Humorous story by A.P. Chekhov's "The Intruder" was first published in 1885 and continued the author's series of ironic stories. the main problem, which Chekhov examines in his work, is the class contradictions between peasants and masters in Russia at that time. The main idea of the story is to reveal the problem of negligence, which always, in any historical era, was so characteristic of our country. Is it the Russian peasant’s fault that he is poor, despite the fact that he works tirelessly? And is he such a terrible criminal if, in search of a livelihood, he pulls nuts from the railroad in order to make seines and then sell them? Of course, this act is worthy of reproach and all condemnation, because because of this, trains go off the rails and people die. But is this unfortunate man really guilty enough to call him a criminal? Who is to blame for this situation?
Reading the story, you don’t feel contempt or hatred for Denis, because he had no intention of harming people. He appears barefoot before the court; he does not have money to buy even the cheapest shoes. Is it his fault that he earns his own food? After all, he never had a desire to kill people.
In the story, the author clearly formulates the problem of who is the true culprit of the negligent attitude towards the lives of innocent people. From the plot it becomes clear who Chekhov calls the real attacker. After all, anyone who agrees to buy gear made by village peasants understands perfectly well what consequences such an activity can lead to. But they prefer to remain silent and continue to buy seines with nuts from the railway. They do not care about the fate of people who can die at any moment and who do not know what fate is in store for them light hand enterprising gentlemen.
The story “The Intruder” can be safely attributed to the direction of realism, since it reflects the picture of Russian reality of that time. The work has an unusual structure because it does not have an introduction or ending. Bottom line judicial trial remains unknown. The author would like the reader to draw his own conclusions and make his own verdict.
Analysis 2
A wonderful writer, who once said: “brevity is the sister of talent,” an experienced doctor, an excellent person by nature, Anton Pavlovich Chekhov, often raises the problem of the “little man” in his works. The story “The Intruder” is no exception, because in it Chekhov continues to reveal the complexities and difficulties of Russian life, different views of people on one thing. It was written in 1885 and published in the Petersburg Newspaper.
The work “The Intruder” evokes both joy and sadness after reading. Laughter comes from the situation that happens in the book: people discussing one thing look at and interpret the incident in their own way. The hero, whose name is Denis Grigoriev, stands trial. He was guilty and was caught for his act: he was unscrewing the bolts that hold the rails in place and allow the train to pass. The judge argues that such an action is not healthy, since people on the train could get hurt, the rails have the ability to move from their specific position if they are deprived of such support as bolts. Grigoriev denies his guilt, because he believes that this action was committed only because of the hero’s plight. On the one hand, the judge has his own truth: the defendant is guilty of stealing the accessories used to fasten the rails. Many lives could have been taken by death if the train had deviated and gone off course. But on the other hand: Denis Grigoriev tried to survive. The situation in the country is terribly tragic, due to which there is no means of livelihood. This is the problem, because theft begins when the government limits the people in something they need.
What makes you sad and despondent after reading the story? The point lies in the lack of education of the defendant. He doesn't realize how much harm he could have caused to so many people. The losses would be incalculable, but the hero cannot understand this fact. It's sad that obvious things aren't presented in character. When it is revealed to him that he is guilty, he only asks the question: “for what?” It’s really scary when a person is not able to realize what his offense is. It seems so accessible and permissible to him to perform a certain action that he forgets about the negative impact on others. And this is a tragedy!
Denis Grigoriev, while in court, tries to convey to the investigator that his act was thought out to the smallest detail, that the character does everything “with his head.” However, the essence of the hero is immediately revealed. Defending their rights, like peasants in historical times, it becomes clear that anything can be expected from the hero, his steps will be completely unpredictable, because the character cares only about his own interests, and the benefits that he can get from this or that action. Denis Grigoriev is worried about how he will live further, on what means he can exist. Therefore, it is not surprising that he goes beyond what is permitted. The hero is of such a nature that he cannot be changed.
In addition to the fact that Anton Pavlovich draws the attention of readers to the authorities that have made a crowd out of the people, forcing them to blindly follow the leader, the writer points out to us the negligence and recklessness of people who, pretending to be “fools,” dream of finding a way out of the current predicament. Isn’t this really happening in our lives now?
5, 6, 7 grade
Several interesting essays
- Essay on the painting From the Rain by Makovsky (8th grade)
V. Makovsky’s painting “From the Rain” has a rather pleasant and incredibly realistic color scheme, carefully drawn characters, harmonious shades.
