Alexander Valentinovich Vampilov(August 19, 1937, Kutulik, Irkutsk region - August 17, 1972, Port Baikal) - Soviet playwright.

During his literary work, A. Vampilov wrote about 70 stories, sketches, essays, articles and feuilletons. In 1962, A. Vampilov wrote a one-act play “Twenty Minutes with an Angel.” In 1963, the one-act comedy “House with Windows on a Field” was written. In 1964, during his studies, the first big play was written - the comedy “Farewell in June” (the playwright returned to work on it several times: four versions of the play are known). In 1965, A. Vampilov wrote the comedy “The Eldest Son” (the first title was “The Suburbs”). In 1968, the playwright completed the play “Duck Hunt”. At the beginning of 1971, A. Vampilov completed work on the drama “Last Summer in Chulimsk” (first title “Valentina”).

“A chance, a trifle, a coincidence of circumstances sometimes become the most dramatic moments in a person’s life,”- Vampilov developed this idea in his plays. A. Vampilov was deeply worried moral problems. His works are written on life material. Awakening conscience, cultivating a sense of justice, kindness and mercy - these are the main motives his plays.

Type of hero of time - eccentrics, strange people, strange women, bringing the holiday (Valentina in the play “Last Summer in Chulimsk.”

Sound. There are no musical sequences - there is an interesting speech of the characters. What is important is the chance - the random circumstance of the episodes, the case is a test for the heroes. The hero's personality manifests itself through dramatic and tragic episodes.

While studying, he wrote the comedy Fair (other title Farewell in June, 1964), which was highly appreciated by playwrights A. Arbuzov and V. Rozov. Vampilov’s own theme can be heard as a harbinger. It has not yet gained strength, it is only cutting through the plot of a “student comedy”, sometimes too intricate, sometimes too simple, in the style of a faculty skit. There are still many spectacular provisions, they are sketched out generously and illegibly. An upset wedding, a failed duel, a hero serving fifteen days of forced labor... The author still does not quite believe that he can hold our attention with a character sketch. And the character has already been presented, its own theme is stated by the fate of young Kolesov.

Zolotuev seems to be a completely introductory comic character, but in the concept of the play he is the most important. Breaking all the laws of the genre, he delivers a three-page monologue. This monologue is about the misfortune of an old bribe-taker who ran into an honest man. He still can’t believe that he didn’t take bribes - everyone takes them, it’s important not to miss the price offered. Zolotuev is offended, indignant at his ostentatious honesty and, even after serving the allotted time, he is sure that he was in prison in vain: it means he gave little.

But what does this have to do with the pensioner Zolotuev, when we are interested in the dashingly brave, honest and charming guy Kolosov? Kolesov is full of young energy, harmless mischief, but in general he is a great guy and when he is kicked out of the institute, most of the guys are on his side.

Trouble comes to the young hero from the other side: when he has to make his first serious life choice. It’s not just blood flowing through your veins, it’s a serious matter: college or love?

Having laughed at Zolotuev, Kolesov himself does not notice how he converts to his faith: everything is bought and sold, the price and purpose are important. Leaving your beloved girl, as her father demands, is both difficult and mean. But what if the diploma is on fire? If fate is at stake? Kolesov had everything that is characteristic of a good, honest young man: next to and across from enthusiasm there is a skeptical posture, next to the romance of the soul, distrust of phrases, educational pressure, moral rules with which elders are always bored. This is probably where the mischief and youth come from. Hence the demonstrative practicality, ostentatious rationalism, a little funny and still innocent at a young age, but imperceptibly, like Kolesov, justifying the first transactions with conscience.

In Kolesov the negative shines through, which will be the essence of Victor in “Duck Hunt”. Transformation Kolesov is a wheel, betrays a girl for the sake of a diploma, scientific work. It can roll here and there. Zilov in “Duck Hunt” - Zil truck, goes along the destinies. There are 20 years between these heroes, the winning student has become an egoist and a scoundrel. 3 plots in “Farewell in June” - Kolesov and Tanya, a student wedding and a mono drama - a man who measures everything for money.

In 1967 Vampilov wrote plays Eldest son and Duck hunting , in which the tragic component of his drama was fully embodied. In the comedy The Eldest Son, within the framework of a masterfully written intrigue (the deception of the Sarafanov family by two friends, Busygin and Silva), the conversation was about the eternal values ​​of existence - the continuity of generations, the severing of emotional ties, love and forgiveness of close people to each other. In this play, the “metaphor theme” of Vampilov’s plays begins to sound: the theme of the house as a symbol of the universe. The playwright himself, who lost his father in early childhood, perceived the relationship between father and son especially painfully and acutely.

What comes to the fore is not love stories, but the relationship between father and son, although they are not blood relatives. Reminds me of the return of the prodigal son from the Bible . Theme: To go crazy or not to go crazy

– they all go crazy with feelings. All this develops into a loving relationship. The plot of the play “The Eldest Son” is simple. The title of the play “The Eldest Son” is most apt, since it main character

Silva, like Volodya, is essentially also an orphan: with living parents, he was raised in a boarding school. Apparently, his father’s dislike was reflected in his character. Silva told Volodya about how his father “admonished” him: “For the last twenty rubles, he says, go to a tavern, get drunk, make a row, but such a row that I won’t see you for a year or two.” It was no coincidence that Vampilov made the origins of the heroes’ destinies similar. By this he wanted to emphasize how important a person’s own choice is, independent of circumstances. Unlike the orphan Volodya, the “orphan” Silva is cheerful, resourceful, but cynical. His true face is revealed when he “exposes” Volodya, declaring that he is not a son or a brother, but a repeat offender. Nina's fiance, Mikhail Kudimov, is an impenetrable man. You meet such people in life, but you don’t immediately understand them. “Smiles. He continues to smile a lot. He’s good-natured,” Vampilov says about him. In fact, what is most valuable to him is the word that he gave himself for all occasions. He is indifferent to people. This character occupies an insignificant place in the play, but represents a clearly defined type of “correct” people who create a suffocating atmosphere around themselves. Involved in a family intrigue, Natasha Makarskaya is shown as a decent, but unhappy and lonely person. Vampilov deeply reveals in the play the theme of loneliness, which can drive a person to despair. In the image of the Sarafanovs’ neighbor, a type of cautious person, an ordinary person, who is afraid of everything (“looks at them with caution, suspicion,” “removes silently and fearfully”) and does not interfere in anything, is deduced. Issues and main idea the plays are stated in the very title of the dramatic work. It is no coincidence that the author replaced the original title “Suburb” with “Elder Son”. The main thing is not where events take place, but where who participates in them. To be able to think, understand each other, support in difficult times, show mercy - this is the main idea of ​​the play by Alexander Vampilov. The author does not define the genre of the play. Along with the comic, there are many dramatic moments in the play, especially in the subtext of the statements of Sarafanov, Silva, and Makarska.

