Poplar. Linden. Sergei Yesenin “Wood Romance”. Religion of thought. Traditional trope. Apple. Tree. Rowan. Maple. Birch. Willow. Kalina. Spruce. Oak.

“Yesenin’s poem “Anna Snegina”” - Evgeny Onegin. A.S. Pushkin. Snapshot. Yesenin read “Anna Snegina”. Pron Ogloblin. The action of "Anna Snegina". Man. Source of the surname. Anna Snegina. Mikhailovskoe. Men's wars. The language of the poem. Lyrical plot. House of A.S. Pushkin in Mikhailovskoye. Poet. The epic theme of the poem. The theme of the imperialist and fratricidal civil war. Time in the poem. Assonance. Yesenin. Olga Snegina. Revolutionary freedom. Letter.

“Yesenin’s Poems” - Protalinka. Yesenin's creativity. Levitan. Metaphor. White birch. Speech warm-up. E. Lebedeva. Epithet. Test yourself. Rural primary school. The first book of poems. The house where the poet was born. State Museum-Reserve. Personification. Physical education minute. Life of Sergei Yesenin. Monument to S. Yesenin. The bird cherry blossomed. Sergei Yesenin. Put the emphasis correctly. Fragrant bird cherry. Born in the Ryazan province.

“Do not wander, do not crush in the crimson bushes” - Conversation on issues. Let the blue evening whisper to me sometimes. “Do not wander, do not wander in the crimson bushes...” Alliteration. Epithet. What mood is in the poem? The subtle name melted away like a sound. The impression of perfection. Image of nature. Vocabulary work. Reading a poem. Words for color. Preliminary task.

“The poem “Anna Snegina”” - What are the moods of the poet’s fellow countrymen. Conversation on issues. How does the lyrical hero see the past? A traditional theme for Russian literature. Statements about Yesenin. Moral and philosophical sound of the poem “Anna Snegina”. Behind the mountains, behind the yellow valleys. The history of the creation of the poem "Anna Snegina". Autobiographical character of the main character. How is the attitude towards the war expressed? Lydia Kashina. Epigraph for the lesson. How do the author and the lyrical hero relate?

“Yesenin “Cheryomukha”” - Sergei Alexandrovich Yesenin. Poem. Poems about nature. Speech warm-up. The first book of poems by Sergei Yesenin. A dilapidated hut. Familiarize students with the biography of S. Yesenin. The stream is singing. Physical education minute. S. Yesenin. Bird cherry. Read expressively. White birch.

It is lyricism in the traditional sense of the word that personifies the most personal, subjective. And the concept of “lyrical hero” is a term that was first proposed precisely in order to describe the phenomenon that arose in the work of Alexander Blok. For the first time, he concretized this hitherto blurred image, making the characters in his poems close in spirit to himself. Now we often use this term as a complete synonym for the image of the author, although this is not entirely true.

The history of the term and its first definition

The history of the concept of “lyrical hero” began on October 9, 1921. On this occasion, researcher Tynyanov made a report dedicated to the memory of Blok. There he says that he mourns the death of Blok the man, and not Blok the poet or publicist. But how do ordinary people know Block the Man? The answer is simple. The poet described himself in poetry, his lyrical hero is Alexander Alexandrovich himself. This human appearance cannot be created from one of his works; it consists only of a collection of poems and poems. For example, you can trace the following pattern. In Blok's early poems, the lyrical hero is a tall image, a prince, Hamlet. Then this portrait is complicated by the appearance of a “dark double.” But Tynyanov distinguishes another appearance - the appearance of a poet, a “name-maker,” a person who composes words into poetry.

The reader, as a rule, when getting acquainted with the works of any author, looks for familiar characters, features already known to him, and familiar metaphors. And Blok retains a certain clicheness in his poems, the melodramatic plot so beloved by readers. Therefore, the hero remained recognizable, close, loved for many generations of people, and he always personified the voice of the time, the era. Sincerity always captivated the reader. So, we can conclude that Blok’s lyrical hero is a prototype of a poet, but collected from a variety of traits, sometimes opposite.

