Evening classes in the sixth company were coming to an end, and the junior officers were looking at their watches more and more often and impatiently. The regulations of the garrison service were practically studied. The soldiers stood scattered all over the parade ground: near the poplars bordering the highway, near the gymnastics machines, near the doors of the company school, at the sighting machines. All these were imaginary posts, such as, for example, a post at a powder magazine, at a banner, in a guard house, at a cash drawer. The guards walked between them and posted sentries; there was a changing of the guards; The non-commissioned officers checked the posts and tested the knowledge of their soldiers, trying either to trick the sentry with his rifle, or to force him to leave his place, or to hand him some thing for safekeeping, mostly his own cap. The old-time servicemen, who knew this toy casuistry more thoroughly, responded in such cases in an exaggeratedly stern tone: “Stand back! I have no complete right to give a gun to anyone unless I receive an order from the Emperor himself.” But the young people were confused. They did not yet know how to separate jokes and examples from the real requirements of the service and fell first to one extreme or the other.

- Khlebnikov! The devil is cross-armed! - shouted the small, round and nimble Corporal Shapovalenko, and commanding suffering was heard in his voice. - I taught you, I taught you, you fool! Whose order have you carried out just now? Arrested? Oh, damn you!.. Answer why you were put in office!

There was serious confusion in the third platoon. The young soldier Mukhamedzhinov, a Tatar who barely understood and spoke Russian, was completely confused by the tricks of his superiors - both real and imaginary. He suddenly became furious, took the gun in his hand and responded to all convictions and orders with one decisive word:

- I’ll stab you!

“But wait... you’re a fool...” non-commissioned officer Bobylev persuaded him. - Who am I? I’m your guard commander, so...

- I’ll stab you! - the Tatar shouted fearfully and angrily, and with bloodshot eyes, he nervously thrust his bayonet at anyone who approached him. A group of soldiers gathered around him, rejoicing at the funny adventure and a moment’s respite from their boring training.

The company commander, Captain Sliva, went to investigate the matter. While he trudged with a sluggish gait, hunched over and dragging his feet, to the other end of the parade ground, the junior officers came together to chat and smoke. There were three of them: Lieutenant Vetkin - a bald, mustachioed man of about thirty-three, a merry fellow, a talker, a singer and a drunkard, Second Lieutenant Romashov, who had served for only his second year in the regiment, and Ensign Lbov, a lively, slender boy with sly, affectionately stupid eyes and an eternal a smile on his thick, naive lips, as if filled with old officer jokes.

“Disgusting,” said Vetkin, looking at his cupronickel watch and angrily clicking the lid. - Why the hell is he still holding a company? Ethiopian!

“You should explain this to him, Pavel Pavlych,” advised Lbov with a sly face.

- Hell no. Go ahead and explain it yourself. The main thing is what? The main thing is that it’s all in vain. They always have a blast before the shows. And they will always overdo it. They will seize the soldier, torture him, torture him, and at the inspection he will stand like a stump. Do you know the famous case where two company commanders argued whose soldier would eat more bread? They both chose the cruelest gluttons. The bet was big - about a hundred rubles. Here is one soldier who ate seven pounds and fell off, he couldn’t take it anymore. The company commander is now talking to the sergeant major: “Have you let me down like this?” And the sergeant-major just gapes: “So I can’t know, your speed, what happened to him. In the morning we did a rehearsal - we cracked eight pounds in one sitting...” So here are ours... They rehearse to no avail, but at the show they sit in galoshes.

“Yesterday...” Lbov suddenly burst out laughing. “Yesterday, classes had already finished in all the companies, I’m going to the apartment, it’s already eight o’clock, probably completely dark.” I see that in the eleventh company they are teaching signals. In chorus. “Na-ve-di, up to gro-di, po-pa-di!” I ask Lieutenant Andrusevich: “Why do you still have such music?” And he says: “It’s us, like dogs, howling at the moon.”

– I’m tired of everything, Kuka! - Vetkin said and yawned. - Wait a minute, who is that riding? I think Beck?

- Yes. Bek-Agamalov, decided the sharp-sighted Lbov. - It sits so beautifully.

“Very beautiful,” Romashov agreed. “In my opinion, he rides better than any cavalryman.” Ooo! She started dancing. Beck is flirting.

An officer wearing white gloves and an adjutant uniform rode slowly along the highway. Below him was a tall, long, golden horse with a short tail, in English. She got excited, impatiently shook her steep neck, gathered like a mouthpiece, and often moved her thin legs.

– Pavel Pavlych, is it true that he is a natural Circassian? – Romashov asked Vetkin.

– I think it’s true. Sometimes Armenians actually pretend to be Circassians and Lezgins, but Bek doesn’t seem to be lying at all. Look how he looks on a horse!

“Wait, I’ll shout to him,” said Lbov.

He put his hands to his mouth and shouted in a choked voice, so that the company commander could not hear:

- Lieutenant Agamalov! Beck!

The officer on horseback pulled on the reins, stopped for a second and turned to the right. Then, turning the horse in this direction and bending slightly in the saddle, he made it jump over the ditch with an elastic movement and galloped at a controlled gallop towards the officers.

He was smaller than average height, dry, wiry, and very strong. His face, with a sloping forehead, a thin hooked nose and decisive, strong lips, was courageous and beautiful and had not yet lost its characteristic oriental pallor - at the same time dark and matte.

“Hello, Bek,” said Vetkin. – Who were you playing tricks in front of? Devas?

Bek-Agamalov shook hands with the officers, leaning low and casually from the saddle. He smiled, and it seemed that his white clenched teeth cast a reflected light on the entire lower part of his face and on his small black, well-groomed mustache...

“There were two pretty Jewish girls walking around there.” What do I need? I have zero attention.

- We know how bad you are at checkers! – Vetkin shook his head.

“Listen, gentlemen,” Lbov spoke and laughed again in advance. – Do you know what General Dokhturov said about infantry adjutants? This applies to you, Beck. That they are the most reckless riders in the whole world...

– Don’t lie, Fendrik! - said Bek-Agamalov.

He pushed the horse with his legs and pretended that he wanted to run over the ensign.

- By God! All of them, he says, don’t have horses, but some kind of guitars, shkbpas - with a fuse, lame, crooked-eyed, drunk. And if you give him an order, he’ll fry you anywhere, throughout the entire quarry. A fence is a fence, a ravine is a ravine. Rolling through the bushes. Lost the reins, lost the stirrups, to hell with the hat! Dashing Riders!

- What's new, Beck? – Vetkin asked.

- What's new? Nothing new. Just now, the regimental commander found Lieutenant Colonel Lech in the meeting. He yelled at him so loudly that you could hear him in the cathedral square. And Lech is drunk as a serpent, he cannot pronounce his father and mother. He stands still and sways, with his hands behind his back. And Shulgovich barks at him: “When you talk to the regimental commander, please don’t keep your hands on your ass!” And the servants were here too.

- Screwed on tightly! - Vetkin said with a grin - not quite ironic, not half encouraging. “In the fourth company yesterday, they say, he shouted: “Why are you rubbing the regulations in my nose? I am a charter for you, and no more talk! I am the king and god here!”

Lbov suddenly laughed again at his own thoughts.

“And here’s another thing, gentlemen, there was a case with an adjutant in the Nth regiment...

“Shut up, Lbov,” Vetkin remarked to him seriously. – The eco broke through for you today.