Play "Duck Hunt" written by Vampilov in 1968. Researchers note that “Duck Hunt is Vampilov’s most bitter, most desolate play.” As critics point out, Alexander Vampilov “managed to sensitively capture and convey the loss in the everyday bustle of a sense of kindness, trust, mutual understanding, and spiritual kinship.” “You need to write about what keeps you awake at night,” Vampilov argued. “Duck Hunt” is a personally experienced, felt, silent experience. The play "Duck Hunt" takes place in the late 60s. Before the reader’s eyes is the city apartment of the chief actor, Zilova. Throughout the play, the hero's memories depict individual episodes of his life. Zilov is “about thirty years old,” as the author notes in the remark. Despite the hero’s young age, his spiritual decline and lack of moral and heartfelt strength are palpable. Vampilov points out that “in his gait, in his gestures, and in his conversation, there is a certain uncertainty and boredom, the origin of which cannot be determined at first glance.” As the play progresses, the reader learns that Zilov’s external well-being and physical health are just appearances. Something destroys the hero from within. Some force took over him. This force is life itself, which Zilov does not want to fight. He does not live - he becomes obsolete. At some point, fate swallowed up Zilov, the routine and routine of life became the norm, moreover, a habit, second nature. The theme of “outliving oneself” and spiritual decline runs through the entire action of the play as a leitmotif. Funeral music, a funeral wreath, the phrase “life, in essence, is lost” are characteristic details accompanying the development of the action. The worst thing is that Zilov has long come to terms with his fall. “Come on, old man,” he says to Sayapin, “nothing will happen between us anymore... However, I could still do something else. But I do not want. I have no desire." This phrase - “I have no desire” - personifies the entire internal and external life of the hero: his relationships with his wife, women, friends, colleagues, himself. Zilov voluntarily surrenders. He enters a vicious circle where the only action is to escape from himself. Zilov is surrounded by people with whom he can communicate without any effort - whether heartfelt or mental. Probably, the hero came to such an existence after a terrible shock. Researchers note that “... behind Zilov’s shoulders<…>undoubted disappointment, mental breakdown, as a result of which he is ready to stop believing in goodness, decency, calling, work, love, conscience.” He turns into a cynic, having experienced an internal catastrophe. Suffering is opposed by indifference and denial. “Cynicism from suffering?...Have you ever thought about this?” . However, it is cynicism that allows Zilov to recognize, understand, and define. Still, he does not live in a world of illusions. As Alexander Vampilov’s contemporary writer Sergei Dovlatov noted, “cynicism presupposes the presence of common ideals.” Of course, Zilov had ideals. But they could not withstand the rough touch of reality when “turbulent life turned into meager prose.” Myself image of the coveted duck hunt devoid of romantic, idyllic coloring. For Zilov, duck hunting is nothingness, the silence of the hunt is “the soundlessness of eternal oblivion, the muteness of an almost otherworldly world”: “Do you know what silence this is? You're not there, do you understand? No. You haven't been born yet. And there is nothing. And it wasn't. And it won’t.” Breaking out of a dark cycle requires action. Not decorations, not preparations for action, but action. In spiritual despair, Zilov tries to commit suicide. But this act of his is a game with himself, dark irony, mockery: “He sat down on a chair, put the gun on the floor, leaned his chest on the trunks. I tried the trigger with one hand and tried it with the other. He put a chair, sat down, arranged the gun so that its barrels rested against his chest, and the butt against the table. He put the gun aside, pulled off his boot from his right foot, took off his sock, and again placed the gun between his chest and the table. I felt the trigger with my big toe...” In our opinion, the problematics of the play “Duck Hunt” can be defined in the words of one of Alexander Vampilov’s contemporaries, the writer Valentin Rasputin: “The main question that Vampilov constantly asks: will you remain a man, man? Will you be able to overcome all that deceitful and unkind..." “Duck Hunt” is the tragic culmination of the main theme of Alexander Vampilov’s theater: “will a living soul overcome the routine of life?” . And maybe all is not lost for Zilov. Maybe the hero will get a second wind and see that “the rain outside the window has passed, a strip of sky is turning blue, and the roof of the neighboring house is illuminated by the dim afternoon sun.” Maybe Zilov’s words “I’m ready. Yes, I’m leaving now” - real action, the beginning of a new life. Without a doubt, Alexander Vampilov possessed a rare gift - the gift of a dramatic writer. His work is alive; a sense of proportion, talent, and a considerable amount of genius are the hallmarks of Vampilov’s dramaturgy. There is no place for untruth in the play “Duck Hunt”. That is why it is read freely and at the same time turns thought into the depths of human existence. The author managed to turn the dialogical speech of the characters into a “sparkling, energetic stream.” Truthfulness and the gift of human sensitivity are what provide the work of Alexander Vampilov with incomparable appeal.

In drama Last summer in Chulimsk(1972) Vampilov created his best female image - the young worker of the provincial tea shop Valentina. This woman strove to preserve the “living soul” within herself with the same tenacity with which throughout the play she tried to preserve the front garden, which was continually trampled by indifferent people.

Almost all Vampilov's heroes young and carefree. They easily go through life, doing their wonderful stupid things. But the day comes when it becomes clear that carelessness is just a game, a shield covering the vulnerable core of the soul. The day comes when they must show their true selves, make a choice on which their future fate will largely depend. They say that we all live for some very important moment in life, when we will have to pour out of the bag of our life everything that we put in it in order to choose something most important - something that will help us not to break down in a difficult situation , but become stronger. However, for the author, the hero is not the one who does not stumble, but the one who finds the strength to rise and move on.

