Literature is the conscience of society (Moral problems of modern literature). Start in science Moral problems in works of literature

I was, I lived.
For everything in the world
I answer with my head.
A. Tvardovsky
The problems of Man and Earth, Good and Evil are one of the most ancient and eternal problems in literature. From the first poetic experiences of primitive man to modern philosophical and sophisticated poetry, there stretches a strong and stable thread of man’s artistic knowledge of the world around him and his place in it. Literature has always worthily expressed its high purpose of being at the forefront of the struggle for the hearts and minds of people, contributed to the development of civic activity, the establishment of high moral ideals and norms, feelings of patriotism and internationalism. The problems are innumerable, but the main one is one: concern for the formation of the human soul.
Writers who constantly solve these problems include V. Rasputin, S. Zalygin, V. Astafiev, G. Troepolsky, V. Belov, V. Shukshin and many others.
In V. Rasputin’s story “Farewell to Matera” we see a clash of life and death. The death of Matera - the work of man - makes us think about eternal problems that have arisen today with particular urgency: the moral right of man to dispose of nature. Matera is preparing for its end, and at the same time “the island continued to live its usual and routine life: bread and grass rose, roots stretched out in the ground and leaves grew on the trees, there was a smell of faded bird cherry and the damp heat of greenery...” And in this In painful contradiction, a person seeks answers to the main questions of existence: “Daria tries and cannot raise a heavy, overwhelming thought: maybe this is how it should be?” “Looking at Matera, won’t the rest of the earth bake?” “Will they (the ancestors) ask me?” They will ask: “How did you allow such impudence, where were you looking?” In Daria, Rasputin reveals a strong character full of dignity and greatness. And Daria sees her last duty as “showing off Matera in her own way, in her own way.” Unforgettable are the pages about how she cleaned and whitewashed her hut, decorated it with fir branches, dressed it up before her death, and in the morning she told the arsonists: “That’s it. Rock it. But don’t even set foot in the hut...” “He who has no memory has no life,” thinks Daria. We see Daria not only in her farewell to Matera, with her life passing away along with Matera, but also in intense reflections about the past and future, about the meaning of life and the purpose of man. In moments like these that Daria experiences, the human soul is born and filled with beauty and kindness! The writer forces us to take a closer look at the spiritual values ​​of such wise people as Daria. Daria's heart is filled with anxiety and the pain of separation. But she finds strength in herself and does not allow herself to accept help. Daria is an amazing person. She constantly thinks about what we live for, about the Motherland, about the meaning of human life.
The story of the human soul and the people’s soul, I think, sounds with special tension in the story “Live and Remember.” The main character of the story, Nastena, must endure not only the suffering common to everyone - war, but also her terrible secret: her deserter husband is hiding not far from his native Atamanovka. Nastena sincerely believes that since her husband committed such a shameful act, it means that she did not mentally protect him well, which means that her care was not enough. She is ready to endure any punishment from people, but not that endlessly lasting deception that destroys both Andrei and her. Rasputin shows how suffering grows in Nastena’s soul, how unbearable it becomes on Victory Day, when great joy unites people just as much as great grief united yesterday.
The more wild and brutal Andrei becomes, the closer the birth of the child, so long-awaited and so impossible now, is, the greater Nastena’s despair. Nastena goes into the waves of the Angara with her unborn child, seeking in death not just oblivion and the end of suffering, but purification before people, before the eternal truth of life. Nastena's character is strong, ready for self-sacrifice and responsibility.
Showing the terrible evil of betrayal, an evil that destroys, like radiation, everything around it, the writer passed over the end of Andrei in silence. He is not worthy of death, which evokes sympathy or at least somehow reconciles with him; he finds himself outside of life, outside of people’s memory. Leaving Guskov alive, the author brands him with a terrible spell: “Live and remember.” And it is no coincidence that V. Astafiev said: “Live and remember, man: in trouble, in grief, in the most difficult days of trials, your place is next to your people; any apostasy, whether caused by your weakness or lack of understanding, turns into even greater grief for your Motherland and people, and therefore for you.”

Genre originality of Russian literature of the second half of the 20th century.