- Essay on real art (9th grade 15.3 OGE)
Regardless of the existing era, fashion, styles and genres, a fairly wide range of the fruits of human creativity can be considered real art, leaving a mark on history and generating love and reverence in the hearts of devoted connoisseurs.
- Characteristics and image of Vralman in the comedy Minor essay
The undergrown Mitrofan in Fonvizin's comedy had several teachers. One of them, and the most worthy in the opinion of the narrow-minded Mrs. Prostakova, was the German Vralman.
Everyone has made mistakes at least once in their life, but not everyone can be analyzed. Probably each of us has at least once thought about what could have happened if we had acted differently?
Is it easy to be young? There are many answers to this question different opinions, everything will depend on the age of the interviewee.
Answers (2)
A special place in the work of Chekhov the humorist is occupied by a miniature joke story and an everyday scene, entirely built on dialogue. They are still popular today because behind the comical dialogues, the life and customs of an entire era are revealed. A number of humoresques are based on the principle of mutual misunderstanding of the participants in the conversation, each of whom repeats his own. This is exactly the case in the story “The Intruder.”
On August 7, 1885, “The Intruder” was published in the “Petersburgskaya Gazeta” under the pseudonym “Antosha Chekhonte”, which was subsequently included in the writer’s first collection “Motley Stories”.
Vladimir Gilyarovsky believed that the prototype of the main character is the peasant Nikita Pantyukhin from the village of Kraskovo, Moscow province. Although the writer had a negative attitude towards the question of the prototypes of his heroes, since for the most part his characters are generalized images.
Genre, direction
Life ordinary people in Russia, their feelings and aspirations always interested Anton Pavlovich. He is the successor best traditions realistic direction in literature. The style of his prose is satirical, where there are “funny” situations and scenes, absurd forms of behavior and speech.
The work was published with the subtitle “Scene”. The genre is a humorous story in which the author delicately, with irony and compassion laughs at his characters.
Humor is associated with a vivid vocabulary surprise, illiterate, illogical speech of the character, as well as an absurd situation when the investigator believes that there is an attacker in front of him demanding punishment, and the “person under investigation” does not understand the tragedy of his own situation.
“Funny” and “sad” are closely intertwined in the story.
Plot
The focus is on the dialogue between the forensic investigator and the stupid “little man”, this is the essence of the story.
A skinny man unscrews a nut on a railroad track in the morning. The lineman Ivan Akinfov catches him doing this “work” and takes him to the forensic investigator. An interrogation begins in order to clarify the circumstances of the theft and prove Grigoriev’s guilt.
The man admits that what happened (the theft of the nut) is a common thing for the Klimovsk men, since their main business is fishing. And nuts are used to make sinkers.
To the accusation that unscrewing the nuts could lead to a train crash, Denis, grinning, objects: “If only the rail had been carried away... otherwise... the nut!”
The result of the investigative dialogue is that the “attacker” is taken into custody and sent to prison.
The main characters and their characteristics
- Denis Grigoriev. Characteristics and description of the attacker: a skinny little man with overgrown hair. Thick eyebrows hang over the eyes, giving the impression of constant gloominess. The head of unkempt hair somewhat resembles a spider's web. Denis’s appearance most likely speaks of his untidiness rather than poverty. Grigoriev’s portrait is evidence of the character’s “confused” life, which he himself cannot understand. He is well versed in the fishery business. Knows the peculiarities of fishing different types fish He is a practical person, as he sensibly explains why lead, a bullet or nails should not be used as a sinker. He indignantly rejects the accusation that unscrewing the nuts could lead to the death of people (“we are some kind of villains”). Honesty - important feature his character. When the investigator directly tells him that Denis is lying, he is sincerely surprised by this, since “I never lied.” He talks in detail about the existence of nuts among him and other men. In particular, Mitrofan Petrov needs a lot of nuts, from which he makes seines, and then sells them to the gentlemen.
- Investigator- representative of the law. The author does not endow him with any portrait characteristics or character traits characteristic of him. The absence of a name suggests that this is a collective image of the social layer of bureaucracy.
- The problem of the people is decided by the writer in his own way. He lives in transitional Russia, among humiliated people and deprived of fate. He does not stay away from the “peasant” theme. Truthfully shows the contradictions of village life. Having no other income, village men fish to feed themselves. And for this you need nuts that can only be unscrewed with railway tracks. And the person finds himself at a crossroads: a state of servitude forces him to commit a “crime” (although he himself does not think so), which is then inevitably followed by “punishment”.
