What is the essence of the political program of Loris Melikova. The Constitution That Wasn't

ESSAY-ESSAY

VICTORY IN THE WAR IS THE VICTORY OF THE PEOPLE'S SPIRIT

Ryzhova Yulia Viktorovna,

11th grade student

Teacher:

Dorohina Svetlana Vasilievna,

teacher of Russian language and literature

MBOU "Secondary School No. 30 named after M.K. Yangel"

the city of Bratsk

History has one indisputable

Law:

Who is devoted to his Motherland - the enemy

Will not be defeated.

S. Vurgun

Ordinary soldiers, sailors,

Through years of fighting and loss

Our peaceful dews are burning

All the gold of your awards.

V. Vinogradsky

May 9 ... Every year, when this bright day comes, the tragic and heroic war years are remembered with particular acuteness. Blood and pain, the bitterness of losses and defeats, the death of relatives and friends, heroic resistance and woeful captivity, selfless, to the point of exhaustion work in the rear - all this was carried by the war, taking away millions of human lives. The Russian people survived this war and defended their long-suffering land.

Victory in war is the victory of the national spirit, the victory of strong-willed people who are able to rise above circumstances and death itself. This is the victory of people who are guided by a feeling of love for the Motherland, which has fallen into serious trouble, a feeling of the most ardent patriotism.

The history of our country keeps the memory of many tragic events, the name of which is "war". More than once, the Russian people stood up to defend their homeland, and the strength of their spirit is passed on from generation to generation.

We learn about the events of the past years by reading authentic documents preserved in the archives, works of fiction, memoirs of the participants in these events.

The great Russian writer L.N. Tolstoy glorified two Russian national epics with “his unsurpassed creations”: first, the Crimean War of 1854-1855 in Sevastopol Tales, and subsequently the victory over Napoleon in 1812 in the novel War and Peace, showing the greatest strength of the Russian spirit people.

In the story “Sevastopol in the month of December”, Tolstoy writes: “You will clearly understand, imagine those people whom you have just seen, those heroes who did not fall in those difficult times, but rose in spirit and prepared with pleasure for death, not out of town but for the homeland. This epic of Sevastopol, of which the Russian people were the hero, will leave great traces in Russia for a long time ... ". A wounded sailor, whose leg was torn off by a shell, “stopped the stretcher in order to look at the volley of our battery,” the soldiers and sailors say: “Nothing, there are two hundred of us on the bastion, there will still be enough for us for two days.”

In the novel by L.N. Tolstoy’s “War and Peace” we read: “With many years of military experience, he (Kutuzov) knew ... that it was not the orders of the commander-in-chief, not the place on which the troops stood, not the number of guns and killed people, but that elusive force that decide the fate of the battle, called the spirit of the army ... ". “A wonderful, incomparable people,” says Kutuzov about Russian soldiers and militia before the battle of Borodino. Before the battle, they put on clean white shirts to prepare for death. They were ready to die for their land, because the French "ravaged their house", and "they are going to ruin Moscow ...". “We fought for the Russian land ..., there was such a spirit in the troops that I had never seen ...”, - says the protagonist of the novel, Andrei Bolkonsky. And this spirit helped the Russian soldiers to defeat Napoleon's army.

The Russian people know how to defend and love their homeland, carrying through the years the heroic traditions of Russian weapons, fanning it with new immortal glory.

There are holy places near Moscow. Dubosekovo junction is one of them. There are six giant concrete figures of warriors, clutching concrete bundles of grenades and machine guns in their hands. They seem to grow out of the ground. And behind them is Moscow. One hundred and twenty-nine years after the battle of Borodino, the Nazi troops will approach Moscow. And again, Russian soldiers will fight to the death, defending their land. “Russia is great, but there is nowhere to retreat, behind Moscow,” these words of Lieutenant Klochkov still live in the memory of people, recalling the feat of the Panfilov heroes. They died, but the enemy was not missed.

In the same distant 1941, fascist radio stations broadcast: “Sevastopol has fallen! Crimea is taken! But it wasn't true. Sevastopol stood to death. He could not fall, because the spirit of the soldiers and sailors who heroically defended Sevastopol in 1854-1855 during the Crimean War lived in new generations of soldiers and sailors. A landing force of twenty-five Black Sea sailors was landed from a submarine into cold water in a small Black Sea bay. He had to take fire on himself in order to distract the Nazis from the main troops. The sailors completed the task assigned to them at the cost of their own lives.

1943 Stalingrad. Fighting continues in the city. Heavy water columns rise up from the bombs falling into the Volga. The defenders of the city "until the end, to the last human possibility" fight the enemies. Konstantin Simonov will say about Stalingrad: "This is a city-soldier, singed in battle ... the exploits of people are cruel, and their suffering is unheard of ... the struggle is not for life, but for death."