Historical novel (Alexey Tolstoy “Peter 1”)

Russian autobiographical prose of the 20th century is connected with the traditions of Russian literature of the past, primarily with the artistic experience of L. Tolstoy

Some of Astafiev’s books are based on memories of childhood. What unites them is the authors’ utmost sincerity and confessionalism. In Astafiev's stories of the 1960s and 1970s, the main character was a boy, a teenager. This applies to Ilka from “The Pass”, and to Tolya Mazov from “Theft”, to Vitka from “The Last Bow”. What these heroes have in common is their early orphanhood, encounters with material difficulties in childhood, increased vulnerability and exceptional responsiveness to everything good and beautiful.

Village prose dates back to the 50s. Its origins are in the essays of V. Ovechkin (“District everyday life”, “Difficult weight on”). As a movement in literature, village prose emerged during the Thaw period and lasted for about three decades. She resorted to different genres: essays (V. Ovechkin, E. Dorosh), short stories (A. Yashin, V. Tendryakov, G. Troepolsky, V. Shukshin), news stories and novels (F. Abramov, B. Mozhaev, V. Astafiev, V. Belov, V. Rasputin).

The emergence of song lyrics during the war.

The song “Holy War” plays a vital role in the history of the war. In fact, it replaced the Russian anthem. Almost the entire song consists of appeals addressed to people. Rhythm - march. The goal is to instill faith in people.

Mikhail Isakovsky.

His works are characterized by lyricism - he is interested in the inner world of a person at war.

“In the forest near the front” - the poem begins with the complete merging of man with nature. The autumn waltz unites people from different parts of the planet - a motive of unity. They are united by memories of peaceful life. Defending the Motherland is associated with protecting the woman you love.

“And everyone knew: the road to it lies through war.”

Development of journalism. The appearance of journalistic stories and essays.

Themes, ideas, problems of Russian literature of the second half of the 20th century.

Soviet literature appeared after 1917 and acquired a multinational character.

1.Military theme.

Two trends in the depiction of war: large-scale works of an epic nature; the writer is interested in a specific person, psychological and philosophical character, and the origins of heroism.

2. Village theme. (Shukshin) - Solzhenitsyn’s story “Matrenin’s Dvor” tells us about the consequences of this terrible experiment for the Russian village.

Village of the war and post-war years. Writers feel the imminent death of the village. Moral degradation.

Village prose dates back to the 50s. Its origins are in the essays of V. Ovechkin (“District everyday life”, “Difficult weight on”). As a movement in literature, village prose emerged during the Thaw period and lasted for about three decades. She resorted to different genres: essays (V. Ovechkin, E. Dorosh), short stories (A. Yashin, V. Tendryakov, G. Troepolsky, V. Shukshin), news stories and novels (F. Abramov, B. Mozhaev, V. Astafiev, V. Belov, V. Rasputin).The cultural level of the village residents was of particular concern. Writers focused society's attention on the formation in the younger generation of a purely consumerist attitude to life, on the lack of craving for knowledge and respect for work.

3. Moral, ethical and philosophical theme (The problem of alcoholism as a way to escape reality)

4. The problem of man and nature (Astafiev)

5. The problem of social life (Trifonov)

6. “Returned Literature” (“Doctor Zhivago”)

7.Stalinist literature (Solzhenitsyn “The Gulag Archipelago”)

8. Postmodernism is a reaction to people's discontent.

"Other literature" 60-80s (A. Bitov, S. Skolov, V. Erofeev, L. Petrushevskaya)

Another representative of this trend, Viktor Erofeev, explains the use of parody as a form of protest against not only insufficient, but absolutely incorrect, our idea of ​​​​a person.

