Alexander Nikolayevich Ostrovsky is a brilliant Russian playwright. His famous play The Dowry was written in 1878. The author worked long and hard on the work for four years. "Dowry" caused a lot of questions and controversy among critics and viewers, who were the very first to see the production of the play on stage.
As is often the case, people's recognition of "Dowry" came only a few years after the death of the author himself. The first staged performances in St. Petersburg and Moscow theaters, unfortunately, were very disastrous, critics gave poor ratings and wrote conflicting reviews. However, the play quickly and easily passed the censorship and was immediately published in the journal Otechestvennye Zapiski in 1879.
It is believed that Ostrovsky wrote the drama based on real events that he had to observe in his life as a justice of the peace in Kineshma district.
The idea of this work was conceived by the author in the autumn of 1874, but the work on it went on for a long time and painstakingly. During the time it was written, the author released several more works, and The Dowry finished only in January 1879. The play, which was not accepted and recognized in its time, has now become a classic and has gained real respect and immortality.
To begin with, it is worth deciding who such a dowry is? So in the old days they called poor girls and those who did not have a dowry, which was supposed to enter the capital of her future family. A woman did not work in those days, therefore, a man took her as a dependent, and, apart from the money received from his parents, he had nothing to hope for, his wife could not help him in financial matters, and her children were automatically left without inheritance from one of the parties. As a rule, such girls diligently tried to win the attention of suitors with their beauty, pedigree and inner virtues.
Alexander Nikolayevich Ostrovsky in his play describes the real inner state of an ordinary dowry woman who stubbornly seeks true, sincere love on earth, but realizes that it does not exist. No one dared to look into her soul and show sincere interest in her, so the girl becomes an ordinary thing for a rich man, she simply has no other choice and even a chance to get a decent attitude. Another option to arrange your life is to marry the miserable, selfish and unpretentious Karandyshev, a petty clerk who, again, marries Larisa for the sake of self-affirmation. But she rejects this option. The author demonstrates all the contradictions of life that surround us, using the example of the fate of the heroes. The essence of the play "Dowry" is to show the reader how mercilessly and vilely people change true love and friendship for an ordinary deal, from which one can only draw one's own benefit.
The drama of the human soul in an immoral society is the main essence of the main tragic theme in Ostrovsky's play "The Dowry", which the author widely reveals through the heroine Larisa Ogudalova. She did not receive a dowry from her mother, so she will have to suffer in this inhuman world. Grooms who are fighting for a girl do not take her seriously, she becomes for them either an object for boasting, or just a toy and a thing.
The theme of disappointment in the world is also present in the work. The main character is waiting for a terrible end: devastation, despair, dishonor and death. The girl believed in a better and new life, believed in love and kindness, but everything that surrounded her could prove to her that there was simply no love, no hint of enlightenment. All storylines in the work affect social topics. Larisa lives in a world where everything can be bought for money, even love.
Of course, a tragedy cannot do without ambiguous and complex questions. The problems in the play by Alexander Nikolayevich Ostrovsky are quite extensive and multifaceted.
Ostrovsky wrote a very emotional drama that will not disappoint even an experienced and fastidious reader with its ideological and thematic content. The main idea of Ostrovsky's drama "Dowry" is to condemn the too high value of wealth and money in society. Material goods in life play the most important role, a person who does not have them can only be a toy in the hands of a rich man who does not have the right to sincere feelings. Poor people become the subject of sale to heartless barbarians who languished over their fortune. Around Larisa Ogudalova, everything is saturated with gross cynicism and cunning, which destroy her pure, bright soul. These qualities determined the price of a woman's life, reselling it among themselves as a faceless and soulless thing. And this price is low.
Using the image of the heroine as an example, the writer shows how the heart of a dowry suffers, who is to blame only for the fact that she has no fortune behind her. So dishonest and unfair is fate in relation to the poor, but very bright and intelligent people. The girl loses faith in humanity, in her ideals, experiencing numerous betrayals and humiliations. What is the reason for the tragedy of the dowry? She could not come to terms with the collapse of her dream, with the destruction of her convictions, and decided to get reality to position her as she needed, as it should have happened in natural conditions. The heroine knows from the very beginning that she is taking a mortal risk, this is evidenced by her farewell remark to her mother. She set conditions for the whole world: either her dream comes true, or she passes away without stooping to marriage and cohabitation of convenience. Even if Karandyshev had not killed her, she would have fulfilled her own warning and drowned herself in the Volga. Thus, the young woman became a victim of her illusions, her pride and intransigence with the vulgarity of the environment.
Before us is a classic clash of romantic dreams and harsh, vulgar reality. In this battle, the latter always wins, but the author does not lose hope that at least some people will come to their senses and stop creating and maintaining unfair conditions for social relationships. He emphasizes true virtue and true values, which must be learned to distinguish from the vain squabbles of empty and petty scoundrels. The heroine's rebellion inspires courage to fight for her beliefs to the end.
Drama, as a genre, presents the reader with the fate of the hero in a contradictory and cruel world, an acute conflict between the human soul and the society in which he lives. The purpose of psychological drama is to show the dramatic position of the individual in a hostile environment. As a rule, the characters of the drama are expected by a tragic fate, spiritual suffering, internal contradictions. In a work of this type, you can find many vivid emotions and experiences that are inherent in many of us.
So, Ostrovsky's play vividly describes the internal state of Larisa Ogudalova, who rebels against the inhuman order in society, sacrifices herself in order not to sacrifice her principles. The heroine hardly accepts the circumstances that overtake her, she endures with horror all the trials prepared for her by fate. This is Larisa's personal tragedy, which she cannot survive. The psychological drama ends with her death, which is typical of a work in this genre.
Ostrovsky's play highlights the life and customs of the Russian provinces, nobles and merchants. All of them are very similar, and, at the same time, differ from each other. The heroes behave quite liberated and are not at all afraid to show their true colors to others, it doesn’t matter to them that sometimes they look rather stupid. They are not afraid not because of courage or openness of character. They simply do not realize that they look ignorant, stingy, suspicious or worthless.
Men do not bypass open communication with women; for them, adultery is not considered shameful. For them, this is an element of status: a mistress becomes a reflection of wealth. One of the heroes of the work, Mr. Knurov, offered Larisa to become his kept woman, although he himself had been married for a long time, he did not care what the heroine felt, only his own benefit and lust were in the first place.
A girl in the province of that time, as we have already found out, must have a good condition in order to successfully marry and live well. In such a world it is very difficult to find true love and respect, in a world where everything is saturated with the power of money and the bad customs of greedy people, an honest and intelligent woman simply could not find her rightful place. Larisa was literally ruined by the cruel and dishonest customs of her contemporaries.