About the courage of the soldiers, about the great desire to liberate their land from enemies, their letters, written by them in rare moments of rest, tell. We read a letter from tanker A. Golikov, who fought near Moscow: “... Through the holes of the tank, I see the street, green trees, flowers in the garden are bright, bright. For you, the survivors, after the war, life will be as bright as these flowers, and happy ... It's not scary to die for it ... ".

G.K. Zhukov, Marshal of the Soviet Union, four times Hero of the Soviet Union, wrote: “The Soviet soldier knew how to boldly look into the eyes of mortal danger, while demonstrating military prowess and heroism. By his will, his inflexible spirit, his blood won victory over a strong enemy. There are no limits to the greatness of his feat in the name of the Motherland.

The strength of the spirit of the people was manifested not only on the battlefields. It was she and the belief that the enemy, trampling the Russian land, would be defeated, helped people survive in the besieged Leningrad, gave strength to hungry women and teenagers for days to stand at the machines, work in the fields.

The Great Patriotic War has already become history. We read about it, like about the other Patriotic War, in history books. And it is very important that behind the facts and figures we can see and hear those who created History, so that we, the next generations, will be given their ability to love and appreciate their land, their fortitude, which in difficult times will help to survive.

The soldiers of their homeland sleep in mass graves, in hospital cemeteries and rural graveyards. Fewer and fewer living participants in the Great Patriotic War remain with us, and I want to bow low to them, both the living and the dead, in gratitude for the fact that the Russia-country they saved remained with us.

Final essay 2017: arguments on the work "War and Peace" for all directions

Honor and dishonor.

Honor: Natasha Rostova, Petya Rostov, Pierre Bezukhoye, Captain Timokhin, Vasily Denisov, Marya Bolkonskaya, Andrey Bolkonsky, Nikolai Rostov

Disgrace: Vasil Kuragin and his children: Helen, Ippolit and Anatole

Argument: The Patriots are ready to fight the French. They want to free the Russian lands. Andrei Bolkonsky and Pierre Bezukhov, Vasily Denisov and Captain Timokhin strove for this goal. For the sake of her, young Petya Rostov gives his life. Natasha Rostova and Marya Bolkonskaya wish victory over the enemy with all their hearts. There is no reason to doubt the truth of the patriotic feelings that owned both the old prince Bolkonsky and Nikolai Rostov. At the same time, the writer convinces us of the complete lack of patriotism among such people as Prince Vasily Kuragin and his children: Ippolit, Anatole and Helen. By no means love for the Motherland (they do not have this love) is guided by Boris Drubetskoy and Dolokhov, entering the army. The first is studying "unwritten chain of command" to make a career. The second tries to distinguish himself in order to quickly regain his officer rank, and then receive awards and ranks. Military official Berg in Moscow, abandoned by the inhabitants, buys things at a cheap price...

Victory and defeat.

Victory: Shengraben battle. The French army outnumbered the Russian one. One hundred thousand against thirty-five. The Russian army led by Kutuzov won a small victory at Krems and had to move to Znaim to save themselves. Kutuzov no longer trusted his allies. The Austrian army, without waiting for the reinforcements of the Russian troops, launched an attack on the French, but seeing their superiority, capitulated. Kutuzov, on the other hand, had to retreat, because the unevenness of forces did not bode well. The only salvation was to get to Znaim before the French. But the Russian road was longer and more difficult. Then Kutuzov decides to send Bagration's vanguard to cut across the enemy, that he, as best he could, detained the enemy. And here chance saved the Russians. The French envoy Murat, seeing Bagration's detachment, decided that this was the entire Russian army, and proposed a truce for three days. Kutuzov took advantage of this "rest". Of course, Napoleon immediately understood the deception, but while his messenger was driving to the army, Kutuzov had already managed to get to Znaim. When Bagration's vanguard retreated, Tushin's small battery, which stood near the village of Shengraben, was forgotten and abandoned by the Russians.

Defeat: Battle of Austerlitz. The main role in the conduct of this war was assumed by the Austrian military leaders, especially since the battles were fought on the territory of Austria. And the battle near the town of Austerlitz in the novel "War and Peace" was also thought out and planned by the Austrian general Weyrother. Weyrother did not consider it necessary to take into account the opinion of Kutuzov or anyone else.

The military council before the battle of Austerlitz does not resemble advice, but an exhibition of vanities, all disputes were not conducted with the goal of reaching a better and correct solution, but, as Tolstoy writes: “... it was obvious that the goal ... of objections consisted mainly in the desire to make one feel General Weyrother, so self-confidently, as to schoolchildren, who read his disposition, that he dealt not only with fools, but with people who could teach him in military affairs. Having made several futile attempts to change the situation, Kutuzov overslept the entire time the council lasted. Tolstoy makes it clear how much all this pomposity and complacency disgusts Kutuzov, the old general is well aware that the battle will be lost.