3) Genre originality of literature of the war years.
The most productive genres of prose in the first two war years were articles, essays, and stories. Almost all writers paid tribute to them: A. Tolstoy, A. Platonov, L. Leonov, I. Erenburg, M. Sholokhov and others. They asserted the inevitability of victory, cultivated a sense of patriotism, and exposed fascist ideology.
A.N. Tolstoy owns more than sixty articles and essays created during the period 1941 -1944. (“What we defend”, “Motherland”, “Russian warriors”, “Blitzkrieg”, “Why Hitler must be defeated”, etc.). Turning to the history of the Motherland, he sought to convince his contemporaries that Russia would cope with the new disaster, as it had done more than once in the past. “Nothing, we can handle it!” - this is the leitmotif of A. Tolstoy’s journalism.
L. Leonov also constantly turned to national history. With particular poignancy, he spoke about the responsibility of every citizen, because only in this he saw the guarantee of the coming victory (“Glory to Russia”, “Your brother Volodya Kurylenko”, “Rage”, Massacre”, “To an Unknown American Friend”, etc.).
The central theme of I. Ehrenburg’s military journalism is the defense of universal human values. He saw fascism as a threat to world civilization and emphasized that representatives of all nationalities of the USSR were fighting against it (articles “Kazakhs”, “Jews”, “Uzbeks”, “Caucasus”, etc.). Ehrenburg's style of journalism was distinguished by sharp colors, sudden transitions, and metaphor. At the same time, the writer skillfully combined documentary materials, verbal posters, pamphlets, and caricatures in his works. Ehrenburg's essays and journalistic articles were compiled in the collection “War” (1942-1944).
The military essay has become a kind of chronicle of the war. Readers at the front and in the rear eagerly awaited news and received it from writers.
K. Simonov, hot on the heels, wrote a number of essays about Stalingrad. He wrote descriptions of military operations and portrait travel sketches.
Stalingrad became the main theme of V. Grossman’s essays. In July 1941, he was enlisted on the staff of the Krasnaya Zvezda newspaper and already in August he went to the front. Grossman kept notes throughout the war. His stern, unpathetic Stalingrad essays became the pinnacle of the development of this genre during the war years (“The Direction of the Main Strike,” 1942, etc.).
Journalism also influenced fiction. Since most of the stories, novels, and a few novels of those years were built on a documentary basis, the authors most often avoided the psychological characteristics of the heroes, described specific episodes, and often retained the names of real people. Thus, during the war days, a certain hybrid form of essay-story appeared. This type of work includes the stories “The Honor of the Commander” by K. Simonov, “The Science of Hatred” by M. Sholokhov, the collections “Stories of Ivan Sudarev” by A. Tolstoy and “The Soul of the Sea” by L. Sobolev.
And yet, among the prose writers of the war years, there was a writer who, in this harsh time, created artistic prose so vivid and unusual that it is worth special mention. This is Andrey Platonov.
He wrote his first story about the war even before the front, during the evacuation. Refusing to work at Voenmorizdat, Platonov became a front-line correspondent. His notebooks and letters allow us to conclude that any fantasy turns out to be poorer than the terrible truth of life that is revealed in war.
It is impossible to understand Platonov’s prose if one ignores his understanding of the war and the writer’s creative tasks: “It is not just bodies to portray what is, in essence, killed. A great picture of life and lost souls, possibilities. Peace is given as it would have been during the activities of those who perished - a better peace than the real one: that is what perishes in war - the possibility of progress is killed.”
Interesting stories were created during the war years by K. Paustovsky,
A. Dovzhenko. Many writers gravitated towards the form of a cycle of short stories ("Sea Soul" by L. Sobolev, "Sevastopol Stone" by L. Solovyov, etc.).
Already in 1942, the first stories began to appear. Writers turned to specific cases that took place during the defense of Moscow, Stalingrad, and other cities and villages. This made it possible to depict specific people in close-up – participants in battles, defenders of their home.
One of the most successful books of the war period is B. Grossman’s story “The People Are Immortal” (1942). The plot was based on specific facts. The story includes the picture of the death of Gomel that shocked Grossman in August 1941. The observations of the author, who depicted the fates of people met on military roads, brought the story closer to the truth of life.
Behind the events of the war, Grossman, who sought to create a heroic epic, saw a clash of ideas, philosophical concepts, the truth of which is determined by life itself.
For example, describing the death of Maria Timofeevna, who did not have time to leave the village before the arrival of enemies, the writer gives us the opportunity to relive with her the last moments of her life. So she sees how the enemies are inspecting the house, joking with each other. “And again Maria Timofeevna understood with her instinct, heightened to the point of holy insight, what the soldiers were talking about. It was a simple soldier's joke about the good food they came across. And the old woman shuddered, suddenly realizing the terrible indifference that the Nazis felt towards her. They were not interested, did not touch, did not care about the great misfortune of a seventy-year-old woman, ready to accept death. The old woman was just standing in front of bread, lard, towels, linen, but she was hungry and thirsty. She did not arouse hatred in them, because she was not dangerous to them. They looked at her the way they look at a cat or a calf. She stood in front of them, an unnecessary old woman, existing for some reason in a space vital for the Germans.”
And then they “stepped over a pool of black blood, dividing towels and taking out other things.” Grossman omits the murder scene: it is not his nature to talk in detail about such things, to depict death.
What is happening is filled with genuine tragedy. But this is not the tragedy of torn flesh, but the “tragedy of ideas,” when an old woman is ready to accept inevitable death with dignity. She is humiliated not only by the very presence of the enemy on her native land, but also by his attitude towards people. The Nazis fought against an entire people, and the people, as history has proven, as V. Grossman argued in his story, are truly immortal.