In general, the peculiarity of Vampilov’s plays is that he does not pronounce the final verdict on his characters. The author prefers to use an ellipsis. We see such an ending in the author’s last play, “Last Summer in Chulimsk.” This play is rightly called the author’s most “Chekhovian” play, from which even a comma cannot be removed. The symbolic image of this play - the front garden fence - is an indicator of humanity for the heroes of the play. Most of them continuously destroy the gate, sincerely not understanding why Valentina stubbornly continues to repair it (“People walk across and will continue to walk”).

Composition

The sixties of the 20th century are better known as the times of poetry. Many poems appear during this period of Russian literature. But dramaturgy also occupies an important place in this context. And a place of honor is given to Alexander Valentinovich Vampilov. With his dramatic work he continues the traditions of his predecessors. But much of his work comes from both the trends of the era of the 60s and the personal observations of Vampilov himself. All this was fully reflected in his famous play “Duck Hunt”.

Thus, K. Rudnitsky calls Vampilov’s plays centripetal: “.. they certainly bring to the center, to the foreground, heroes - one, two, at most three, around whom the rest of the characters move, whose destinies are less significant...”. Such characters in “Duck Hunt” can be called Zilov and the waiter. They are like two satellites, complementing each other.

"Waiter. What can I do? Nothing. You have to think for yourself.

Zilov. That's right, Dima. You're a creepy guy, Dima, but I like you better. At least you don't break down like these... Give me your hand...

The waiter and Zilov shake hands...”

The attention of the dramaturgy of this period of Russian literature was directed to the features of a person’s “entry” into the world. And the main thing becomes the process of his establishment in this world. Perhaps only hunting becomes such a world for Zilov: “..Yes, I want to go hunting... Are you going out?.. Great... I’m ready... Yes, I’m going out now.”

The conflict was also special in Vampilov’s play. “The interests of dramaturgy were directed... to the nature of the conflict, which forms the basis of the drama, but not to the processes occurring within human personality“,” noted E. Gushanskaya. Such a conflict also becomes interesting in the play “Duck Hunt”. In fact, in the play there is no, as such, the usual conflict between the protagonist and the environment or other characters. The background of the conflict in the play is Zilov’s memories. And by the end of the play, even this construction does not have its resolution;

In Vampilov's play, strange and unusual incidents often occur. For example, this ridiculous wreath joke. “(Looks at the wreath, picks it up, straightens the black ribbon, reads the inscription on it out loud). “To the unforgettable Viktor Aleksandrovich Zilov, who was untimely burned out at work, from his inconsolable friends”... (He is silent. Then he laughs, but not for long and without much fun).”

However, E. Gushanskaya notes that the story of the wreath was told to Vampilov by an Irkutsk geologist. “It was his fellow geologist who was sent a wreath by his friends with the inscription “Dear Yuri Alexandrovich, who burned down at work.” This strangeness extends to the content of “Duck Hunt” itself. Throughout the play, the main character gets ready to go hunting, makes the necessary preparations, but never gets there in the play itself. Only the finale speaks of his next preparations: “Yes, I’m leaving now.”

Another feature of the play is its three-stage ending. At each of the stages it would be possible to complete the work. But Vampilov does not stop there. The first stage can be indicated when Zilov, having invited friends to the funeral, “felt for the trigger with his big toe...”. No wonder there is an ellipsis at the end of this phrase. There is a hint of suicide here.

Viktor Zilov crossed some threshold in his life when he decided to take such a step. But a phone call does not allow the hero to complete the job he started. And friends who came later bring him back to real life, an environment that he wanted to break with only a couple of minutes ago. The next step is a new attempt at Zilov’s “attempt on his life.” “Sayapin disappears.

Waiter. Come on. (He grabs Kuzakov and pushes him out the door.) It will be better this way... Now put the gun down.

Zilov. And you get out. (They look into each other's eyes for a moment. The waiter retreats to the door.) Alive.

The waiter detained Kuzakov who appeared at the door and disappeared with him.”

In the third ending of the play, Zilov never comes to any specific answer to the questions that arise for him during the course of the play. The only thing he decides to do is go hunting. Perhaps this is also some kind of transition to solving one’s life problems.

Some critics also viewed Vampilov's plays in a symbolic sense. “Duck Hunt” is simply filled with symbolic objects or situations. For example, a phone call that brings Zilov back to life, one might say, from the other world. And the telephone becomes a kind of conductor for Zilov’s connection with the outside world, from which he tried to at least isolate himself from everything (after all, almost all the action takes place in a room where there is no one except him). The window becomes the same connecting thread. It is a kind of outlet in moments of mental stress. For example, with an unusual gift from friends (a funeral wreath). “He stands in front of the window for some time, whistling the melody of the funeral music he has dreamed of. Sits on the windowsill with a bottle and glass.” “The window is, as it were, a sign of another reality, not present on the stage,” noted E. Gushanskaya, “but the reality of the Hunt given in the play.”

Hunting and everything connected with it, for example, a gun, becomes a very interesting symbol. It was bought for duck hunting. However, Zilov tries it on himself. And hunting itself becomes an ideal-symbol for the main character.

Victor is so eager to get to another world, but it remains closed to him. And at the same time, hunting is like a moral threshold. After all, it is, in essence, murder legalized by society. And this is “raised to the rank of entertainment.” And this world becomes a dream world for Zilov, eh. The image of a waiter becomes a guide to this world.

Like a waiter worried about a trip: “How’s it going? Are you counting the days? How much do we have left?.. My motorcycle is running. Order... Vitya, the boat needs to be tarred. You should write to Lame... Vitya!” And in the end, the dream simply turns into a utopia, which, it seems, cannot come true.

E. Streltsova calls Vampilov’s theater “the theater of the word, in which in an incomprehensible way the author was able to connect the incompatible.” The unusual and sometimes comical nature of some situations brings together memories that are near and dear to the heart.

