The reasons for the quarrel between Dubrovsky and Troekurov. A.S. Pushkin "Dubrovsky"
"The Young Lady-Peasant" is a story from the cycle "The Stories of IP Belkin". in it, the author was able to express his dream of high morality, of love that does not know social barriers.
Let's try to analyze the story by answering a number of questions:
1. When and where was the story "The Young Lady-Peasant" written?
"The Young Lady-Peasant" was written in the fall of 1830 in Boldino. More precisely, September 20, 1830. It was this date that Pushkin put at the end of the work.
2. Explain the title of the story.
Liza was a young lady, the daughter of a landowner, and disguised herself as a peasant.
3. Why did Lisa do this?
She wanted to meet Alexei Berestov: their fathers were at odds.
4. What caused the quarrel of the landowners?
The reason for the quarrel between the fathers is not very clear to the children. They say that Berestov was thrifty and Muromtsev was wasteful. One tripled his income, and Muromtsev went into debt. Students should feel Pushkin's irony in the portrayal of both landlords. The teacher explains it. Berestov's self-conceit was expressed in the fact that he himself “considered himself the smartest person in the whole neighborhood, which is in no way a sign of a real smart person". The neighbors just “did not contradict him in this. His cultural interests were rather narrow: he did not read anything except "Senatskiye vedomosti". Along the way, we draw attention to the features of the old noble life, familiar to them from "Dubrovsky". As well as to Troekurov in Pokrovskoe, Berestov's neighbors "... came to visit him with their families and dogs." It is possible to dwell on Muromsky's Anglomania, which speaks of the admiration of Russian landowners before foreigners, already familiar to students from Dubrovsky.
5. What did Miss Jackson do in her host country?
She did almost nothing. I reread it twice a year english novel, she received two thousand rubles for this, a lot of money for that time, and “died” of boredom in this “barbaric Russia”.
6. How does Pushkin portray Alexei Berestov? The author speaks about him with sympathy, but at the same time with derision. Alexei "was great," he rode a horse well, he wanted to military service... He was a young and cheerful man, but he spoke of "lost joys and faded youth" and wore a black ring with depicting the dead heads.
7. How does Alexei feel about Akulina?
Alexey sincerely fell in love with Akulina, teaches her to read and write. Against the wishes of his father, who threatened to deprive him of his inheritance, he decided to marry Akulin and live by his own labor.
8. Remember how the quarrel between the two landowners ended and what general plans
made them friends. We remember how the landowners made up and how they decided to marry their children. And it was this common undertaking that made them friends.
9. What attracts us to Lisa?
Liza is "bold", "easy to handle with Nastya", "naughty". She is resourceful: she figured out what to do when Alexei was supposed to come to them.
10. What is the originality of the composition of the story "Young Lady - Peasant Woman"? After Lisa, in the guise of Akulina, meets with Alexei, we constantly monitor Alexei's behavior. We know who Lisa is, but he doesn't. When the fathers reconciled, Lisa finds herself in a difficult situation. We do not know how she will come out of it, and we look forward to her appearance among the guests with interest. In the last scene, Alexei learned what the reader had known for a long time: Akulina is Liza. On this stage, you can show children the “indirect
inner speech ". The author speaks about the joy of Alexei, who recognized Akulina in Liza, but says
as Alexei would say about it.
There are no traces of romantic poetics in The Young Lady-Peasant, there is nothing mysterious, unexpected in it, everything is simple in it: love, heroes, and atmosphere village life... There is a joke, mischief, slyness here. Pushkin jokes directly, jokes without looking back. "The young lady-peasant" is easy story, built on a real-everyday basis with an uncomplicated plot and with happy ending... Some critics, Pushkin's contemporaries, considered the story unworthy of Pushkin's talent, condemned it as being unserious. " "But they did not notice in the ironic pathos of the story a positive, artistic and creative beginning."
Lesson topic: A.S. Pushkin "Dubrovsky". The quarrel of the landowners.