“There is more news,” Bek-Agamalov continued. He again turned his horse's front towards Lbov and, jokingly, began to run into him. The horse shook its head and snorted, scattering foam around itself. - There is more news. The commander of all companies requires officers to cut down scarecrows. In the ninth company I was so cold it was terrifying. Epifanov was put under arrest because the sword was not sharpened... Why are you cowardly, Fendrik! - Bek-Agamalov suddenly shouted at the ensign. - Get used to it. You yourself will someday be an adjutant. You will sit on a horse like a fried sparrow on a platter.

The writer Alexander Kuprin became known to everyone after the story “The Duel” was published in one of the collections in the spring of 1905. The book quickly sold out, and after about a month the work had to be reprinted. The author shows in the story the royal army, the inhuman conditions that ordinary soldiers exist in it. Everything he writes about, Alexander Kuprin saw when he served in the army. In the depiction of Lieutenant Kuprin, life in the army has long been vulgarized, and has a dulling effect on a person.

But then the author says that it is difficult to escape from such a life. And the officer must either continue to think about his studies at the military academy, or pull this burden further, hoping to retire with the assigned pension salary. The life of the officers is scheduled: drills and classes to study army regulations, drinking, relationships with women, balls, always card games and trips to a brothel. But sometimes, for variety, parades and maneuvers were held.

The story shows many officers: Vetkin is a kind fellow and does not strive for anything, Plum is a company commander, a stupid captain, Osadchiy is an officer who believes that war can change everything, Zegrzhet is a widowed lieutenant who barely has enough money for his maintenance small children, and he has four of them, Rafalsky is a lieutenant colonel, whose name is Bram, she came from a passion for the menagerie, Bobetinsky is trying to pretend to be a socialite, but he is actually a dummy, Archakovsky is cheating at cards, and others. All the officers that Alexander Kuprin shows do not evoke any sympathy. Thus, officer Rafalsky beats a soldier-bugler just because he is tired and plays a different signal on his instrument.

The action of Kuprin's story takes place at the end of the 19th century. At that time, duels were very popular, especially between officers. But the author dwelled in more detail on the scenes of beating and humiliation of soldiers. A striking image of a soldier from the people is the soldier Khlebnikov, whom the soldiers constantly mock. A. Kuprin not only denounces the order that reigns in the army, but the main point is the devastation and inhumanity of people who find themselves in army conditions. The author contrasts two heroes: Romashov and Nazansky.

Romashov is a second lieutenant; many critics found similarities in his features with the author. He was born and raised in the small town of Narovchata, Penza province. Little is known about his family: his mother lives in Moscow, the hero does not remember his father. The second lieutenant studied in the cadet corps, where he began to get involved in writing. A charming young man attracts the reader's attention with the purity of his soul. He is a compassionate soldier and naive, but such a person will not be able to live long in an army environment. Service is a burden to him, since there are moral monsters around him. He dreams of breaking out of this inhumanity.

Romashov is supported in his humanistic dreams by his friend officer Nazansky. And the second lieutenant’s humanism is manifested in every scene of Kuprin’s story: Romashov condemns the cruel punishment of the soldiers, his acquaintance with Khlebnikov, who has already despaired, the way he protects the woman and at the same time is burdened by his vulgar connections with Raisa Peterson, and in his pure love for Alexandra Petrovna. Kuprin's hero is dreamy, but he is only twenty years old. He dreams of changing the world, but maintaining honor and faith in his fatherland.

The same dreams, but more mature ones, also arise in officer Nazansky. A cheerful officer tries to enjoy all the joys of life, but he does not like the army. He idolizes women, and he considers love for them sacred. He speaks enthusiastically about unrequited love for a woman. Romashov considers him his teacher, he sees him as a sage. Nazansky accuses the officers of not striving for a new life and remaining blind and deaf to it. The officer does not believe in the biblical commandments, and does not want to accept thoughts about serving or fulfilling his duty. According to the hero, you only need to love yourself and serve yourself. He believes that the time will come when people themselves will become gods. But these thoughts can be regarded as simple selfishness.

Nazansky and Romashov are united by disgust for the traditions and orders that exist in the tsarist army, where officers forget about honor, and the common man is humiliated and suppressed. But there is also a difference in their views. Nazansky despises weak people, and Romashov treats him with care. Romashov believes that every person has three main recognitions that he must realize. This is art, science and physical labor, but at will. But in Russia, where autocratic and serfdom reigned, no free labor was possible.

The atmosphere of human decay and stupefaction covers not only officers. Officers' wives live boring lives, they are ignorant and narrow-minded. Kuprin's prominent representative of such an officer's wife is Raisa Peterson. The author begins the reader's acquaintance with this woman with letters that she writes and sends to Romashov. The content is stupid and vulgar, they are both sentimental and angry at the same time. But from them you can easily imagine the heroine herself. When Romashov informs her that he is breaking off this vulgar relationship, she begins to take revenge on him, disgustingly and vilely. Raisa writes anonymous letters, which become the culprits of Romashova’s death in a duel.

The image of Nikolaeva is drawn differently. Alexander Kuprin put all his talent and sensitivity into the portrayal of Shurochka. Alexandra Petrovna is charming and beautiful in appearance, she is smart, a woman has both a sense of tact and sensitivity. That is why Romashov falls in love with her. Nazansky is in love with him too. But the beautiful woman is frightened by what awaits her ahead: children, a small salary and the rank of an officer’s wife, and poverty. But she always dreams of dressing well, looking beautiful and graceful, so that people will worship her. In the meantime, she lives with her husband, whom she does not love at all, he is disgusting to her, but she demands that he enter the academy so that he can make a career in the future.

To achieve this, she is ready to sacrifice Nazansky’s love, and even betray both the love of the second lieutenant and Romashov himself. For the sake of her goals, she gives herself to Romashov in order to deprive him of his will. Therefore, the image of Shurochka is shown by the author as distorted, devoid of humanity. Its main life goal- go out into high society, where she would be successful, and escape from this province. Alexandra Petrovna is depicted by the author as selfish.

The story by Alexander Kuprin is a strong and vibrant work. In it, a person who is cheerful and philanthropic is contrasted with a society where the individual is humiliated and suppressed. And this was the real, real way of life in Russia at that time. Therefore, “The Duel” also contains a humanistic meaning. And the writer’s criticism of the army turns to criticism of the system of life that gives rise to such anti-human relations. Kuprin ends his story with a report about Romashov’s duel, in which he was killed. The author ends his story with a fatal shot for the main character.

The story “The Duel” was written and published by A.I. Kuprin in 1905. Many considered and still consider this work to be the best of all that the writer created during his long creative life. The “duel” was indeed given by A.I. Kuprin's real name is Russian literature, putting him on a par with his great contemporaries: Gorky, Chekhov, Bunin. Meanwhile, the story was received ambiguously by Russian educated society, as well as in the military environment of the 1910s. After the events of 1917 and the bloodshed that followed Civil War The attitude of the author himself to the content of his work, already well known to readers, has also radically changed.

The history of the story

A.I. Kuprin’s story “The Duel” is largely autobiographical. It is based on the personal impressions of the author, a graduate of the Alexander School, who served for four years as a young officer in the provincial town of Proskurov, Podolsk province. Perhaps A.I. Kuprin, due to his character, personality and temperament, was not created for military service, especially in Peaceful time. But the future writer did not choose the military profession for himself: that’s how life turned out. His mother, a widow, not having the means to give her son a decent education, sent the boy to a military gymnasium, which was later transformed into cadet corps. Resentment for the lack of freedom of one’s own choice affected Kuprin’s entire subsequent military career, as well as in his literary creativity. As if in a distorting mirror, it was reflected on the pages of many of the writer’s “military” works and, to the greatest extent, in the story “The Duel.”