His dramaturgy included new images of characters, a unique conflict, and strange and unusual events. And using symbolic objects, you can recreate a separate picture, which will highlight the actions and behavior of the main character even more clearly. A kind of open ending, characteristic of his other plays, gives hope that Zilov will be able to find his place not only in his memories within the confines of the room.

Features of the plot in A. Vampilov’s dramas “Duck Hunt” and “Last Summer in Chulimsk”

© Tikhonenko Valentina Aleksandrovna

Senior Lecturer, Department of Languages ​​of Asia-Pacific Countries, School of Regional and International Studies, Far Eastern Federal University

Russia, 690922, Vladivostok, o. Russian, st. Ajax, 10, building D20.

E-mail: [email protected]

The article analyzes the features of the plot in A. Vampilov’s dramas “Duck Hunt” and “Last Summer in Chulimsk”. Based on the analysis, it is argued that the playwright poses the problem of the culture of human relations: how immoral actions negatively affect the lives of others and what impact highly moral human behavior can have on people. The plot in both plays, in comparison with the plot in A. Vampilov’s essay “Walking along Kutulik,” makes it possible to clarify the author’s idea that the culture of relationships is the basis of human existence and the main responsibility for behavior always and everywhere lies with the individual. Neither the influence of the “environment” nor any stage in the life of society relieves a person of the obligation to take into account other people.

Key words: A. Vampilov, action in drama, conflict, plot outline, person and “environment”, personal responsibility.

Plot features in A. Vampilov's dramas "Duck Hunting" and "Last Summer in Chulimsk"

Valentina A. Tikhonenko

senior lecturer of Department of the Asia-Pacific Region Languages, School of Regional and International studies, FEFU.

building D20 10, Ayaks Str., Russian Island, Vladivostok 690922, Russia

The article analyzes the problem of culture of human relations (how immoralities affect others" life and how moral behavior can affect human) on the material of A. Vampilov"s dramas "Duck Hunting" and "Last Summer in Chulimsk". The analysis of A. Vampilov's dramas in comparison with his story about moral problems of modern society "Walking in Kutulik" allows to clarify the author's idea that culture of relationship is a basis of human existence and the main responsibility for human actions belongs to the personality, ever and everywhere. Neither environmental influence nor any changes in society don"t remove a person"s responsibility to consider other people.

Keywords: A. Vampilov, action in drama, conflict, storyline, "community", man and environment, the responsibility of the individual.

Researchers of A. Vampilov’s work, as a rule, consider the drama “Duck Hunt” (1967) to be the crown of his creative achievements. A. Demidov, V. Lakshin, N. Tenditnik, S. Imikhelova and others wrote about this. Meanwhile, Vampilov himself, working on his last completed play, believed that the drama “Last Summer in Chulimsk” (the first title was “Valentine”) was written at a fairly high artistic level. Vampilov wrote about the work on “Valentina” in 1969 to the head of the literary department of the Moscow drama theater them. M. N. Ermolova E. Yakushkina: “ New play(“Valentine” - in two acts) is half written in blank,<...>I stick to the “Hunting” level, and then maybe I’ll jump over this level.”

It seems that both plays, highly valued by the author during the period of his creative maturity, are close in concept and plot: they are about how the actions of people around them, busy thinking about their own happiness, can lead a person’s life to a tragic point. Let's consider storylines two plays by the playwright, revealing the unity of the problems that worried the playwright.

The plot in “Duck Hunt,” at first glance, is determined and driven by the actions and actions of the main characters, primarily Viktor Zilov. In talking about him, critics tried to understand the reasons for the rude, scandalous behavior of an intelligent, sensitive hero. Researchers pointed either to the reasons that should be sought in the character of the hero, considering him responsible for his own inconsistency

worthiness (E. Gushanskaya, T. Zhurcheva, V. Solovyov, A. Demidov), or on external circumstances independent of a person, such as the state of society at the end of the 1960s, that atmosphere of disappointment in previous illusions and ideals that put forward mediocrity and vulgarity, regimentation and external decency are brought to the fore instead of the need for internal spiritual work (N. Tenditnik, V. Sakharov, I. Shaitanov, B. Sushkov, V. Lakshin).

Zilov is certainly the most interesting person in the circle of characters drawn by Vampilov: he is distinguished by freedom of judgment, wit, he is ironic, and always commands the attention of those around him. When, at the beginning of the play, Zilov wakes up in his new apartment and receives a funeral wreath from his friends, he realizes that his life is “essentially lost” and mentally replays the events of the last three months. The play is structured in such a way that most of the action is devoted to memories - at least 5/6 of the text. The behavior of others and Zilov’s attitude towards them make it possible to determine the reason for the hero’s unworthy actions: in his personality or in the circumstances that pushed him to these actions.

In these memoirs it turns out that the person closest to Zilov, whom he lost forever, was his wife Galina. According to the author’s remark, Galina is tired of life with a “frivolous husband”, “the burden of unfulfilled hopes,” but through her fatigue peeks through “an grace that is not immediately discernible and in no case is shown by her on purpose.” The author's high assessment of the heroine is obvious. Galina’s behavior in Zilov’s memory constantly confirms this assessment.

At first, Galina still only suspects that her husband is cheating, but still hopes for the best. Thanks to the efforts of boss Kushak, Zilov gets an apartment, and Galina’s housewarming party seems like an opportunity to restore relations with her husband, to start new stage their life together, leaving everything false in the past: “We will live together here, right?<...>In the evenings we will read and talk. Shall we? . Galina’s high spiritual spirit and her love for her husband are beyond doubt.

In the housewarming scene, Galina's nobility in her relationships with Zilov's friends and acquaintances is clearly demonstrated. She does not think about the money spent, unlike her seemingly completely unscrupulous husband, who notes that “a serious meal” has been prepared and that no one

of his friends “didn’t deserve this.” Galina does not expect gifts from her guests and tries to complete the giving scene as quickly as possible. Unlike the Sayapins, she does not try to show special attention to Kushak and emphasize her gratitude for the new apartment. She warmly greets Kuzakov when, due to lack of money, he brings a garden bench as a gift to the house, where there is nothing to sit on yet: “Thank you, Kuzya! It couldn't have been better<...>. Place it on the table. The ladies will sit on it." Obviously, from everyone around Zilov, Galina singles out Kuzakov, probably because he is “mostly thoughtful, self-absorbed,” “in society he is usually in the shadows.” But the waiter Dima scares her. Despite the rude, familiar behavior of Vera, Zilov’s former mistress, and being intuitively against her visit, Galina said goodbye as to the person she would like to see in her home: “I hope you will visit us. I'll be happy" . In turn, Vera, contrary to her expectations, correctly assessed Galina: “I liked your wife. I'm even surprised how you managed to marry someone like that.<...>. I can imagine how much she suffered because of you. ".