A large place in the literature of the 70-80s of the 20th century is occupied by works about the complex moral quest of people, about the problems of good and evil, about the value of human life, about the clash of indifferent indifference and humanistic pain. It is clear that the increasing interest in moral problems is combined with the complication of the moral search itself.

In this regard, the work of such writers as V. Bykov, V. Rasputin, V. Astafiev, Ch. Aitmatov, V. Dudintsev, V. Grossman and others is very significant, from my point of view.

In V. Bykov's stories, the moral problem always serves as the second turn of the key, opening the door to the work, which at the first turn represents some small military episode. This is how “Kruglyansky Bridge”, “Obelisk”, “Sotnikov”, “Wolf Pack”, “His Battalion” and other stories of the writer were built. Bykov is especially interested in situations in which a person, left alone, must be guided not by a direct order, but solely by his own moral compass.

Teacher Moroz from the story “Obelisk” raised in children a kind, bright, honest attitude towards life. And when the war came, his students made an attempt on the life of a policeman nicknamed Cain. The children were arrested. The Germans promised to release the boys if the teacher who had taken refuge with the partisans showed up. From the point of view of common sense, it was useless for Moroz to report to the police: the Nazis would not have spared the teenagers anyway. But from a moral point of view, a person (if he is truly a person!) must confirm with his life what he taught and what he is convinced of. Frost could not live, could not continue teaching, if even one person thought that he had chickened out and abandoned the children at a fatal moment. Moroz was executed along with the boys. Moroz's act was condemned by some as a reckless suicide, and after the war his name was not found on the obelisk at the site of the execution of schoolchildren. But precisely because the good seed that he planted with his feat sprouted in their souls, there were those who managed to achieve justice: the teacher’s name was written on the obelisk along with the names of the hero children.

But even after this, Bykov makes the reader a witness to a dispute in which one of the “clever people of today” disdainfully says that there is no special feat behind this Moroz, since he did not even kill a single German. And in response to this, one of those in whom a grateful memory is alive sharply says: “He did more than if he had killed a hundred. He put his life on the chopping block. Myself. Voluntarily. Do you understand what this argument is? And in whose favor...” This argument specifically relates to the moral concept: to prove to everyone that your beliefs are stronger than the threat of death. The frost overstepped the natural thirst to survive, to survive. This is where the heroism of one person begins, so necessary to raise the morale of the entire society.

Another moral problem - the eternal battle of good and evil - is explored in V. Dudintsev’s novel “White Clothes”. This work is about the tragedy that befell Soviet genetics, when its persecution was elevated to the rank of state policy. After the notorious session of the All-Russian Academy of Agricultural Sciences in August 1948, the civil execution of genetics as a bourgeois pseudoscience began, the persecution of stubborn and unrepentant genetic scientists began, repressions against them, and their physical destruction. These events slowed down the development of domestic science for many years. In the field of genetics, selection, treatment of hereditary diseases, and in the production of antibiotics, the USSR remained on the side of the road along which those countries rushed forward that did not even dare to think of competing with Russia in genetics, which was headed by the great Vavilov.

The novel “White Clothes” depicts with almost documentary precision the campaign against genetic scientists.

F.I. Dezhkin, who had come under suspicion, arrived at one of the country's agricultural universities at the end of August 1948 on behalf of the “people's academician” Ryadno (his prototype is T.D. Lysenko), who was supposed to “clean up the underground kublo” and expose the Weismanists -Morganists at the institute. But Dezhkin, having become acquainted with the experiments of the scientist Strigalev on growing a new variety of potatoes, seeing the selfless devotion to science of this man, who gives and does not take, without thinking, makes a choice in favor of Strigalev. After the arrest and exile of Strigalev and his students, Fyodor Ivanovich saves the scientist’s inheritance from Ryadno - a potato variety he bred.

