner entered. Soon the new owner gave the name to Kashtanka. Now everyone called her Aunt.

In the chapter "Miracles in a sieve" The aunt watches what tricks the new owner and his trained goose are doing. For more than an hour there was a rehearsal with Ivan Ivanovich, and Kashtanka really liked it, which all the time tried to break away and participate in everything.

Soon Khavronya Ivanovna was also invited into the room, who turned out to be a good-natured pig. Kashtanka watched as the new owner demanded the Egyptian Pyramid number from the animals. After that, the circus artist began to teach the goose how to ride a cat, and Fyodor Timofeich to smoke. These new impressions thrilled the dog. But already at night she spent the night in the same room with Fyodor Timofeitch and Ivan Ivanovich.

In the chapter "Talent! Talent!" the reader sees Kashtanka again, who has been living in the new owner's house for a month now. She has already begun to get used to the fact that she is now called Aunt, who eats a delicious lunch every day. She got used to her new cohabitants, and even began to get used to her new owner. Every day was similar to the previous one: the goose woke up first and woke the rest with his long monologues.

Every day there were trainings that lasted 3-4 hours and everyone got tired of them, even the owner himself. In the evening the owner was leaving somewhere, leaving Kashtanka alone. The goose and the cat always went with him. She was sad from time to time. She saw some people she used to love.

And when Auntie had already become a real well-fed dog, the owner decided to teach her tricks. The circus artist decided to make an artist out of Aunt. First, she learned to walk on her hind legs, jumping on them to grab the sugar in the hands of the owner. After that, she trained many other tricks:

• Danced.
• Went out to the music.
• She ran on a lunge.
• Shot and called.
• Became a member of the "Egyptian pyramid".

The owner saw how quickly Auntie learns everything new, what pleasure it gives her and constantly said that she was a real talent. Soon, Kashtanka already perceived this word as if it were her nickname.

The chapter "Restless Night" tells how Auntie once had a strange dream, from which she immediately woke up. It was somehow sad and hard for her, but she also could not fall asleep. She was also frightened by the cry of Ivan Ivanovich, some piercing and unnatural.

As soon as Kashtanka dozed off again, she again began to have terrible dreams. And again there was a strange cry. Kashtanka jumped up and began to bark, but soon noticed that there were no strangers in the room, the goose was sitting on the floor and looked somehow strange. Everyone woke up, and the owner began to worry. He took Ivan Ivanovich with him. My aunt couldn't sleep anymore, she was scared.

The owner again went into the room and examined Ivan Ivanovich. He remembered that a horse had stepped on him today and the goose was dying now. The aunt was frightened, and she, turning her face to the dark window, began to howl. Tears rolled down the owner's cheeks. It's dawn. The janitor took the goose and took it somewhere.

Chapter "Unsuccessful Debut" the excited host informs Auntie that today she will also have to perform. In the "Egyptian Pyramid" the dog was supposed to replace the late Ivan Ivanych.

On a sleigh they came to some large house, where lanterns were burning brightly. Kashtanka ended up in the clown's dressing room. The aunt watched attentively as her master's appearance changed. Soon he put both Aunt and Fyodor Timofeyich in a suitcase. When the clown opened it, Kashtanka saw a lot of light. A new world opened up before her.

After dancing with the cat, the clown pulled out a pipe and began to play. Aunt began to howl. And suddenly, from somewhere in the audience, Auntie heard her old name, pronounced in a childish voice. Kashtanka looked there and recognized the carpenter and his son. Memories flooded over her and she, happily barking, ran to them. Soon she was already walking behind them, thinking that life in another house was some kind of dream for her.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

"Kashtanka", analysis of Chekhov's story

Anton Pavlovich Chekhov (1860 - 1904) did not write stories especially for children. In his letter to the publisher G. I. Rossolimo, he once admitted that he did not like children's literature at all. Nevertheless, his "Children", "The Fugitive", "Grisha", "Vanka", "Kashtanka" entered the treasury of stories for children. More than one younger generation reads them with pleasure and draws conclusions for themselves. Chekhov chestnut genre

There is a version that the story "Kashtanka" (1887) was created on the basis of a real story that happened to the trainer Vladimir Durov. A little bit of creative imagination, and before us is a defenseless animal, a red-haired dog, “a mixture of a dachshund with a mongrel” named Kashtanka. She divides people into owners and customers: the first is allowed to beat her, but the second she herself can bite on the calves.

Chekhov pays much attention to the main character. We see a constantly hungry and eternally slaughtered dog. Instead of food in the carpenter's house, she was slipped tobacco, and was also tormented by sadistic "tricks". Only dog's devotion made Kashtanka forget all insults and insults against herself. Interestingly, we not only follow Kashtanka in various situations, but also know about her feelings, experiences, thoughts. With this subtle artistic device, Chekhov helps the reader to penetrate the sensual and rational world of the animal.