Zilov’s attitude towards his wife throughout his “memory work” is disgusting: he cheats on her, lies, destroys his last hopes for family happiness with his reaction to words about an unborn child. His indifference was explained by the fact that at that time he was organizing a date with the young Irina who had just appeared in his life - only he remembers this too.

ZILOV. Child?..<...>Well, I'm glad. Yes, I'm glad, I'm glad. Well, what do you want - sing, dance?... See you?... See you today. After all, you won’t have it this very minute.”

When Irina tries to reason with Zilov during a scandal in a cafe, standing up for his offended friends, he insults her too: “Here’s more for you! Another one! Grab it!<.>Lovely creation! Bride! Well! Why are you confused? Do you think nothing will work out? Nonsense! Believe me, this is done easily!” . Irina’s storyline shows: everything that Zilov wins from life with his charm, he does not appreciate and therefore loses. He loses because neither his beautiful wife nor his mistresses - first the accessible Vera, then the young, spontaneous Irina - gave him happiness and satisfaction. Zilov was not and could not be carried away by work. He understood that he had failed as an engineer. He says to Sayapin: “Old man, none of us

it won't be anymore.<...>our office is the most suitable place for you and me.”

In addition to women, there were also friends in Zilov’s life who willingly spent time with him, respected his passion for duck hunting and were ready to do something nice: for a housewarming they presented him with a special hunting gift - wooden decoy ducks. But they are also convinced how much Zilov does not take them into account and does not respect them. He doesn’t care about Sayapin, about his dream of getting, like him, Zilov, a new apartment, he despises him for currying favor with his boss, shifting all the blame onto him, Zilov, when he has to answer for the fake article that they shared signed.

During dinner in a cafe on the occasion of vacation and the upcoming duck hunt, Zilov insults his guests, as they say, to the fullest. If he loses people close to him, it is of his own free will. The hero's intelligence and charm, which attracted people to him, should not have given him the right to treat them as he pleased. And the plot paradox is that the smart, charming man did not bring good to any of his relatives and friends, and did not bring happiness and joy to himself - this is the result of the hero’s “memory work”. The plot of the play reproduces this “work” as a process of realizing how with his own hands he destroyed the connections between himself and the people around him.

During a discussion of the play by the artistic council of the Irkutsk Drama Theater. N.P. Okhlopkov, a dispute arose about whether Zilov, with his disgusting actions, could be called a modern hero. The question arose who was to blame for the hero’s fiasco in life: society, which did not provide worthy goals, or he himself, who demanded too much from society and from life.

Vampilov, according to N. Tenditnik, spoke quite definitely about his Zilov: “And that’s who we are! It's me, you know? Foreign writers write about the “lost generation”. Haven’t we experienced any losses?” . These words explain not only the social atmosphere of the time, but also the nature of the action and plot of “Duck Hunt”, because it is important that the hero lives all the events in his memories, which means that the storylines are aimed at the hero’s search for something in himself that “reflects badly on other people."

On the one hand, Zilov is the “culprit” of everything that happened, but on the other hand, only he is able to understand his own guilt. Whether he will come to her understanding, whether repentance will be accomplished remains...

beyond the boundaries of the play. But, as Vampilov’s subsequent work showed, he did not remove responsibility from the individual; he saw in it the guarantee of a moral attitude to life. The relationship between man and environment, man and the circumstances of time, shown in the storylines of “Duck Hunt,” constitute a complex, sometimes contradictory and paradoxical process of mutual influence and mutual repulsion.

Following “Duck Hunt,” the playwright wrote the essay “Walking along Kutulik” (1968). Its creation by an already accomplished writer was dictated by the internal need to comprehend the problems that worried him. Assessing cultural changes over the past five to seven years in the regional center where he was born and raised, the achievements of material culture - asphalt on the main street of the village, new school, a large stadium, a concert and dancing in the new House of Culture, Vampilov sees another side of reality in connection with the rude behavior of teenagers who followed the girls after dancing. He also recalls a wild incident in the neighboring village of Tabarsuk, when teenagers climbed into an empty school, tore up class magazines, and took a shit for fun. Vampilov refused to explain such actions of young people by the influence of the environment, as the public did. The writer explains “savagery” (to use Vampilov’s favorite expression) by a person’s attitude towards other people and, discussing the “influence of the environment,” comes to the conclusion: “The environment is how each of us works, eats, drinks, what each of us likes and what he doesn’t like, what he believes in and what he doesn’t believe in, which means everyone can ask himself with all severity: what is there in my life, in my thoughts, in my actions that reflects badly on other people?” . The essay leaves no doubt that it was important for Vampilov: no external influences relieve a person of responsibility for his behavior and attitude towards life and others.

These reflections will be embodied in dramatic form in the play “Last Summer in Chulimsk” (1972). Its plot conflict lies in the choice of behavior by the characters: some are ready to fight for their happiness “with teeth and legs,” like the pharmacist Kashkina, like Pashka; others - Shamanov, Mechetkin, Pomigalov, Khoroshikh - are indifferent to others, to the norms of human morality. All of them are opposed by Valentina, who under no circumstances accepts violence against a person or inattention to the lives of others. She takes care of the front garden, decorating the lives of tea visitors.

noah, without forcing anyone to follow her example

Grow and protect flowers. He loves Shamanov without trying to attract attention. Finally, she does not allow her father to stand up for her violated honor.