Despite the presence of a number of memoirs and other evidence, the history of the creation of the story “The Duel” is extremely contradictory. Some of its nuances still raise questions among literary scholars, biographers, and researchers of A.I. Kuprin’s work.

Well-known sources indicate that the idea of ​​a large work (novel) about the life of Russian officers in a remote province was born to the writer in the early 1890s.

In 1893, in an undated letter to N.K. Mikhailovsky, Kuprin mentions his work on a great novel:

“I’m writing a long novel, The Grieving and the Embittered, but I can’t get past chapter 5.”

Neither Kuprin's biographers, nor in his subsequent correspondence, make any further mention of this novel. There is also no information that this work was dedicated to army life. However, most researchers consider “The Mourning and the Embittered” to be the first version of “The Duel,” which the author did not like and abandoned it.

In the 1890s, a number of Kuprin’s stories appeared in print, dedicated to the life and customs of Russian officers, but Kuprin turned to a new major work from the life of the military only in 1902-1903.

While Kuprin was thinking about the plot and collecting materials, German writer Fritz von Kürburg, writing under the pseudonym Fritz-Oswald Bilse, published his novel “Aus einer kleinen Garrison” (“In a small garrison”). This book, which aimed to expose the crude soldiery, caste isolation, vulgar arrogance and stupidity of the German military, was a huge success. Was incited against the author trial, which caused a wide public outcry not only in Imperial Germany, but also in other European countries. Bilse-Kürburg, by order of Emperor Wilhelm II, was excluded from military service. Already in 1903-1904, critical articles devoted to the “Little Garrison” appeared in the Russian magazines “Russian Wealth” and “Education”. In 1904, several translations of this work by Bilse were published into Russian and other European languages.

“My misfortune,” Kuprin said in an interview in 1910, “is that when I think of something and while I’m getting ready to write what I’ve planned, someone will definitely write it in the meantime. This was the case with “Yama”, “Olga Eruzalem” appeared, and this was also the case with “Duel” in 1902, when Bilse’s notes “In a small garrison” appeared. Even my "Duel" was translated into French like this: “La petite garrison russe.”

The topic was intercepted from Kuprin. “The Duel” was conceived by the author as an autobiographical, confessional work. But for publishers and readers at the beginning of the new, 20th century, the personal experiences of an army officer in the late 1880s were of little interest. The story must have contained an accusatory subtext that was fashionable at that time. Without him it was impossible to count on success.

During this period, A.I. Kuprin, by his own later admission, was entirely under the influence of A.M. Gorky and writers close to him, who consider it their calling and duty to scourge social ills. In those years, Gorky was indeed perceived by Russian society as the most prominent exponent of advanced political thought in fiction. His connection with the Social Democrats, revolutionary actions and government repressions against him were before everyone's eyes; almost every new work of his was not so much a literary as a political event. For Kuprin, Gorky was also not just a literary authority or a more successful writer. The voice of the “petrel of the revolution” sounded like the voice of a new creator of history, a prophet and arbiter of future changes.

After the publication of Bilse’s book, it was Gorky who convinced the author of “The Duel” that work on the work he had started should be continued. Back then, Kuprin believed that he was writing a great “novel” about what he saw and personally experienced, that he would be able to combine all his impressions with the requirements of the pre-revolutionary time and thereby “fit into the era.” It turned out to be not so simple. The progress of work on the book did not satisfy him. In search of inspiration, Kuprin rushed from city to city: he went to Balaklava, then lived a little in Odessa, at the end of 1904 he returned to St. Petersburg, where he again actively communicated with A.M. Gorky. However, the socially acute, topical “novel” about army life did not work out.

Only the image of Lieutenant Romashov, which he finally found, helped Kuprin to connect the incompatible. A vulnerable, trusting person, essentially deeply alien to both military profession, and the harsh realities of garrison life, with mental suffering he perceives the reality surrounding him: the lack of rights of soldiers, the emptiness and lack of spirituality of many officers, class prejudices, established army traditions and customs. The story masterfully conveys the “horror and boredom” of garrison life, but at the same time a heartfelt hymn to true love is created, through the hero’s lips a firm belief in the victory of the human spirit is expressed.

According to the recollections of Kuprin’s relatives, in the winter of 1904-1905, work on “The Duel” froze again. Kuprin was not confident of success, he found any excuse not to work on the story: he drank, led a disorderly lifestyle, and was surrounded by unfulfilled obligations, debts, and creditors. They even wrote this poem about him: “If truth is in wine, how many truths are there in Kuprin?”

Initially, “The Duel” was intended for the magazine “God’s World,” the publisher of which was A.I. Kuprin’s mother-in-law, Alexandra Arkadyevna Davydova, but when, during 1904-1905, Kuprin became especially close to Gorky, he decided to place his novel in the next volume of Gorky’s collection "Knowledge". (Reported this in a letter dated August 25, 1904 from Odessa).

Subsequently, Alexander Ivanovich himself admitted that he completed the story “The Duel” only thanks to the sincere, friendly participation of M. Gorky:

"A. M. Gorky was a touching comrade in literature, he knew how to support and encourage in time. I remember that I abandoned “The Duel” many times, it seemed to me that it was not done brightly enough, but Gorky, after reading the written chapters, was delighted and even shed tears. If he had not inspired me with confidence to work, I probably would not have finished my novel.”

Elsewhere, Kuprin characterizes Gorky’s role in the creation of the novel with even greater certainty: “The Duel would not have appeared in print if not for the influence of Alexei Maksimovich. During the period of my lack of faith in my creative powers, he helped me a lot.”

But there is other evidence. A.I. Kuprin has always been a man of passions, and the decisive role in the work on the story, most likely, was played not by Gorky’s friendly participation, but by the persistence of the writer’s adored wife, Maria Karlovna Davydova. She was tired of observing attacks of creative doubts, which were expressed in Kuprin, as a rule, in drunken revelry and causeless idleness. Maria Karlovna simply kicked her husband out of the house, declaring that he should not appear on the doorstep without the next chapter of “The Duel.” This method turned out to be more than effective. Kuprin rented a room and, having written the next chapter, hurried to his family apartment, climbed the stairs, pushed the manuscript through the door that was ajar with a chain. Then he sat down on the steps and waited patiently for Maria Karlovna to read and let him in. One day, to see his wife, Alexander Ivanovich brought a chapter he had already read earlier, and the door slammed loudly. “Executed! Indeed he was executed!” - he repeated in confusion, unable to get up and leave...

Thus, through the joint efforts of the spouses, the story was completed and published in the next collection of the publishing company “Knowledge” in May 1905.

Reaction of contemporaries

May 1905. The whole country was under the heavy impression of the military failures of the Russian army and navy in Far East. "Small victorious war" turned into huge casualties. In those days, it was rare that a family did not mourn the officers, soldiers and sailors who perished on the hills of distant Manchuria and died in the battles of Tsushima and Port Arthur. After the January execution, general dissatisfaction with the government grew stronger and more powerful, soon developing into revolutionary movement. And suddenly, A.I. Kuprin’s story “The Duel” appears.