Conclusion: The history of mankind consists of victories and defeats in wars. In the novel "War and Peace" Tolstoy describes the participation of Russia and Austria in the war against Napoleon. Thanks to the Russian troops, the battle of Shengraben was won, and this gave strength and inspiration to the sovereigns of Russia and Austria. Blinded by victories, preoccupied mainly with narcissism, holding military reviews and balls, these two men led their armies to defeat at Austerlitz. The Battle of Austerlitz in Tolstoy's War and Peace was the decisive battle in the War of the Three Emperors. Tolstoy shows the two emperors at first as pompous and self-satisfied, and after the defeat as confused and unhappy people. Napoleon managed to outwit and defeat the Russian-Austrian army. Emperors fled the battlefield, and after the end of the battle, Emperor Franz decided to submit to Napoleon on his terms.

Mistakes and experience.

Argument: While living in France, Pierre was imbued with the ideas of Freemasonry, it seemed to Pierre that he had found like-minded people, that with their help he could change the world for the better. But he soon became disillusioned with Freemasonry.

Pierre Bezukhov is still very young and inexperienced, he is looking for the purpose of his life, but comes to the conclusion that nothing can be changed in this world and falls under the bad influence of Kuragin and Dolokhov. Pierre begins to "burn through life", spends his time on balls and social evenings. Kuragin marries him to Helen. Bezukhov was inspired by passion for Helen Kuragina, he rejoiced at the happiness of marrying her. But after a while, Pierre noticed that Helen was just a beautiful doll with an icy heart. Marriage with Helen Kuragina brought Pierre Bezukhov only pain and disappointment in the female field. Tired of a wild life, Pierre is eager to work. He begins to carry out reforms in his lands.

Pierre found his happiness in marriage with Natasha Rostova. A long journey of wandering, sometimes erroneous, sometimes funny and ridiculous, nevertheless led Pierre Bezukhov to the truth. We can say that the end of Pierre's life searches is good, because he achieved the goal that he originally pursued. He tried to change this world for the better.

Mind and feelings.

On the pages of world fiction, the problem of the influence of feelings and the mind of a person is raised very often. So, for example, in Leo Tolstoy's epic novel "War and Peace" two types of heroes appear: on the one hand, impetuous Natasha Rostova, sensitive Pierre Bezukhov, fearless Nikolai Rostov, on the other hand, haughty and prudent Helen Kuragina and her brother, callous Anatole. Many conflicts in the novel come precisely from the excess of feelings of the characters, whose ups and downs are very interesting to watch. A vivid example of how a burst of feelings, thoughtlessness, ardor of character, impatient youth influenced the fate of the heroes is the case with Natasha, because for her, laughable and young, it was incredibly long to wait for a wedding with Andrei Bolkonsky, could she subdue her unexpectedly flashed feelings for Anatole the voice of reason? Here, a real drama of mind and feelings unfolds in front of us in the soul of the heroine, she faces a difficult choice: leave her fiancé and leave with Anatole, or not succumb to a momentary impulse and wait for Andrei. It was in favor of feelings that this difficult choice was made, only chance prevented Natasha. We cannot condemn the girl, knowing her impatient nature and thirst for love. It was feelings that dictated Natasha's impulse, after which she regretted her act when she analyzed it.

Friendship and enmity.

One of the central lines of the novel, one of the greatest values, according to Tolstoy, is, of course, the friendship of Andrei Bolkonsky and Pierre Bezukhov. They are both alien to the society in which they find themselves. Both of them are above him in their thoughts and moral values, only Pierre needs time to understand this. Andrey is sure of his own, special purpose, and the empty, unchanging life is not for him. He is trying to convince Pierre, who is the only one he respects in that environment due to the contrast with the empty elite, to stay away from this life. But Pierre is nevertheless convinced of this on his own, from his own experience. He, so simple and unpretentious, is difficult to resist the temptation. The friendship between Andrei and Pierre can be considered true, beautiful and immortal, because the soil on which it stood was the most worthy and noble. There was not a drop of self-seeking in this friendship, and neither money nor influence was a guideline for any of them either in their relationships or in the life of each separately. This is what should unite people if they live in a society where all feelings can be bought and sold so coldly.

Fortunately, in Tolstoy's novel, these characters found each other, thereby finding salvation from moral loneliness and finding worthy ground for the development of morality and real ideas that should not be lost even by a minority of people.

Official comment:
The direction allows you to think about victory and defeat in different aspects: socio-historical, moral and philosophical,
psychological. Reasoning can be connected both with external conflict events in the life of a person, country, world, and with the internal struggle of a person with himself, its causes and results.

Literary works often show the ambiguity and relativity of the concepts of "victory" and "defeat" in different historical conditions and life situations.