Researcher I. Grigorai draws attention to the plot chain of actions of all the characters fighting for their happiness, which push Valentina to take pity on Pashka and go to the dance with him. Due to her mental makeup, Valentina does not allow the possibility of violence. "For each of the heroes,

I. Grigorai writes, - the author creates his own limiting situation,<.>when one’s vested interest - often a strong feeling - forces even good people forget about those around you." In other words, all the heroes are united by the motive of the struggle for happiness. Except Valentina - she does not fight for happiness, understanding it in her own way.

In the first version of the ending, when Valentina commits suicide after violence committed against her, the author emphasized the importance of the role of this plot chain of the struggle for happiness. Der-gachev, far from the events around Valentina, although indirectly connected with them by hatred of Pashka, asserts universal responsibility for Valentina’s death.

DERGACHEV. We are to blame. Everyone is to blame. Listen, Pavel. Everyone involved. We will all answer.

Vampilov’s thought is clear: everyone is to blame, and not just the rapist Pashka. It is noteworthy that the playwright then abandoned the option of Valentina’s suicide. From the memoirs of V. Rasputin it is known that Vampilov felt bad for several days because he allowed himself to doubt his heroine, to believe that, yes, they had broken him. In the last lifetime (and therefore canonical) version,

In this morning scene, the first thing Valentina does when she leaves the house is to begin repairing the front garden. A strong character The heroine does not allow her to “break down” and lose faith in people, in the fact that those around them will ultimately understand the purpose of beauty in their lives and will come to respect other people’s work and each other.

It is interesting that in the latest version there are two storylines. On the one hand, the actions of each character in the drama lead to Valentina’s tragedy, and on the other, her moral standards influence those around her and are affirmed no matter what. The rapist Pashka leaves Chulimsk, realizing that he will not be able to conquer the one who does not submit to force. Investigator Shamanov is ready to return to the city and fight in court for justice in a case that previously seemed hopeless. Valentina Pomigalov's father will now take her opinions and feelings into account.

If a person’s highly moral behavior can influence people, then immoral actions can to a large extent affect their lives - this idea expressed in the essay “Walking along Kutulik” turned out to be the development of the plot of the drama “Last Summer in Chulimsk.” If the “environment”, “environment”, “circumstances” in Chulimsk led Valentina to tragedy, this, according to Vampilov, is not a reason for the heroine to abandon moral principles, which, thanks to her, ultimately triumph.

Thus, in the plot outline of the dramas “Duck Hunt” and “Last Summer in Chulimsk”, in their action and endings, the playwright’s innermost thought about the culture of human relations as the basis of morality is embodied. It is this author's idea that drives the plot of his mature plays.

Literature

1. Vampilov A. House with windows in the field. - Irkutsk: Vost.-Sib. publishing house, 1981. - 690 p.

2. Vampilov A. Dramatic heritage. - Irkutsk: Irkutsk regional printing house No. 1, 2002. - 844 p.

3. Vampilov A. Favorites. - M.: Consent, 1999. - 778 p.

4. Grigorai I. Features of character development in Russian drama of the 50-70s of the twentieth century. - Vladivostok: Dalnevost Publishing House. University, 2004. - 240 p.

5. Imikhelova S. S., Yurchenko O. O. Art world Alexandra Vampilova. - Ulan-Ude: Buryat Publishing House. state unta, 2001. - 106 p.

6. Rasputin V. From the place of eternal storage // Vampilov A. Favorites. - M.: Consent, 1999. - P. 5-11.

7. Tenditnik N. Truths are old but eternal // Tenditnik N. Masters. - Irkutsk: Vost.-Sib. publishing house, 1981. - P. 125 -210.

1. Vampilov A. Dom oknami vpole. Irkutsk: East Siberian publ., 1981. 690 p.

2. Vampilov A. Dramaturgicheskoe nasledie. Irkutsk: Irkutsk regional printing No. 1 publ., 2002. 844 p.

3. Vampilov A. Izbrannoe. Moscow: Soglasie, 1999. 778 p.

4. Grigoraj I. Osobennosti khararteroslozheniya v russkoj dramaturgii 50-70-x godov XX century. Vladivostok: Far Eastern University publ., 2004. 240 p.

5. Imihelova S. S., Yurchenko O. O. Chudozhestvenyj mir Alexandra Vampilova. Ulan-Ude: Buryat State University publ., 2001. 106 p.

6. Rasputin V. S place vechnogo hraneniya. Vampilov A. Izbrannoe - Vampilov A. Selected works. Moscow: Soglasie, 1999. Pp.5-11.

7. Tenditnik N. Istiny starye, no vechnye. TenditnikN. Mastera - TenditnikN. Masters. Irkutsk: East Siberian publ., 1981. Pp.125-210.

dramaturgy of vampires genre play

From the very beginning, “Duck Hunt” (1967) gained a reputation as the most mysterious and complex play by A.V. Vampilov, including at the level of determining the genre of the work. In numerous research work, dedicated to "Duck Hunt", quite diverse interpretations of its genre basis are given: farce, phantasmagoria, tragicomedy, psychological drama.

In the plays preceding “Duck Hunt,” Vampilov appeared before the reading and theater public primarily as a comedic author, somewhere vaudeville-like cheerful and ironic, somewhere truly witty and mocking, somewhere lyrical and soft. “In “Duck Hunt,” the tone of the narrative and the overall sound of the play become serious. “Duck Hunt” is built as a chain of Zilov’s memories,” M.B. rightly believes. Bychkova.

Consistently staged, but scattered memorable episodes from the hero’s past life present not only to the reader and viewer, but also to Zilov himself, the story of his moral decline. Thanks to this, from the very first episode of the play, a real drama unfolds before us human life built on deception. The drama of Zilov’s life gradually turns into the tragedy of loneliness: indifference or feigned participation of friends, loss of feelings of filial affection, vulgarization of the sincere feelings of a girl in love with him, the departure of his wife... Signs of tragicomedy in the play are obvious (Zilov’s conversation with Galina at the moment of her departure; Zilov’s public denunciation of the vices friends; preparing Zilov for suicide). However, the leading techniques for constructing a play that create genre orientation works are techniques of psychological drama. For example, there is the fact that the hero A.V. Vampilov is shown at a moment of acute mental crisis, shown from the inside, with all his experiences and problems, almost mercilessly turned inside out, psychologically exposed. The focus of the playwright’s attention is on the content of the moral world of his contemporary, while there is no definition of the hero as bad or good, he is internally complex and ambiguous. According to E. Gushanskaya, the finale of “Duck Hunt” was complicated, “triple”: the play could have been completed twice before the main ending: when Zilov put a gun to his chest or shared property with Sayapin (then this would be more consistent with the canons of tragicomedy). The main ending of the play is open-ended and resolved in the traditions of psychological drama.

