Why did you give me life? Analysis of Pushkin's poem: a gift in vain, an accidental gift

“A vain gift, an accidental gift...” Alexander Pushkin

A vain gift, a random gift,
Life, why were you given to me?
Or why fate is a secret
Are you sentenced to death?

Who makes me a hostile power
From nothingness he called,
Filled my soul with passion
Has your mind been disturbed by doubt?

There is no goal in front of me:
The heart is empty, the mind is idle,
And it makes me sad
The monotonous noise of life.

Analysis of Pushkin’s poem “A vain gift, an accidental gift...”

The poem “A vain gift, an accidental gift...” Pushkin wrote on the twenty-sixth of May 1828 - at not the best time for himself. It would seem that exile to the south and to the Mikhailovskoye, Decembrist uprising and the tragic events that followed it are a thing of the past. In May 1829, Pushkin received the long-awaited permission to settle in St. Petersburg. But he quickly got bored with the capital. Her noise and bustle turned out to be alien to Alexander Sergeevich. That period cannot be called a creative upsurge. Pushkin's pen often produced only elegant trinkets. Two poems stand out: “Memories” and “A Vain Gift, an Accidental Gift...”. In the second work, a lyrical hero appears before the readers, overcome by despair. A deep feeling of disappointment in life came over him. He is trying to find the meaning of existence, to answer eternal philosophical questions. The conclusion is disappointing, which is reflected in the final quatrain - there is no goal, the heart is empty, the mind is idle. The poem is anti-God in nature. According to the lyrical hero, it was the Lord who “called him out of insignificance” and “excited his mind with doubt.” He blames the Creator for all the troubles that have happened.

Pushkin received an answer to the thoughts expressed in the text under consideration. The author was Metropolitan Philaret of Moscow and Kolomna. He wrote the poem “Not in vain, not by chance...”. In it, one of the main people in the Russian Orthodox Church said that life is given by God for a reason, that man himself evokes evil from the dark abysses, fills the “soul with passion” and excites the “mind with doubt.” The Metropolitan’s essay is an unobtrusive, non-hostile, maximally tactful appeal to Alexander Sergeevich to reconsider his philosophical and religious views and change his position in life. Two years later, Pushkin dedicated the poem “In hours of fun or idle boredom...” to the Metropolitan. According to the lyrical hero, Filaret is capable of “meek and loving power” to tame wild dreams. The finale is noteworthy:
Your soul is burning with your fire
Rejected the darkness of earthly vanities,
And listens to the seraphim's harp
The poet is in holy horror.

Alexander Sergeevich understood what the Metropolitan wanted to say with the poem “Not in vain, not by chance...” and appreciated his point of view. The poet saw in Filaret not just a church minister, albeit a high-ranking one, but a real messenger of the Lord on earth.

Under the poem “A vain gift, an accidental gift...” is the date May 26, 1828. This is the day when Pushkin turned 29 years old. 1828 was a difficult period in Pushkin’s life. In June of the same year, a commission began its work, which was supposed to render a verdict on the “Gabriiliad” (1821). Pushkin himself long ago abandoned his youthful views and sought harmony in his relationship with God. Perhaps it was the poem “The Gift...” and Metropolitan Philaret’s subsequent response to it that became a turning point in Pushkin’s worldview.

Literary direction, genre

The lyrical hero of the poem is a romantic. He despises a vain and random life and does not value it at all. He is filled with passions and doubts, his existence is aimless. One can only guess what the romantic hero’s longing and search for vivid impressions will lead to.

And yet, this is not a poem by a romantic poet, reveling in melancholy, longing, and passions. This is a philosophical discussion about the meaning of life, closest in genre to elegy. Realism is read in the questions of the poem. If they are rhetorical, these are the laments of a romantic. And if they are not rhetorical, then these are questions of a person who has come to his senses, who has already crossed the line of youth and is entering the time of maturity. These are questions of a crisis age, allowing, having found answers to them, to continue the path of life.

Theme, main idea and composition

The poem consists of three stanzas. The first and second are questions about the meaning of life: why it was given, why it will be cut short (condemned to execution), who gave it to the lyrical hero and why it is so imperfect (with passions and doubts). The third stanza is a kind of bitter conclusion: the life of the lyrical hero is aimless. After the colon, it is explained what this means: an empty (without love) heart and an idle (inactive) mind. This state of the lyrical hero makes life monotonous and dull, dreary.