Despite the fact that the story dealt with events more than ten years ago (duels in the army were allowed in the peaceful year of 1894), the so-called “progressive public” perceived the story as a more than modern and topical work. Even the least attentive and far-sighted reader was easily able to discern in “The Duel” an explanation of the reasons for Russia’s military failures solely through the depravity of its long-rotten state system.

Is it any wonder that under these conditions, newspaper and magazine criticism received Kuprin’s story with a bang. A week after the release of “The Duel,” the newspaper “Slovo” published an article by M. Chunosov (I.I. Yasinsky) “The Monster of Militarism,” in which the author called Kuprin’s work a bold indictment against bureaucracy, militarism and monarchical militarism. He was actively echoed by other critics of the democratic camp: V. Lvov (Rogachevsky), Izmailov, Lunacharsky, etc. The future Soviet People's Commissar of Education in his article “On Honor” wrote:

However, a significant part of Russian society, in contrast to the positive assessment of criticism and the press, perceived “The Duel” as a scandalous libel, almost a spit in the face of all those who sacrificed their lives in the interests of the Fatherland in the Far Eastern theater of military operations.

A critic of the very popular conservative newspaper “Moskovskie Vedomosti” A. Basargin (A.I. Vvedensky) described “The Duel” as “an unscrupulous pamphlet full of sloppy insinuations,” “obscene babble from someone else’s voice in the tone of the general trend of the “Knowledge” collections.”

The military could not agree with Kuprin either. Some of them, like Lieutenant General P.A. Geisman, who published a rather harsh article about the “Duel” in the military official “Russian Invalid”, really “went too far.” Recognizing Kuprin’s literary talent as a “writer of everyday life,” the general sincerely did not advise the author to touch on what he, in his opinion, does not know:

“Women, flirting, adultery, etc. - this is his genre,” reasoned General Geisman, declaring in conclusion: “That’s where we advise him to direct his attention and his abilities. And about the war, military science, the art of war, military affairs and the military world in general, it is better for him not to talk about it. For him, these “grapes are green.” He can write pictures without explanations, but nothing more!”

But what offended most representatives of the military environment in “The Duel” was not the author’s ignorance or his general resentment towards the army as such. To please the general oppositional mood prevailing in the editorial office of Znanie, with his preaching of anti-militarism, Kuprin, first of all, shamed all defenders of the Fatherland with their profession. Even the most benevolent reviewers noted: “The Duel” is harmed precisely by the journalistic, in its own way beautiful and even spectacular anger...” (P. M. Pilsky).

Kuprin dealt a cruel blow to those who considered military service to be their true calling, and not an accident, a heavy duty or an absurd mistake. Behind the ardent desire to “expose and castigate,” the author was unable to discern in each of his unsympathetic characters the future defenders of Port Arthur, the true heroes of the First World War, those who stood up to defend their homeland in a completely hopeless situation at the beginning of 1918, created Volunteer Army and died in her first Kuban campaigns.

Neither before nor after “The Duel” did Kuprin give in his works such a broad picture of the life of a certain environment (in this case, the officers); he never raised such acute issues that required their resolution social problems, finally, the writer's skill in depiction inner world man, his complex, often contradictory psychology did not achieve such expressiveness as in “The Duel.” For Kuprin's contemporaries, the denunciation of the vices of military life was an expression of the general incurable illness of the entire monarchical system, which, it was believed, rested solely on army bayonets.

Many critics called “The Duel” by A.I. Kuprin “a duel with the entire army”, as an instrument of violence against the human person. And if we take it more broadly, then a duel with the entire state system contemporary writer Russia.

It was precisely this radical formulation of the question that determined the severity of the struggle around the “Duel” between representatives of two public camps - progressive and protective-reactionary.

Only the subsequent tragic events of the beginning of the 20th century clearly showed Kuprin himself and all his contemporaries the complete illegality and untimeliness of such “fights.” Violence always remains violence, no matter how beautiful ideas it is covered up by people in uniform or without them. It was necessary to fight not with orders, not with mechanisms or tools, but with the nature of man himself. Unfortunately, Kuprin and the “progressive public” of that time realized this too late. In “The Duel,” Kuprin also tries to prove that it is not people themselves who are bad, but the conditions in which they are placed, i.e. that environment that gradually kills everything that is best in them, everything that is human.

But 1917 came. What Kuprin’s Romashov once dreamed of happened: the soldiers, incited by the “fighters for the people’s happiness,” said the same thing to the war: “I don’t want to!” But the war did not stop because of this. On the contrary, it took on an even uglier, inhumane, fratricidal form.

“The holiest of titles,” the title of “man,” is disgraced as never before. The Russian man is also disgraced - and what would it be, where would we turn our eyes, if it weren’t for “ ice treks"! - Ivan Bunin wrote, remembering those very “cursed days.”

Yes, no one, except for a handful of yesterday’s tsarist officers, once exposed in the “Duel” as moral monsters - victims of an inhumane, vicious system - even tried to save Russia from the horrors of Bolshevism. No one except them, the defamed, betrayed, humiliated yesterday’s front-line heroes and cadet boys, stood up for the disgraced Treaty of Brest-Litovsk country. No one but them tried to fight to regain the title of man...

After the Civil War, when in Soviet Russia criticism extolled Kuprin’s “Duel” as a “truly revolutionary work” exposing the tsarist army and the rotten through and through, completely decomposed officers, the author himself adhered to a completely different position.

It is characteristic that back in 1907, having carefully read the text of “The Duel” by L.N. Tolstoy, he remarked: “Kuprin has no idea, he is just an officer.” And it was true. In a time of trial, Kuprin - an officer not by position, but in essence - could not renounce his Motherland, remain indifferent to the feat of the Russian officers, who completed their way of the cross in a foreign land.

In our opinion, the novel “Junker”, written by A.I. Kuprin in exile, became a kind of “apology” for “The Duel”. In it, the writer Kuprin, like many emigrant intellectuals who once desperately scolded the tsarist order, with pain in his soul, was nostalgic for his lost youth, for his lost homeland, for the Russia that was and which they all lost.

Analysis of the work

Compositional features of the “Duel”

Kuprin himself and his first critics often called The Duel a “novel.” Indeed, the abundance of characters, several thematic lines that, intertwined, create complete picture life of the army environment - allow us to consider this work a novel. But a single plot line, simple and laconic, as well as conciseness, limited events in time and space, a relatively small amount of text - all this is more typical of a story or short story.

Compositionally, “The Duel” was built by Kuprin according to the principles of his first story “Moloch”. The author's attention is focused primarily on the main character, his emotional experiences, the characteristics of his attitude towards people, on his assessments of the surrounding reality - exactly the same as in “Moloch”, where the engineer Bobrov stood in the center. The factory and workers were the background of "Moloch", the regiment, officers and soldiers represent the background of "Duel".

However, in “The Duel,” Kuprin has already deviated from the principle of a “total” image of the background: instead of the faceless mass of “Moloch” workers, “The Duel” contains a more detailed, more differentiated description of the mass of soldiers and a very expressive gallery of officer portraits. The regiment, officers, soldiers are written in close-up in organic interaction with the main character of the story, Romashov. The reader sees in front of him interspersed realistic paintings, creating a large canvas in which “minor” characters can be as important to the artistic whole as the main images.

Loser Hero

At the center of “The Duel,” as in the center of the story “Moloch,” is the figure of a man who has become, to use Gorky’s words, “sideways” to his social environment.