In the era of the cult of Stalin in the country and the cult of Lysenko in agriculture, Dezhkin, a man of good will, is forced to play a “double game”: pretending to be faithful to “Dad” Ryadno, he engages in forced, painful, but heroic acting, saving for a righteous cause, for the truth . It’s scary to read (although interesting: it looks like a detective story) about how Dezhkin had to live in peacetime in his own country as an underground fighter, a partisan. He is similar to Stirlitz, with the only difference that he is a resident of goodness and true science... in his homeland!

Dudintsev solves a moral problem in the novel: good or truth? Can you allow yourself to lie and pretend in the name of good? Isn't it immoral to lead a double life? Is there no justification for unprincipledness in such a position? Is it possible to sacrifice moral principles in some situation without soiling the white robes of the righteous?

The writer argues that a person of goodness, who feels that he is called to fight for some higher truth, must say goodbye to sentimentality. He must develop tactical principles of struggle and be prepared for heavy moral losses. In a conversation with a correspondent of “Soviet Culture,” Dudintsev, explaining this idea, repeated a parable from the novel about good that is pursued by evil. Good chases evil, and on the way there is a lawn. Evil rushes straight across the lawn, and good with its high moral principles will run around the lawn. Evil, of course, will run away. And if so, then, undoubtedly, new methods of struggle are needed. “In your novel you give tools for good,” one reader told Dudintsev. Yes, this novel is a whole arsenal of weapons of good. And white clothes (purity of soul and conscience) are armor in the cause of justice and combat.

V. Grossman poses very complex moral problems in the novel “Life and Fate.” It was written in 1960, then arrested in manuscript, only a third of a century later it was released, rehabilitated and returned to Russian literature.

War is the main event in the novel, and the Battle of Stalingrad (like the Battle of Borodino in War and Peace) is the crisis point of the war, because it began a turning point in the course of the war. Stalingrad in Grossman's novel, on the one hand, is the soul of liberation, and on the other, a sign of Stalin's system, which is hostile to freedom with its entire being. At the center of this conflict in the novel is the house “six fraction one,” Grekov’s house (remember Pavlov’s house?!), located “on the axis of the German strike.” This house is like a bone in the throat for the Germans, as it does not allow them to advance deeper into the city, into the depths of Russia.

In this house, as in a free republic, officers and soldiers, old and young, former intellectuals and workers, do not know superiority over each other, they do not accept reports here, they do not stand at attention in front of the commander. And although the people in this house, as Grossman notes, are not simple, they form one family. In this free community, selflessly sacrificing itself, they fight the enemy not for life but for death. They are not fighting for Comrade. Stalin, but to win and return home, to defend their right “to be different, special, in their own, separate way to feel, think, live in the world.” “I want freedom, and I’m fighting for it,” says the “house manager” of this house, Captain Grekov, implying not only liberation from the enemy, but also liberation from “general coercion,” which, in his opinion, was life before the war. Similar thoughts came to Major Ershov in German captivity. It is clear to him that “by fighting the Germans, he is fighting for his own Russian life; victory over Hitler will also be a victory over those death camps in Siberia where his mother, sisters and father died.”

“The triumph of Stalingrad,” we read in the novel, “determined the outcome of the war, but the silent dispute between the victorious people and the victorious state continued. The fate of man and his freedom depended on this dispute.” Grossman knew and was not deceived that it would be terribly difficult to withstand life against fate in the form of camp towers and various immeasurable violence. But the novel “Life and Fate” is filled with faith in man and hope for him, and not disastrous disappointment in him. Grossman leads the reader to the conclusion: “a person will not voluntarily give up freedom. This is the light of our time, the light of the future.”