Interesting? Save it on your wall!Female a girl who is married, without demanding a dowry, for her beauty and dignity. A dowry is called, jokingly, a poor groom or a deceived dowry. A bride without a dowry, poor, who has nothing. Unattached exchange, in which not ... ... Dahl's Explanatory Dictionary
Bride, Slavenka Dictionary of Russian synonyms. dowry n., number of synonyms: 3 dowry (1) ... Synonym dictionary
DOWNHOUSE, dowry, wives. In a bourgeois noble society, a girl without a dowry or a girl who will be willingly married for her virtues without a dowry. Explanatory Dictionary of Ushakov. D.N. Ushakov. 1935 1940 ... Explanatory Dictionary of Ushakov
DOWNHOUSE, s, wives. In the old days: a poor girl with no dowry. Explanatory dictionary of Ozhegov. S.I. Ozhegov, N.Yu. Shvedova. 1949 1992 ... Explanatory dictionary of Ozhegov
- "Dowry", USSR, Rot Front, 1936, b/w, 85 min. Drama. Based on the play of the same name by A. N. Ostrovsky. The film entered the fund of Soviet film classics thanks to the social interpretation of the drama, vivid imagery in the depiction of the mores of the Russian merchant class and ... ... Cinema Encyclopedia
- (foreigner) a beautiful girl (who will be taken as a wife and without a dowry) A dowry, a deceiver, that is, that is. Wed Well, Avdotya Vlasyevna, I said: your grandson is growing up without a dowry; look what a beauty! Dal. New paintings of Russian ... Michelson's Big Explanatory Phraseological Dictionary
Without a dowry (foreigner), a beautiful girl (who will be taken as a wife and without a dowry). A dowryless deceiver, what is, is. Wed Well, Avdotya Vlasyevna, I said: you have a grandson without a dowry; look what a beauty! Far... ... Michelson's Big Explanatory Phraseological Dictionary (original spelling)
The girl is the bride, the parents of the swarm do not have the opportunity to give her a dowry. (Source: Dictionary of Sexual Terms) … Sexological Encyclopedia
G. A girl bride without a dowry. Explanatory Dictionary of Ephraim. T. F. Efremova. 2000... Modern explanatory dictionary of the Russian language Efremova
Dowry, dowryless, dowryless, dowryless, dowryless, dowryless, dowryless, dowryless, dowryless, dowryless, dowryless, dowryless, dowryless (Source: “Full accentuated paradigm by ... Forms of words
"Dowry" - drama by A.N. Ostrovsky, the fortieth ("jubilee") play written by the great Russian playwright. The amazing, even exceptional stage fate of this play of the 19th century continues to attract the attention of theater historians and literary scholars to this day. Theatrical performances and film adaptations of "Dowry", which have long become classics, still enjoy the love of the domestic audience.
Nina Alisova as Larisa
How could it happen that of the entire vast literary heritage of the great Russian playwright A.N. Ostrovsky, only this play, unaccepted and misunderstood by the author's contemporaries, crossed all time limits and gained real immortality?
Let's try to figure it out.
Throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, the attitude of viewers and critics to the work of A.N. Ostrovsky has undergone many changes. Democratic criticism of the late 1850s and early 1860s tried to see in the playwright's works a kind of social protest against the inertia and stagnation of the surrounding reality. Some contemporaries (in particular, the writer and critic P. Boborykin) generally denied Ostrovsky the right to be a playwright, noting the unstaged, even epic nature of his most successful plays.
The most acute controversy was caused by Ostrovsky's drama "Thunderstorm". According to most literary critics, A.N. Ostrovsky gained universal fame as a playwright solely through the efforts of N. Dobrolyubov. Detailed critical analyzes by Dobrolyubov of Ostrovsky's plays on the pages of Nekrasov's Sovremennik became textbooks already in the 19th century. It was Dobrolyubov who invented both the "dark kingdom", and the "ray of light", and a host of other clichés that are still actively exploited in school essays. However, next to Dobrolyubovskaya, another line almost immediately took shape in the interpretation of A.N. Ostrovsky. This is the line of A. Grigoriev, a personal friend of the playwright, who considered the world of his works not at all a “dark kingdom”, but the kingdom of “poetry of folk life” (the articles of M. M. Dostoevsky and M. I. Pisarev gravitate towards it). For Dobrolyubov and Grigoriev, The Thunderstorm was included in different aesthetic contexts (depending on the worldview of the critics, their understanding of the historical patterns and driving forces of Russian life). In one case it was read as a harsh social drama, in another as a high poetic tragedy.
The play "Dowry" was much less fortunate. If in the late 1850s - early 1860s Dobrolyubov, Grigoriev, M. Pisarev and other leading critics broke spears in disputes: is Katerina from The Thunderstorm a "beam of light in the dark kingdom", then in 1878, when she appeared "Dowry", the play was practically not noticed.
Despite the fact that A.N. Ostrovsky considered his fortieth play to be the best dramatic work; its productions in Moscow and St. Petersburg disappointed not only critics, but also longtime admirers of the playwright's work. The “Dowry” was labeled as a very ordinary, boring play with a banal plot and forgotten about for many years.
But really talented works, as a rule, outlive their authors and find a response in the hearts of future generations. The play "Dowry" was provided by A.N. Ostrovsky immortality for centuries. The playwright accurately foresaw this immortality, taking the plot of a cruel urban romance as the basis of the play. The eternal, enduring theme of the relationship between the ideal and the material principles (love and poverty), forever "caught in the net" of the Russian audience. In our opinion, this is precisely what explains the phenomenon of the “Dowry” that has outlived all its critics and persecutors. For almost a century and a half, the play has not left the scenes of the country's leading theaters, and its cinematic versions - "Dowry" by Protazanov (1936) and Khudyakov (1974), "Cruel Romance" by E. Ryazanov (1982) - remained and remain favorite films for several generations of both Soviet and post-Soviet people.
A. N. Ostrovsky, being very dependent on the theater, an exclusively theatrical playwright, usually wrote his things in a relatively short time. For 30 years (from 1853 to 1883) his new plays were staged every season on the stages of the main Moscow and St. Petersburg theaters. For his creative life, A.N. Ostrovsky managed to compose fifty-four plays (of which only seven were in collaboration with other playwrights). However, the author deliberately removed his fortieth play "Dowry" from the usual theatrical conveyor, pondered and created it for several years.
As evidenced by Ostrovsky's note on the first page of the autograph, the drama was conceived on November 4, 1874 in Moscow, and completed only in the autumn of 1878.
In parallel with his work on The Bride, the playwright managed to create several very famous plays that were immediately accepted for production by the Maly Theater: Wolves and Sheep (1875), Rich Brides (1876), Truth is Good, but Happiness is Better (1877). ), "The Last Victim" (1878). All of them have been a great success.