A lot of things happen in a short story. When Kashtanka got lost, her familiar world collapsed, because the life of the new owner was very different from the previous one. Even the name of the dog was now different - Aunt. And the heroine's artistic talent was revealed, and they began to prepare her for a performance at the arena. The aunt was not beaten, they were well fed, but she still yearned for her former life.

The opening day at the circus is the climax of the story. Quite by chance, the former owners of the dog were at the show. Hearing such a native and familiar voice from the crowd, Kashtanka rushes into a past life.

The story's ending leaves a lot of room for controversy and fantasy. Indeed, why did Kashtanka return to its former owners with such joy? After all, the well-fed life of a circus artist is much more interesting. Most likely, the canine instinct of devotion worked. But, perhaps, in the behavior of an animal, Chekhov saw moments characteristic of people who are slavishly ready to endure humiliation and insults. Nekrasov also wrote about such people: “the heavier the punishment, the dearer they are to the Lord.”

However, if you still recognize "Kashtanka" as a work for children, then the denouement is happy. The heroine found her former life and wagged her tail with happiness.

"Death of officials ika”, analysis of Chekhov’s story

"The Death of an Official" is one of the early stories of the famous Russian writer Anton Chekhov. In 1886, the work was included in the collection Motley Stories. "The Death of an Official" was written in the spirit of realism, this trend spread in Russia in the second half of the 19th - 20th centuries.

Chekhov managed to combine "strict realism" with heightened conventionality. At the beginning of the story, we can clearly trace the features of this direction, but at the end of the work, Chekhov goes beyond realism, for which mockery of death is unacceptable.

In this work, Chekhov raises the theme of the "little" person. In his work, Chekhov tries to protest the suppression of the human personality, and in the work “The Death of an Official” clearly shows the consequences of such treatment: the object of ridicule is a petty official who, for no particular reason, is in constant confusion.

There are only three characters in the story: an official with a speaking surname Ivan Dmitrievich Chervyakov, Chervyakov's wife and General Brizzhalov. Chekhov pays the most attention to the official, because this is the main character, the object of ridicule. The rest of the characters are of no interest to the author.

The little man in this story is both comical and pitiful. Laughter is caused by Chervyakov's absurd perseverance, and pity gives rise to his zealous humiliation of himself. Once again, apologizing to the general, the official renounced his human dignity.

At the beginning of the story, the author compares two sides: a petty official and a general. Already from this moment, a conflict is generated, traditional for Chekhov's works. Due to the fact that the general shouted at the visitor, Chervyakov dies - a seemingly familiar plot scheme. But there are significant shifts in the story: the general shouted at his subordinate only when the latter brought him to aggression.

Such an unexpected and comical turn of events lies precisely in the special worldview of the protagonist. And Chervyakov died not at all from fright, but from the fact that a person of high rank violated the sacred principles for him.

The master of the small genre and this time could not change his style. Chekhov's conciseness is simply amazing. His small works often contain a deep meaning, and it can only be known through artistic details that are designed to convey the main idea to the reader. In this story, the presence of the author is not felt, Chekhov is removed from the characters. This technique helps to describe actions even more objectively.

"Thick and thin", analysis of Chekhov's story

The story "Thick and Thin" (1883) refers to the early period of A.P. Chekhov's work. The story is very small in volume, as it is written unusually succinctly and concentrated. A recognized master, Chekhov knew how to "talk briefly about long things." At the same time, the author's position in the story is deliberately not accentuated - the reader himself can draw conclusions based on what he has read.

The genre of the work is a story written in the best traditions of critical realism. The story clearly shows the features of Chekhov's individual writing style: the rapid development of the plot, conciseness, attention to expressive details, and the accuracy of the language.

Problems of the story

In the story, Chekhov shows the dependence of people on their social status and the stereotypes of thinking associated with it.

The author, with his inherent subtle humor, ridicules people who crawl before the position. The main object of ridicule is a small official who grovels when no one forces him to do so. Chekhov truthfully and mercilessly paints a picture of the world of the “thin”, the world of slave psychology. The tragedy lies in the loss of their "I" by such people, the loss of a sense of personality.

Features of the plot composition of the story

The work is distinguished by its extremely brief exposition expressed in one sentence. Even two conclusions can be drawn from it. Firstly, the writer uses the antithesis, saying that one friend is fat, the other is thin, already opposing them to each other. Secondly. The Nikolaev railway connected Moscow and St. Petersburg; its main passengers were officials. It can be assumed that the story will be about them. The plot is an unexpected meeting of two childhood friends - Mikhail and Porfiry.