The purpose of the lesson: the formation of the skill of textual and comparative analysis images of heroes, the development of the ability to reason, defending their own opinions
Lesson objectives (for the teacher): 1) identify students' impressions of what they read; 2)to clarify the motivation for the actions of the heroes; 3) form the skill of expressive reading;4) activate cognitive activity, stimulate mental activity; 5)foster a culture of coherent speech,tolerance, ability to communicate.
Lesson objectives (for the student):
1) give comparative characteristics central characters,
2) determine the reasons squabbles of landlords,
3) determine the motives of their behavior.
During the classes.
Organizational moment. Greetings. Motivation.
Guys, after completing a literary warm-up, you will find out what our lesson topic, tasks is.
Exercise "The third extra" (see Slide).
What is a novel? We will find the answer to this question on page 137 of the electronic textbook.(Novel (French) - a genre of narrative literature that reveals the history of several, sometimes many human destinies for a long time, sometimes for whole generations in connection with the fate of society and the historical situation. This determines the significance of the volume of the novel. Its peculiarity is the branching of the plot, reflecting the complexity of the relations of the heroes.)
So, let's write down the topic of the lesson in a notebook. What questions are we going to answer during the lesson?
introduction teachers (page 142 EU - portrait of the poet )
Pushkin is the sun of Russian culture. This idea is by no means new. There is no genre in domestic literature where Pushkin would not have left his mark. Years and centuries pass, and Russian culture continues to develop ideas, images, themes that it once touched upon. Pushkin's heroes, and with them the writer himself, conduct their continuous dialogue with the reader, reflecting on good and evil, honor and dishonor, mercy and cruelty.
After "Belkin's Tales", in October 1832, A. Pushkin set to work on the novel in three parts, which remained unfinished and was published only after his death. It was Dubrovsky, named after the main character. There is no title in the manuscript; the first page simply says: “Volume one. Chapter first". Pushkin wrote only two volumes. As the markings in the manuscript show, the second volume was completed in February 1833. Pushkin based the novel on a case that was quite typical for relations between landowners and for judicial arbitrariness that existed at that time. Using his influence, a strong and wealthy landowner could always oppress his poor neighbor and even take away his property legally belonging to him.
- Let us recall the history of writing a novel, referring to electronic textbook- p. 137. Who can add facts about the history of the novel? (Students' answer).Pushkin knew the court case of the Nizhny Novgorod landowner Dubrovsky, who in 1802 was illegally deprived of his relative's estate. The county court left the estate to the wife of the provincial prosecutor. The peasants of Dubrovsky were ready to deal with the sergeant and the soldiers who forbade the removal of timber from the estate.
Guys, in the novel, the estate, just like the heroes, has prototypes. Let's remember this (individual message about Petrovsky and Boldino (Kistenyov). Page 136 E.U (image of the estate)
- N. G Chernyshevsky wrote about this novel: “It is difficult to find in Russian literature a more accurate and vivid picture, like a description of the life and habits of a great master of old times at the beginning of the novel“ Dubrovsky ”.
- Turn to the textbook page 136. Read the critical comments about the novel. How do they rate the novel? Let's follow the link and find out who the words belong to (V.G. Belinsky, Annenkov).
Pushkin's novel shows the life of serf landlords.Page 138 EH - reproduction. From what work, studied last year, did we learn how the landowner treated her serfs? (From the story of IS Turgenev "Mumu", to Kapiton, Tatiana, Gerasim).And with the theme of which poem by Pushkin does the novel "Dubrovsky" echo?(In his poem “Village" Pushkin spoke this way about serf life:
Here the lordship is wild, without feeling, without law
Appropriated itself with a violent vine
And labor, and property, and the time of the farmer ...
Here, a painful rampage to the grave, everyone attracts.
This is a merciless condemnation of the "wild" lordship, protection human honor and dignity, deep love Pushkin to his native people and sympathy for their suffering.)
We will try to carefully read the novel and see that it is not only about the events of almost two hundred years ago, but also about our time.