But, as the correspondence of A.N. Ostrovsky, for four years the author literally lived his "Dowry". He constantly returned to this particular play, pondering the storylines, characters and monologues of the main characters; not wanting to miss the slightest detail, he finished his fortieth item in the most thorough manner.
On October 1, 1876, informing his friend, actor of the Alexandrinsky Theater F. A. Burdin about his work on the comedy “Truth is good, but happiness is better,” Ostrovsky wrote: “All my attention and all my strength are directed to the next big play, which was conceived more than a year ago and on which I have been continuously working. I am thinking of finishing it this year and will try to finish it in the most thorough way, because it will be my fortieth original work.
On a draft autograph of "Dowry", stored in the Department of Manuscripts of the State Library of the USSR. V. I. Lenin, Ostrovsky marked: "Opus 40". A secondary mention of the work on "The Bride" is found in a letter from the playwright to Burdin dated February 3, 1878 from Moscow: “... I am now busy with a large original play; I want to finish it in the winter for the next season, in order to be freer in the summer.
In September 1878, the playwright also wrote to one of his acquaintances: “I am working on my play with all my might; it doesn't look bad."
Hopes, it would seem, were justified. Shortly after the completion of the work, on November 3, 1878, the playwright reported from Moscow: “I have already read my play in Moscow five times, among the listeners there were people who were hostile to me, and everyone unanimously recognized The Dowry as the best of all my works”
At the same time, Ostrovsky was negotiating the production of The Dowry in Moscow and St. Petersburg. On October 28, 1878, The Dowry was already approved for staging by the Theater and Literary Committee.
The premiere of "Dowry" took place on the stage of the Maly Theater in Moscow on November 10, 1878. It was held under the sign of the benefit performance of the actor N.I.Muzil, who played Robinson. The second time the play was given as a benefit performance to M.P. Sadovsky (Karandyshev). Ostrovsky repeatedly testified to the great success of the performance in Moscow (see his letter to F.A. Burdin dated December 27, 1878, as well as “Note on the draft “Rules on Prizes ... for Dramatic Works” of 1884).
However, according to most reviewers, the play "Dowry" suffered a complete, undeniable and even final failure.
The staging of Ostrovsky's new work was completed in just ten days. Now it's hard to even believe it. However, for that time it was a completely ordinary phenomenon. It is clear that in such a short time, neither the actors nor the director could even really comprehend the work that was to be presented to the public from the stage.
Glykeria Fedotova
The first performer of the role of Larisa Ogudalova on the Moscow stage was the actress Glikeria Nikolaevna Fedotova. G. Fedotova was a bright actress, who was equally successful in both dramatic and comedic roles. However, the role of Larisa performed by Fedotova was recognized as extremely unsuccessful. Here are some of the critics' remarks: "Definitively deprived of truth and originality"; “the gap between the melodramatic tone taken by the actress and “the rest of the everyday environment” made the face of the actress “false and banal”, etc.
In subsequent productions of "Dowry" at the Maly Theater, Larisa was played by M.N. Yermolov. The role of Karandyshev was played by M.P. Sadovsky, who had the role of "everyday simpleton" and "comedian" in the theater. He also failed to capture one of the play's most psychologically complex images.
A day after the Moscow premiere, on November 12, Russkiye Vedomosti published a review by P. Boborykin, Ostrovsky's longtime and constant opponent. According to the reviewer, the benefit performance of the artist N. Musil (he played Robinson) "gathered all of Moscow, who loves the Russian stage." Everyone expected a good play, but did not wait. “The playwright has exhausted the entire audience, even the most naive spectators,” for the audience “clearly outgrew the spectacles” that Ostrovsky offers it. The reviewer was especially indignant at the uncomplicated plot of The Dowry, because there is no interest in the story of how “some provincial girl fell in love with a scoundrel, agreed to marry an antipathetic vulgar man and, rejected another time by the object of her passion, puts her breasts under the groom’s gun ". The heroine also got it: “... this girl with her suffering could attract our attention, if she were a colorful, large, socially significant person. Alas ... there is nothing of this in her, Larisa speaks banalities, her story about why she considers Paratov, “a libertine and impudent”, to be a “hero”, is simply ridiculous with her mental and moral “baseness”.
Maria Ermolova
In Larisa, Boborykin saw a complete repetition of the heroines from Mad Money and other plays by Ostrovsky, and in Paratov - another scoundrel from a whole series of dissolute vulgarities in the playwright's previous plays (including Vadim Dulchin in The Last Victim). Karandyshev was named the most successful way, but criticism was very embarrassing for his inconsistency and duality. Theater actors of the 19th century were not yet able to play it. Even a very good actor would hardly have been able to "disguise" Karandyshev's duality at the end of the third and fourth acts.
It is very significant that an experienced writer, author of novels and plays, P. Boborykin was unable to comprehend the plot of the play, nor to understand the complexity of the characters and the relationships connecting them. He simplified everything to the extreme, coarsened it, did not grasp the main thing either in the problems of the play or in its artistic embodiment, he did not even come close to the core of the idea.
The rest of the Moscow criticism either echoed Boborykin, or was completely silent.
Unfortunately, in 1878, when neither N. Dobrolyubov nor the most faithful admirer of A.N. Ostrovsky Apollon Grigoriev, there was no one to appreciate the “Dowry” at its true worth. The playwright outlived all his talented critics, giving the right to distant descendants to evaluate his fortieth, "jubilee" work.
In St. Petersburg, "Dowry" evoked more sympathetic responses. The premiere took place on the stage of the Alexandrinsky Theater on November 22, 1878, at a benefit performance by F.A. Burdin, with the participation of Prime Minister M. G. Savina, who played the role of Larisa. The performance was also attended by: Polonsky (Karandyshev), Burdin (Knurov), Sazonov (Vozhevatov), Nilsky (Paratov), Chitau (Ogudalova), Ardi (Robinson), Vasiliev 1st (Gavrilo), Gorbunov (Ivan), Konstantinov (Ilya), Natarova 1st (Evfrosinya Potapovna).
The actors of the Alexandrinsky Theater, among whom Ostrovsky had many friends, reacted very coolly to the new play. Burdin initially objected to Knurov's role. She seemed to him episodic and unimportant for a benefit performance ("accessory role"). N.F. Sazonov refused to play Karandyshev, demanding significant reductions in the text from the author.
Theatrical criticism noted the excellent play of M.G. Savina, but the actress herself did not like the play, just as she did not like her own work in it. On tour in the provinces, where Savina took her favorite roles, she played "Dowry" only three times and left forever. She played Larisa "too perfect", "too incomprehensible" from the point of view of common sense, theater critics and a few reviewers.