The development of the action includes the first sincere joy of recognition, and general memories of childhood, and questions about life. The culmination of the work is the moment when the “thin” learns that the “fat” has the rank of Privy Councilor. In the acute social denouement, the behavior of the "thin" and his family changes dramatically. The “thin” begins to fawn over the “thick”: the appeal to “you” is replaced by “your excellency”, a high style (“gracious attention”) appears in Porfiry’s speech. The writer's special technique - unfinished sentences - as if allows you to hear how the breath of the "subtle" is interrupted from reverence. "Tolstoy" is annoyed by the situation, and he is in a hurry to part with the "thin" family.

Character system

A distinctive feature of the story is the sharpness of the psychological characteristics of the characters. The relationship between the main characters - "thick" and "thin" - is based on the opposition of the two heroes.

There is no description of the appearance of the characters in the narrative, however, with the help of expressive strokes, Chekhov created vivid images, showing the place of each character in life. The author emphasizes the social difference of childhood friends with the help of smells: from the “fat” who dined in the restaurant of the station, it smelled of “sherry and orange blossom”, from the “thin” - “ham and coffee grounds”.

In the second part of the story, the internal conflict intensifies. The writer reveals it through contrasting the facial expressions of the characters - the "fat" one "grimaced", while the "thin one turned pale, petrified", "shrank, hunched over, narrowed". The “fat” one retains the former appeal to Porfiry to “you”, and the “thin” one has “you” - “What are you with ...”.

The introduction of the minor characters of the wife and the "thin" son helps the author to fully reveal the features of Porfiry's character.

Analysis of stylistic features

The story was written in artistic style using elements of conversational style.

Revealing the character of the characters with the help of a contrasting image, Chekhov widely uses a variety of stylistic devices: antonyms, comparisons, metaphors, alliteration, syntactic antithesis, repeated repetition of the union "a".

Throughout the story, the speech of the characters changes: at the beginning of the story, the author puts colloquial vocabulary (“darling”, “fathers”) into the mouths of the characters, which is replaced in the second part with an official business address.

As a doctor, as a writer, as a person, Chekhov reveals in his work the spiritual diseases of society, calling for "drop by drop to squeeze a slave out of oneself."

"Chameleon", analysis of Chekhov's story

The humorous story "Chameleon" refers to the early stage of the creative path of Anton Pavlovich Chekhov. As a student of the gymnasium, young Chekhov had already begun to write, mostly notes, funny captions for drawings, sketches, stories. In his student years, under the pseudonym "Antosha Chekhonte", he published humoresques and feuilletons in humorous magazines. The story "Chameleon" was written in 1884, when the writer graduated and began working as a doctor. The writer continued to collaborate with magazines, perhaps for this reason, the features of the journalistic genre are felt in the work. But it would be wrong to conclude that this is a shortcoming of the story; on the contrary, the style of performance gives it a special charm and uniqueness. The young man was a novice writer only in terms of fame, but the skill and depth in the work are clearly not youthful.

The main character, police officer Ochumelov, was shown in various life situations. The image is collective, describing an incredible number of representatives of the human race. Who are they? Chameleons. They don't care about the truth, they don't need justice, they don't know what conscience is. The main goal is to survive and, preferably, with maximum comfort, in the shadow of the powerful.

The situation with a dog, whose fate depends on who its owner is, is very indicative and characteristic of all times and peoples. The concept of "chameleonism" began to be used everywhere to define people who are unprincipled and change their minds depending on the situation.

Unfortunately, modern society also continues to produce Ochumelovs. Slave psychology, which Chekhov ridicules in his humorous story, has always been beneficial to "those in power."

An analysis of the literary devices used in the work allows us to conclude that it was written in the style of realism. While reading, the imagination effortlessly draws a very vivid and accurate picture of what is happening. Perhaps the reason for this is the special form of presentation, characteristic only of Chekhov and being his "calling card". There are no lengthy descriptions in "Chameleon", only short and very accurate characteristics. The story is more like a transcript, a discreet reportage. But this is precisely what enhances the incredible images of the characters and allows you to consider them with maximum clarity, without being distracted by extraneous details. Only the essence, the most important and significant, is cut with a sharp dagger in the memory and on the heart.

"Intruder", analysis of Chekhov's story

A. P. Chekhov's story "Intruder" was published for the first time in July 1885 in the "Petersburg newspaper". He continues the line of Chekhov's miniatures, which evoke "laughter through tears" in readers. The analysis of this work reveals the abyss of peasant-master relations in Russia at that time.

Storyline of the story

Before the court in the story appears a man named Denis Grigoriev - barefoot, not distinguished by quickness of mind, but ready to defend his innocence to the end.

His crime was that he unscrewed the nuts on the railroad tracks. During the interrogation, it turns out that the nuts are needed for the net, which does not want to sink without them. The judge is trying to explain to Denis that this could derail the train and kill people. But Denis claims that this was not even in his thoughts, but the net is unsuitable for fishing without nuts.