The play by A.V. Vampilov's "Duck Hunt" is usually considered as a socio-psychological drama (less often as a tragicomedy with elements of industrial conflict, farcical and melodramatic inserts), in which the playwright reconsiders the problems of his early works.

In the first two multi-act plays (“Farewell in June”, “Eldest Son”) the playwright was interested in the balance of power in revealing the human subjectivity hidden under the social mask in a situation generated by the unique manifestations of omnipotent life. “They were understood as a confluence of circumstances, which is an echo of the multi-events and diversity of life, and a happy or unfortunate event as a form of its individual expression of will.”

According to E.V. Tymoshchuk, “the problematics of the plays were born at the intersection of relative constancy, internal orderliness, regularity of reproduction of everyday conditions, shown not from the material, but from the socially effective side, human subjectivity, seeking self-determination and access to reality, and existence as a kind of good god who is able to lead life in motion."

It was convenient to solve such dramatic problems within the framework of the comedy genre: this practically did not require deviating from its canonical structure. However, even with a slight shift in emphasis from depicting the situation to the process of self-knowledge of the individual, a change in genre forms was required, which led to a revision of the disposition in Vampilov’s triad of man - life (people) - being.

On the one hand, the infinity of manifestations of the act of self-knowledge and the impossibility of its completion became obvious to the playwright, on the other hand, social life in reality showed the limitations of its proposals to man and was unable to satisfy his growing need to find a common substantial meaning from which individual meaning would be derived .

“The favorable existence of comedies was, in fact, not the reality of life, but the reality of literature - the playwright was convinced of this by personal example, trying to break through to the reader and meeting constant resistance along the way.” Life has abandoned man, offering him, at the risk of everything, to be active and fight, without objective reasons, effective methods and faith in a positive outcome of the struggle.

The complication of the picture of the world, the unstoppable actualization and self-generation of models of existence that claim to explain the true reasons for its existence and the vector of development, the loneliness of a person in a world that has lost interest in him, pushed Vampilov to the transition from the comedic element to the tragicomic, from the canonical features of drama to its novelization ( term by M.M. Bakhtin).

This was expressed not only in the deliberate incompleteness of the fate of the protagonist, immersed in the eternal present without the possibility of any future, but also in the complex plot and compositional structure of the play, previously uncharacteristic of Vampilov’s poetics.

The “fabric” of “Duck Hunt” falls into three layers: Zilov’s past, which is a chain of episodes, loosely interconnected plot-wise and aimed at revealing as many aspects of his personality as possible, the hero’s present, in which he is deprived of the opportunity to act, and representations of the hero, tied to the moment of the present and showing his capabilities as an interpreter."

Vampilov freely connects parts of the text, using the logic of memories generated by mentally flipping through a phone book. After a party at the Forget-Me-Not cafe (the name is symbolic: the inability to forget the past), Zilov receives a funeral wreath from his friends.

The first episode of the hero’s performances, stage-marked by music and blackout, shows how he sees the reaction of the environment to his own death, if it really happened: Sayapin’s doubts about the veracity of the rumors (“No, he was joking, as usual”), Kuzakov’s confidence in the realization pessimistic version of events (“Alas, this time everything is serious. It couldn’t be more serious”), the ironic epitaph of Vera (“He was an Alik of Aliks”), the sanctimonious condemnation of Kushak (“Such behavior does not lead to good”), the unification in grief of Galina and Irina (“We will be friends with you”) and the sinister role of the Waiter, who collects money for a wreath, making the fact of death socially irrefutable.

The described scene gives an idea of ​​Zilov as a psychologist and interpreter of human nature: his assumptions about the possible behavior of the environment are accurate and plausible - this is confirmed by the further course of the play.

In addition, this fragment reveals the specifics of constructing the play’s imagery system (its concentration around the image of Zilov) and the dual definition of the characters’ subjectivity - through identifying their attitude towards Zilov (acceptance/rejection) and characterizing their positioning strategy, which involves the following methods: declarative statements: " Kuzakov. Who knows... If you look at it, life is essentially lost..." .

According to M.B. Bychkova, in this case, a replication of the persistent Chekhov motif “life is lost” is presented.

This is supported by the frequency of occurrence of the phrase in the text, its contextual environment (it is said out of place, at the wrong time), and lexical design.

In Vampilov we are dealing with a passive construction, in which there is a distinction between a grammatical subject, expressed lexically, and a logical subject, hidden, but easily restored from the context - life has been lost [by us] (accusatory mode). The heroes of "Duck Hunt" are characterized by a partial awareness of their own role in shaping their destiny, begun but not completed, and therefore incomplete recognition of responsibility for life.

Complexes of statements and actions aimed at creating and maintaining a socially approved image: “Sash.<…>I am far from being a prude, but I must tell you that he behaved very... mm... imprudently." The image of Kushak, to a greater extent than all the others, is satirical. The comic mask of an influential person, but burdened with vices, is presented here in almost all their basic qualities.

There is neither a tragicomic shift in emphasis (hyperbolization of vice, layering of monstrous features), nor a dramatic complication of subjectivity.

In criticism of the 70-90s. There has been a tendency to interpret "Duck Hunt" primarily as a drama of loss, since the play consistently exposes value series: the hero realizes - or makes visible for awareness - something that could have become a solid support in his life, but is no longer there. And yet, “Duck Hunt” is primarily a tragicomedy of existence and self-valued awareness: its conflict is born where reality, taking the form of a mercilessly objective mirror, provides the hero with the opportunity to look at himself from the outside.

The vision of subjectivity as an invariably stable, long-standing and correctly understood entity, which gives the hero confidence in his own abilities, comes into conflict with the image that appears before him when he finds himself not in the role of a participant in events, but in the role of an eyewitness.