The St. Petersburg newspapers Novoye Vremya and Golos twice returned to their evaluation of The Dowry. The play made a “strong impression” on the reviewer of Novoye Vremya, but even he did not see anything new in the plot: neither the type of the main character, nor the other figures are new; the play lacks stage movement, action, etc. The reviewers of Golos, on the one hand, praised Ostrovsky as a writer of everyday life, emphasizing the precise characteristics and complex characters of her characters. But at the same time, they could not forgive the playwright for too rough realism, the overt cynicism of his heroes (Paratov, Knurov with Vozhevatov, even Larisa). It turned out that critics appreciated The Dowry for its realistically revealed “shameless and cold heartlessness”, which became the main sign of modern progress, but immediately accused the author of underestimating the positive aspects of this notorious progress and impenetrable pessimism.
The inconsistency of critical assessments, in our opinion, is caused by the innovative nature of the play itself, its stage, compositional, psychological complexity, which was far ahead of the canons of its time. Unfortunately, theater critics contemporary to the author, directors and actors who are not used to going beyond their stage roles, were unable to understand Ostrovsky's innovation. On the contrary, in the 1870s, the playwright was more and more often accused of ideological backwardness, hackneyedness, stereotypedness, and the exhaustion of his dramatic poetics. The public insistently demanded the appearance on the stage of other characters, free from pessimism and remnants of the "dark kingdom", that is, heroes who live in the present, responding to the social and political problems of our time, heroes-workers, innovators, fighters.
But the author of The Thunderstorm, The Forest, The Dowry differed sharply from the playwrights who wrote on the topic of the day and indulged the momentary interests of the viewer. He called for the comprehension of deep, hard-to-reach truths and therefore believed not only in the spectator of today, but also of tomorrow, in the spectator of the future. That is why the deeply thought-out, largely ahead of its time, Ostrovsky's play in the 70s of the 19th century did not suit either theatrical criticism or the general public. Despite the full ensemble of actors, in the season of 1878-79 the play was put into the repertoire of the Alexandrinsky Theater extremely rarely, and then they completely forgot about it. In St. Petersburg, "Dowry" left the stage already in 1882 and did not appear on it for 15 years. In Moscow, the play lasted longer - until 1891. The "Dowry" was resumed on both metropolitan stages in the 1896-1897 season. But it was already a new life for a well-forgotten play.
Return of the "Dowry" by A.N. Ostrovsky on the stage of metropolitan and provincial theaters is associated with the name of the great Russian actress Vera Fedorovna Komissarzhevskaya. It was Komissarzhevskaya who truly discovered the role of Larisa, and the already largely changed era itself breathed new life into this character.
Vera Komissarzhevskaya
At the turn of the 19th-20th centuries, the theater, like the whole society, experienced a breakdown in worldviews, a reassessment of values, and could not stand aside from new trends in literature and art. On the wave of modernist quests of the late 1890s, simple plays by A.N. Ostrovsky from the life of the provincial merchants looked like something archaic and indigestible.
18 years have passed since the writing of The Dowry. And in 1896, ten years after the death of A.N. Ostrovsky, the Alexandrinsky Theater decided to stage the once failed play again.
It is known that V.F. Komissarzhevskaya herself insistently demanded that the directorate of the Alexandrinka appoint her to the role of Larisa Ogudalova. At the same time, the actress even resorted to blackmail: either you give me the role of Larisa in The Dowry, or I leave the theater. The directors still did not set themselves the task of giving Ostrovsky's old play a new reading, but they did not want to lose the talented actress. However, no one, except Komissarzhevskaya herself, counted on success ...
September 17, 1896 the theater was full. The venerable audience came to see the obstinate Komissarzhevskaya in the famous play. The first two acts, the audience was perplexed. They are accustomed to Savin's Larisa, a pretty philistine who leads a reckless life in her mother's house. And suddenly Larisa - Komissarzhevskaya: fragile, shy, dim, speaks quietly, at first it seemed - even uninteresting. During the intermissions, the audience was disappointedly talking among themselves about the failure of the performance, but some spectators already appeared, mainly from the gallery, who began to understand that they were facing an actress who embodied the image of a “wounded”, deeply suffering woman, that this had never happened on the stage of the Russian theater . In the third act, the coughing, whispering, rustling of programs stopped. Komissarzhevskaya became the sole ruler of the public. And when the last chord of the guitar broke, the audience was afraid to move.
Criticism was expressed very favorably about the game of Komissarzhevskaya. In her Larisa there were no typical gypsy features and the imprint of the old province, although other performers of the role (Fedotova, Yermolova, Savina) considered these features to be the main ones.
One of the critics, Yuri Belyaev, noted that with her performance, Komissarzhevskaya “raises the prestige” of Larisa, a girl who has fallen to the position of “a precious trinket on which lots are cast.” The critic admired the actress, but believed that she created an image that was strikingly different from the heroine Ostrovsky. He believed that Vera Fedorovna showed Larisa some kind of "white seagull", and not at all a girl with seething gypsy blood. Another critic, Fedor Stepun, appreciated in Komissarzhevskaya’s game that from her very first phrase (“I just looked at the Volga, how good it is on the other side”), she raises Larisa’s inner world to a great spiritual height.
Another critic, A. Kugel, considered the game of Vera Feodorovna charming, but wrong. In his opinion, Larisa came out too sad and elegiac. Perhaps it is true that Komissarzhevskaya's performance was too "over-the-top".
Komissarzhevskaya, perhaps contrary to all the performers who preceded her, as well as theater directors and critics, understood what the main drama of Ostrovsky's play was. The author called "Dowry" a drama not only because of the tragic denouement. Almost all of her characters are complex, ambiguous people, in many respects ambivalent.
Larisa, of course, is not a "beam of light in the dark kingdom", but she is not a carefree fool who was deceived by a visiting villain, and then accidentally shot by a local madman. Larisa is a thinking person, deeply feeling, perfectly understanding all the absurdity of her situation (“I am a doll for you. You play with me, break it and leave it”; “Why do you constantly reproach me with this camp? Did I like this kind of life myself?” etc.). d.). She needs love like a beautiful flower needs water and sunlight. Larisa is torn between the world of her beautiful dreams and hopes and the world of cruel reality, into which she is drawn by her own mother and proud, predatory admirers. In search of a way out, the girl rushes to everyone who promises to love her, even to Karandyshev, but "everyone only loves himself." And the best way out for her is death.
That is how, tragically doomed, hysterically, hopelessly, Larisa sounded in the interpretation of Komissarzhevskaya. This was the new birth of the play. "Dowry" occupied the imagination of theatrical Petersburg for many days. It was impossible to get a ticket for the performance. Komissarzhevskaya brought to the theater that part of the Russian intelligentsia, which for many years considered the theater only a place of vulgar entertainment.