Moreover, it turns out that almost all the peasants of the village are engaged in this occupation and even sell these nets to the gentlemen.

The judge has no choice but to give the order to take Denis back to prison, to which the man is naively and sincerely surprised: for what?

The miniature story raises the theme of negligence, which has always been in Russia. Who is to blame for the fact that men are pulling nuts out of the railway, resulting in train accidents and people dying? In the course of reading the work, it does not at all give the impression that Denis had such an intent and that he is a malicious violator of the law. He appears before the court barefoot, which means that he is poor, and the seine net is a way of his survival. Is it possible to accuse him of getting his own food? After all, he has no intention of killing innocent people.

In the story, the problem of who is the true culprit of this negligence and the real attacker sounds very clearly. The gentlemen to whom the village peasants sell these tackles know perfectly well where the nuts come from on the nets. And they are certainly much smarter than the peasants and perfectly understand what such “needlework” of the peasants can lead to. But they are silent. They are silent and continue to buy nets with rail nuts.

The story is written in a realistic direction, as it specifically draws pictures of Russian reality at the end of the 19th century. The work is unusual in its composition, since it has neither beginning nor end: a piece of the trial of Denis seems to be torn out of the general course of the investigation. The verdict remains unknown: Chekhov wanted the reader to make it himself.

Very short in content, but capacious from the point of view of the idea, the story of A.P. Chekhov "The Intruder" makes the reader think about the topic of negligence in Russia and its true culprits.

"Surgery", analysis of Chekhov's story

Chekhov A.P. in his short humorous story “Surgery” perfected the text so much that every word in it had the weight of the only possible one. In his notes, the writer noted that "the art of writing is the art of abbreviation."

The story is written in the style of realism about a small episode from life. The title of the story is very simple and does not quite match the content of the story. A hint of the discrepancy is also the description of the appearance of the "surgeon" Kuryatin in the first lines of the story. The image of the paramedic is briefly but succinctly outlined in the description of clothes and actions. He is receiving patients, and in his hand is a fetid cigar, in his clothes - negligence. Accurate artistic detail replaces detailed description.

The speaking surname Kuryatin gives his image a characterization of a person who smokes and an association with the word "chicken". “Like a chicken paw”, “chicken brains” - such a person does not know how to do anything well and is stupid. The following story confirms this. Thus, the title gives the story not only a comical, but also a satirical character.

The writer originally defined its plot as a "sketch". The story is based on dialogues. The speech of the characters is the main characteristic of their images. There are two of them in the story: the paramedic Kuryatin and the sexton Vonmiglasov. The surname of the sexton is speaking, meaning: “Pay attention! ". He came to the hospital with a problem to get attention.

Events follow in chronological order. At the beginning of the story, Vonmiglasov comes to the zemstvo hospital complaining of a toothache. In terms of the development of the action, the paramedic, after examining the patient, decides to remove the tooth. The characters are polite to each other. The deacon reverently listens to Kuryatin's reasoning about surgery, praising him in advance for the result. With a mask of humility, he casually quotes Holy Scripture. Kuryatin speaks of surgery as a trifle, randomly choosing an instrument for work.

The first attempt to remove the tooth fails (culmination). The dialogue is changing. Not a trace remains of the deacon's unctuousness. He scolds. And Kuryatin now speaks of surgery as a difficult task.

The second climax: another attempt to pull out a tooth ends up with splinters sticking out in the deacon's mouth. He calls names, laments, his feigned humility disappears. The paramedic's speech consists of unfinished phrases, repetitions, which shows him as a person who does not know his business. Mentioning three times about his alleged success in removing the tooth of the Egyptian landowner and the contradiction of this boasting of reality lead to the question - was there a landowner?

The denouement: the paramedic, having caused the patient suffering, and does not try to correct the situation. After a skirmish with mutual insults, the angry sexton "leaves home." The final is open. This feature of Chekhov's works leaves the reader a chance to think of something important.

There are no ratings for the author in this story. He writes on behalf of an outside observer. But while reading, a complete picture of the characters is created. Vonmiglasov's humility is replaced by rude abuse. "Chameleonism" also sounds in the words of Kuryatin. He speaks of the landowner with respect for rank, but treats the deacon with disdain. The unprofessionalism of the paramedic is "appreciated" by the deacon's words and his departure.

The images in the dialogues are drawn in such a way that by the end of the story the characters are perceived as real people. Actions are described by short and rare remarks inside the dialogues. This technique creates a visual picture of the story.

Analysis of the story "Vanka"

Anton Pavlovich Chekhov devoted many stories to the lives of ordinary people, unknown to anyone, invisible and unhappy. One of such deep and sad works is "Vanka" - a story about the tragic fate of a peasant boy.