Aphorisms and sayings of famous people:
The greatest victory is victory over yourself.
Cicero
The possibility that we may be defeated in battle should not prevent us from fighting for a cause that we consider just.
A. Lincoln
Man is not created to suffer defeat... Man can be destroyed, but he cannot be defeated.
E. Hemingway
Be proud only of the victories you have won over yourself.
Tungsten

Socio-historical aspect
Here we will talk about the external conflict of social groups, states, military operations and political struggle.
Peru A. de Saint-Exupery owns a paradoxical, at first glance, statement: "Victory weakens the people - defeat awakens new forces in it ...". We find confirmation of the correctness of this idea in Russian literature.
"The Tale of Igor's Campaign"- a famous monument of literature of Ancient Russia. The plot is based on the unsuccessful campaign of the Russian princes against the Polovtsians, organized by the Novgorod-Seversky prince Igor Svyatoslavich in 1185. The main idea is the idea of ​​the unity of the Russian land. Princely civil strife, weakening the Russian land and leading to ruin by its enemies, make the author bitterly sad and complain; victory over enemies fills his soul with ardent delight. However, this work of ancient Russian literature tells about defeat, and not about victory, because it is defeat that contributes to the rethinking of previous behavior, gaining a new view of the world and oneself. That is, defeat stimulates Russian soldiers to victories and exploits.
The author of the Lay addresses all the Russian princes in turn, as if calling them to account and demandingly reminding them of their duty to their homeland. He calls them to defend the Russian land, "to block the gates of the field" with their sharp arrows. And therefore, although the author writes about defeat, there is not even a shadow of despondency in the Lay. The "Word" is as concise and laconic as Igor's appeals to his squad. This is the call before the fight. The whole poem, as it were, is turned to the future, permeated with concern for this future. A poem about victory would be a poem of triumph and joy. Victory is the end of the battle, while defeat for the author of the Lay is only the beginning of the battle. The battle with the steppe enemy is not yet over. The defeat should unite the Russians. The author of the Lay calls not to a feast of triumph, but to a feast-battle. This is written in the article "The Word about the campaign of Igor Svyatoslavich" D.S. Likhachev.
The "Word" ends happily - with the return of Igor to the Russian land and the singing of glory to him at the entrance to Kyiv. So, despite the fact that the “Word” is dedicated to the defeat of Igor, it is full of confidence in the power of the Russians, full of faith in the glorious future of the Russian land, in victory over the enemy.
The history of mankind consists of victories and defeats in wars. In the novel "War and Peace" L.N. Tolstoy describes the participation of Russia and Austria in the war against Napoleon. Drawing the events of 1805-1807, Tolstoy shows that this war was imposed on the peoples. Russian soldiers, being far from their homeland, do not understand the purpose of this war, they do not want to lay down their lives senselessly. Kutuzov understands better than many the uselessness of this campaign for Russia. He sees the indifference of the allies, the desire of Austria to fight by proxy. Kutuzov protects his troops in every possible way, delaying their advance to the borders of France. This is explained not by distrust of the military skill and heroism of the Russians, but by the desire to save them from senseless slaughter. When the battle turned out to be inevitable, the Russian soldiers showed their constant readiness to help the allies, to take the brunt. For example, a detachment of four thousand under the command of Bagration near the village of Shengraben held back the onslaught of the enemy, "eight times" outnumbering him. This made it possible for the main forces to advance. The miracles of heroism were shown by the unit of officer Timokhin. It not only did not retreat, but struck back, which saved the flank units of the army. The real hero of the Shengraben battle was the courageous, resolute, but modest captain Tushin before his superiors. So, largely thanks to the Russian troops, the battle of Shengraben was won, and this gave strength and inspiration to the sovereigns of Russia and Austria. Blinded by victories, preoccupied mainly with narcissism, holding military reviews and balls, these two men led their armies to defeat at Austerlitz. So it turned out that one of the reasons for the defeat of the Russian troops under the sky of Austerlitz was the victory at Shengraben, which did not allow an objective assessment of the balance of power.
All the senselessness of the campaign is shown by the writer in the preparation of the highest generals for the battle of Austerlitz. So, the military council before the battle of Austerlitz does not resemble advice, but an exhibition of vanities, all disputes were not conducted with the goal of reaching a better and correct solution, but, as Tolstoy writes, “... it was obvious that the goal ... of objections consisted mainly in the desire let General Weyrother feel, as self-confidently as to schoolchildren who read his disposition, that he was dealing not only with fools, but with people who could also teach him in military affairs.
And yet, we see the main reason for the victories and defeats of the Russian troops in the confrontation with Napoleon when comparing Austerlitz and Borodin. Speaking with Pierre about the upcoming battle of Borodino, Andrei Bolkonsky recalls the reason for the defeat at Austerlitz: “The battle is won by the one who firmly decided to win it. Why did we lose the battle at Austerlitz? .. We told ourselves very early that we lost the battle, and lost And we said this because we had no reason to fight: we wanted to leave the battlefield as soon as possible. "We lost - well, run!" We ran. If we had not said this before evening, God knows what would have happened. And tomorrow we won't say that." L. Tolstoy shows a significant difference between the two campaigns: 1805-1807 and 1812. The fate of Russia was decided on the Borodino field. Here, the Russian people had no desire to save themselves, no indifference to what was happening. Here, as Lermontov says, "and we promised to die, and we kept the oath of allegiance in the Battle of Borodino."
Another opportunity to speculate about how a victory in one battle can turn into a defeat in a war is provided by the outcome of the Battle of Borodino, in which Russian troops gain a moral victory over the French. The moral defeat of Napoleon's troops near Moscow is the beginning of the defeat of his army.
The Civil War turned out to be such a significant event in the history of Russia that it could not but be reflected in fiction. The basis for the reasoning of graduates can be "Don stories", "Quiet Don" M.A. Sholokhov.
When one country goes to war with another, terrible events occur: hatred and the desire to defend themselves make people kill their own kind, women and the elderly are left alone, children grow up as orphans, cultural and material values ​​are destroyed, cities are destroyed. But the warring parties have a goal - to defeat the enemy at any cost. And every war has a result - victory or defeat. Victory is sweet and immediately justifies all losses, defeat is tragic and sad, but it is the starting point for some other life. But "in a civil war every victory is a defeat" (Lucian).
The life story of the central character of the epic novel by M. Sholokhov "The Quiet Don" by Grigory Melekhov, reflecting the drama of the fate of the Don Cossacks, confirms this idea. War cripples from the inside and destroys all the most precious that people have. It forces the heroes to take a fresh look at the problems of duty and justice, to seek the truth and not find it in any of the warring camps. Once at the Reds, Grigory sees all the same as the Whites, cruelty, intransigence, thirst for the blood of enemies. Melekhov rushes between the two belligerents. Everywhere he encounters violence and cruelty, which he cannot accept, and therefore cannot take one side. The result is logical: “Like a steppe scorched by fires, Grigory’s life became black ...”.