3.Working with text (conversation, selective reading, matching)
In today's lesson, we will get acquainted withexposure of this novel, we find out what happened to the characters before the development of the main events, how the author reveals their characters.
Let's read the first 2 paragraphs expressively - the EI application. Listening to an audio fragment. ()
What landowners quarreled with?
Who is Troekurov? (Kirila Petrovich Troekurov is an old Russian gentleman).Page 143 EI - interactive task (pencil # 2)
Who is Andrey Gavrilovich Dubrovsky?
One of the types homework you had a comparative table for the images of Troekurov and Dubrovsky, so when characterizing the characters, you can refer to it.
Troekurov
Dubrovsky
Retired general-in-chief, rich, comes from a noble family and has connections, a lot of weight in the provinces
Retired lieutenant of the guard, owned by seventy souls, poor and independent
Character traits
Uneducated, ardent disposition, limited mind, arrogant in relations with people of lower rank, who from birth did not honor anyone with his attention
Impatient and determined. Expresses his or her opinion directly, not caring if it contradicts the opinion of the owner of the house
Classes
Idleness, the house is full of guests, exuberant amusements, suffered from gluttony and was drunk every evening, spent time traveling around his extensive estates, in long feasts and in pranks
Hot hunter
The attitude of neighbors
Were glad to please, trembled at his name
Everyone envied the agreement with Troekurov, marveled at the courage, tried to imitate
Attitude towards peasants
Was strict and capricious
Kind
Common in the fate of heroes
They married for love, soon became a widow, both had a child, were friends
Talking about Troekurov and Dubrovsky, Pushkin uses words that may not be familiar to everyone.
Lexical work (pre-trained student)
(Subservience - flattering, obsequiousness; conceited - boasted, boasted; arrogant - arrogant, emphasizing his superiority over others; heavy weight (portable) - great influence; wayward - capricious, extravagant; go to Troekurov - quarrel with Troekurov; ink tribe - officials ; contrary to expectation (outdated) - versus expectation; appeal - complaint).
Kirila Petrovich Troekurov. Cyril (in Pushkin - one letter "l") from Persian - the sun, from Greek - a little master. Troekurov is as powerful as the sun: "His wealth, noble family and connections gave him great weight in the province." At the same time, he is a master: “The neighbors were happy to please his slightest whims; provincial officials trembled at his name. " Yes, and his surname says: three times vicious. He "suffered from gluttony twice a week and was tipsy every night." But his worst vice soullessness (therefore, his patronymic is Petrovich, Peter - from ancient Greek - rock, stone)
The names of other heroes are also speaking. An individual task was prepared by ...:
Cyril (Greek) - lord, lord, sovereign
Peter - rock, cliff, stone.
Andrey is brave, brave
Gabriel (Hebrew) - strong husband, fortress.
What do the names of the heroes say?
- What brought the two landowners closer and what separated them?
(The fates of both are similar: peers, of the same class, the same upbringing, neighbors on the estate, served together, married for love, early widowed, one brings up a son, the other a daughter, partly converged both in characters and inclinations. Both were proud and independent They were distinguished by their condition - one poor, the other rich).
4. Reading the episode. Will read the 3rd paragraph ... (up to the words "Accidental Accident")
- "Left outside the general law." And what was general law? (Everyone had to please the slightest whims of Troyekurov, no one dared to express their opinion, contrary to the opinion of the landowner.Dubrovsky does not seek benefits from friendship with Troekurov, does not hypocrite. He refuses the patronage of Troekurov).
Do you think this exception to the rule could persist for a long time or conflict is inevitable? Why? (The combination of a proud character and a "humble state" puts Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky in a special position. You cannot stay in this position for a long time. "An accident at the kennel" is a manifestation of a social pattern.)
Indeed, "an accident upset and changed everything."
5. Viewing the episode "At the kennel" from the movie "Dubrovsky", retelling the episode and its discussion - page 140 EH.
Who is to blame for the quarrel between two friends? Find quotes in the text proving the guilt of Dubrovsky, Troekurov, Paramoshka.