In the 1930s, "Dowry" was one of Ostrovsky's plays, which enjoyed the greatest love of the Soviet audience. On the stage of the Soviet theater, the social pathos of this wonderful drama was most acutely expressed. It was staged in many drama theaters in Moscow, Leningrad and on the periphery. Of the Moscow productions of The Dowry, the productions of the Drama Theater (former Korsh) with V. N. Popova in the role of Larisa (1932) and the Central Theater of Transport (1946) are especially significant. In 1948, The Dowry was resumed on the stage of the Maly Theatre.
However, for the mass audience, the play by A.N. Ostrovsky's "Dowry" became familiar only thanks to the successful film versions of Y. Protazanov (1936) and E. Ryazanov (1984), rightfully considered classics of Russian cinema.
Unlike most other dramatic works of the 19th century, The Dowry was filmed four times in our country.
The first attempt belongs to director Kai Ganzen. In 1912, he made a non-sound film of the same name, starring Vera Pashennaya and Nikolai Vasiliev.
In 1936, the “Dowry” by Y. Protazanov appeared (starring N. Alisova and A. Ktorov). Protazanov did not change the plot, but Vladimir Schweitzer did a lot of work on the script - the same one who worked on the scripts for Soviet fairy tale films Vasilisa the Beautiful, The Little Humpbacked Horse, Kashchei the Immortal, and others.
Protazanov and Schweitzer literally "anatomized" Ostrovsky's play, but did not blindly follow the text. The possibilities of film production were much more extensive than the possibilities of a theatrical performance and, in general, the possibilities of dramatic action. Therefore, a lot of new episodes appeared in the film (the wedding of Larisa's sister, the adventures of Robinson, beautiful location shooting, etc.).
The cast was impeccable: A. Ktorov (Paratov), B. Tenin (Vozhevatov), M. Klimov (Knurov), O. Pyzhova (Larisa's mother), V. Balikhin (Karandyshev). For the role of Larisa, Protazanov invited a very young student, a freshman at VGIK, Nina Alisova. Field shooting took place in Kineshma, Kaluga, Kostroma and Plyos.
"Dowry" by Protazanov immediately became a landmark film for the entire Soviet pre-war cinema. The film immediately, as they say, "went to the people." For many years, the Soviet audience was sure that the famous episodes with a beaver coat thrown into the mud, a race on steamboats and Robinson's outrages were Ostrovsky's original text. A. Guerich's song "No, he did not love" was sung by all the girls of the 1930s and 40s, sincerely considering it an old gypsy romance, which was performed by Larisa Ogudalova in the play.
The screen version of Protazanov and Schweitzer turned out to be so successful that for almost fifty years it suited the Soviet audience.
The teleplay "Dowry" by K. Khudyakov (1974), despite the excellent constellation of actors (T. Doronina, A. Dzhigarkhanyan, V. Gaft), only disappointed with its "theatricality" and "intimacy". After the Protazanov film, which was based on the interpretation of the image of Larisa Komissarzhevskaya, the return of T. Doronina to Larisa of the “pre-Commissarzhevskaya” period looked original, but looked without interest.
Therefore, when in 1984 E. Ryazanov's film "Cruel Romance" was released, it became practically a revelation for viewers who did not see or fundamentally did not watch the Protazanov film, which was somewhat "outdated" by that time.
So much has been written and said about the remarkable film by E. Ryazanov that it makes no sense to repeat all the critical reviews in this essay.
However, today many do not even remember that when it appeared, "Cruel Romance" caused a lot of controversy and criticism, especially among older people - fans of "Dowry" of 1936. The director and screenwriter of the film E. Ryazanov himself admitted in his numerous interviews more than once: when he wrote the script for "Cruel Romance", his motto was the maximum departure from the text of Ostrovsky's play in order to deprive the film of "intimacy", to make it interesting for the modern viewer. But then, in the process of filming, the director called out: “back to Ostrovsky!”. And that's what made the movie so good. All (with rare exceptions) replicas of the characters in the play "Dowry" are heard in "Cruel Romance", all the characters are presented vividly and vividly, the action of the film is fully consistent with the author's concept of A.N. Ostrovsky.
Especially a lot of criticism of the film "Cruel Romance" was for the original interpretation, even the development of the image of Paratov (N. Mikhalkov). The older generation could not forgive Ryazanov for the overly democratic Mikhalkov, who by temperament is more reminiscent of a Mexican macho, and not a Russian gentleman. One of my elderly relatives, who was brought up on the Protazanov version, after watching Ryazanov’s movie, was indignant for a long time at the episode where Paratov, getting off a white horse, moves a dirty carriage with his own hands: “He is a gentleman, not a bindyuzhnik!” Of course, the episode with a fur coat in Protazanov's film looked much more impressive, but it was already used 50 years ago, and the repetition of this gesture by the actor Mikhalkov would look more like a parody. It was obvious to all viewers of the 1980s that Mikhalkov was not Ktorov, and Ktorov was not Mikhalkov. Types such as the protazanovskiy Paratov died out in the first half of the century.
That is why, in our opinion, Ryazanov in his film very successfully removed from Paratov both the mask of an inveterate scoundrel and a socially colored gentleman-white hand, a slave of class prejudices. Having psychologically developed the image of the central character of the play, the director brought him at the same time closer to the realities of Russian life in the 70s of the XIX century, and made it interesting for people of the XX century. In fact, Paratov is not an insidious seducer and far from a prudent businessman. A ruined nobleman, a former shipowner, he himself fell victim to his difficult time, the time of the Knurovs and Vozhevatovs. Ostrovsky by no means puts an equal sign between Paratov and Briakhimov's moneybag merchants. For him, money is not a goal, but a means of subsistence, meaningless and aimless, because this person cannot have any specific goal. Paratov is the same thing, the same senseless trinket as Larisa. The only difference is that all his suffering and throwing at the moment of "selling" himself for money remain outside the scope of the stage action and are not visible to the viewer. We see an unfortunate person who has already resigned himself to his fate, who finally throws dust in his eyes, but also dies, crushed, broken. Larisa dies, remaining herself - loving and free.
The theme of "Dowry" became especially close to the Russian audience at the turn of the 20th-21st centuries, in the era of a total revision of former values, the breakdown of human relations, thoughtless worship of the "golden calf". How many of these Laris - beautiful, smart, talented girls with a university education - went to the kept women of the modern Knurovs or Vozhevatovs, no statistics will tell. Perhaps some of them still believe that they did the right thing, seizing on material well-being, trampling on everything that they once considered the main thing in their lives. God is their judge.
But one thing is clear: the phenomenon of "Dowry" as an eternal plot for all time does not let us go today. Thirty years after the release of The Cruel Romance, the film is still watched in one breath, and modern youth have an idea about the work of the great Russian playwright A.N. Ostrovsky exclusively from this film. And this is not the worst option.