Moral-philosophical and psychological aspects
Victory is not only success in battle. To win, according to the dictionary of synonyms, is to overcome, overpower, overcome. And often not so much the enemy as himself. Consider a number of works from this point of view.
A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit". The conflict of the play is a unity of two principles: public and personal. Being an honest, noble, progressive-minded, freedom-loving man, the main character Chatsky opposes the Famus society. He condemns the inhumanity of serfdom, recalling "Nestor of noble scoundrels", who exchanged his faithful servants for three greyhounds; he is disgusted by the lack of freedom of thought in the society of the nobility: “And who in Moscow did not shut up lunches, dinners and dances?”. He does not recognize servility and sycophancy: "Who needs it: for those who are arrogant, they lie in the dust, and for those who are higher, flattery, like lace, was woven." Chatsky is full of sincere patriotism: “Will we ever rise again from the foreign power of fashion? So that our smart, peppy people, although by language, do not consider us Germans. He strives to serve the “cause”, and not individuals, he “would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to serve.” Society is offended and, defending itself, declares Chatsky crazy. His drama is aggravated by a feeling of ardent but unrequited love for Famusov's daughter Sofya. Chatsky does not make an attempt to understand Sophia, it is difficult for him to understand why Sophia does not love him, because his love for her speeds up “every heartbeat”, although “the whole world seemed to him dust and vanity.” Chatsky's blindness with passion can justify him: his "mind and heart are out of tune." The psychological conflict turns into a social conflict. Society unanimously comes to the conclusion: "crazy in everything ...". Crazy society is not terrible. Chatsky decides to "search around the world where the offended feeling has a corner."
I.A. Goncharov assessed the finale of the play as follows: "Chatsky is broken by the quantity of the old force, inflicting a mortal blow on it with the quality of the new force." Chatsky does not give up his ideals, he only frees himself from illusions. Chatsky's stay in Famusov's house shook the inviolability of the foundations of Famusov's society. Sophia says: “I am ashamed of myself!”
Therefore, the defeat of Chatsky is only a temporary defeat and only his personal drama. On a public scale, "the victory of the Chatskys is inevitable." The “past century” will be replaced by the “current century”, and the views of the comedy hero Griboyedov will win.
A.N. Ostrovsky "Thunderstorm". Graduates can reflect on the question of whether Katerina's death is a victory or defeat. It is difficult to give an unambiguous answer to this question. Too many reasons led to a terrible ending. The playwright sees the tragedy of Katerina's position in that she comes into conflict not only with Kalinov's family mores, but also with herself. The straightforwardness of Ostrovsky's heroine is one of the sources of her tragedy. Katerina is pure in soul - lies and debauchery are alien and disgusting to her. She understands that, having fallen in love with Boris, she has violated the moral law. “Ah, Varya,” she complains, “I have a sin on my mind! How much I, poor thing, wept, no matter what I did to myself! I can't get away from this sin. Nowhere to go. After all, this is not good, because this is a terrible sin, Varenka, that I love another? Throughout the play, there is a painful struggle in Katerina's mind between understanding her wrong, her sinfulness and a vague, but increasingly powerful sense of her right to human life. But the play ends with Katerina's moral victory over the dark forces that torment her. She expiates her guilt immeasurably, and escapes bondage and humiliation by the only path that has been opened to her. Her decision to die, if only not to remain a slave, expresses, according to Dobrolyubov, "the need for the emerging movement of Russian life." And this decision comes to Katerina along with internal self-justification. She dies because she considers death the only worthy outcome, the only way to preserve the higher that lived in her. The idea that Katerina's death is actually a moral victory, the triumph of the real Russian soul over the forces of the "dark kingdom" of the Wild and Kabanovs, is also strengthened by the reaction of other heroes of the play to her death. For example, Tikhon, Katerina's husband, for the first time in his life expressed his own opinion, for the first time he decided to protest against the suffocating foundations of his family, joining (if only for a moment) in the fight against the "dark kingdom". "You ruined her, you, you..." he exclaims, turning to his mother, before whom he has trembled all his life.
I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons". The writer shows in his novel the struggle between worldviews of two political trends. The plot of the novel is built on the opposition of the views of Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov and Evgeny Bazarov, who are the brightest representatives of two generations that do not find mutual understanding. Differences on various issues have always existed between the youth and the elders. So here, a representative of the younger generation, Evgeny Vasilyevich Bazarov, cannot, and does not want to understand the "fathers", their life credo, principles. He is convinced that their views on the world, on life, on relations between people are hopelessly outdated. “Yes, I will spoil them ... After all, this is all pride, lion's habits, foppery ...”. In his opinion, the main purpose of life is to work, to produce something material. That is why Bazarov disrespectfully treats art, sciences that do not have a practical basis. He believes that it is much more useful to deny what, from his point of view, deserves to be denied, than to watch indifferently from the side, not daring to do anything. “At the present time, denial is most useful - we deny,” says Bazarov. And Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov is sure that there are things that cannot be doubted (“Aristocracy ... liberalism, progress, principles ... art ...”). He values ​​habits and traditions more and does not want to notice the changes taking place in society.
Bazarov is a tragic figure. It cannot be said that he defeats Kirsanov in a dispute. Even when Pavel Petrovich is ready to admit his defeat, Bazarov suddenly loses faith in his teaching and doubts his personal need for society. "Does Russia need me? No, apparently I don't," he reflects.
Of course, most of all a person is manifested not in conversations, but in deeds and in his life. Therefore, Turgenev, as it were, leads his heroes through various trials. And the strongest of them is the test of love. After all, it is in love that the soul of a person is revealed fully and sincerely.