What qualities does the lyrical hero have?

At the beginning of the article it was said that using this term as a complete correspondence to the image of the author is incorrect. Why? It should be remembered that the character of the lyrical hero, his actions, intonations are features created by the author. In some cases, as, for example, with Alexander Blok, Andrei Bely, they coincide with the image of the person who created the work, but still these concepts cannot be identified. A lyrical hero is a character that exists only in a work, created by the author, in a sense artificial, dependent on the twists and turns of the plot. Yes, he has his own feelings, assessments, intonation, but this is also the author’s merit. Those wishing to understand a poet or writer more deeply should analyze several works or turn to other biographical materials (correspondence, memoirs, etc.). There, of course, the presence of invented lyrical images will be excluded, but you will get to know the author from a historical, personal and moral point of view. Sometimes it is necessary to understand the reasons for this or that behavior of the images created by him, because in literature there is a similar concept - “the image of the author.”

The article “lyrical hero” is present on Wikipedia in several languages: Armenian, Belarusian, Kazakh, Polish, Russian and Ukrainian. All of these are languages ​​that were in the area of ​​influence of the language policy of the former USSR. Of course, this fact in itself does not characterize the term in essence, but indirectly indicates the area of ​​its distribution in philology.

The term “lyrical hero” was coined by Yu. Tynyanov and A. Bely (“lyrical subject”). Apparently, the term was originally supposed to describe the theme and drama of duality, understood as the relationship between the “role” played by the poet and “himself” (whatever the phrase “himself” means; here we are actually talking about the paradox of the actor Diderot and the meaning so-called “reality”).

A clear trace of this use of the term can, of course, be read in modern serious philological literature: for example, the behavioral model that I. Brodsky asked himself “in life” is being built.

At the same time, I cannot find any trace of lyrical hero in English. And a Google search, for example, does not produce many complete matches - only 6, and one of the hits is a presentation of M. Bakhtin’s concept in English.

It is difficult to judge why the sharp increase in the frequency of use of the word “lyrical hero” in the Russian language is happening right now, and whether the latest additions to the National Corpus of the Russian Language reliably reflect lexical reality.

The figure shows the frequency of use of the phrase “lyrical hero” per million word forms (according to NKR):

There are no disputes about the boundaries of the term in the NKRJ sample, but there are reproaches from some writers to others that they do not distinguish the “lyrical hero” from the “author”. They compare the “Lermontov” lyrical hero with some other, non-Lermontov lyrical hero (thus presuming the presence of lyrical subjective unity in all of Lermontov’s poetry).

“Baratynsky’s lyrical hero hangs between vigil and sleep,” - here, obviously, the phrase is used as a synonym or metaphor for reader perception.

There is also such a wonderful usage of words: “Like the lyrical hero of the commedia dell’arte who does not wear a mask...” - news for theater experts. It turns out that the commedia dell'arte had lyrical heroes.

Apparently, the modern Russian reader or poet (not a scientist) is accustomed to the fact that “lyrical hero” generally means everything that can somehow be attributed to the area of ​​the “internal”, to the area of ​​the so-called psyche of the subject: to experiences, feelings, intimacy, to an indefinite unity of an imaginary subject.

These ideas have found a place in textbooks, articles, notes - we are no longer talking about a sample of the NKR.

The Encyclopedic Dictionary of a Young Literary Critic (M., Pedagogika, 1987) gives the definition: “A lyrical hero is an image ... of a hero in a lyrical work, whose experiences, thoughts and feelings are reflected in it.” Note the recursion. The image of a hero whose thoughts are reflected. And further: “He is by no means identical to the image of the author, although...” Here the “image” of the lyrical hero differs from the “image” of the author, and the enfilade of mutual unequal reflections of images of images goes into the foggy distance.

