The article is devoted to Ostrovsky’s drama “The Thunderstorm”
At the beginning of the article Dobrolyubov writes that “Ostrovsky has a deep understanding of Russian life.” He then analyzes the article about Ostrovsky by other critics, writes that there is “no direct view of things” in them.
Then Dobrolyubov compares the “Storm” with the dramatic canons: “The subject of the drama must certainly be an event where we see the struggle of passion and duty – with the unfortunate consequences of the victory of passion or with the happy consequences of winning the debt.” Also in drama there must be unity of action, and it must be written in high literary language. “The thunderstorm” does not satisfy the most dramatic goal of the drama – to inspire respect for moral duty and to show the harmful effects of passion. “Katerina, this criminal, appears to us in the drama, not only in a gloomy light, but even with the radiance of martyrdom. so well, she suffers so piteously, everything is so bad around her that you are armed against her oppressors and, therefore, in her person you justify the vice. Therefore, drama does not fulfill its high purpose. All the action is sluggish and slow, because it is cluttered with scenes and faces completely unnecessary. Finally, the language, as the actors say, surpasses all the patience of a well-bred person. “
This comparison with
“The writer has still been granted a small role in this movement of humanity towards natural principles,” writes Dobrolyubov, after which he remembers Shakespeare, who “moved the general consciousness of people to several levels, to which no one had risen before.” Further, the author turns to other critical articles about the “Thunderstorm”, in particular, Apollon Grigoriev, who claims that Ostrovsky’s main merit is his “nationality.” “But what is the nationality, Mr. Grigoriev does not explain, and therefore his line seemed very funny to us.”
Then Dobrolyubov comes to the definition of Ostrovsky’s plays as a whole as a “play of life”: “We want to say that in his forefront is always the general situation of life, he does not punish neither the villain nor the victim. You see that their position dominates them, and you blame them only because they do not show enough energy to get out of this situation. This is why we do not dare to consider unnecessary and superfluous those faces of Ostrovsky’s plays that do not participate directly in intrigue. they are as necessary for the plays We, like the main ones, show us the situation in which the action takes place, draw a position that determines the meaning of the main characters in the play. “
In the “Thunderstorm” is especially visible the need for “unnecessary” persons. Dobrolyubov analyzes the replicas of Feklusi, Glasha, Wild, Kudryash, Kuligin, etc. The author analyzes the inner state of the heroes of the “dark kingdom”: “everything is somehow restless, it’s not good for them.” Besides them, without asking them, another life has grown up, with other beginnings, and although she is still not seen well, she already sends bad visions to the dark arbitrariness of the tyrants, and Kabanova is very gravely upset by the future of the old order with which she has outlived it. She foresees the end of them, tries to maintain their significance, but already feels that there is no to his former respects and that at the first opportunity they had been abandoned. “
Then the author writes that “Groza” is “the most resolute work of Ostrovsky, the mutual relations of tyranny are brought to it to the most tragic consequences, and while most of those who read and see this play agree that there is even something in the” Thunderstorm ” something refreshing and encouraging. This “something” is, in our opinion, the background of the play, indicated by us and revealing the precariousness and the close end of the tyranny. Then the very character of Katerina, drawn against this background, also blows on us a new life that opens to us in her very doom “.
Further, Dobroliubov analyzes the image of Katerina, perceiving it as “a step forward in all of our literature”: “Russian life has reached the point where it was felt the need for people more active and energetic.” The image of Katerina “is steadfastly faithful to the instinct of natural truth and selflessness in the sense that it is better for him to die than for life in those principles that are contrary to him.” This integrity and harmony of character is his strength. Free air and light, despite all precautions of perishing tyranny, break into Katerina’s cell, she is eager for a new life, even if she had to die in this rush. What’s her death? Anyway, she does not consider life to be that of the vegetation that fell to her share in the Kabanovs’ family. “
The author analyzes in detail the motives of Katerina’s actions: “Katerina does not belong to violent characters, dissatisfied, loving to destroy, on the contrary, this character is primarily creative, loving, ideal.” That is why she tries to ennoble everything in her imagination. pleasures naturally opened in a young woman. ” But it will not be Tikhon Kabanov who is “too busy to understand the nature of Katerina’s emotions:” I will not analyze you, Katya, “he says to her,” then you will not get words from you, not like caresses, and so on yourself you climb “. So usually spoiled nature judge the nature of a strong and fresh. “
Dobrolyubov comes to the conclusion that in the image of Katerina Ostrovsky embodied the great folk idea: “In other creations of our literature, strong characters look like fountains that depend on an extraneous mechanism.” Katerina is like a big river: flat bottom, good – it flows smoothly, great stones meet – she jumps over them, the cliff – cascades, locks her – she rages and breaks in another place. This is not why she wants to water suddenly wants to make a noise or get angry at obstacles, but simply because it needs it to fulfill its natural requirements – for further flow. “
Analyzing the actions of Katerina, the author writes that he believes that Katerina and Boris can escape as the best solution. Katerina is ready to run, but here comes another problem – the material dependence of Boris from his uncle Wild. “We said above a few words about Tikhon, Boris – the same, in essence, only educated.”
At the end of the play, “we are pleased to see the release of Katerina – though through death, if it can not be otherwise.” Living in a “dark kingdom” is worse than death. Tikhon, rushing to the corpse of his wife, pulled out of the water, screams in self-oblivion: “Good for you, Katya! But why should I live on earth and suffer? “This exclamation ends the play, and it seems to us that nothing could be invented stronger and more truthful than this ending. Tikhon’s words make the viewer think not of love intrigue, but of this whole life, where the living envy the dead. “
In conclusion, Dobrolyubov refers to the readers of the article: “If our readers find that Russian life and Russian power are caused by the artist in the Grozny to take decisive action, and if they feel the legitimacy and importance of this matter, then we are happy, whatever our scientists say and literary judges. “