The reader is immediately struck by the “foreignness” of Romashov, his worthlessness and uselessness to the mechanism of which he is forced to consider himself a part, his incompatibility with the surrounding reality, with the realities of army garrison life. At the same time, Kuprin clearly makes it clear that Romashov is not by chance a student or high school student who ended up in the army, who was just excommunicated from his parents, torn from his family or from some other, more prosperous environment. Romashov initially had the desire to do military career: I studied at a military school, mastered special knowledge, and even dreamed of entering the academy. And suddenly, faced with what he had been trained for for so many years - namely, real army service - all the plans of the young officer turn out to be untenable. An internal protest against boredom, violence, inhumanity, etc. appears. etc. The entire action of the story, including the complete rebirth of the hero, takes only a few months (from April to June). The development of the image is unnaturally fast, even lightning fast: yesterday everything was fine, but today there is a complete collapse and awareness of one’s own tragic mistake.

The conclusion involuntarily suggests itself that such a hero, in any chosen field, could come to the same disappointment, rejection of the surrounding reality and simply die. What does the army have to do with it?

Kuprin repeatedly emphasizes the internal growth of his hero, which ultimately results in the desire to free himself from military service, as an instrument of violence against his personality. But what is the former “Fendrik” Romashov going to do? Write novels? Rock the already wretched edifice of Russian statehood? Bringing closer the “bright future” that Kuprin’s contemporaries then saw in revolution and the destruction of the old world? This hero does not have any more or less clear program of action.

Soviet critics who analyzed Kuprin’s “Duel” interpreted the image of Romashov in an extremely contradictory manner. Some saw in him a future revolutionary, a freedom fighter human personality. Thus, a critic of the magazine " New world“L. Mikhailova, in her review of the three-volume collected works of Kuprin, published by Goslitizdat in the early 1950s, wrote: “If Romashov had worn not the shoulder straps of an infantry second lieutenant, but a green student’s jacket, we most likely would have seen him at a student gathering, in circle of revolutionary youth."

Others, on the contrary, pointed out the worthlessness and uselessness of such a loser hero, who has no place in a bright tomorrow. The author of one of the dissertations dedicated to A.I. Kuprin, K. Pavlovskaya, noted in her abstract: “... the characterization of Romashov emphasizes the non-viability of such people, the failure of their struggle for personal freedom. Kuprin realized that the Romashovs were no longer needed in life.”

Most likely, Kuprin himself did not know (he could not even imagine) what would happen to his hero when he gained the much-desired freedom. Lieutenant Romashov is like a randomly grown flower in a no man's land between two warring armies. According to all laws, he should not have grown up on the scorched ground plowed up by shells, but he grew up, and the soldier running to attack crushed him with his boot. Will this flower wither or rise again to die in a crater from another explosion? Kuprin didn’t know. The image of Romashov was so out of touch with the overall picture of future socialist realism, which A.M. had already begun to preach in literature. Gorky and K, that the author decided to simply send him into oblivion.

The death of a hero on the eve of rebirth is a completely successful literary device. It occurs precisely at the moment when Romashov made an attempt to rise, breaking out of an environment alien to him, and therefore symbolizes the active hostility of this environment to anyone who in one way or another comes into conflict with it.

Character system of the story

Researchers of Kuprin’s work often denied the author a realistic portrayal of the images of many of the characters in “The Duel,” arguing that he deliberately deprived all the officers - the heroes of the story - of even glimpses of humanity, exposing each of them as a cardboard embodiment of any of the army’s vices: rudeness, cruelty, martinetry, drunkenness, money-grubbing, careerism.

P.N. Berkov in his book about Kuprin noted that “despite such big number images of officers in “The Duel”, they are all more or less similar,” there are many “officers little different from each other” in the novel.

At first glance, such a statement may seem not without foundation. In "The Duel" there is only one hero - Romashov. All other characters are built around him, creating a kind of faceless vicious circle, breaking out of which becomes the main task of the main character.

However, if we turn to Kuprin’s work itself, it becomes clear that in reality everything is far from so simple. This is the strength of Kuprin as a realist artist, that, drawing many officers of the same provincial garrison, similar, like “cogs” of a huge mechanism, he tried to depict people endowed with their own, unique, individual traits.

The author does not at all deprive his heroes of humanity. On the contrary, he finds something good in each of them: Colonel Shulgovich, having reprimanded the officer who had wasted public funds, immediately gives him his money. Vetkin - a kind person and a good friend. Bek-Agamalov is, in fact, a good comrade. Even Sliva, a stupid campaigner who beats soldiers and gets drunk alone, is impeccably honest about the soldiers’ money passing through his hands. The point, therefore, is not that only degenerates and monsters pass before us, although among characters There are such “duel”, but the fact is that even officers endowed with some positive inclinations, in the conditions of terrible arbitrariness and lawlessness that prevailed in the tsarist army, lose their human appearance. “The environment is stuck” - this is a simple and understandable explanation for all the surrounding evil. And at that moment this explanation suited the absolute majority of Russian society.

Three years before the appearance of “The Duel” A.P. Chekhov, in one of his letters to Kuprin, criticized his story “On Repose,” dedicated to depicting the joyless life in an almshouse of several elderly actors: “Five definitely depicted appearances tire attention and eventually lose their value. Shaved actors look alike, like priests, and remain alike, no matter how carefully you portray them.”

“The Duel” is evidence of how organically Kuprin accepted Chekhov’s criticism. Not five, but more than thirty representatives of the same social environment are depicted in the story, and each of them has its own character, its own special features. It is impossible to confuse the old army servant, the degraded drunkard Captain Sliva, with the dandy lieutenant Bobetinsky, who aspires to aristocracy and imitates the guards’ “golden youth”. You cannot mix up the other two officers - the good-natured, lazy Vetkin and the cruel and predatory Osadchy.

It is characteristic that at the moment of meeting the hero, the writer, as a rule, does not give a detailed description of his appearance. Kuprin’s portrait characteristics are extremely compressed and serve to reveal the main character traits of the person depicted. So, speaking about Shurochka’s husband, Lieutenant Nikolaev, Kuprin notes: “His warlike and kind face with a fluffy mustache turned red, and his large dark ox eyes flashed angrily.” This combination of kindness with belligerence, the ox-like expression of the eyes with an angry gleam, reveals the lack of a strong character, dullness and vindictiveness inherent in Nikolaev.

Some of the portraits in “The Duel” are interesting because they contain perspective further development image. Drawing the appearance of Osadchy, Kuprin notes: “Romashov always felt in his beautiful gloomy face, the strange pallor of which was even more strongly set off by his black, almost blue hair, something tense, restrained and cruel, something inherent not in a person, but in a huge, strong to the beast. Often, imperceptibly watching him from somewhere from afar, Romashov imagined what this man must be like in anger, and, thinking about this, he turned pale with horror and clenched his cold fingers.” And later, in the picnic scene, the writer shows Osadchy “in anger,” confirming and deepening the impression that this officer evoked in Romashov.

Kuprin’s portraiture is no less convincing when he portrays simple and even primitive people, clear at first glance: the sad captain Leshchenko, the widowed lieutenant Zegrzht with many children, etc.