The literary encyclopedia says that a lyrical hero is one of the forms of manifestation of the author's consciousness. Has this formula made it any easier? What other forms of manifestation of the author's consciousness are there?

You can find the following passage: “Pushkin, Nekrasov, Tyutchev, Fet are lyricists without a lyrical hero. The author's image in their lyrical works seems to be merged with a real personality - the personality of the poet himself. It is inappropriate to call this a lyrical hero, because a lyrical hero, as researcher L.Ya. Ginzburg accurately noted, “is always a reflection, separated from the reflected.”

I do not present the confusion of these quotations for entertainment.

Indeed, we could probably get approximately the same picture for the phrase “dark energy”: Blavatsky, cosmological physicists, and the notorious Vasya would be included in the sample. But in the case of energy, we at least imagine nests of meaning where people who use the word think they know exactly what they are talking about (physicists will give a definition and propose mechanisms for reproducible measurements).

In the case of the “lyrical hero,” I do not see not only a point of support for some semantic nest of meanings, but also no prospects for clarifying the term. It seems to me that this phrase is a purely regional, intra-tribal tradition, which speaks more about the users of the term, their history and traditions, than about the subject that the speakers are going to describe.

Probably, we are talking about the social linking of thought on the sentimentalist, romantic and (or) Hegelian attitudes of the 18th-19th centuries, moreover, of the Russian model. Probably, this is also related to the surge in the use of the term “lyrical hero” in the NKR in the early 10s of this century. In any case, I will not be surprised if further updates of the NKR do not smooth out this strange graphic surge of Russian spiritual depth just on the eve of the catastrophic political events for Russia in 2014-2016.

Of course, the statement about the sentimentalistic and romantic conditionality of the use of the “lyrical hero” is not scientifically provable. But this is not the only philological problem that is exclusively regional. As an example, let us point out the still living tradition of interpreting several famous characters in Russian literature of the 19th century as “superfluous people.” This tradition is completely imposed by later (second half of the 19th century) ideological deposits; it is unable to see the extra-artistic kinship of the heroes of Pushkin, Lermontov or Turgenev with the general background of European cultural development (with the characters of de Sade, for example).

A quick survey of three poems is offered in order to demonstrate an approach that has nothing to do with the use of the term “lyrical hero” and, it seems, without losing the scope of the “lyrical”.

Ekphrasis Gumilyov

Poem by N. Gumilyov “Perseus. Sculpture of Canova" was first published in Monthly Literary and Scientific Supplements to "Niva", 1913, No. 1. Here is a photograph of the sculpture and Gumilyov’s text.

Muses have long loved him,
He is young, bright, he is a hero,
He raised Medusa's head
A steel, swift hand.

And he won’t see, of course,
He, in whose soul there is always a thunderstorm,
How good, how humane
Once upon a time scary eyes

The features of one tormented by pain,
Now a beautiful face...
- Boyish willfulness
There is no barrier, no end.

There awaits naked Andromeda,
A dragon coils before her,
There, there, victory is behind him
Flies, winged like him.

Let's imagine a metaphorical or real film projector, from the lens of which a narrative (image) is presented on the screen.

The poem, as it seems obvious, changes the point of view and focus of the frame several times.

The first two lines are the opening credits. We then see Gumilyov's beautiful cinematic montage. Watch the camera move.

Close-up of the face, hand of Perseus and the head of Medusa raised by him.

Then two lines of motivation for switching focus. And four lines of close-up of the Gorgon's face.

Again two lines with the willful face of Perseus. And the camera goes to the side, along the line of sight of Perseus (this is not in the sculpture at all): towards the waiting Andromeda and towards the dragon.

Finale, two lines: the entire figure of Perseus rushes towards Andromeda and the goddess Victory herself follows him.