In 2011, director A. Puustusmaa based on the drama of Ostrovsky filmed another "Dowry". The plot of the film in general terms repeats the plot of the play, but the action has been moved to the present day.
A.N. Ostrovsky created an amazing gallery of Russian characters. Representatives of the merchant class became the main characters - from "domostroevsky" tyrants to real businessmen. The playwright's portrayals of women were no less vivid and expressive. Some of them looked like the heroines of J.S. Turgenev: they were just as brave and resolute, had warm hearts and never gave up their feelings. Below is an analysis of Ostrovsky's "Dowry", where the main character is a bright personality, different from the people who surrounded her.
The analysis of Ostrovsky's "Dowry" should begin with the history of its writing. In the 1870s, Alexander Nikolayevich was an honorary judge in one county. Participation in lawsuits and familiarity with various cases gave him a new opportunity to search for topics for his works.
Researchers of his life and work suggest that the plot for this play was taken from his judicial practice. It was a case that made a lot of noise in the county - the murder of a local resident of his young wife. Ostrovsky began writing the play in 1874, but progress was slow. And only in 1878 the play was completed.
The next point in the analysis of Ostrovsky's "Dowry" is a small description of the characters in the play.
Larisa Ogudalova is the main character. A beautiful and impressionable noblewoman. Despite her sensitive nature, she is a proud girl. Its main disadvantage is poverty. Therefore, her mother tries to find a rich groom for her. Larisa is in love with Paratov, but he leaves her. Then, out of desperation, she decides to marry Karandyshev.
Sergey Paratov is a nobleman who is over 30 years old. An unprincipled, cold and calculating person. Everything is measured in money. He is going to marry a rich girl, but does not tell Larisa about it.
Julius Kapitonych Karandyshev is a petty official who has little money. Vain, his main goal is to win the respect of others and impress them. Jealous of Larisa to Paratov.
Vasily Vozhevatov is a young rich merchant. I've known the main character since childhood. A cunning person without any moral principles.
Moky Parmenych Knurov is an elderly merchant, the richest man in the city. He likes the young Ogudalova, but he is a married man. Therefore, Knurov wants her to become his kept woman. Selfish, he cares only for his own interests.
Harita Ignatievna Ogudalova - Larisa's mother, widow. Cunning, she tries to profitably give her daughter in marriage so that they do not need anything. Therefore, he believes that any means are suitable for this.
Robinson is an actor, mediocrity, a drunkard. Friend of Paratov.
One of the points in the analysis of Ostrovsky's "Dowry" is a brief description of the plot of the play. The action takes place in the Volga city of Bryakhimov. In the first act, the reader learns from the conversation between Knurov and Vozhevatov that Sergei Paratov, a wealthy gentleman who loves to appear spectacularly in society, is returning to the city.
He left Bryakhimov so hastily that he did not say goodbye to Larisa Ogudalova, who was in love with him. She was in despair because of his departure. Knurov and Vozhevatov say that she is beautiful, smart and performs romances incomparably. Only her suitors shun her, because she is a dowry.
Realizing this, her mother constantly keeps the doors of the house open, in the hope that a rich groom will marry Larisa. The girl decides to marry a petty official, Yuri Kapitonych Karandyshev. During the walk, the merchants inform them of Paratov's arrival. Karandyshev invites them to a dinner party in honor of his fiancee. Julius Kapitonych arranges a scandal for the bride because of Paratov.
Meanwhile, Paratov himself, in a conversation with the merchants, says that he was going to marry the daughter of the owner of the gold mines. And Larisa is no longer interested in him, but the news of her marriage makes him think.
Larisa quarrels with her fiancé because she wants to leave with him for the village as soon as possible. Karandyshev, despite the constraint on funds, is going to give a dinner party. Ogudalova is having an explanation with Paratov. He accuses her of cheating and asks if she loves him. The girl agrees.
Paratov decided to humiliate Larisa's fiancé in front of the guests. He gets him drunk at dinner, and then persuades the girl to go on a boat trip with him. After spending the night with her, he tells her that he has a fiancee. The girl realizes that she is disgraced. She agrees to become the kept woman of Knurov, who won her in a dispute with Vozhevatov. But Yuri Karandyshev shot Larisa out of jealousy. The girl thanks him and says that she is not offended by anyone.
In the analysis of Ostrovsky's "Dowry" one should also consider the image of the main character. Larisa appeared before the reader as a beautiful, educated noblewoman, but without a dowry. And, finding herself in a society where the main measure is money, she was faced with the fact that no one takes her feelings seriously.
Possessing an ardent soul and a warm heart, she falls in love with the treacherous Paratov. But because of his feelings, he cannot see his true character. Larisa feels lonely - no one even tries to understand her, everyone uses her like a thing. But despite the subtle nature, the girl has a proud disposition. And just like all heroes, she is afraid of poverty. Therefore, she feels even more contempt for her fiancé.
In the analysis of Ostrovsky's "Dowry" it should be noted that Larisa does not have great fortitude. She does not decide to commit suicide or start living the life she wants. She accepts the fact that she is a thing and refuses to fight any further. Therefore, the groom's shot brought her peace, the girl was glad that all her suffering was over, and she found peace.
In the analysis of the play "Dowry" by Ostrovsky, one can also consider the image of the heroine's fiancé. Julius Kapitonych is shown to the reader as a small person who is important to earn the recognition of others. For him, a thing has value if rich people have it.
This is a proud man who lives for show and causes only contempt from others because of his pathetic attempts to be like them. Karandyshev, most likely, did not like Larisa: he understood that all men would envy him, because she was the dream of many. And he hoped to get the public recognition he so desired after their wedding. Therefore, Julius Kapitonich could not come to terms with the fact that she left him.
Comparative analysis of "Thunderstorm" and "Dowry" by Ostrovsky helps to find not only similarities, but also differences between the works. Both heroines are bright personalities, and their chosen ones are weak and weak-willed people. Katerina and Larisa have warm hearts and fall in love with men who match their imaginary ideal.
Both heroines feel lonely in society, and the internal conflict is heating up more and more. And this is where the differences come in. Larisa did not have the inner strength that Katerina had. Kabanova could not come to terms with life in a society where tyranny and despotism reigned. She rushed into the Volga. Larisa, realizing that for everyone she is a thing, cannot decide on such a step. And the girl does not even think about the fight - she just decides to live now like everyone else. Perhaps that is why the viewer immediately liked the heroine Katerina Kabanova.
In the analysis of Ostrovsky's drama "Dowry", it can be noted that, contrary to expectations, the performances failed. The viewer seemed bored with a story about a provincial girl who was deceived by a fan. Critics also did not like the acting: for them it was too melodramatic. And only in 1896 the play was staged again. And even then the audience was able to accept and appreciate it.