- In this regard, there arises problem of justice, responsibility before the law. An evildoer is a person who deliberately intended evil and is therefore obliged to appear before the law. But finding ourselves in difficult social conditions men are not like that. They are Christians. “Evil” and “crime” are alien concepts to them.
- The problem of power, violence a red thread runs through the entire narrative. For what everyone else does, one will receive hard labor, and only because a lazy official accidentally noticed him. Alas, there is no supervision of the tracks, so people don’t even know what can be done and what cannot be done. To them, illiterate and uneducated, no one explained the meaning of the laws.
- The problem of mutual misunderstanding. Thus, the investigator, recalling the train crash last year, speaks of his “understanding” of what happened, linking the tragedy with the theft of nuts. Denis perceives this situation in his own way, interpreting the investigator’s “understanding” as a feature characteristic only of educated people. In his opinion, the “peasant mind” perceives what is happening differently and is not capable of drawing conclusions. Grigoriev is told that he could be sentenced “to exile at hard labor,” to which Denis replies: “You know better... We are dark people...”. When they announce that the consequence of his “actions” is now being sent to prison, he objects with surprise that there is no time now, since he needs to go to the fair.
- Theme of negligence, dishonest attitude towards state property is not affected by chance. Rich gentlemen buy seines to satisfy their personal needs, and do not think at all about where men get their nuts from. The gentlemen who buy gear are absolutely not concerned about the condition of the railway, about train crashes, or about the fact that they themselves may find themselves in one of them. This is some kind of typically Russian irresponsibility that has been accumulating in the Russian people for centuries.
Topics and issues
The problems of the story are rich and complex, which makes it all the more surprising that the author put it into such a laconic form.
the main idea
Sparing details recreate a picture of village everyday life, behind which the features of Russian reality are revealed. And in this mosaic, consisting of many “episodes,” hidden evil triumphs, and the point of the story is to show and prove it. All content is imbued with deep drama. The reader is presented with a painfully unhappy man, driven by circumstances. He is a savage, but pity for him, for ordinary men, for the fact that a person essentially innocent of the evil that is happening may suffer, “overwhelms” the reader.
The accusatory scene presents a line of protest against the lies that reign in Russia, where unenlightened people eke out a miserable existence, and the authorities, who do not see people, hide behind laws that contradict the humane attitude towards people. This is the main idea of the work. The story evokes feelings of bitterness and regret.
What does it teach?
Chekhov cultivates independence, will and intelligence in his reader. What worries him most is the inner weakness of the human spirit. He says: “It is better to die from fools than to receive praise from them.” The main criterion of actions should be conscience. Everything must be done according to conscience: “Even if you flog, but for the sake of it.” Here is the moral of the piece.
The writer wanted cheerfulness to become everyone’s lifestyle, because it is precisely this that is a condition and a sure sign of the spiritual health of the nation.
The true criminals are those “masters of life” who do not care about public order, but satisfy only their whims and desires.
What is the author making fun of?
Chekhov was convinced that slavish behavior before the “powers that be” could only be countered by laughter. The writer makes fun of the darkness and ignorance of the people, who are not free even in their own feelings.
The comedy is created by the equanimity and peculiar prudence of the responses of the “attacker”, who is unable to understand what they want from him and why he is here. The position of the investigator, driven to frenzy by the impenetrable stupidity of the man, is comical.
Chekhov's humor always “keeps pace” with sadness, which is born from the fact that a person cannot stand up for himself or maintain his self-esteem.
Laughter is a reason to pay attention, first of all, to your shortcomings and “squeeze the slave out of yourself drop by drop.”
Interesting? Save it on your wall!
When you read this story, the words of one of the Russian classics come to mind that there are two troubles in Russia: fools and roads. In this case we are talking about the first option. A.P. Chekhov's story “The Intruder” was published in the summer of 1885 in the Petersburg Newspaper. This is one of those many Chekhov stories that are read while laughing through tears. When analyzing the story, an abyss of relations between the peasants and the gentlemen who were present in Russia at that time opens up.
Story line
The man Denis Grigoriev is on trial. He stands barefoot in front of the judge, apparently, he does not shine with any particular sharpness of mind, although he is ready to prove to the end that he is right. The essence of the crime is that this man unscrewed railway nuts from the rails. As he explains to the judge, this is extremely necessary thing when making a seine, because without it the seine does not sink. In response to the judge’s arguments that because of these nuts, a train could derail and people could die, Grigoriev insists on one thing, that he had never even thought about it.