We have not introduced a single - neither strict nor non-strict - concept associated with the nature of the human personality, with the structure of its psyche or the movements of the soul. In our interpretation, we relied on the intuitive machinery of cinema. And, it seems, they described the composition of the poem quite adequately - it is completely cinematic.

There is nothing in the poem that even remotely resembles the most vague of all the vague lyrical heroes. There are no “I”s here. Nevertheless, this is lyrics with a completely lyrical final pathos of victory, accessible, probably, to any “I” of any reader.

It is not known whether Gumilyov really meant film technology, but by the time this poem was written, cinema was already developed in Russia, in 1907 the Russian magazine “Kino” began to be published, in 1908 - the newspaper “Cinematograph Post”, and in 1908 cinemas , according to Birzhevye Vedomosti, there were more than 1,200 in Russia.

Below is a more complex case.

Movie camera versus epistole

Here is the famous “From Nowhere with Love” by I. Brodsky.

Out of nowhere with love, the eleventh of March,
dear, respected, sweetheart, but it doesn’t matter
even who, for the devil's face, speaking
frankly, I can’t remember, not yours, but
and no one's faithful friend greets you from one
from five continents, supported by cowboys.
I loved you more than the angels and myself,
and so further now
from you than from both of them.
Far away, late at night, in the valley, at the very bottom,
in a town covered in snow up to the door handle,
squirming on the sheets at night,
as not stated below, at least
I fluff up my pillow with a humming “you”
behind the mountains, which have no end,
in the dark your whole body features
repeating like a crazy mirror.

The first part - up to “Far away, late at night” - is the beginning of the message, epistle. This is the beginning of a letter in which, nevertheless, the detachment from tradition is immediately emphasized: from “nowhere.” For Brodsky's fictional letters, this is a completely traditional form of storytelling. It refers to the endless variety of the epistolary genre (and not only poetic).

In the second half, the “letter-message” turns into a cinematic sketch. The movie camera gives a general shot of the night, the valley, “falls” down to the town and a close-up of the door handle of a snow-covered house. Then the subject of the image changes - a movie camera inside the house, a close-up of a body writhing on a sheet, a pillow and, finally, a crazy mirror.

The entire “epistole” with its heavy semantics “I, so alone, am unhappy, am writing to you about...” in some sense can still be reinterpreted in the terminology of the “lyrical hero”. But not the second part, where talking about the lyrical “I” is approximately the same as talking about the lyrical hero of Antonioni or Buñuel.

Changing the narrative mode - turning on a movie camera that came from nowhere - presents not so much what is happening “in reality”, but a dissection of the epistolary genre, textual descriptions of mental misfortunes, etc. Letters are read. Movies - watching. This preparation, of course, is not given in a sudden burlesque; it is lexically prepared in the first part - “out of nowhere”, “March-breeze”, inconsistency of gender (dear, dear), etc.

I fully admit that this turning point was not intended initially, but arose in the process, after some kind of everyday pause. Poems are often completed after their beginning for some reason turns out to have no ending. This change from the epistole to the movie camera corresponds to some kind of conversion, change, metanoia. But now we are not talking about the psychology of creativity and not about philological work to clarify contextual or biographical connections.

The following is stated: there is a “movie camera” of narration, where changing shooting modes, shooting objects, framing, editing present us with the result. The lyrical hero - if we take this phrase as having at least some meaning - is just one of the diverse ways of making films or taking photographs, a way of conceptually grouping all possible “unfortunate people experiencing me.” And he, the lyrical hero, is connected with letters to loved ones (I would polemically add - with letters of the 18th-19th centuries), which need to be read. But in reality, it doesn’t exist. There is a body writhing on a sheet, given to us in a crazy reflection in the background, etc. This “movie” needs to be seen.

Generally speaking, we can move the conversation from the realm of cinematic metaphors to the plane of the topological positions of the narrator, their changes in the course of the narrative, introduce some kind of topological formalism and get into the rather familiar field of formal structuralist descriptions (without any “lyrical heroes,” of course). But at the same time we will lose the opposition to read and see.