And then the hot and passionate nature of Bazarov swept away all his theories. He fell in love with a woman whom he highly valued. “In conversations with Anna Sergeevna, he expressed even more than before his indifferent contempt for everything romantic, and left alone, he indignantly recognized the romance in himself.” The hero is going through a severe mental breakdown. "...Something...was possessed in him, which he never allowed, over which he always mocked, which revolted all his pride." Anna Sergeevna Odintsova rejected him. But Bazarov found the strength to accept defeat with honor, without losing his dignity.
So all the same - did the nihilist Bazarov win or lose? It seems that in the test of love, Bazarov is defeated. First, his feelings and himself are rejected. Secondly, he falls into the power of the aspects of life he himself denies, loses ground under his feet, begins to doubt his views on life. His position in life turns out to be a position in which, however, he sincerely believed. Bazarov begins to lose the meaning of life, and soon loses life itself. But this is also a victory: love made Bazarov take a different look at himself and the world, he begins to understand that life does not want to fit into a nihilistic scheme in anything.
And Anna Sergeevna formally remains among the winners. She managed to cope with her feelings, which strengthened her self-confidence. In the future, she will build a sister well, and she herself will successfully marry. But will she be happy?
F.M. Dostoevsky "Crime and Punishment". Crime and Punishment is an ideological novel where non-human theory collides with human feelings. Dostoevsky, a great connoisseur of the psychology of people, a sensitive and attentive artist, tried to understand modern reality, to determine the degree of influence on a person of the then popular ideas of revolutionary reorganization of life and individualistic theories. Entering into polemics with democrats and socialists, the writer sought to show in his novel how the delusion of fragile minds leads to murder, shedding of blood, maiming and breaking young lives.
Raskolnikov's ideas are generated by abnormal, humiliating conditions of life. In addition, the post-reform breakup destroyed the age-old foundations of society, depriving human individuality of connection with the old cultural traditions of society, historical memory. Raskolnikov sees a violation of universal moral norms at every step. It is impossible to feed a family with honest labor, so the petty official Marmeladov finally becomes an inveterate drunkard, and his daughter Sonechka is forced to trade herself, because otherwise her family will die of hunger. If unbearable living conditions push a person to violate moral principles, then these principles are nonsense, that is, they can be ignored. Raskolnikov comes to this conclusion when a theory is born in his inflamed brain, according to which he divides all of humanity into two unequal parts. On the one hand, these are strong personalities, "super-humans" such as Mohammed and Napoleon, and on the other, a gray, faceless and submissive crowd, which the hero bestows with a contemptuous name - "trembling creature" and "anthill".
The correctness of any theory must be confirmed by practice. And Rodion Raskolnikov conceives and carries out the murder, removing the moral prohibition from himself. His life after the murder turns into a real hell. A painful suspicion develops in Rodion, which gradually turns into a feeling of loneliness, rejection from everyone. The writer finds a surprisingly accurate expression characterizing Raskolnikov's inner state: he "as if cut himself off with scissors from everyone and everything." The hero is disappointed in himself, believing that he did not pass the test for the role of the ruler, which means, alas, he belongs to the "trembling creatures".
Surprisingly, Raskolnikov himself would not want to be the winner now. After all, to win means to perish morally, to remain with your spiritual chaos forever, to lose faith in people, yourself and life. Raskolnikov's defeat was his victory - a victory over himself, over his theory, over the Devil, who took possession of his soul, but could not forever displace God in it.
M.A. Bulgakov "Master and Margarita". This novel is too complex and multifaceted, the writer touched on many topics and problems in it. One of them is the problem of the struggle between good and evil. In The Master and Margarita, the two main forces of good and evil, which, according to Bulgakov, should be in balance on Earth, are embodied in the images of Yeshua Ha-Notsri from Yershalaim and Woland - Satan in human form. Apparently, Bulgakov, in order to show that good and evil exist outside of time and for thousands of years people live according to their laws, placed Yeshua at the beginning of a new time, in the fictional masterpiece of the Master, and Woland, as the arbiter of cruel justice, in Moscow of the 30s. XX century. The latter came to Earth to restore harmony where it had been broken in favor of evil, which included lies, stupidity, hypocrisy and, finally, betrayal that filled Moscow. Good and evil in this world are surprisingly closely intertwined, especially in human souls. When Woland, in a scene in a variety show, tests the audience for cruelty and decapitates the entertainer, and compassionate women demand to put her in her place, the great magician says: “Well ... they are people like people ... Well, frivolous ... well, what ... and mercy sometimes knocks on their hearts ... ordinary people ... - and loudly orders: “Put on your head.” And then we observe how people are fighting because of the gold pieces that have fallen on their heads.
The novel "The Master and Margarita" is about the responsibility of a person for the good and evil that happens on earth, for his own choice of life paths leading to truth and freedom or to slavery, betrayal and inhumanity. It is about all-conquering love and creativity, elevating the soul to the heights of true humanity.
The author wanted to proclaim: the victory of evil over good cannot be the end result of social and moral confrontation. This, according to Bulgakov, is not accepted by human nature itself, should not be allowed by the entire course of civilization.
Of course, the range of works in which the thematic direction “Victory and Defeat” is revealed is much wider. The main thing is to see the principle, to understand that victory and defeat are relative concepts.
Wrote about it R. Bach in the book "Bridge Through Eternity": “The important thing is not whether we lose the game, but how we lose and how we change because of this, what we bring out for ourselves, how we can apply it in other games. In a strange way, defeat turns out to be victory."