Even the episodic characters in “The Duel” are wonderfully done. Among them, Lieutenant Mikhin deserves special mention. He, like Romashov and Nazansky, is drawn by the author with sympathy. Kuprin emphasizes and highlights “Romashov’s” features in Mikhin: ordinary appearance, shyness - and along with this, moral purity, intolerance and aversion to cynicism, as well as unexpected in this nondescript-looking young man physical strength(when he defeats the taller Olizar at a picnic).

It is significant that when Romashov, after a collision with Nikolaev, is summoned to the court of a society of officers, the only one who openly expresses his sympathy for him is Mikhin: “Only one second lieutenant Mikhin shook his hand for a long time and firmly, with wet eyes, but did not say anything, blushed, dressed hastily and awkwardly and left.”

Nazansky

Nazansky occupies a special place among the heroes of “The Duel”. This is the least vital character in the story: he does not participate in the events in any way, he cannot be called the hero of the work at all. The image of a drunken, half-crazed officer was introduced by Kuprin solely to express his cherished thoughts and views. It would seem why they cannot be put into the mouth of such wonderful person like Romashov? No! Kuprin follows the established literary tradition of realism: in Russia, either drunks, or holy fools, or “ former people" As the saying goes, “what a sober man has in his head, a drunk man has on his tongue.” It is no coincidence that in the works of the same A.M. Gorky, it is tramps, drunkards, “former people” who carry out Nietzschean sermons (for example, Satin in the play “At the Depths”). In this regard, Nazansky successfully complements the image of the sober romantic Romashov. Nazansky exists, as it were, outside of time and space, outside of any social environment that has long ago crushed him and spat him out like unnecessary trash.

It was into the mouth of such a person that Kuprin put his merciless criticism of the army and officers. “No, think about us, the unfortunate Armeuts, about the army infantry, about this main core of the glorious and brave Russian army. After all, it’s all rubbish, rubbish, garbage,” says Nazansky.

Meanwhile, Nazansky’s views are complex and contradictory, just as Kuprin’s own position was contradictory. The pathos of Nazansky's monologues is, first of all, the glorification of a personality free from shackles, the ability to distinguish true life values. But there is something else in his words. According to Nazansky, the possession of high human qualities is “the lot of the chosen ones,” and this part of the hero’s philosophy is close to Nietzscheanism, which Gorky had not yet suffered from at that time: “... who is dearer and closer to you? Nobody. You are the king of the world, its pride and adornment. You are the god of all living things. Everything you see, hear, feel belongs only to you. Do what you want. Take whatever you like. Do not be afraid of anyone in the entire universe, because there is no one above you and no one is equal to you.”

Today, all the protracted philosophical monologues of this character look rather like a parody, an artificial author’s insertion-remark into the body of a living work. But at that moment, Kuprin himself was fascinated by Nietzscheanism, was influenced by Gorky and believed that they were absolutely necessary in the story.

Society persistently demanded change. Nazansky’s acutely topical monologues were enthusiastically perceived by opposition-minded youth. For example, in the words of Nazansky about the “cheerful two-headed monster” who stands on the street: “Whoever passes by him, it will now hit him in the face, now in the face,” - the most radically minded readers saw a direct call to fight this monster, under which, naturally, meant autocracy.

In the revolutionary days of 1905, Kuprin successfully performed reading excerpts from “The Duel” in a variety of audiences. It is known, for example, that when on October 14, 1905, the writer read Nazansky’s monologue at a student evening in Sevastopol, Lieutenant Schmidt approached him and expressed his admiration. Soon after this, the delighted lieutenant went to Ochakov, where he killed hundreds of people with his adventurous actions.

Defending the right to freedom of an individual person worthy of it, Nazansky speaks with complete disdain about other people: “Who can prove to me with clear conviction how I am connected with this - damn him! - my neighbor, with a vile slave, with an infected person, with an idiot?.. And then, what interest will make me break my head for the happiness of the people of the thirty-second century?

Schmidt and similar “figures” thought exactly the same. As you know, the rebellious lieutenant was not going to die heroically for the happiness of the “vile slaves”: he successfully escaped from the burning cruiser, and was caught only by pure chance. For a long time, this was perceived by society as a high moral feat. An excellent illustration for the sermon of the most “advanced” character in “The Duel”!

However, it cannot be said that Nazansky, this hero-reasoner, hero-mouthpiece, designed to convey a certain idea to the reader, fully expresses the opinion of the author of the story on all the topical issues he raised.

It is especially significant that Romashov, who listens attentively to Nazansky, seems to find in his words answers to important questions for himself, agrees with him, but in fact does not at all follow the advice of his half-crazed friend. And Romashov’s attitude towards the unfortunate, downtrodden soldier Khlebnikov, and even more so his refusal of his own interests in the name of the happiness of his beloved woman, Shurochka Nikolaeva, indicate that the preaching of militant individualism, developed by Nazansky, only excites the consciousness of the hero of the story, without affecting his heart. It is in this, in our opinion, that the contradictions that tormented the author of “The Duel” between the ideas declared by reason and those qualities that were originally inherent in every person by nature were revealed. This is the main merit of Kuprin as a humanist writer: only a man who called upon all his best to help human qualities, having abandoned selfish egoism and self-deception, is able to change something, make this world a better place and love it. There is no other way.

Shurochka

The principles preached by Nazansky are fully implemented in the story by Shurochka Nikolaeva, who condemns Romashov, who is in love with her, to certain death in the name of her selfish, selfish goals.

All critics unanimously recognized Shurochka’s image as one of the most successful in “The Duel.” Kuprin, perhaps for the first time in Russian literature, managed to create a generally negative female image, without showing either the author’s condemnation or pitiful condescension towards his heroine. Unlike many of his predecessors (L.N. Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Chekhov), Kuprin does not “explain” anything about this character; he perceives Shurochka as she is, and at the same time endows her with a number of attractive traits. Shurochka is beautiful, smart, charming, in all respects she stands head and shoulders above the other officer ladies of the regiment, but she is calculating, selfish and, unlike Romashov, has a clear, definite goal. True, in his ideas about better life the young woman has not yet gone beyond the dream of the capital, of success in high society etc. But a person who is able to have a dream and act with the most radical methods in the name of its implementation, as a rule, achieves a lot in life.

The portrait of Shurochka is also given in a unique way. Kuprin deliberately evades the author's description of her appearance, leaving it to Romashov himself to draw her as he sees her. From his internal monologue we see not just a detailed portrait, but also the hero’s expressed attitude towards his beloved:

“How boldly she asked: am I good? ABOUT! You are beautiful! Darling! Here I sit and look at you - what happiness! Listen: I will tell you how beautiful you are. Listen. Your face is pale and dark. Passionate face. And there are red burning lips on it - how they should kiss! - and eyes surrounded by a yellowish shadow... When you look straight, the whites of your eyes are slightly blue, and in the large pupils there is a dull, deep blue. You're not a brunette, but there's something gypsy about you. But your hair is so clean and thin and comes together in a knot at the back with such a neat, naive and businesslike expression that you want to quietly touch it with your fingers. You are small, you are light, I would pick you up in my arms like a child. But you are flexible and strong, you have breasts like a girl’s, you are all impetuous and mobile. On your left ear, below, you have a small mole, like a mark from an earring - it’s lovely...”