The question “Is it really me?” that is not expressed verbally in the play, the catastrophic discrepancy between I-for-myself and I-actually, the reluctance to be myself gives rise to an existential conflict that involves two ways of resolution: the destruction of the unwanted “I” through physical elimination (suicide) or by transformation."

Zilov consistently tries both. The open ending of the play does not leave us the opportunity to make an unambiguous statement about Zilov’s transformation: Vampilov did not want categorical certainty. The consciousness of the hero, burdened with the burden of dramatic guilt, having acquired the ability to reflect, is wide open to life, like the consciousness of the reader and the author. There is no limit to subjectivity; it is capable of change.

Speaking about the play and about Zilov: “It’s me, you know?” - Vampilov, apparently, wanted not only to point out the limitations of vulgar sociological interpretations of the play, but also to declare it as a drama of self-comprehension, in which the hero, reader and author are equal.

Vampilov's theater is an open, unfinished system in which three dramaturgical nodes are clearly distinguished: plays devoted to the problem of existence, in the center of which is an individuality cut off from the world ("Farewell in June", "Duck Hunt"); plays in which the object of the image is a utopia under construction or destruction ("The Eldest Son", "Last Summer in Chulimsk"); plays depicting a deformed, “inverted” world (“Provincial Anecdotes”, this line was obviously supposed to continue with the vaudeville “The Incomparable Tips”, work on which was interrupted by the death of the playwright).

In A. Vampilov’s creative system, there is a dialogic tension between comedies, on the one hand, and tragicomedy and drama, on the other: the former present positive arguments in favor of the possibility of a person building an ideal strategy for existence in the world, and the latter - negative ones.

Elements of other genres are included in the general comedic logic of the first two multi-act plays as factors for expanding the interpretive field: “Farewell in June” reveals thematic similarity to the tragicomedy “Duck Hunt”, “The Eldest Son” has vaudeville and melodramatic features that determine the breadth of the concept, its irreducibility to general schemes for constructing dramatic works.

Vampilov is a playwright who has written worthy plays, including Duck Hunt by Alexander Vampilov.

Vampilov Duck hunting

Vampilov's play was written in 1971. This vivid work tells us about the values ​​of the past generation, the generation of the Thaw. Studying the work of the playwright, we see that Vampilov in Duck Hunt created characters with different characters, which puzzle the reader and have even caused public concern in the past. If we talk about positive and negative heroes, then there are none here, they are all neutral.

Here we meet Dima, who was confident in himself. There is also a defiant Faith. A sash that lived in eternal fear. Of course, the most bright image the work is the image of Zilov, who is the main character. We are introduced to the plot of the book through the prism of the main character’s memories. He recalls the past days after his friends joked with him by sending a funeral wreath with the inscription: Zilov, who died untimely at work.

Zilov himself appears before us in the image of a man tired of life, although he is just a thirty-year-old young man. He is healthy and may well be useful to society, but no. There are no values ​​for him. Already at the beginning we learn that he caused some kind of scandal in the cafe. When friends come to his house for a housewarming party, he cannot even answer what is important to him in life. His friends are responsible for him, reminding him of the hunt.

We see that Zilov likes to drink and eat; talking about work brings boredom. This is a man who did not find time to visit his sick father. He died without waiting for his son. Zilov loves to chase girls, easily cheats on his wife, who wanted everything to work out for them, but this does not happen, and she leaves for her childhood friend.

Reading the work Duck Hunt, one gets an ambiguous opinion about the hero. A seemingly insignificant person who does not know how to love, who can be called a scumbag; sincerity and indifference, charm and lies, daydreaming and cunning are intertwined in him. When it comes to hunting, his passion, he is transformed. Hunting for him is like Muse for creative person. He talks about her like a poet and waits for her as a relief from boredom. Waiting for you as freedom, as a dream come true, as an opportunity to relax, to get rid of the bustle of the city. For him, hunting, which he goes on on vacation, is a period of respite, an opportunity to start living in a new way. But something new doesn’t come, and all because Zilov doesn’t care about anything. He is tired of everything, everything is indifferent, and as his wife said, he has no heart.

Vampilov’s work is interesting and at the same time has an unexpected ending, it’s not for nothing that the writer was called a master of open endings. So in Duck's Story our hero falls on the bed and either cries or laughs, but we don't know about it. And then he calms down and, as if nothing had happened, agrees to go hunting.

Duck hunting summary

It all started with a call. He woke up Zilov, but the hero did not pick up the phone. Only after a while I called Dima to find out about the scandal that the hero caused in the cafe. After the conversation, a boy rings at Zilov’s door and hands over a funeral wreath from friends who decided to make a joke on the hero. And then we get acquainted with the man’s memories. First he remembers a cafe where he often meets with friends during a break. His boss, his lover, and his friend are here. Zilov invites all of them to a housewarming party, because the Zilovs recently received an apartment.

In the evening everyone gathered at the Zilovs’, bringing gifts. Everyone at the table mocks the hero.

Next, Zilov recalls how he and Sayapin were supposed to prepare a report, but the information turned out to be false. However, he doesn’t care, he persuades Sayapin to sign the report and submits it to the director, without fear of consequences. Zilov receives a letter from his father, but does not react in any way to the contents, which say that the old man is very sick. Moreover, during his vacation he had already planned a hunting trip. Then a certain Irina appears, who was looking for a newspaper publishing house, but got confused by the offices, ending up in the office where Zilov worked. A man meets Irina and they begin an affair.

We learn that Zilov does not spend the night at home, and then tells his wife about the business trip, although everyone saw him in the city. The hero makes excuses, lies after lies. He learns from his wife that she was pregnant, but had an abortion. This news did not hurt him much. Further, in order to soften his wife a little, he begins to remember the past when they first met, but subsequently he could not remember much important point their lives, which brought his wife to tears.

Zilov recalls how at work the director called him to his office regarding a fake report. The man takes the blame, but Sayapin’s wife managed to calm the angry director, who took Kushak to football. Here Zilov receives news of his father's death. Before leaving, Zilov visits a cafe where he has an appointment with Irina, and his wife also came here. This is how Irina finds out that the hero is married.