Troekurov:"Kirila Petrovich laughed loudly at the insolent remark of his slave, and the guests followed him laughing, although they felt that the huntsman's joke could apply to them as well."
"I got angry and sent the same servant a second time to tell Andrei Gavrilovich, [if he doesn't immediately come to spend the night at Pokrovskoe, then he, Troekurov, will quarrel with him forever."
"But does he know with whom (he is getting in touch? Here I am him ... He will cry with me, he will find out what it is like to go to Troekurov!"
"On the way back, with all my desire, I deliberately drove through the fields of Dubrovsky."
Dubrovsky: “His condition allowed him to keep only two hounds and one pack of greyhounds; he could not refrain from some envy at the sight of this magnificent institution. "
"The kennel is wonderful - it is unlikely that your people live as well as your dogs."
“Meanwhile, Andrei Gavrilovich disappeared, and no one noticed. Andrei Gavrilovich did not obey and did not want to return. "
"... But I do not intend to tolerate jokes from your lackeys, and I will not tolerate them from you either, because I am not a jester, but an old nobleman."
Paramoshka: "Onefromthe hounds were offended. "We are on our own," saidhe, - Thanks to God and the master, we do not complain, but what is true is true, it would not be bad for another and a nobleman to exchange the estate for any local kennel. He would have been better fed and warmer. "
We draw conclusions:
a) Troyekurov is to blame - he began to laugh at the cheeky joke of the huntsman.
b) A hound who joked offensively.
C) Dubrovsky, because he envied and flared up.
According to one literary critic, Troekurov is the personification of all vices: gluttony, idleness, anger, pride. There is a lot of evil in him, but this time it was not he who struck the match. In fact, Dubrovsky was in many ways the same as him. Do you agree?
Why was Troekurov glad of the "impudent remark" of the huntsman?
(The loyal servant's remark flattered his pride.)
Did Troekurov immediately understand that he had offended an old friend?
(Kirila Petrovich does not understand that he offended Dubrovsky. Troyekurov treated him as he usually treated everyone.)
Does he regret what happened?
(Kirila Petrovich is surprised and saddened by Dubrovsky's absence at dinner (he sends him twice, upset so much that he “dismissed the guests and went to bed,” “the next day his first question was" about Dubrovsky).
Why did Dubrovsky's letter offend Troekurov?
(In his letter, Dubrovsky demands the impossible - equality with Troyekurov himself. Kirila Petrovich cannot forgive this!)
Why did Troekurov refrain from intending to destroy Dubrovsky's estate?
(Troekurov, hurt by the defiant behavior of his former friend, decides not just to take revenge ex-friend, but destroy it.)
Why is Troekurov sure that his plans will come true?
How the actors conveyed state of mind your heroes?(At the sight of Troyekurov's kennel, nodules on Dubrovsky's face play with envy. Dubrovsky breaks the cane out of unheard-of impudence of the kennel.
Does your idea of the heroes of the novel coincide after watching the film?
The situation at the kennel became the match that sparked a fire of mutual enmity. Trace step by step how they behaved in anger.
(Upon learning of Dubrovsky's departure, Troyekurov did not ask, but “ordered to catch up with him immediately and turn him back without fail.” The offended Dubrovsky asks to send Troyekurov’s people to confess, and he will “be free to pardon them, punish them.” While on a hunt, Troekurov deliberately drove across the fields Dubrovsky punished Troyekurov's peasants who stole the forest from him - “famous robbers.” Troyekurov “lost his temper,” “he wanted to ruin Kistenevka to the ground and lay siege to the landowner himself in his estate. Such feats were not unusual for him." ).
What ultimately chooses the way of revenge of the Troekurs? (Troekurov chose the most vile method of revenge - he decided to illegally take away the estate from his former friend, using the services of assessor Shabashkin).
Is the speaking surname Shabashkin?
Viewing an episode of a movie.
What did the squabble of the landowners lead to?
6. Generalization of what was learned in the lesson ( apolitical conversation).
So who is to blame for the quarrel?