Vanka Zhukov is a nine-year-old orphan apprenticed to a city shoemaker. From the first lines of the work, we understand that Vanka is unhappy. He longingly recalls his grandfather Konstantin Makarych, the only close person, his native village, the time when his mother was alive, she served as a maid to the masters, and he lived with her in a manor house. The young lady Olga Ignatievna "fed Vanka with candies and, having nothing to do, taught him to read, write, count to a hundred and even dance a quadrille." When his mother died, Vanka was thrown out of the master's house into the people's kitchen, where his grandfather huddled, and then they were escorted to Moscow.

On the night before Christmas, taking advantage of the fact that the owners went to church, the boy writes a letter to his grandfather, in which he begs: "... take me away from here, otherwise I will die." Vanka agrees to everything, if only his grandfather would take him home (“if anything, then flog me like a Sidorov goat”), and promises to take care of him when he grows up. The boy's life is unbearable: the owners beat him, hardly feed him, force him to do backbreaking work. Vanka writes: “But there is no food. In the morning they give bread, at lunch they give porridge, and in the evening they also give bread, and for tea or cabbage soup, the owners themselves crack.

Vanka is an inquisitive and observant boy, he writes to his grandfather about what struck him most in Moscow: about fishing lines with a variety of fishhooks, expensive guns, abundant butcher shops.

When you read at the end of the story about how Vanka put his letter in the mailbox, and then fell asleep, lulled by sweet hopes, it becomes very sad. After all, it is clear that a letter with the address “To the village of grandfather” will never reach the addressee and the boy will continue to toil with strangers. His life will not change, and maybe even worse. The tragic fate of a little orphan boy leaves no one indifferent. She evokes pity and sympathy.

Hosted on Allbest.ru

Similar Documents

Biography of the famous Russian writer and playwright Anton Pavlovich Chekhov. The stories "White-browed" and "Kashtanka" are two fairy tales from a dog's life. Narration from the face of a dog in the story "Kashtanka". Adventures of a good-natured and cheerful puppy White-fronted.

presentation, added 09/25/2012


Characteristics of the life path and work of the Russian writer Anton Pavlovich Chekhov. Members of his family. Early years. The beginning of Chekhov's literary activity. The first book of theatrical stories "Tales of Melpomene". Originality of plays and theater criticism.

presentation, added 04/23/2011


The place of the writer in Russian literature and features of his stories. The life path and place of the writer in Russian literature. Chekhov as a master of the story, analysis of his stories: "On Christmas Eve", "Surgery", "Longing", "The Lady with the Dog", "Darling", "The Bride".

term paper, added 02/25/2010


The study of the life and creative activity of A.P. Chekhov - Russian writer, universally recognized classic of world literature. Reflection of the features of the Russian national character in the work of Chekhov. The history of the creation of the story "About love", its summary.

presentation, added 11/24/2014


Childhood of Anton Pavlovich Chekhov in Taganrog. Years of study. Periods of creativity and dramaturgy. A trip to Sakhalin Island and a round-the-world trip. Acquaintance with the figures of the Moscow Art Theater. Creation of the greatest world masterpieces by Chekhov.

presentation, added 11/07/2011


The end of the 70s of the XIX century - the beginning of the journalistic activity of Anton Pavlovich Chekhov. Humor and a characteristic feature of the stories and heroes of Antosha Chekhonte. Analysis of the story "Thick and thin". Causes and consequences of A.P. Chekhov to Sakhalin Island.

abstract, added 07/09/2010


The idea of ​​time in the early works of Anton Pavlovich Chekhov ("Letter to a learned neighbor", "Tosca"). Creativity of writers Potapenko Ignatius Nikolaevich and Avilova Lidia Alekseevna. Analysis of the novel "Not a Hero" and the stories "At the Lighthouse" and "Magnificent Life".

thesis, added 02/11/2014


History of the life and work of Anton Pavlovich Chekhov. Description of the writer's childhood home. Study of the beginning of professional literary activity, cooperation with magazines. Premiere of the play "The Seagull", moving to Yalta. Participation in the public life of Russia.

presentation, added 02/16/2015


A.P. Chekhov - Russian writer, master of socio-psychological and lyrical story, doctor: childhood, youth; the beginning of a creative journey. The Sakhalin period is an indicator of civic courage. Features of dramaturgy, bibliography; Interesting Facts; memory.

abstract, added 04/06/2011


A.P. Chekhov is a classic of world literature and a doctor, a reflection of medical activity in a number of his works. The theme of illness of the body and soul in the works of the writer. Subtle interweaving of knowledge of diseases and observations of patients into the artistic basis of the works.