The theme of the poem is a person’s reasoning about the meaning of life.

The main idea: a person must find the purpose and meaning of life, otherwise it will be unhappy, full of despondency and disappointment.

Meter and rhyme

The poem is written in trochaic tetrameter. The first emphasis in each line falls on the key word, almost always monosyllabic: gift, life, who, mind, soul, goals, heart. The rhyme is cross, female rhyme alternates with male rhyme.

Paths and images

Life in the work is metaphorically called a gift, a gift. But epithets devalue this gift in the eyes of the lyrical hero: gift vain, random. This image of a useless life is further deepened with the help of epithets: takes away life secret fate gives life hostile power. Mystery and hostility are characteristics of some higher power, in whose hands fate and power are. The word God is not pronounced by the lyrical hero. Yes, he is not sure that this is God, because the hostile force filled his soul with passion, and agitated his mind with doubt. The third stanza describes the consequences of the vices of the lyrical hero. Spiritual passions led to emptiness of the heart, and doubts of the mind to idleness. The hero plunges into the abyss of despondency, which is caused by an empty life, metaphorically called “the monotonous noise of life.”

Answer from Metropolitan Philaret

The poem marked the beginning of Pushkin’s poetic correspondence with Metropolitan Philaret, who was not indifferent to the fate of the Russian genius.

There is not a single question in Filaret's poem. It was written by a believer who has no doubt about his purpose and destiny. Using the framework of Pushkin’s poem, the Metropolitan gave answers to all questions.

Life is not a vain and not an accidental gift, given to us by God, according to His secret will, and taken away by Him. Everything bad in a person’s life comes from himself:

I myself am capricious in power
Evil has called out from the dark abysses,
I filled my soul with passion,
The mind was agitated with doubt.

The Metropolitan minimally changes the last two lines of Pushkin, changing to me on myself. The last stanza is not a conclusion, like Pushkin’s, it is a way out, a prayer: “Remember me, Forgotten by me.” This is a request to create in the praying “a pure heart, a right mind.” Filaret simply changes Pushkin’s epithets, quoting almost verbatim the Orthodox prayer: “Create in me a pure heart, O Lord, and renew a right Spirit in my womb.”

Pushkin responded to the Metropolitan with a new poem, “In Hours of Fun or Idle Boredom,” from which it is clear that he accepted the Metropolitan’s spiritual guidance. Dejection and melancholy in his poetry were replaced by bright motives.

“The Captain’s Daughter”, a summary of the chapters of Pushkin’s story
“The luminary of the day has gone out,” analysis of Pushkin’s poem
“I remember a wonderful moment...”, analysis of Pushkin’s poem

Who makes me a hostile power
From nothingness he called,
Filled my soul with passion,
Has your mind been agitated by doubt?..

There is no goal in front of me:
The heart is empty, the mind is idle,
And it makes me sad
The monotonous noise of life.

The Metropolitan responded to these verses as follows:

Not in vain, not by chance
Life was given to me by God,
Not without the secret will of God
And she was sentenced to death.

I myself am capricious in power
Evil called out from the dark abysses,
He filled his soul with passion,
The mind was agitated with doubt.

Remember me, forgotten by me!
Shine through the darkness of thoughts -
And it will be created by You
The heart is pure, the mind is bright!

Pushkin, in turn, dedicated “Stanzas” to Philaret:

In hours of fun or idle boredom,
It used to be that I was my lyre
Entrusted pampered sounds
Madness, laziness and passions.

But even then the strings of evil
Involuntarily I interrupted the ringing,
When your voice is majestic
I was suddenly struck.

I shed streams of unexpected tears,
And the wounds of my conscience
Your fragrant speeches
The clean oil was refreshing.

And now from a spiritual height
You stretch out your hand to me,
And the strength of meek and loving
You tame your wild dreams.

Your soul is burning with your fire
Rejected the darkness of earthly vanities,
And listens to Seraphim's harp
The poet is in holy horror.

The original text of the last stanza, changed at the request of the censor, was as follows:

Your soul is warmed by your fire
Rejected the darkness of earthly vanities,
And listens to Philaret's harp
The poet is in holy horror.

[Once Metropolitan Philaret served in the Assumption Cathedral. Pushkin went there and, with his arms crossed as usual, stood throughout the long sermon. After mass he returns home.
- Where have you been for so long? - asks the wife.
- In Uspensky.
-Who did you see there?
“Oh, leave it alone,” he answers and, putting his head in his hands, began to sob.
- What happened to you? - the wife was alarmed.
- Nothing, give me paper and ink quickly.