Victory is always welcome. We wait for victory from early childhood, playing catch-up or board games. Whatever the cost, we need to win. And the one who wins feels like the king of the situation. And someone is a loser, because he doesn’t run so fast or just the wrong chips fell out. Is it really necessary to win? Who can be considered the winner? Is victory always an indicator of true superiority.

In Anton Pavlovich Chekhov's comedy The Cherry Orchard, the center of the conflict is the confrontation between the old and the new. The noble society, brought up on the ideals of the past, has stopped in its development, accustomed to getting everything without much difficulty, by right of birth, Ranevskaya and Gaev are helpless in the face of the need for action. They are paralyzed, unable to make decisions, to move. Their world is collapsing, flying into hell, and they are building rainbow-colored projectors, starting an unnecessary holiday in the house on the day the estate is auctioned. And then Lopakhin appears - a former serf, and now - the owner of a cherry orchard. Victory intoxicated him. At first he tries to hide his joy, but soon the triumph overwhelms him and, no longer embarrassed, he laughs and literally shouts:

My God, Lord, my cherry orchard! Tell me that I'm drunk, out of my mind, that all this seems to me ...

Of course, the slavery of his grandfather and father may justify his behavior, but in the face, according to him, of his beloved Ranevskaya, this looks at least tactless. And here it is already difficult to stop him, like a real master of life, the winner he demands:

Hey, musicians, play, I want to listen to you! Everyone come and watch how Yermolai Lopakhin will hit the cherry orchard with an ax, how the trees will fall to the ground!

Maybe, from the point of view of progress, Lopakhin's victory is a step forward, but somehow it becomes sad after such victories. The garden is cut down without waiting for the departure of the former owners, Firs is forgotten in the boarded-up house... Does such a play have a morning?