Analysis of the story by A.P. Chekhov "Kashtanka"

performed by a student of group B-1

Anatsko Daria

Chestnut. The first association for this name is footage from the Soviet cartoon of the same name. Something childish. Warm tones. And a kind smile: a "cartoon" from childhood - he is always kind. However, let's turn to the original source that served as the basis for creating the cartoon, namely, to the text.
"Chestnut". Anton Pavlovich Chekhov. A short story, just a few pages. But - amazing! - how capacious, how complex meanings the writer puts into such seemingly simple lines - into the usual story of a lost dog. And yet, should we be surprised? Chekhov. But in order.

***
So, "Kashtanka". The title is the first compositional element that we encounter when analyzing any work. We do not yet know that this is the nickname of the “young red dog”, for us it is still an abstract name, maybe a nickname. “Nominal” titles, as a rule, reflect the writer’s intention to present one or another type in his work (let’s recall at least Pushkin’s “Eugene Onegin”), which means that we can assume that we will be told a typical story that happened in typical conditions with typical heroes . As you read, the assumption will grow into confidence, therefore, looking ahead a little, let's say: "Kashtanka" is an epic work (an objective picture of the world is presented) of a moral and everyday genre, embodied in the form of a story written using the artistic method of critical realism.

For the most professional study of this work, it is necessary to read the text three times and analyze it at three levels: 1) ideological and thematic, 2) plot-forming, 3) poetic.

The author tells us about a dog named Kashtanka, who was lost and then found by a "stranger", who sheltered her at home, and then taught her various tricks. At her first circus performance, Kashtanka was recognized by her former owners. The dog returns to its former life. Thus, the theme of the work (i.e. what it is about) is the story of a lost dog.

The question that arises by itself is why does Kashtanka return to Luka Alexandritch with such joy? Chekhov unequivocally makes it clear that these people treated the dog cruelly, take at least Fedyushka's "games", from which Kashtanka "turned green in the eyes and hurt in all joints", or the carpenter's appeal to her - "cholera", "insect creature" , "cursed". All this hardly speaks of the great love of the owners for their pet. But, nevertheless, Kashtanka makes a choice in the finale of the work, and this choice - logically - is not justified. Thus, the problem of the story (that is, the question that Chekhov poses) - what role does attachment and "habitual" play in life and how they affect the fate of a person. Here you have the right to stop me, exclaiming: “Dear! What kind of person are we talking about, if the main character is a dog? Formally, yes, of course.

"A young red dog - a cross between a dachshund and a mongrel - very similar in muzzle to a fox." With this sentence, Chekhov himself begins his work. But let's think about it. Anton Chekhov. A writer of the turn of the century, rooting for the future of Russia, for the fate of its social strata, who created a magnificent gallery of typical characters of his time, despising the scum and baseness of this life, suddenly - suddenly! - in the middle of his creative path, he writes a sentimental story about a lost animal. I wonder for what purpose? Is it really moral to take a break from the roughness of reality and create a non-binding, superficial work about a small dog, based on which in a few decades they will shoot the most beautiful animated picture? Sorry, I don't believe. Chekhov chose the difficult path of a man who sees more than his contemporaries and dares to criticize the foundations of life, and this path was worthily passed to the end.

Chekhov created a rather complex system of artistic images in the story. To understand the author's idea, it is necessary to interpret (i.e. interpret) it. But we'll get to that a bit later. Now we are interested in the plot-forming level of the work.

In the first paragraph of the text, we can observe compositional technique of retrospection(i.e., the reception of a chronometric return, turning the plot to the past), which begins with the words “she remembered very well ...” and ends with the words “Kashtanka ran back and forth”, i.e. repeating the first sentence. Right there, in the dog's recollection of the past day, we are given concise exposition- we get acquainted with Luka Alexandrych, we understand what kind of life Kashtanka leads.

outstretched is an episode when the dog, finally realizing that he was lost, “clung to some entrance and began to cry bitterly”, “did not think about anything and only cried.” The plot is provoked by a random coincidence, and here it is - “ all of a sudden the front door clicked” and “a man came out”. Kashtanka and the stranger go to his house.

Further, the action develops on the rise: the dog begins to live in a new apartment, gets the nickname Aunt, gets acquainted with other inhabitants - the cat Fyodor Timofeich, the goose Ivan Ivanovich, the pig Khavronya Ivanovna ... A month passes. The stranger begins to teach Auntie circus tricks. Then - a terrible description of the death of Ivan Ivanovich.

Performance in the circus, or rather, the recognition of the dog by the former owners, is climax. This is the peak of tension, which is discharged when “someone gasped loudly in the audience upstairs.

There is a chestnut!"

And we are waiting to see how Aunt-Kashtanka will behave. "She ... jumped up and with a joyful squeal rushed to these faces."