(From conversations of Elder Barsanuphius with spiritual children)]

The dialogue between the poet and the metropolitan is contradictory, but one thing is certain: during these years Pushkin begins to feel himself new, and in his work the idea of testing sounds more and more clearly.

The complexity of the relationship between Pushkin and the Orthodox Church is not the same as the relationship between Pushkin and Christianity (“...It is not Catholicism that is more important, but the idea of Christ” - from his letter to P. Chaadaev). But he also interacted with Orthodoxy all the time. Without stating this fact, it is impossible to understand the bright transformation of Pushkin on the threshold of death.

P. Florensky: “If there is Rublev’s “Trinity”, then there is God.” By analogy, we can say that if there is Pushkin, then there is the secret of Russian humanity. Pushkinist V. Nepomnyashchiy calls him “holding now” for Russia (an image from the letter of the Apostle Paul: “... For the mystery of iniquity is already at work, only it will not be accomplished until the one who now holds it is taken out of the way." At the same time, Pushkin also did not have time to understand something important, just as Russia still has not solved its secret. But he revealed this secret with his entire destiny! As long as Russia has Pushkin, lawlessness will not be committed in action. Pushkin holds our national existential backbone. The status of his work for Russia is not ontological, but numenous (nomen is a sign indicating something in which the hidden forces and energies of the world process are directly involved).

The main accents of Pushkin’s work are female-centric (trust in the wife, justification of the soul). This is also associated with a feeling of Russia. Love assumes act- this is the final essence of the duel (not to allow your soul - and your country - to be executed). This is essentially a religious choice.

[Love that saves must be sighted. The most dangerous love is the one that involves blindness (threats of romanticism).]

To understand Pushkin, everyone must expose their chest to the cutting sword of his poetry.

Pushkin is always final; everywhere in him one can feel the utmost concentration of the poetic idea, the final completeness. It provokes a strange fluoroscopy in the whole body of culture. Is the poet always right? Pushkin himself was surprised at the paradoxical nature of his gift (the Prophet and Walsing from “A Feast in the Time of Plague”, the embodiment of “rapture of the abyss”).

The mystery of poetry is related to the mystery of lost cosmocentrism. The poetic gift is a synergistic gift. There is something in the poet’s topos that is capable of upward movement, of interaction with transcendental energies. [In Pushkin’s “Boris Godunov” the idea of the heart comes into contact with the idea of conscience.] Poesis is “the mother language of the human race.”

The main existential energy remains the energy of eros. All poets are victims of twisted eroticism in a general ontological sense. Instead of the unrealized Homeric truth (paradise, fusis, cosmos) there is a broken, split universe. However, the poetic principle is still alive.

Eros is what sets the movement in the direction from the beginning to the goal (from the acorn to the oak). In ancient space, the kouros always goes to the bark, his leg is always clearly pointed to the left, he knows where to move. And this is not an intellectual, but a heartfelt action - quantum pulse movements.

The most dangerous things are common. We are doomed to error if we rely on self-evidence. Pushkin studies in its concern have shown that All are wrong. Pushkin often turns out to be instrumentalized for his own peace of mind, it is easy to hide behind him (“Pushkin is beautiful, period”). This is how the accounting of judgments is formed. Pushkin, among other things, becomes an indulgence for his own indiscipline.

[The tragedy of geniuses lies in their almost general lack of fulfillment (they didn’t manage to do everything). Even Chekhov did not have time to plant the seeds of the cherry orchard.

Religion is what connects us with God, rejected into the transcendent.

Poesis - existence is embodied in words. Language is the most important thing given to us by evolution. It connects us with meaning, creates reality. However, intuitions need to be treated responsibly.]

The mystery of Russian humanity is associated with the heights and lowlands of Pushkin. He, like Russia, needs decide. To live is for one’s own change. Another thing is Pushkin’s betrayal. Today, in the almost universal feeling of the end (of history, culture, science, art), we simply have no time left to assume, celebratory, and not essentially approach the same literature. We need sight, intelligibility. The culminating question of every opportunity is where is our conscience? Life is permeated with the reality of each of us. The world is accumulated within us. Civilization must become educated.

Yes, there is “beautiful” poetry of Pushkin - but there is also Truth the same Pushkin, and our responsibility for him.