An analysis of Ostrovsky's work "Dowry" allows us to show what a serious psychological subtext the play has. How detailed the characters are. And, despite the sentimental scenes, the play belongs to the genre of realism. And her characters have replenished the gallery of Russian characters, masterfully described by A.N. Ostrovsky.
"Dowry"- a play by Alexander Nikolaevich Ostrovsky. Work on it continued for four years - from 1874 to 1878. The premiere performances of The Dowry took place in the autumn of 1878 and provoked protests from the audience and theater critics. Success came to the work after the death of the author.
The play was first published in the journal Domestic Notes (1879, No. 1).
1 / 5
✪ DOWNHOUSE. Alexander Ostrovsky
✪ A.N. Ostrovsky "Dowry". Literature video lesson Grade 10
✪ FOR 5 MIN: Dowry Ostrovsky A.N. / SUMMARY AND SUMMARY
✪ 2000288 Chast 1 Audiobook. Ostrovsky Alexander Nikolaevich. "Dowry"
✪ What will happen if MARRIAGE IS UNEQUAL // DOWNHOUSE and enviable groom
In the 1870s, Alexander Ostrovsky served as an honorary magistrate in the Kineshma district. Participation in the processes and familiarity with the criminal chronicle gave him the opportunity to find new topics for his works. Researchers suggest that the plot of The Dowry was suggested to the playwright by life itself: one of the high-profile cases that stirred up the entire county was the murder of his young wife by a local resident Ivan Konovalov.
Starting a new work in November 1874, the playwright made a note: "Opus 40". Work, contrary to expectations, went slowly; In parallel with The Dowry, Ostrovsky wrote and published several more works. Finally, in the fall of 1878, the play was completed. In those days, the playwright told one of the familiar actors:
I have already read my play in Moscow five times, among the listeners there were people who were hostile to me, and everyone unanimously recognized The Dowry as the best of all my works.
Further events also testified that the new play was doomed to success: it easily passed the censorship, the Otechestvennye Zapiski magazine began to prepare the work for publication, the troupes, first of the Maly and then of the Alexandrinsky Theater, began rehearsals. However, the premiere performances in Moscow and St. Petersburg ended in failure; reviews from critics abounded with scathing reviews. Only ten years after the death of the author, in the second half of the 1890s, the recognition of the audience came to the "Dowry"; it was associated primarily with the name of the actress Vera Komissarzhevskaya.
The action takes place on the site in front of a coffee shop located on the banks of the Volga. Local merchants Knurov and Vozhevatov are talking here. During the conversation, it turns out that the shipowner Paratov is returning to the city. A year ago, Sergei Sergeevich hastily left Bryakhimov; the departure was so swift that the master did not have time to say goodbye to Larisa Dmitrievna Ogudalova. She, being a “sensitive” girl, even rushed to catch up with her beloved; it was returned from the second station.
According to Vozhevatov, who has known Larisa since childhood, her main problem is the lack of a dowry. Harita Ignatievna, the girl's mother, in an effort to find a suitable groom for her daughter, keeps the house open. However, after Paratov's departure, the contenders for the role of Larisa's husband came across unenviable: an old man with gout, an eternally drunk manager of some prince and a fraudulent cashier who was arrested right in the Ogudalovs' house. After the scandal, Larisa Dmitrievna announced to her mother that she would marry the first person she met. It turned out to be a poor official Karandyshev. Listening to the story of a colleague, Knurov notices that this woman was created for luxury; she, like an expensive diamond, needs an “expensive setting”.
Soon, the mother and daughter of the Ogudalovs appear on the site, accompanied by Karandyshev. The fiance of Larisa Dmitrievna invites visitors to the coffee shop to his dinner party. Harita Ignatievna, seeing Knurov's contemptuous bewilderment, explains that "it's the same as we have dinner for Larisa." After the departure of the merchants, Julius Kapitonovich arranges a scene of jealousy for the bride; to his question, why is Paratov still good, the girl replies that she sees in Sergey Sergeevich the ideal of a man.
When a cannon shot is heard on the shore, announcing the arrival of the master, Karandyshev takes Larisa out of the coffee shop. However, the establishment is not empty for long: after a few minutes, the owner Gavrilo meets all the same merchants and Sergei Sergeevich, who arrived in Bryakhimov together with the actor Arkady Schastlivtsev, nicknamed Robinson. The name of the book hero, as Paratov explains, the actor received due to the fact that he was found on a deserted island. The conversation of old acquaintances is built around the sale of the steamer "Swallow" by Paratov - from now on, Vozhevatov will become its owner. In addition, Sergei Sergeevich informs that he is going to marry the daughter of an important gentleman, and takes gold mines as a dowry. The news of the upcoming marriage of Larisa Ogudalova makes him think. Paratov admits that he feels a little guilty towards the girl, but now "old scores are over."
The events unfolding in the second act take place in the Ogudalovs' house. While Larisa is changing clothes, Knurov appears in the room. Harita Ignatievna greets the merchant as an honored guest. Moky Parmyonych makes it clear that Karandyshev is not the best match for such a brilliant young lady as Larisa Dmitrievna; in her situation, the patronage of a rich and influential person is much more useful. Along the way, Knurov recalls that the bride's wedding attire should be exquisite, and therefore the entire wardrobe should be ordered at the most expensive store; he bears all expenses.
After the merchant leaves, Larisa informs her mother that she intends to leave immediately after the wedding with her husband to Zabolotye, a distant county, where Julius Kapitonych will run for justice of the peace. However, Karandyshev, appearing in the room, does not share the wishes of the bride: he is annoyed by Larisa's haste. In the heat of the moment, the groom delivers a long speech about how all Briakhimov has gone mad; cabbies, sex workers in taverns, gypsies - everyone rejoices at the arrival of the master, who, having squandered in revelry, is forced to sell "the last steamer".
Next comes Paratov's turn to pay a visit to the Ogudalovs. First, Sergei Sergeevich communicates sincerely with Harita Ignatievna. Later, left alone with Larisa, he wonders how long a woman is able to live apart from her loved one. The girl is tormented by this conversation; when asked if she loves Paratov, as before, Larisa answers yes.
Paratov’s acquaintance with Karandyshev begins with a conflict: saying the saying that “one loves watermelon, and the other loves pork cartilage,” Sergey Sergeevich explains that he studied Russian from barge haulers. These words cause indignation of Julius Kapitonovich, who believes that barge haulers are rude, ignorant people. The flaring quarrel is stopped by Harita Ignatievna: she orders to bring champagne. Peace has been restored, but later, in a conversation with merchants, Paratov admits that he will find an opportunity to “make fun” of the groom.