The climax is the highest point of tension of the conflicting parties. But… Was there a conflict? In fact, the narrative is quite static, and we seem to be immersed in it, drowning in it, freezing in a long wait - “And how will it all end?”. And everything ends very quickly, literally in a few paragraphs, which, by the way, in contrast to the general nature of the action, are filled with dynamics (this is expressed at least in the number of verbs used: gasped, whistled, shouted, called, shuddered, looked, remembered, fell, jumped up , rushed, resounded, jumped, found herself, crawled, crossed ...). So something has changed. What? If we do not see external confrontation, then it is worth talking about internal conflict, which is most likely psychological or moral. Obviously, the essence of the conflict is somehow connected with the question that we thought about after the first reading - why does Kashtanka go to the former owners? Let's leave it unanswered for now.

denouement- here she is: Kashtanka goes home after the drunken Luka Alexandrych and Fedyushka. Doesn't it remind you of anything? A few pages ago, the lost dog also went home - for a stranger. Let's compare the episodes of the tie and the denouement.

“... Chestnut ... whined even more pitifully.

And you good, funny! said the stranger. - Quite a fox! ...

He smacked his lips and made a sign to Kashtanka with his hand, which could mean only one thing: "Let's go!". The chestnut has gone."

Discord.

“...- And you, Kashtanka, - bewilderment. Against a man you are like a carpenter against a carpenter.

... Kashtanka looked at both of them in the back, and it seemed to her that she had been following them for a long time and rejoices…»

In both the first and second cases, Kashtanka was found after being lost. We see different attitudes towards it of the people who found it. In the tie, the stranger is affectionate, gentle. And at the denouement, Luka Alexandrych is rude and does not show love for the dog. However, the emotional state of Kashtanka also varies. In the plot, she “cries”, whines, but in the denouement she rejoices. Those. her mood is just the opposite of how people treat her. The denouement, as it were, mirrors the tie. In other words, we can say that Chekhov uses reception of the ring composition(perhaps it is not particularly obvious), in which external circumstances are repeated in the first and last episode. Note also that the composition is based on the principle of contrast(a long description of Aunt's life and her dynamic conversion back to Kashtanka) and additions(episodes complement each other, expanding our understanding of what is depicted).

So the external circumstances repeat themselves. But what happens internally? But nothing. We can say with confidence that absolutely nothing has changed in the inner world of Kashtanka. She exchanged a free life, in which she was valuable in herself, in which she was respected, but in which, however, she had to work, for the life of a forced creature. But for an easy life habitual. Changed without hesitation, at the first opportunity. That's what it is the main conflict of the work is an internal, moral conflict in the choice of life paths: free, but thorny, or bonded, but very "comfortable".

Thus, we have come to compiling plot-forming scheme.

Prologue and epilogue as elements of the plot are missing. Of the elements of the composition, there are the title, portraits (very concise), interior (the interiors of the carpenter's room and the stranger's room are given in comparison), monologues (which are meant as dialogues, because they represent conversations between a person and an animal that cannot answer, but instead performs some action or responds to a certain emotional state).

Now we have come to interpretation of the system of artistic images, which was left a little earlier. In our opinion, the writer uses allegory, implying in the image of Kashtanka a common type of "little man" (let's not forget, the artistic method used by Chekhov is realism), perhaps a petty official, in a word, a representative of the most common class - an insignificant tradesman without a right voice, which is in constant dependence on someone or something.

Thus, the conflict we have identified acquires a scale and greater social significance. The author points to such characteristic features of the "little man" as his cynicism, the impossibility of independent action. Let's remember how the conflict of the work is resolved - the path is easy, but the path of humiliation is chosen. Chekhov is simply signing Russia's verdict. He says that the bulk of the public is inert, dead, and she quite likes to receive constant slaps on the back of the head and listen to her: "you ... an insect creature and nothing more." This mass can only "cry" when they are left without a guiding, guiding hand, "whining" about their hard lot and feel sorry for themselves, their beloved. Chekhov is ironic, he laughs at Kashtanka: “If she were a man, she would probably think: “No, it’s impossible to live like that! You have to shoot!" While a sane person, seeing the “impossibility” of his life, tries to fix it with his own hands, the whining “little people” think: “We need to shoot ourselves!”. The word "need" looks ridiculous, awkward in this context. It is necessary ... It seems that this is the speech of a romantic hero - “We are shooting, sir! At dawn!". But the romantic hero is active, he is passionate, he is full of life! If he says, “let's shoot!”, then, indeed, at dawn, from fifteen steps. And the chestnut trees sit in their corners - “you need to shoot yourself.” An absurd, stupid parody of a person.

Luka Alexandrych is a typical representative of a ruined nobleman who moved to the city. Drunkenness, rudeness and the desire to assert oneself through the humiliation of those who are still lower on the social ladder - these chestnut trees.