Conversations on such topics must have a serious hermeneutical basis; simply talking is unacceptable - there are too many open questions. In particular, we need to talk about how the poetic, with its special ideological and sensory geometry, different from all others (religious, scientific), turns out to be associated with Pushkin’s drama. By interceding with the mystery of Pushkin, we begin to peer into the mystery of poetic existence and consciousness.

Two characteristic vectors emerge here:

1. The motive of pilgrimage and wandering is one of the main ones in Russia;

2. The motive of Job the prophet, who is tested not only by spiritual temptations, but also, like Faust, by the temptations of seeking evil.

In his translation “God sent me a wonderful dream...” Pushkin includes a poetic paraphrase of the prayer of John of Damascus: “... Arranging a thing for me.” In this context (in the old Russian sound) a thing is something that broadcasts. ABOUT of things Many people spoke about the specifics of his work. Incl. I.A. Ilyin writes that Pushkin was given to create the solar center of our history (“The Prophetic Calling of Pushkin”).

V.S. Nepomnyashchy, as mentioned above, gave Pushkin the ontological status of “holding now.” Pushkin is the center of the Russian spiritual archetype, separate from the Western one. The West is our eternal dialogue partner (Easter archetype versus Christmas archetype). The key to understanding the difference is the image of the cross. For Western culture, the cross is a symbol of suffering nature (the subject is a special relationship with reality). For the Eastern (Easter) worldview, the cross is a symbol of human guilt before the grieving God, crucified by us, but also victorious, and elevating us above the sorrow of nature (special relationship with ideal). Pushkin in this is protecting the special essential specificity of the Russian existential archetype.

Today, the mystery of the poetic is lost, art becomes an object of consumption, and not a form of knowledge of existence. For Aristotle, it is “an attempt to imitate beautiful nature” (that is, he, too, is essentially post-classical, the secret of the archaic was lost even then). According to M. Heidegger, truth, which has become an absolute secrecy for other forms of consciousness, is preserved in poesis. This is close to “experience,” its existential aspect. The essence is to the extent that the truth penetrates us, to the extent that we react to it unconsciously. This is how a special kind of certainty is born. Man, torn by pluralism and temptation, is straightened and corrected when poetry finds a reader. In unipolarity (only the author) it is dead, but in dialogue it makes it possible to get rid of fictionality and simulativeness.

Poets often find themselves helpless in mastering their gift. The lack of control of a genius, his shock at his own insights is the leitmotif of Pushkin’s fate (“no matter what he says, everything is brilliant!”). Creators are hostages of the secret of common destiny. The phenomenon of genius is a sensory connection to a higher reality, a feeling of connectedness of everyone with each other. Poesis, as a special type of social consciousness, has its own laws (temporal-spatial arrangement, images into which ideas are embodied, etc.). The poet is always embedded in a special symphony of the universe, he sees the holography of existence, where everything matters, in everything there are signs of revelation, but he himself is doomed see. Such a sensory-spiritual connection to an increasingly greater secrecy often associated with temptations and dangers (it can both elevate spiritually and kill).

Pushkin's fate is filled with signs. It opens up for Russia after 1812 - at a time when the whole country lives in the ethics of the sublime. Here are the origins of the phenomenon of the Decembrists (for whom the poet, with his frantic desire for freedom, sounded in poetry, was a kind of program) and the genius of Pushkin himself.

Pushkin is a poetic point of bifurcation in a very special period of Russian history. This is his responsibility - and, perhaps, the eternal reproach for the tragic “what if?..” (“...And I had a dream that Pushkin was saved”). At the very beginning of the most difficult time for humanity, Shakespeare managed to create his encyclopedias of existence. Goethe also left an archetypal set of warnings for modern man (Faustian). Pushkin also carried out similar cataloging - hence his openness to the geniuses of other nations, to the secrets of the history of many peoples. In fact, all of his work is poetry “for the occasion” (of his own life and other cultures). And this is natural: before we say something new, we need to understand what we already have, to understand it (today’s problems).

The happiness and unhappiness of Pushkin’s family life is just as existentially important for us (“The devil made me dream about happiness”). Poetry always comes down to the mystery of reflecting the fate of love (which also applies to all other spheres of consciousness). Reality may not be real. Reality is only that which is essentially alive, that which we love. Reality is a function of the vectoriality of love. What is preferable - form or content? (a poetic warning to the cult of physicality).