Neskuchny Garden

Here is Grigory Dashevsky’s poem “The Neskuchny Garden (1)”:

To the right is an invisible river.
The streets are noisy on the left hand.
And the ant crawls over the letters
phrases: and the king, going around the troops,

I saw... The maple shadow lay down,
slits of the sky lay on the page.
You will hear a rustling sound and move
flat pattern of good and evil,

hidden in a book, if through the lines
the tread will penetrate narrow sandals
alternating between transparent and dull,
into the rustling of leaves on hard sand.

The poem, it seems, does not represent a film. And we cannot cinematize it as easily as we did with the previous two examples.

The syntax of the poem, starting from the transition from the second to the third quatrain, is difficult (difficult syntax in Dashevsky is everywhere, not only in this poem).

But an episode-by-episode analysis is, of course, possible.

The first two lines give an indefinite opening: some place in the Neskuchny Garden, where on the right there is a river, apparently obscured by vegetation, and on the left the roar of the street can be heard. Neither the street nor the river are visible. There is sound, but no obvious image.

Then a close-up shot of an ant crawling across the page of a book.

The quote on which the ant crawls - we see it on the page, it is highlighted. We don't know where this quote comes from. The king saw it.

The first two lines of the second quatrain: the frame enlarges a little, taking in the page as a whole. The shadows of maple trees are visible on the page. You can hear the rustling of either leaves or the pages of a book being shaken by the wind.

The third, fourth lines of the second quatrain and half of the first line of the third quatrain: the page font fluctuates, trembles (“the flat pattern of good and evil moves”).

The end of the first and the second line of the last quatrain (a very difficult syntactic turn): from the fluctuations of the font appears the tread (narrow sandals) of a living person.

The last two lines of the last quatrain: feet in sandals, foliage of the garden path. Sound: the rustle of leaves on the sand under the tread of walking feet in sandals.

Who came out of the book? - Probably the king.

Who is the reader of the book? - Unknown. It doesn't matter.

Why such a complicated syntax for the entire last (long) phrase? - in order to give a picture of the transformation of the readable text of a page into a tangible reality without the words “magic”, “miracle”, etc., implying someone else’s assessment. There is no one whose assessment could be heard, there is no reader of the book. There are difficulties in the genre definition of this poem.

Conclusion

Even a cursory review of three (not randomly selected, of course) poems gives rise to non-trivial questions.

Not being a specialist in the field of epistolary culture in Russia in the 19th and 20th centuries (and doubting that such large-scale stylistic research was ever carried out), I assume that it was the structure of a personal, individual message with a specific author to a specific addressee and the range of compositions of such epistols that formed the structural foundations "lyrical hero" The addressee can become imaginary, and the author - an actor (of course, any European literature knows such a literary form).

But could it be that these epistolary foundations, common to the entire European culture, were overlaid with the burden of an unconscious habit of censorship and perlusration? How to measure this load? A letter could become not just intimate, not just a connection between two people, but secret, hidden, valuable by virtue of the very fact of writing, valuable regardless of what happens outside the page in the real world. Without a body, even invisible. But waiting for its addressee.

In such mysticism, it would seem, there is also nothing historically extraordinary. The whole question is in the social scale of what happened, in its prospects and horizons.

Apparently, this special mysticism could and did lead to the emergence of the most wonderful phenomena in Russian literature of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. But it is clear that this mysticism did not and does not have any related relationship to the bookish religiosity of Jews or Christians; it is mimicry, imitation, simulation, convergence of external signs.

It is against this simulation that the last two poems cited carry out poetic quiet but victorious operations. And we have the right to assume that the alternative to vision - writing/reading - plays a fundamental role in such a confrontation.