Good and evil are mixed.
V. Rasputin

It is difficult to find a work in the history of literature that does not comprehend the problems of spirit and morality and does not defend moral and ethical values.
The work of our contemporary Valentin Rasputin is no exception in this regard.
I love all the books of this writer, but I was especially shocked by the story “Fire,” published during perestroika.
The eventual basis of the story is simple: warehouses caught fire in the village of Sosnovka. Who saves people's property from the fire, and who grabs what they can for themselves. The way people behave in an extreme situation serves as an impetus for the painful thoughts of the main character of the story, driver Ivan Petrovich Egorov, in whom Rasputin embodied the popular character of a lover of truth, suffering at the sight of the destruction of the age-old moral basis of existence.
Ivan Petrovich is looking for answers to the questions that the surrounding reality throws at him. Why “has everything turned upside down?.. It was not supposed to, not accepted, it became supposed and accepted, it was impossible - it became possible, it was considered a shame, a mortal sin - it is revered for dexterity and valor.” How modern these words sound! Indeed, even today, sixteen years after the publication of the work, forgetting elementary moral principles is not a shame, but “the ability to live.”
Ivan Petrovich made the rule of his life “to live according to conscience”; it pains him that during a fire, the one-armed Savely drags bags of flour into his bathhouse, and the “friendly guys - Arkharovites” first of all grab boxes of vodka.
But the hero not only suffers, he tries to find the reason for this moral impoverishment. At the same time, the main thing is the destruction of the centuries-old traditions of the Russian people: they have forgotten how to plow and sow, they are accustomed to only taking, cutting down, and destroying.
The residents of Sosnovka do not have this, and the village itself is like a temporary shelter: “Uncomfortable and unkempt... bivouac type... as if they were wandering from place to place, stopped to wait out the bad weather, and ended up stuck...”. The absence of a Home deprives people of their life basis, kindness, and warmth.
Ivan Petrovich reflects on his place in the world around him, because “... there is nothing easier than getting lost in yourself.”
Rasputin’s heroes are people who live according to the laws of morality: Egorov, Misha Hampo’s uncle, who at the cost of his life defended the moral commandment “thou shalt not steal.” In 1986, Rasputin, as if foreseeing the future, spoke about the social activity of a person who could influence the spiritual atmosphere of society.
One of the important issues in the story is the problem of good and evil. And again I was amazed by the visionary talent of the writer, who declared: “Good in its pure form has turned into weakness, evil into strength.” The concept of a “kind person” has also disappeared from our lives; we have forgotten how to evaluate a person by his ability to feel the suffering of others and to empathize.
The story sounds one of the eternal Russian questions: “What to do?” But there is no answer to it. The hero, who decides to leave Sosnovka, does not find peace. The ending of the story is impossible to read without excitement: “A little lost man is walking along the spring land, desperate to find his home...
The earth is silent, either greeting or seeing him off.
The earth is silent.
What are you, our silent land, how long are you silent?
And are you silent?”
The Russian writer Valentin Rasputin, with civil frankness, raised the most pressing problems of the time and touched on its most painful points. The very name “Fire” takes on the character of a metaphor, carrying the idea of ​​moral trouble. Rasputin convincingly proved that the moral inferiority of an individual person inevitably leads to the destruction of the foundations of the life of the people.

The problem of morality has existed ever since man realized himself as a being not only thinking, but also feeling. Currently, due to various processes taking place in the country and the world as a whole, it has acquired a special meaning and become unusually acute. With the development of civilization, the discovery of more and more new technologies, and the cult of material values, people gradually forget about moral duty, perceive it as something abstract, and sometimes completely unnecessary.

Since the middle of the last century, this problem began to occupy the minds of almost all Russian writers, who, on the pages of their works, began an active search for possible solutions to it. The authors of many stories, novels and novellas tried to define a new scale of moral values, realizing that this was simply necessary, otherwise society would degrade. The moral standards of past years were outdated and required rethinking, as did the specific events that occurred in history and constituted its essence. People, having realized their mistakes, will begin to act wisely in the present and build a worthy future. And it is writers who can provide the main assistance in this realization.

The works of modern authors clearly reflect the essence of the problem of morality, which has become so urgent. V. Rasputin, V. Astafiev, Ch. Aitmatov, Yu. Bondarev, V. Rozov and many other writers of modern times wrote about this topical issue. Such works as “Fire”, “The Sad Detective”, “The Scaffolding”, “The Game”, “The Hog” tell about values ​​that are eternal, no matter what is said on this subject.