In the story of Alexander Ivanovich Kuprin "Garnet Bracelet" the focus is on the fate of a young man who dared to fall in love with a woman not of his circle. G.S.Zh. long and devotedly loves Princess Vera. His gift - a garnet bracelet - immediately attracted the attention of a woman, because the stones suddenly lit up like “charming deep red live fires. "Just like blood!" Vera thought with unexpected anxiety. Unequal relationships are always fraught with serious consequences. Anxious forebodings did not deceive the princess. The need at all costs to put in place the presumptuous villain arises not so much for the husband as for Vera's brother. Appearing in the face of Zheltkov, representatives of high society a priori behave like winners. Zheltkov’s behavior strengthens them in his confidence: “his trembling hands ran around, fiddling with buttons, pinching his blond reddish mustache, touching his face needlessly.” The poor telegraph operator is crushed, confused, feels guilty. But as soon as Nikolai Nikolaevich recalls the authorities, to whom the defenders of the honor of his wife and sister wanted to turn, Zheltkov suddenly changes. No one has power over him, over his feelings, except for the object of adoration. No power can forbid to love a woman. And to suffer for the sake of love, to give one's life for it - this is the true victory of the great feeling that G.S.Zh. was lucky to experience. He leaves silently and confidently. His letter to Vera is a hymn to a great feeling, a triumphant song of Love! His death is his victory over the petty prejudices of pitiful nobles who feel themselves masters of life.

Victory, as it turns out, can be more dangerous and more disgusting than defeat if it violates eternal values ​​and distorts the moral foundations of life.

Probably, there are no people in the world who would not dream of victory. Every day we win small victories or suffer defeats. In an effort to succeed over yourself and your weaknesses, getting up in the morning thirty minutes earlier, doing sports, preparing lessons that are poorly given. Sometimes such victories become a step towards success, towards self-affirmation. But this is not always the case. Seeming victory turns into defeat, and defeat, in fact, is a victory.

In the comedy "Woe from Wit" by A.S. Griboedov, the main character A.A. Chatsky, after a three-year absence, returns to the society in which he grew up. Everything is familiar to him, he has a categorical judgment about every representative of secular society. “Houses are new, but prejudices are old,” concludes a young, passionate man about the renewed Moscow. The Famus society adheres to the strict rules of Catherine's time:

“honor by father and son”, “be poor, but if there are two thousand tribal souls, that is the groom”, “the door is open for invited and uninvited, especially from foreign ones”, “it’s not that novelties are introduced - never”, "judges of everything, everywhere, there are no judges over them."

And only subservience, servility, hypocrisy rule over the minds and hearts of the "chosen" representatives of the top of the noble class. Chatsky with his views is out of place. In his opinion, “ranks are given by people, but people can be deceived”, it is low to seek patronage from those in power, it is necessary to achieve success with the mind, and not with servility. Famusov, barely hearing his reasoning, plugs his ears, shouting: "... on trial!" He considers the young Chatsky a revolutionary, a "carbonari", a dangerous person, and when Skalozub appears, he asks not to express his thoughts aloud. And when a young man nevertheless begins to express his views, he quickly leaves, not wanting to be responsible for his judgments. However, the colonel turns out to be a narrow-minded person and catches only arguments about uniforms. In general, few people understand Chatsky at Famusov's ball: the owner himself, Sofia and Molchalin. But each of them makes their own verdict. Famusov would forbid such people to drive up to the capital for a shot, Sofya says that he is “not a man - a snake”, and Molchalin decides that Chatsky is just a loser. The final verdict of the Moscow world is madness! At the climax, when the hero delivers his keynote speech, no one in the audience listens to him. You can say that Chatsky is defeated, but it's not! I.A. Goncharov believes that the comedy hero is the winner, and one cannot but agree with him. The appearance of this man shook the stagnant Famus society, destroyed Sophia's illusions, and shook Molchalin's position.

In I.S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons”, two opponents collide in a heated argument: a representative of the younger generation, the nihilist Bazarov, and nobleman P.P. Kirsanov. One lived an idle life, spent the lion's share of the allotted time in love with a famous beauty, a socialite - Princess R. But, despite this lifestyle, he gained experience, experienced, probably, the most important feeling that overtook him, washed away everything superficial, knocked down arrogance and self-confidence. This feeling is love. Bazarov boldly judges everything, considering himself a "self-broken", a person who made his name only with his own work, mind. In a dispute with Kirsanov, he is categorical, harsh, but observes external decency, but Pavel Petrovich cannot stand it and breaks down, indirectly calling Bazarov a "dummy":

...before they were just fools, and now they are suddenly nihilists.

Bazarov's external victory in this dispute, then in a duel, turns out to be a defeat in the main confrontation. Having met his first and only love, the young man is not able to survive the defeat, he does not want to admit the collapse, but he cannot do anything. Without love, without sweet eyes, such desired hands and lips, life is not needed. He becomes distracted, cannot concentrate, and no denial helps him in this confrontation. Yes, it seems that Bazarov won, because he is so stoically going to death, silently fighting the disease, but in fact he lost, because he lost everything for which it was worth living and creating.

Courage and determination in any struggle are essential. But sometimes you have to reject self-confidence, look around, re-read the classics, so as not to make a mistake in the right choice. After all, this is your life. And when defeating someone, think about whether this is a victory!