And indeed it is. He had no intent to harm, he is simply so stupid that he cannot realize the consequences of his actions. Moreover, during the investigation it turns out that all the men in their village do this and the number of nuts unscrewed from the rails goes into the dozens. And the seines that the men make with the help of these nuts are bought from them by the gentlemen. All that remains for the judge to do is order Grigoriev to be taken to prison. This decision sincerely surprises the man. For what?!
Story Analysis
“The Malefactor” raises the topic of negligence, which has always been sore for Russia. Who is to blame for trains derailing and people dying? Illiterate men, the vast majority of them do not understand what their actions can lead to, or smart gentlemen who understand everything perfectly well, who buy from them seines with these unscrewed nuts.
It seems that if the same Denis Grigoriev knew that he was actually becoming a murderer, if someone had explained this to him, then, most likely, he would not have done this, since the Russian peasant is fundamentally God-fearing and will not consciously commit such a sin as murder. The problem is that, judging by the ending of the work, due to his innate stupidity and darkness, he did not understand anything why he was being punished, because he simply earns his living.
The story clearly and clearly states who the true attackers are. Smart, competent gentlemen who buy fishing gear from village men in order to further enjoy fishing, are well aware of the manufacturing technology of these seines, but are silent. They know what such “handicraft” of the peasants leads to, but they continue to buy these nets, thereby encouraging the peasants to further “creativity”.
The story is written in the style of realism, because it reflects the specific reality of Russian reality late XIX century. The composition of the work is unusual. There is no beginning or end here. It’s as if the scene with Denis was taken out of the overall picture and presented to the reader. The verdict is unknown. One can feel the author's desire for the reader to endure it. The story was written more than a hundred years ago, but an inquisitive reader can easily draw living parallels with modern times.
Heroes of the story
Of course, the central character here is the village peasant Denis Grigoriev. The second character is an investigator who interrogates a man. The character is rather neutral, without any special characteristics. In his story, Chekhov continues the theme of the little man, filling it with new content and developing it. Standing in front of the forensic investigator, the man talks completely honestly and sincerely about what he did and why. At first, he evokes pity in the reader, like a man who is being unfairly punished.
But, during the course of the story, it turns out that he is, indeed, a criminal. The only problem is that he ended up in this hypostasis due to ignorance, his limitations and, truly, boundless stupidity. He cannot be called an idiot or a mentally abnormal person. No! He just doesn’t realize what consequences his handiwork can lead to. He cannot be called evil or a person with evil intent. IN real life, most likely, he wouldn’t hurt a fly.
But, his darkness and impenetrable stupidity take on an ominous connotation in light of the consequences that may occur due to his actions. But just terrible things could happen. The forensic investigator is trying to reach his consciousness: “If the watchman hadn’t looked, the train could have gone off the rails, people would have been killed!” Grigoriev's further reasoning makes his figure more and more sinister. He tries to convince the investigator that he is doing everything thoughtfully and “with his head.” And his words really make you scared, because now it’s completely clear what you can expect from him. This person lives momentarily, he is only interested in his immediate needs.
When you read the story and dialogue between the investigator and Grigoriev, the common phrase “he’s talking about Ivan, but he’s talking about the idiot” comes to mind. The investigator explains to him that people could die, and he replies that without screws good fish don't catch it. Selfishness is perfect, but it is not the result of his evil nature. This character is a downtrodden creature. People like Grigoriev are forced to constantly think about how to feed their family, which can be assumed to be considerable. In addition, he is completely uneducated, crushed by difficult life circumstances. His behavior is quite understandable and explainable.
Therefore, the bitter irony with which the author describes his “attacker” is understandable. Which one is the criminal? He didn’t really understand what his fault was. The third hero, who can be given the main place along with Grigoriev, can be called those gentlemen who buy tackle with the nuts unscrewed from people like Denis Grigoriev. They are the main criminals. The men who unscrew the nuts don’t understand what they are doing. And these people understand everything. The question is, which of them is the bigger criminal?
This story is not only a criticism of the system, which turns ordinary people into a weak-willed herd, with whom you can do whatever the powers that be please. The author also voices some well-known national traits. The most famous of them is our Russian “maybe”. Maybe it will pass and it will work out. The writer shows that his character is cunning in his own way, like most, he does not like those in power, and does not particularly think about the consequences of his actions. The reason for this lies in the Russian mentality and in the conditions in which the Russian people exist.