It is quite possible that real ethics of such purely Russian lyrical writing are emerging. “A poet in Russia is more than a poet,” is one of them, of course. If so, then, indeed, we have the right to talk about the formation of such an imaginary subjectivity, when the acting, artificial nature of the “I” of writing becomes the supporting structure not only of writing and not only for some, but also the structure of everyday life, the life of many - with the complete oblivion of vision.

I think that the idea of ​​a “lyrical hero” is the conceptual eye of Mordor (more precisely, one of them), the gaze of which translates a very specific cinema onto the historical screen.

The title illustration was drawn by Regina Akchurina

A lyrical hero is the image of that hero in a lyrical work, whose experiences, thoughts and feelings are reflected in it. It is by no means identical to the image of the author, although it reflects his personal experiences associated with certain events in his life, with his attitude towards nature, public life, and people. The uniqueness of the poet's worldview, his interests, and character traits find appropriate expression in the form and style of his works. A person who is well acquainted with lyrics can easily distinguish the unique originality of the lyrics of A. S. Pushkin, M. Yu. Lermontov, N. A. Nekrasov, F. I. Tyutchev, A. A. Blok, V. V. Mayakovsky, A. T. Tvardovsky and other Russian and Soviet, as well as foreign poets: I. V. Goethe, I. F. Schiller, G. Heine, I. R. Becher, N. Guillen, P. Neruda and others.

Artistic images of any work, including lyrical ones, generalize the phenomena of life and, through individual, personal experience, express thoughts and feelings that are characteristic of many contemporaries. So, for example, in “Duma” Lermontov expressed the feelings of an entire generation of people of his time. Any personal experience of a poet only becomes a fact of art when it is an artistically perfect expression of feelings and thoughts typical of many people. Lyrics are characterized by both generalization and artistic invention. The more talented the poet, the richer his spiritual world, the more deeply he penetrates into the world of other people’s experiences, the greater heights he reaches in his lyrical creativity. Reading the poet’s poems one after another, we, despite all their diversity, establish their unity in the perception of the world, in the nature of experiences, in their artistic expression. A complete image is created in our consciousness - an experience, that is, a state of character, an image of a person’s spiritual world. The image of a lyrical hero appears. The lyrical hero, like the hero of epic and dramatic works, reflects certain characteristic, typical features of the people of his time, his class, exerting a huge influence on the formation of the spiritual world of readers.

For example, the lyrical hero of A. S. Pushkin’s poetry, who in his “cruel age” revealed the ideal of a spiritually rich, free personality, high humanism, greatness in struggle, creativity, friendship and love, was the banner of the progressive people of that era and continues to provide beneficial influence on people of our time.

The lyrical hero of V. V. Mayakovsky’s poetry reveals in an unusually versatile way the rich inner world of a person in a socialist society, his socio-political, moral, and aesthetic ideals.

In many ways, the lyrical hero of A. T. Tvardovsky appears before us in character, ideas, proposals: restrained, stern, taciturn. And already completely different, unlike the first two, the lyrical hero of B. L. Pasternak - fragile, impressionable, vulnerable, sophisticated.

The lyrical hero in the works of socialist realism reflects and reveals the diversity of the spiritual world of the builders of a new society.

Image lyrical hero is created on the basis of the poet’s life experience, his feelings, sensations, expectations, etc., enshrined in the work in an artistically transformed form. However, complete identification of the personality of the poet himself and his lyrical hero is unlawful: not everything that the “biography” of the lyrical hero includes actually happened to the poet himself. For example, in the poem by M.Yu. Lermontov's "Dream" the lyrical hero sees himself mortally wounded in the valley of Dagestan. This fact does not correspond to the empirical biography of the poet himself, but the prophetic nature of the “dream” is obvious (the poem was written in 1841, the year of Lermontov’s death):

The term “lyrical hero” was introduced by Yu.N. Tynyanov 1 in 1921, and by him is meant the bearer of the experience expressed in the lyrics. “A lyrical hero is an artistic “double” of the author-poet, growing out of the text of lyrical compositions (a cycle, a book of poems, a lyric poem, the entire body of lyrics) as a clearly defined figure or life role, as a person endowed with certainty, individuality of fate, psychological clarity of inner peace" 2.