At first, as if with random touches, and then more and more clearly, Kuprin highlights in the character of this woman such traits as spiritual coldness, callousness, and pragmatism that were initially completely unnoticed by Romashov. For the first time, he catches something alien and hostile to himself in Shurochka’s laughter at the picnic: “There was something instinctively unpleasant in this laughter, which sent a chill into Romashov’s soul.” At the end of the story, in the scene of the last date, the hero experiences a similar, but significantly intensified sensation when Shurochka dictates her terms of the duel: “Romashov felt something secret, smooth, slimy crawling invisibly between them, which sent a cold smell to his soul " This scene is complemented by the description of Shurochka’s last kiss: “her lips were cold and motionless.”

For Shurochka, Romashov’s love is just an annoying misunderstanding. As a means to achieving her cherished goal, this person is completely unpromising. Of course, for the sake of his love, Romashov could pass the exams to the academy, but this would only be a meaningless sacrifice. He would never have fit into the life that so attracted his chosen one, he would never have achieved what was so necessary for her. Nikolaev, on the contrary, from Kuprin’s point of view, had all the qualities necessary for this. He is flexible, diligent, hardworking, and natural stupidity has never stopped anyone from achieving high ranks and gain a position in society. The reader does not even have any doubt that with a woman like Shurochka, the bumpkin Nikolaev will definitely become a general in twenty years. Only he won’t have to count on a general’s pension after October 1917...

Images of soldiers

The images of soldiers do not occupy such a significant place in the story as the images of officers. They were introduced by Kuprin solely for the purpose of clearly demonstrating social inequality and class prejudices that reigned in the army.

In the story, only the private of the platoon commanded by Romashov, the sick, downtrodden soldier Khlebnikov, is highlighted in close-up. He appears directly before the reader only in the middle of the story, but already on the first page of “The Duel” Khlebnikov’s surname, accompanied by swear words, is pronounced by his closest superior, Corporal Shapovalenko. This is how the reader’s first, still absentee, acquaintance with the unfortunate soldier takes place.

One of the most exciting scenes of the story is the night meeting at the canvas railway two losers, potential suicides - Romashov and Khlebnikov. Here, both the plight of the unfortunate, driven and downtrodden Khlebnikov, and the humanism of Romashov, who sees in the soldier, first of all, a suffering person, just like himself, are revealed with utmost completeness. Romashov, in a fit of philanthropy, calls Khlebnikov “my brother!”, but for Khlebnikov, the officer who condescended to him is a stranger, a master (“I can’t do it anymore, master”). And the humanism of this master, as Kuprin sharply emphasizes, is extremely limited. Romashov’s advice – “you have to endure” – was given by him, rather, to himself than to this desperate man. The author clearly proves that Romashov is unable to change anything in Khlebnikov’s fate, because between him, even the most worthless and low-paid infantry officer and a simple soldier, there is a bottomless abyss. It is absolutely impossible to overcome this gap under these conditions, and at the end of the story Khlebnikov still commits suicide. Romashov does not know what needs to be done so that hundreds of “these gray Khlebnikovs, each of whom is sick with their own grief,” really feel free and breathe a sigh of relief. Nazansky doesn’t know and doesn’t want to know this either. And those who believed that they knew what needed to be done began by killing the gentlemen officers themselves with the hands of these same Khlebnikovs. But did this make the Khlebnikovs happy and free? Unfortunately no.

Heroes and prototypes

Readers of “The Duel” often ask the question: did the heroes of the famous story have real prototypes among the officers of the regiment in which Kuprin served in the first half of the 90s? Based on the data at their disposal, researchers answer this question in the affirmative.

The next year after the writer left the army in Kamenets-Podolsk, the “Address-calendar of the Podolsk province” was published, which contains full list officers of the 46th Dnieper Infantry Regiment. In the year that had passed since Kuprin left the army, the officer corps of the regiment, which was very stable in those years, could change only slightly.

Kuprin's fidelity to the facts of the biography of individual officers of the Dnieper Regiment, who served as his prototypes, in some cases is simply amazing. For example, here is what is said in the story about the regimental treasurer Doroshenko:

“The treasurer was Staff Captain Doroshenko - a gloomy and stern man, especially towards the Fendriks. IN Turkish war he was wounded, but in the most inconvenient and dishonorable place - in the heel. Eternal teasing and witticisms about his wound (which, however, he received not in flight, but at the time when, turning to his platoon, he commanded the attack) made it so that, having gone to war as a cheerful ensign, he returned from it bilious and an irritable hypochondriac."

From the service record of Staff Captain Doroshevich, stored in the Russian State Military Historical Archive (RGVIA), it follows that in his youth he participated in the Russian-Turkish War and was wounded during the battle near the village of Mechke in the right leg by two rifle bullets. Having served for many years in the Dnieper Regiment, Doroshevich was the regimental treasurer from 1888 to 1893, and from March 1894, a member of the regimental court. Doroshevich served in the Dnieper Regiment until 1906 and retired as a colonel.

The prototype for the image of the battalion adjutant Olizar was another colleague of Kuprin, adjutant Olifer.

Olizar, along with Archakovsky, Dietz, Osadchiy and Peterson, belongs to the most negative characters in “The Duel.” And his appearance - “long, thin, sleek, pomaded - a young old man, with a naked but wrinkled, whippy face,” and his whole behavior speaks of Kuprin’s sharply hostile attitude towards him. Particularly indicative are the pages of “The Duel,” which depict the adventures of officers in a brothel. Olizar’s actions here are distinguished by extremely frank cynicism. It is characteristic that, describing the return of the officers from the brothel and pointing out that they “acted a lot of outrages,” Kuprin in the first printed edition attributed the most outrageous act to Olizar. Subsequently, while editing the story, the writer removed this episode, obviously afraid of shocking the reader, but the general negative assessment of it remained. That is why, in the picnic scene, Kuprin takes special pleasure in showing how “small, awkward,” but deeply sympathetic to the reader, Mikhin wins a victory over Olizar in a fight.

According to the service record, Olizar’s prototype Nikolai Konstantinovich Olifer, “from the hereditary nobles of the Voronezh province,” served in the Dnieper Regiment from 1889 to 1897, and from the beginning of his service until 1894 he was a battalion adjutant. After the Dnieper Regiment, he served in the border guard and was dismissed in 1901 due to “illness.” From the medical examination report kept in Olifer’s personal file, it is clear that he was sick with syphilis. The illness led him to mental illness in the form of paralytic dementia.

In all likelihood, Kuprin did not know this gloomy end. But even if he did find out, he would hardly be very surprised. “Seventy-five percent of our officer corps are sick with syphilis,” Kuprin reports through the mouth of Nazansky. It is unlikely that venereologists would share such statistics with the writer, but Olifer’s story indirectly illustrates these words.

Kuprin's autobiography, dating back to 1913, tells of his clash with the regiment commander, Alexander Prokofievich Baikovsky. The old colonel is characterized in such a way that one involuntarily recalls Shulgovich, the commander of the regiment in which Romashov serves: .

In the seventh chapter of “The Duel”, after the dressing down caused by Shulgovich, Romashov, like Kuprin, dines with his regimental commander, and he establishes that they are fellow countrymen.