In the house of Karandyshev - a dinner party. Yulia Kapitonovich's aunt, Efrosinya Potapovna, complains to the servant Ivan that this event takes too much effort, and the costs are too high. It's good that we managed to save on wine: the seller sold the batch at six hryvnias per bottle, re-gluing the labels.
Larisa, seeing that the guests did not touch the offered dishes and drinks, is ashamed of the groom. The situation is aggravated by the fact that Robinson, who is instructed to drink the owner to complete insensibility, suffers loudly due to the fact that instead of the declared Burgundy he has to use some kind of "kinder-balm".
Paratov, demonstrating affection towards Karandyshev, agrees to have a drink with an opponent for brotherhood. When Sergei Sergeevich asks Larisa to sing, Julius Kapitonovich tries to protest. In response, Larisa takes the guitar and performs the romance "Do not tempt me unnecessarily." Her singing makes a strong impression on those present. Paratov confesses to the girl that he is tormented by the fact that he has lost such a treasure. Immediately he invites the young lady to go beyond the Volga. While Karandyshev proclaims a toast in honor of his bride and looks for new wine, Larisa says goodbye to her mother.
Returning with champagne, Julius Kapitonovich finds that the house is empty. The desperate monologue of the deceived groom is dedicated to the drama of a funny man who, when angry, is capable of revenge. Grabbing a gun from the table, Karandyshev rushes in search of the bride and her friends.
Returning from a night walk along the Volga, Knurov and Vozhevatov discuss the fate of Larisa. Both understand that Paratov will not exchange a rich bride for a dowry. To remove the question of possible rivalry, Vozhevatov proposes to decide everything with the help of lots. A thrown coin indicates that Knurov will take Larisa to an exhibition in Paris.
Meanwhile, Larisa, rising from the pier uphill, is having a difficult conversation with Paratov. She is interested in one thing: is she now a wife to Sergei Sergeyevich or not? The news that the beloved is engaged becomes a shock for the girl.
She is sitting at a table near the coffee shop when Knurov appears. He invites Larisa Dmitrievna to the French capital, guaranteeing, in case of consent, the highest content and the fulfillment of any whims. Next comes Karandyshev. He tries to open the bride's eyes to her friends, explaining that they see in her only a thing. The found word seems to Larisa successful. Having informed her ex-fiance that he is too small and insignificant for her, the young lady passionately declares that, having not found love, she will look for gold.
Karandyshev, listening to Larisa, takes out a pistol. The shot is accompanied by the words: “So don’t get it to anyone!”. To Paratov and the merchants who ran out of the coffee shop, Larisa informs in a fading voice that she does not complain about anything and is not offended by anyone.
The premiere at the Maly Theater, where the role of Larisa Ogudalova was played by Glikeria Fedotova, and Paratov was Alexander Lensky, took place on November 10, 1878. The excitement around the new play was unprecedented; in the hall, as reviewers later reported, "the whole of Moscow gathered, loving the Russian stage," including the writer Fyodor Dostoevsky. Expectations, however, did not come true: according to the observer of the Russkiye Vedomosti newspaper, "the playwright tired the entire audience, even the most naive spectators." It was the most deafening failure in Ostrovsky's creative biography.
The first production on the stage of the Alexandrinsky Theater, where Maria Savina played the main role, caused fewer derogatory responses. So, the St. Petersburg newspaper Novoe Vremya admitted that the performance based on "Dowry" made a "strong impression" on the audience. However, there was no need to talk about success: a critic of the same publication, a certain K., complained that Ostrovsky spent a lot of effort on creating a story of little interest to anyone about a “stupid seduced girl”:
Those who waited for a new word, new types from a venerable playwright are cruelly mistaken; instead of them, we got updated old motives, got a lot of dialogue instead of action.
Critics did not spare the actors who participated in the "Dowry". The capital's newspaper Birzhevye Vedomosti (1878, No. 325) noted that Glikeria Fedotova "did not understand the role at all and played badly." The journalist and writer Pyotr Boborykin, who published a note in Russkiye Vedomosti (1879, March 23), remembered only “drawing and falsity from the first step to the last word” in the work of the actress. Actor Lensky, according to Boborykin, when creating the image, made too much emphasis on white gloves, which his hero Paratov put on "unnecessarily every minute." Mikhail Sadovsky, who played the role of Karandyshev on the Moscow stage, presented, according to the observer of Novoye Vremya, "a poorly conceived type of official-groom".
In September 1896, the Alexandrinsky Theater undertook to revive the play, which had long been removed from the repertoire. The role of Larisa Ogudalova, performed by Vera Komissarzhevskaya, initially caused the familiar irritation of reviewers: they wrote that the actress "played unevenly, in the last act she hit melodrama." However, the audience understood and accepted the new stage version of "Dowry", in which the heroine was not between suitors, and above them; the play gradually began to return to the theaters of the country.
Productions
Larisa, which is included in the gallery of notable female images of literature of the second half of the 19th century, strives for independent actions; she feels like a person capable of making decisions. However, the impulses of the young heroine collide with the cynical morality of society, which perceives her as an expensive, exquisite thing.
The girl is surrounded by four admirers, each of whom is trying to get her attention. At the same time, according to researcher Vladimir Lakshin, it is by no means love that drives Larisa's boyfriends. So, Vozhevatov is not greatly distressed when the lot in the form of a thrown coin points to Knurov. He, in turn, is ready to wait until Paratov comes into play in order to later "take revenge and take the broken heroine to Paris." Karandyshev also perceives Larisa as a thing; however, unlike rivals, he does not want to see his beloved stranger thing . The simplest explanation of all the troubles of the heroine, associated with the lack of a dowry, is broken by the theme of loneliness, which young Ogudalova carries within herself; her inner orphanhood is so great that the girl looks "incompatible with the world."
Critics perceived Larisa as a kind of "continuation" of Katerina from Ostrovsky's play "Thunderstorm" (they are united by ardor and recklessness of feelings, which led to a tragic ending); at the same time, features of other heroines of Russian literature were found in her - we are talking about some Turgenev's girls, as well as Nastasya Filippovna from The Idiot and Anna Karenina from the novel of the same name:
The heroines of Dostoevsky, Tolstoy and Ostrovsky are brought together by their unexpected, illogical, reckless actions, dictated by emotions: love, hatred, contempt, remorse.
Karandyshev, like Larisa, is poor. Against the background of the "masters of life" - Knurov, Vozhevatov and Paratov - he looks like a "little man", who can be humiliated and insulted with impunity. At the same time, unlike the heroine, Julius Kapitonovich is not a victim, but part cruel world. Wanting to connect his life with Larisa, he hopes to pay off former offenders, to demonstrate to them his moral superiority. Even before the wedding, he tries to dictate to the bride how to behave in society; Karandyshev does not understand her reciprocal protest, he cannot delve into the reasons for their disagreement, because he is “too busy with himself”