Who won the quarrel: Dubrovsky or Troekurov?
(Troyekurov won. He took the estate from Dubrovsky. After a quarrel with Troyekurov, Dubrovsky fell seriously ill and died, and Troyekurov preserved his estate, health, and life)
What feelings does a person experience from victory? (share their experience)
Did Troekurov feel joy from this victory? Why?
(No. Troekurov acquired the Kistenyovka estate.
But Troekurov did not need the Dubrovsky estate. Firstly, he was rich enough, and secondly, "... by nature he was not selfish").
What torments Troekurov? What is his state of mind?
(Troekurov has lost a friend. His conscience torments him, he has lost peace of mind. For him, the main thing was the desire to break the pride and independence of A. G. Dubrovsky.)
The answer to the question: "Who won the quarrel: Dubrovsky or Troyekurov?" at first glance it seems simple. After all, Troekurov achieved his goal. But he himself did not feel the joy of this victory.
What then is Troekurov's victory if he lost more than he gained?(When friends, close people quarrel, how can there be a winner. Someone loses more, like Dubrovsky, someone less, like Troekurov, but all the participants in the conflict suffer. Troekurov realized this too late).
7. Compilation of syncwines "Troyekurov", "Dubrovsky".
8. Summing up. Grading.
So, in today's lesson we got acquainted with the exposition of the novel "Dubrovsky", with its characters, their relationships. But, as I said at the beginning of the lesson, this work is not only about the events of two hundred years ago, but also about our time. Reading it, you can learn a lot for yourself. moral lessons... The first of them: "Make peace with your opponent sooner, while you are still on the way with him." These words belong to the biblical character Matthew. Remember what long-term fights can lead to. I wish you never to allow this to happen in relationships with family and friends.
9. Reflection.
Continue the phraseThis lesson helped me understand …
– What questions remain regarding the text?
– Whose role would you play in the play? In film?
9. Homework.
- Prepare a message "Dubrovsky in court", "Troekurov in court".
From the section "Minutes of Creativity" (Draw the coat of arms of the Troekurovs and Dubrovskys).
In his novel "Dubrovsky9 A.S. Pushkin described the life of serfs, tyranny of landowners. He tells about a quarrel between two neighbors, landowners Troyekurov and Dubrovsky. Dubrovsky - educated, intelligent person, who first of all respects a person, and not his titles and wealth, for him serfs are not slaves, not animals, but individuals. For Troekurov, serfs are of no value, he is rude to them, wayward, at times cruel.
When the district court ruled on the transfer of Dubrovsky's peasants into the ownership of Troekurov, it is natural that all Dubrovsky's servants were indignant. People knew about Troyekurov's arbitrariness and did not want to leave the previous owner. Dubrovsky stopped his people when they wanted to deal with the clerks who brought the decision from the district court. The peasants obeyed the owner, but some of them did not accept, they understood that the decision would be carried out and it was in their power to change their fate.
At night, the young master Vladimir Dubrovsky set fire to his house, a riot was also brewing in it, and the peasants supported him. The house with the sleeping clerks was on fire, and a cat darted about on the roof of the shed. Blacksmith Arkhip, one of the most brave rebels, risking his life, saved the animal. Why is cruelty and kindness so combined in people? I think because a person protests against violence, injustice, evil and, when humane arguments do not lead to a positive result, he understands that he cannot win without a cold and calculating struggle. And the innocent, weak, downtrodden, if you are stronger, you need to protect. Therefore, those who had a strongly developed sense of freedom and justice, went with Dubrovsky to the forest.
After the fire, a group of robbers appeared in the vicinity, robbing and burning landowners' houses. Dubrovsky was at the head of this gang. Those who wanted freedom received it, those who wanted to fight for their rights became a forest robber.
15503 person viewed this page. Register or log in and find out how many people from your school have already copied this essay.
/ Works / Pushkin A.S. / Dubrovsky / Riot of the peasants against injustice (Based on the novel by A.S. Pushkin "Dubrovsky")
See also the work "Dubrovsky":
We will write a great essay for your order in just 24 hours. Unique composition in a single copy.