Luka - and the namesake from Gorky's "At the Bottom" immediately comes to mind. Luke is the one who is cunning. Let us turn to Ozhegov's explanatory dictionary for a precise explanation. To dissemble - to be cunning, to pretend, to behave insincerely. On the other hand, the Evil One was also called Satan... But do not distort, saying that Chekhov saw the devilish will in the dying city nobility aimed at the destruction of Russia, but, in any case, having awarded the character with such a name - Luka - the author quite unequivocally expressed their negative attitude towards him.

Fedyushka is the young son of Luka, who shows a certain sadistic inclination. A representative of the younger generation, who in the last episode is "in his father's cap." In other words, he has already tried on his father's clothes. This means that Chekhov does not see the future as particularly joyful. People who experience sincere joy in causing suffering to others are unlikely to lead to something bright.

By the way, it is worth recalling here that Kashtanka “divided all of humanity ... into two very unequal parts: into owners and customers; there was a significant difference between the two: the former had the right to beat her, and the latter she herself had the right to grab by the calves. In other words, the entire hierarchy of social relations was reduced to a simple one: to knowing in front of whom necessary grovel and who can humiliate.

It is no coincidence that Kashtanka's dream is given. "Fedyushka ... suddenly became covered with shaggy hair ... and found himself near Kashtanka." Chekhov speaks allegorically about the fragility of this social hierarchy, and perhaps even at all - he anticipates an imminent revolution.

Who is this "stranger"? The only character, by the way, who was not awarded a name. Another mystery of "Kashtanka". It can be assumed that, having depersonalized him, Chekhov emphasized the typical in this image more strongly. It doesn't matter what his name is. There are hundreds and thousands of them - strangers picking chestnuts in the frosty streets.

This is a man living in rather meager conditions, earning a living by his own labor. Most likely, this is the image of a typical Russian intellectual of the late 19th century. The interaction between the intelligentsia and the lower strata of the bourgeoisie was rather complicated, Chekhov does not delve into it, he simply shows that the intelligentsia could well give the “little man” a choice, offer him a different path of life and development. But… an interesting detail. What is the type of activity of the "stranger"? What is he doing? He repeats the same actions day after day, which seem absurd ... He moves in a circle. And ... "the owner also put on a cotton jacket with a large scalloped collar and with a gold star on the back, multi-colored stockings and green shoes ...". Chekhov does not use this word in the text, but we understand that the stranger is a clown. He, humiliating himself, amuses the crowd - a drunken, stupid, inert mass. That is the entire "saving role" of the intelligentsia.

Fyodor Timofeevich, Ivan Ivanovich ... Whom did Chekhov "hid" behind these images? Notice - it does not seem that they are in a dependent position from the "stranger", on the contrary, they seem to be connected by a warm friendship. And in some ways they are very similar. After all, they grimacing together in public. So, most likely, this is also the intelligentsia.

Fyodor Timofeich - full of dignity, unhurried, "deeply despised the crowd, and the bright light, and the owner, and himself." Yes, he despised it. But again, this is a passive position. He, too, is moving in that circle from which there is no way out, and is not going to change anything. Ivan Ivanovich seems to be more filled with life than Fyodor Timofeich, seems to be more active, but here's the paradox - he is dying. Dies stupidly, being crushed by a horse. And his place is easily taken by Kashtanka picked up from the street, and they forget about him so soon - after all, you need to go in circles, you need to make the crowd laugh in order to earn a living ...

The episode of Ivan Ivanovich's death is truly terrible. It is filled with something dark, terrifying, some forebodings, from which everyone is restless, from which one wants to hide, which one simply does not want to see. Probably, this vague feeling of fear of the unknown tormented Chekhov himself. Then “The Cherry Orchard”, “In the Carriage”, “Ward No. 6” will be born ... And in them Chekhov bitterly states that Russia is rushing into the abyss, into darkness, and that there, in this darkness, nothing good will happen.

The beginning of this bitterness is laid in the story "Kashtanka". Chekhov says that Russia, which, of course, is on the verge of changes, has no one to rely on in a new life. The country was filled with chestnuts - cowardly drones without citizenship and ability to act. The intelligentsia, which for some reason everyone always hopes for, has long been moving in some kind of absurd circle. And humiliation is the basis of life. Humiliate yourself to get a piece of bread. Humble yourself before those who are stronger, so as not to be trampled. Humiliate those who are weaker in order to at least somehow assert themselves. And there is no way out. The way out will appear when a person leaves the thought that it is easier to follow the path of humiliation, more familiar, less expensive, and, therefore, extremely convenient than along the path of one's own, hard, painful transformation of this life. That's what it is ideological content Chekhov's story "Kashtanka".

Thus, Anton Pavlovich Chekhov raises in his work the generally significant problems of human morality, which have not lost their relevance to this day. The story "Kashtanka" is an excellent example of critical realism.