The lyrical hero is not present in all the works of the lyric poet, and the lyrical hero cannot be judged by one poem; the idea of ​​the lyrical hero is formed from the poet’s cycle of poems or from his entire poetic work. This is a special form of expression of the author’s consciousness 3:

1. The lyrical hero is both a speaker and the subject of the image. He stands openly between the reader and the world depicted; we can judge the lyrical hero by what is close to him, what he rebels against, how he perceives the world and his role in the world, etc.
2. The lyrical hero is characterized by internal ideological and psychological unity; in different poems a single human personality is revealed in its relationship to the world and to itself.
3. Biographical unity can be combined with the unity of the internal appearance. In this case, different poems can be combined into episodes from the life of a certain person.

The definiteness of the lyrical hero is characteristic, for example, of the poetry of M.Yu. Lermontov (to whom the discovery of the lyrical hero in Russian literature belongs, although the term itself appeared in the twentieth century), N.A. Nekrasov, V. Mayakovsky, S. Yesenin, A. Akhmatova, M. Tsvetaeva, V. Vysotsky... From their lyrical works grows an image of a whole personality, outlined psychologically, biographically, and emotionally, with its characteristic reactions to events in world, etc.

At the same time, there are lyrical systems in which the lyrical hero does not come to the fore; we cannot say anything definite about his psychology, biography, or emotional world. In such lyrical systems, “between the poetic world and the reader, during the direct perception of the work, there is no personality as the main subject of the image or a keenly tangible prism through which reality is refracted” 4 . In this case, it is customary to talk not about the lyrical hero, but about the poetic world of this or that poet. A typical example is the work of A.A. Fet with his special poetic vision of the world. Fet constantly speaks in his lyrics about his attitude to the world, about his love, about his suffering, about his perception of nature; he widely uses the personal pronoun of the first person singular: over forty of his works begin with “I”. However, this “I” is not Fet’s lyrical hero: he has neither external, biographical, nor internal certainty that allows us to talk about him as a certain personality. The poet's lyrical "I" is a view of the world, essentially abstracted from a specific individual. Therefore, when perceiving Fet’s poetry, we pay attention not to the person depicted in it, but to a special poetic world. In Fet's poetic world, the center is a feeling, not a thought. Fet is interested not so much in people as in their feelings, as if abstracted from people. Certain psychological situations and emotional states are depicted in their general terms - without a particular personality make-up. But the feelings in Fet’s poems are also special: vague, indefinite. To reproduce such a vague, barely perceptible inner world, Fet resorts to a complex system of poetic means, which, despite all their diversity, have a common function - the function of creating an unsteady, indefinite, elusive mood.

The lyrical hero in poetry, although he does not completely coincide with the author’s “I,” is accompanied by special sincerity, confession, “documentary” lyrical experience, introspection and confession prevail over fiction. The lyrical hero, and not without reason, is usually perceived as the image of the poet himself - a real person.

However, what attracts us to the lyrical hero (with all his obvious autobiography and autopsychologism) is not so much his personal uniqueness, his personal destiny. Whatever biographical and psychological certainty the lyrical hero may have, his “fate” is interesting to us primarily for its typicality, universality, and reflection of the common destinies of the era and all of humanity. Therefore, the remark of L.Ya. is correct. Ginzburg on the universality of lyrics: “...lyrics have their own paradox. The most subjective type of literature, it, like no other, is directed towards the general, towards the depiction of mental life as universal... if lyricism creates a character, then it is not so much “particular”, individual, as epochal, historical; that typical image of a contemporary that is developed by large cultural movements" 5 .