What are these values? First of all, love. Writers put it on a pedestal, firmly believing in the invincibility and power of a great feeling. In the last decades of the 20th century, society’s attitude towards the Motherland was also a subject of particular interest. The authors of many works reflected a reverent attitude towards the place where a person was born, where he grew up and was formed as a person. The nature close and familiar from childhood should not be forgotten by a person, and, ever returning to his native land, he should not remain indifferent, cold, indifferent.

According to modern writers, a significant place on the scale of eternal values ​​should be occupied by the culture and history of a nation. Also, great attention should be paid to the qualities that one would like to observe in each individual representative of society. This is humanism, the ability to sympathize and the desire to help. In contrast to these values, the thirst for profit, cruelty, refusal of compassion, and the desire to humiliate the weak were described as reigning around.

Considerable attention in the works of modern authors is paid to revealing the essence of the political system, which largely determined the moral decline. Writers of our time opposed this model, when concepts of morality are imposed on society by violent means, through the suppression of personal qualities. Such methods are too cruel, and cruelty cannot in any way be combined with morality.

The problem of morality is remarkably revealed in V. Rasputin’s work “Fire”. Using the example of a tragic event, the author shows the disunity of interests of a separate human group, in which each representative fights only for himself. In the conditions of the elements, the sad elements of reality are clearly indicated: broken equipment for extinguishing a fire, disorder in the location of goods, hidden previously scarce products... When extinguishing a fire, each person tries to grab something for his personal needs, and most characters do not pass the test of moral durability.

Against the background of general immorality, a person stands out who did not show negative traits in a spontaneous situation. Ivan Petrovich Egorov, the main character of the story, with whom the author obviously sympathizes, speaks out against the vices of society sharply and accusatoryly: “... We stood up against someone else’s enemy, our enemy, like our own thief, is more terrible.”

The image of the main character is contrasted with a society in which everyone preaches their personal principles and fights for individual goals. Egorov understands what a common misfortune is, he does not reject the sorrows of those around him, and, like them, does not follow the principle “my house is on the edge.” By portraying Ivan Petrovich, Rasputin wanted to show that not all values ​​have been lost by humanity; explain that spiritual rebirth is quite possible if each of us believes in it and becomes an active participant.

Every modern person is obliged to make a choice between morality and immorality, between external well-being with internal squalor and the wealth of nature with a modest existence.

The considered work by V. Rasputin reveals the problem of the moral choice of the entire society as a whole, while V. Astafiev’s novel “The Sad Detective” reveals the social catastrophe of an individual. The ideological meaning of the novel lies in the author’s emphasized depiction of the conditions of reality in which the existence of both individuals who have lost their human appearance and completely normal people is possible. What prompts the former to absorb all conceivable and inconceivable vices and make them part of their “I”? The lack of a moral core, as V. Astafiev shows, becomes the main problem of society, and ignorance of the reasons for the emergence of this terrible reality only aggravates the situation.

It can be assumed that in the life of every person there comes a period when he has to solve the problem of choice: to continue to live according to his own moral principles or to become like the unspiritual majority. In the second case, a person consciously abandons moral standards, so it is not surprising that sooner or later he ends up committing a crime. Positive qualities will gradually be replaced by negative ones, good people will lose their authority, and eventually the formation of the villain will end, and he will appear before society “in all his glory.”

The main character of V. Astafiev’s work in his life has to deal with many negative qualities present in other people.

This “thinker from the railway village” fights for his morality, and, probably, in him the author reflects his own path to spiritual perfection. We are faced with a situation of moral choice: when, in response to a question about the reasons for the crime committed (three were killed), the former commander hears the impudent: “But I didn’t like the hari,” he decides to carry out lynching, without having any grounds other than moral ones. Most readers will probably approve of the hero's decision, although according to the law it is cruel and immoral. What pushes young people to commit cruel and unjustified acts? This question is asked by the author of the novel and he himself answers it: this is facilitated by Russian reality, the atmosphere of the 70s and 80s, in which inaction, rudeness and vice “breed” with incredible speed

In the works of many modern authors, the key theme is the problem of morality and the need for spiritual adherence. The special significance of works on this topic is that they lack aesthetic distortion or grotesquery; the description is realistic and makes you see life exactly as it is. Probably, when creating their creations, the authors set themselves a single goal: to draw people’s attention to the essence of their existence, to see themselves from the outside.