Interesting information about Baikovsky was reported by T. Goigova, the daughter of Kuprin’s colleague S. Bek-Buzarov, some of whose features Kuprin used when creating the image of Bek-Agamalov:

“As far as I remember, there was no longer Kuprin, nor Baikovsky in the regiment (I saw him at our house later, when he came, being retired, to Proskurov from Kyiv, where he lived at that time), nor the Volzhinskys. But I have a vivid idea of ​​each of them, formed from the stories of my parents. Baikovsky seems to me more like an out-and-out tyrant than a beast. They told how he threw two officers in patent leather boots, who he had just invited into his crew, into a deep puddle filled with liquid mud, only because the officers recklessly said “Merci” and Baikovsky could not stand anything foreign. He had many similar examples of tyranny. At the same time... outside of duty, he showed attention to the officers. I know of a case when he called an officer to his home who had lost at cards and, after scolding him, forced him to take money to pay off his gambling debt.”

The boss and fellow countryman of Second Lieutenant Kuprin, Baikovsky, also turned under the pen of the writer Kuprin into one of the most striking figures in his work.

Despite the fact that the story “The Duel” is entirely a product of its own era, already quite far removed from us, it has not lost its relevance today. With this book, Kuprin, wittingly or unwittingly, predetermined the nature of the depiction of the tsarist army in all subsequent Russian-language literature. Such significant works of the 1900s dedicated to the army as “Retreat” by G. Erastov, “Babaev” by S. Sergeev-Tsensky and a number of others arose under the direct influence of “The Duel.”

In the wake of general social upheavals at the end of the 20th century - beginning of the XXI century, it has again become fashionable to expose the vices of the Russian state system to the public, and at the same time to criticize Russian army. It was then that it became clear that it was possible to write honestly about everyday life in the army only in the spirit of “The Duel.” The authors of military themes are Y. Polyakov (“One Hundred Days Before the Order”), V. Chekunov (“Kirza”), V. Primost (“730 Days in Boots”), screenwriter and director of the film “Anchor, more anchor!” P. Todorovsky and many others today raise the same “eternal” problems that were first voiced in the once sensational story by A.I. Kuprin. And again, some critics and readers enthusiastically applaud the bold, accurate characterizations, sharing the kind and not-so-kind humor of the creators of these works; others reproach the authors for being excessively “dirty,” slanderous, and unpatriotic.

However, the majority of today's youth, who can only read the label on a bag of chips, learn about the problems of the modern army not so much from fiction, but from their own bitter experience. What to do about it, and who is to blame - these are eternal Russian questions, the solution of which depends on ourselves.

Elena Shirokova

Materials used:

Afanasyev V.N.. A.I. Kuprin. Critical-biographical essay.- M.: Fiction, 1960.

Berkov P.N. Alexander Ivanovich Kuprin. – Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, M-L., 1956

Druzhnikov Yu. Kuprin in tar and molasses // New Russian word. – New York, 1989. – February 24.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The main characters of the story

Yuri Romashov

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

Alexandra Nikolaeva (Shurochka)

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

Vladimir Nikolaev

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

Shulgovich

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

Nazansky

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

Raisa Peterson

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The main idea of ​​the story

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

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

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

However, “The Duel” received not only positive reviews. Lieutenant General P. Geisman accused the writer of slander and attempted undermining political system.

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

The story “The Duel” by A. Kuprin is considered his best work, since it touches on the important problem of the army’s troubles. The author himself was once a cadet, he was initially inspired by this idea - to join the army, but in the future he will remember these years with horror. Therefore, the theme of the army, its ugliness, is very well depicted by him in such works as “At the Turning Point” and “The Duel.”

The heroes are army officers, here the author did not skimp and created several portraits: Colonel Shulgovich, Captain Osadchiy, Officer Nazansky and others. All these characters are not shown in the best light: the army turned them into monsters who recognize only inhumanity and education with sticks.

The main character is Yuri Romashkov, a second lieutenant, whom the author himself literally called his double. In him we see completely different traits that distinguish him from the above-mentioned persons: sincerity, decency, the desire to make this world better than it is. Also, the hero is sometimes dreamy and very intelligent.

Every day Romashkov became convinced that the soldiers had no rights; he saw cruel treatment and indifference on the part of the officers. He tried to protest, but the gesture was sometimes difficult to notice. He had many plans in his head that he dreamed of implementing for the sake of justice. But the further he goes, the more his eyes begin to open. Thus, Khlebnikov’s suffering and his impulse to end his own life amaze the hero so much that he finally understands that his fantasies and plans for justice are too stupid and naive.

Romashkov is a person with a bright soul, with a desire to help others. However, love destroyed the hero: he believed the married Shurochka, for whose sake he went to the duel. Romashkov's quarrel with her husband led to a duel, which ended sadly. It was a betrayal - the girl knew that this was how the duel would end, but she tricked the hero, who was in love with herself, into believing that it would be a draw. Moreover, she deliberately used his feelings for her just to help her husband.

Romashkov, who was looking for justice all this time, ultimately was unable to fight the merciless reality; he lost to it. But the author saw no other way out other than the death of the hero - otherwise another death, a moral one, would have awaited him.

Analysis of Kuprin's story The Duel

The fight is perhaps one of the most famous works Alexander Ivanovich Kuprin.

IN this work found reflections of the author's thoughts. He describes the Russian army of the early 20th century, how its life is structured, and how it actually lives. Using the example of the army, Kuprin shows the social disadvantage in which it finds itself. He not only describes and reflects, but also looks for possible solutions to the situation.

The appearance of the army is diverse: it consists of different people, differing from each other in certain character traits, appearance, and attitude to life. In the described garrison everything is the same as everywhere else: constant drills in the morning, rioting and drinking in the evenings - and so on day after day.

The main character, Second Lieutenant Yuri Alekseevich Romashov, is generally believed to be based on the author himself, Alexander Ivanovich. Romashov has a dreamy personality, somewhat naive, but honest. He sincerely believes that the world can be changed. As a young man, he is prone to romanticism, he wants to achieve feats and show himself. But over time, he realizes that it is all empty. He fails to find like-minded people or interlocutors among other officers. The only one he can find mutual language, this is Nazansky. Perhaps it was the absence of a person with whom he could speak as himself that ultimately led to the tragic outcome.

Fate brings Romashov together with the officer’s wife, Alexandra Petrovna Nikolaeva, or otherwise Shurochka. This woman is beautiful, smart, incredibly pretty, but at the same time she is pragmatic and calculating. She is both beautiful and cunning. She is driven by one desire: to leave this city, get to the capital, live a “real” life, and she is ready to do a lot for this. At one time, she was in love with someone else, but he was not suitable for the role of someone who could fulfill her ambitious plans. And she chose marriage with someone who could help her dreams come true. But the years go by, and the husband still fails to get a promotion with a transfer to the capital. He had already had two chances, and the third was the last one. Shurochka is languishing in her soul and it is not surprising that she gets along with Romashov. They understand each other like no one else. But unfortunately, Romashov cannot help Shurochka get out of this outback.

Everything becomes clear over time, and Alexandra Petrovna’s husband finds out about the affair. Officers of that time were allowed duels as the only way to protect their dignity.

This is the first and last duel in Romashov’s life. He will trust Shurochka’s words that her husband will shoot past, and let him shoot past: his honor is preserved and so is his life. As an honest person, it doesn’t even occur to Romashov that he could be deceived. So Romashov was killed as a result of the betrayal of the one he loved.

Using the example of Romashov, we can see how the romantic world collapses when it collides with reality. So Romashov, when he entered the duel, lost to harsh reality.

Story for 11th grade

  • Essay based on the painting by Reshetnikov Arrived on vacation (description)

    Fyodor Pavlovich Reshetnikov wrote the work “Arrived on Vacation” in 1948. Almost immediately this painting gained popularity among Soviet viewers.