Kirila Petrovich Troekurov and Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky (based on the novel by Alexander Pushkin "Dubrovsky")
Alexander Pushkin's novel “Dubrovsky9raquo;- a work about the dramatic fate of a poor nobleman, whose estate was illegally taken away. Imbued with compassion for the fate of a certain Ostrovsky, Pushkin in his novel reproduced a true life history, without, of course, depriving it of the author's fiction.
Hero of the novel, Andrey Gavrilovich Dubrovsky- a retired guard lieutenant, a poor landowner.
He lives very modestly, but this does not prevent him from maintaining good-neighborly relations with Kirila Petrovich Troekurov, a well-known barin throughout the district, a retired general-in-chief, a very wealthy and noble man with numerous connections and weighty authority. Everyone who knows Troekurov and his disposition trembles at the mere mention of his name, they are ready to please his slightest whims. The eminent gentleman himself takes such behavior for granted, because, in his opinion, it is precisely this attitude that his person deserves.
Troekurov is arrogant and rude even to people of the highest rank. No one and nothing can make him bow his head. Kirila Petrovich constantly surrounds himself with numerous guests, to whom he demonstrates his rich estate, kennel and who are shocked with crazy fun. This is a wayward, proud, vain, spoiled and perverted person.
The only one who enjoys the respect of Troyekurov is Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky. Troeko-ditch was able to discern in this poor nobleman a courageous and independent person, capable of ardently defending self-esteem before anyone else, able to freely and directly express his own point of view. Such behavior is a rarity in the environment of Kirila Petrovich, therefore, his relationship with Dubrovsky developed differently than with others.
True, Troekurov's mercy quickly changed to anger when Dubrovsky went against Kirila Petrovich.
Who is to blame for the quarrel? Troyekurov is power-hungry, and Dubrovsky is decisive and impatient. This is a hot-headed and imprudent person. Therefore, it would be unfair to blame only Kirila Petrovich.
Troekurov, of course, misbehaved, not only allowing the huntsman to offend Andrei Gavrilovicha, but also supporting the words of his courtyard with a loud laugh. He was also wrong when he got angry at the neighbor's demand to extradite Paramoshka for punishment. However, Dubrovsky is also to blame. He taught the captured Pokrovsky peasants a lesson, stealing the forest from him, with rods, and took the horses away from them. Such behavior, according to the author, contradicted “all concepts of the law of war”, and a letter written a little earlier to Troekurov, according to the then concepts of ethics, was “completely indecent9raquo ;.
The scythe found on the stone. Kirila Petrovich chooses the most terrible method of revenge: he intends to deprive his neighbor of a roof over his head, even if in an unjust way, humiliate him, crush him, force him to blame. "This is the strength," says Troeku-dvor, "to take away property without any right." A rich gentleman bribes the court, not thinking about the moral side of the matter, or about the consequences of the ongoing lawlessness. Willfulness and lust for power, ardor and passionate disposition in no time destroy the friendship of neighbors and the life of Dubrovsky.
Kirila Petrovich is quick-witted, after a while he decides to reconcile, since "by nature he is not greedy," but it is too late.
Troekurov, according to the author, always "showed all the vices of an uneducated person" and "used to give full vent to all the impulses of his ardent disposition and all the ventures of a rather limited mind." Dubrovsky did not want to come to terms with this and suffered a heavy punishment, dooming not only himself, but also his own son to poverty. Heightened ambition and wounded pride did not allow him to take a sober look at the current situation and compromise, seeking reconciliation with his neighbor. Being a deeply decent man, Andrei Gavrilovich could not imagine how far Troyekurov could go in a desire to revenge, how easily a court could be bribed, how they could be put out on the street without a legal basis. He measured those around him by his own yardstick, was sure of his own righteousness, “had neither the desire nor the opportunity to pour money around him,” and therefore “worried little about 9raquo; about the case brought against him. This played into the hands of his ill-wishers.
Outlining the conflict between Troyekurov and Dubrovsky Sr., A.S. Pushkin denounced harshness and vindictiveness, showed the price of fervor, sharply raised the moral questions of his time, which are very close to today's reader.
Attention, only TODAY!
K. Troekurov and A. Dubrovsky What was Troekurov famous for? Troyekurov's lessons. How did Andrei Dubrovsky differ from Troekurov? Why did he not want his son to marry Masha? What does the author emphasize in Troekurov, and what in Dubrovsky? Are they retreating human feelings front social conditioning their relationship? Friendship of fathers --- love children. Wealth and Poverty.
Kirila Petrovits Troekurov - landlord - serf-owner, general-in-chief Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky - poor nobleman Vladimir Dubrovsky Masha Troekurova Arrogant, wayward, impractical, imprudent; poor, but direct and independent, noble. ... "I'm not a jester, but an old nobleman." Which hero do these words belong to? Explain their meaning. Make a conclusion about the characters and foundations of the noble society.
Quarrel of two landowners (p. 76, 77) Read and explain who, in your opinion, is guilty of the quarrel. Why did the friendship of the two landowners turn out to be fragile? The conflict between social law and human will. How can you explain the meaning of this phrase? Honesty is poverty; love is hate; restraint is revelry. Compare these words in relation to each of the landowners.
/ / / Revolt of peasants against injustice (based on Pushkin's novel "Dubrovsky")
In the novel “”, grandiose in design and embodiment, Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin described not only the tyranny and tyranny of noble nobles, but also the life of serfs.
The plot of the novel is based on a quarrel between two landowners who lived in the neighborhood, Kirila Petrovich Troekurov and Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky. Last - noble man, who judges people not by titles and status, the courtyard peasants for him are, first of all, personalities, he does not consider them slaves who have no right to anything. What can not be said about Troekurov. The wayward gentleman Kirila Petrovich does not take into account the fact that serfs are people too, treats them rudely and cruelly, believing that the value of their existence lies only in serving the landowner.
The decision of the district court on the transfer of all Dubrovsky peasants to the ownership of Troekurov caused a wave of indignation. The servants, who had heard about Kirila Petrovich's disposition and his treatment of the servants, did not want to leave the former owner, who after the death of his father became the young master.
Injustice judgment, Shabashkin's attacks and disgusting behavior caused aggression and discontent in the hearts of people, they want to deal with the clerks who arrived at the house. And although Vladimir discourages them from this terrible act, many do not want to obey, because fate is still decided, and nothing can be changed.
And he himself suddenly changes his mind. At first, the young man wanted to quietly say goodbye to his native land and leave. But the letters of the mother were forced to turn off the intended path and set fire to the ancestral home, so as not to give it up for ruin to strangers, strangers.
The rebellion in the heart of the young man, generated by the unwillingness to ridicule the things memorable for him, was supported by all the courtyard people. The house with the clerks sleeping in it burned, and no one began to save them. But the blacksmith Arkhip, at the risk of being burned in the fire, rushed to the aid of the cat, which was rushing about on the roof, not knowing how to be safe.
The family estate has turned to ashes. After this incident, a gang began to plunder in the vicinity, which robbed only rich and noble people. And at the head of it was Vladimir Dubrovsky, who crossed the line between good and evil and stood up to protect the poor, humiliated and insulted. He was joined by all those who thirsted for justice, who wanted to fight for it with their last bit of strength.
The peasants' protest against tyranny and cruelty resonates in the soul of Vladimir, because this is also his sworn enemy. He is ready to devote his whole life to avenge this man for the death of his father. Dubrovsky with all his heart also hates officials who are ready to do anything for the sake of money: to deceive, to manipulate facts, to alter documents.
Revolt in the soul of the people, especially under the leadership of a young and noble youth, was bound to result in a struggle, which happened in the pages of the novel.
But according to the law of the genre, the good must win, so Alexander Sergeevich ends his work with the disappearance of the gang, leaving the opportunity to think that the time will come when it will again stand up for the protection of simple and honest people.