And in Pushkin there is a reflection of the mystery of love (with all the experience of the previous culture). He opens the "grotto of Aphrodite" early. Pushkin knew the Holy Scriptures well - hence the multiplicity of evangelical allusions in his work (including the secret of the harlot), and at the same time - erotomania, phenomenal falling in love. “I learned a lot” - hence the broad and accurate diagnosis of erotic gravity. At the zenith of his love for Countess Elizaveta Vorontsova, Pushkin leaves several secret poems, the meaning of which he himself becomes hostage to.

“Proserpina” is the most difficult secret of ancient myth, a symbol of a stolen soul. [In Russian folk imagery, the personification of the soul is Vasilisa (immanent wisdom, instinct of conscience), she is abducted by a snake, and Ivan will save her, extracting the soul from the lair of corporeality.] In the Greek myth, Hades-Hades carries away Proserpina on black horses (metaphor of will). For Pushkin, its sign became apocalyptic; in this imagery he felt his place. At the same time, the motif of Cleopatra is born - a symbol of poisonous explosiveness and the power of unbridled eros. The mystery of love turns out to be connected with the mystery of death. Pushkin himself becomes a victim of a broken erotic vector - hence his blissful, hysterical state on the eve of the Black River. A premonition of it already sounds in the Lyceum poem “Unbelief.” The chorus of demonism is revealed in “Scenes from Faust” (“I’m bored, demon”). Faust, plagued by gracelessness, sinks the ship of existence. Meanwhile, Pushkin dedicates his hope for the saving idea of conscience - the drama "Boris Godunov" - to Karamzin.

The last period of his life is a dissonance between the poetic Pushkin (the mystery and paradox of genius are revealed) and the journalistic prose. The nascent Christian consciousness and the restless poetic consciousness cannot be reconciled in it. In Pushkin’s poems, “life is like a plague,” but his journalism is evenly enlightened. Speaking of this, we again come to the question of the maximum of poetic ability.

The final mystery of poetry is the mystery of a common destiny. This is the famous speech of F.M. Dostoevsky at the opening of the monument to Pushkin. The specificity of the brotherhood of people is the mission of the Russian heart. Accommodating other people's geniuses into the soul as if they were relatives is Pushkin's discovery. If he had lived longer, would there have been less strife? “...Pushkin died in the full development of his powers and undoubtedly took some great secret with him to the grave. And now we are solving this mystery without him.”

CandyA Pupil (232), closed 4 years ago

GALINA Supreme Intelligence (746930) 4 years ago

This poem was written on May 26, 1828, the poet’s birthday.
old style.
In terms of genre, it is close to philosophical elegy.
The content of the poem reflects a state of painful duality
lyrical hero in search of the highest meaning of life.
It is no coincidence that he is thinking about the meaning of life; he is oppressed by the terrible thought of
that his existence may be pointless.
A vain gift, a random gift,
Life, why were you given to me?
Or why fate is a secret
Are you sentenced to death?
Article conveys the idea that has developed in the Christian tradition about
dual material-spiritual nature of human essence,
the eternal opposition of these principles in man.
Therefore, we see that, be that as it may, the hero perceives life as a gift,
The whole poem begins with this word. The first line proves
the need for change, rethinking, transformation. The hero clearly realizes the value of the gift, but does not find the true meaning in it; terrible doubt reigns
over it; it is unclear to him whether this gift is in vain, that is, given to him for some purpose, but to no avail; or is it an accident, nonsense, a mistake? The first line asks two seemingly mutually exclusive questions: “Why were you given to me? " and "Why was fate secretly condemned to execution? “These questions and torment confirm the excitement in the hero’s soul, his desire to find his image, to change something. He does not agree with the possibility of living, but he also does not agree with his condemnation.

A thirst for knowledge of God’s secret, the mystery of life, the idea contained in the God-given right to live, awakens in the soul. “Life, why were you given to me? “It’s worth shifting the emphasis to the word “me.” Thus, an extreme degree of interest is presented to the reader. In the desire to achieve a sign from above, an answer, there is even some despair; when reading the first stanza aloud, one gets the impression that the questions are thrown into nowhere, into the air, but it is in the air that the hero wants to find the answer, he turns to all living things and the heavens themselves.
The second stanza is more specific, as if it deciphers the misunderstanding expressed earlier:
Who makes me a hostile power
From nothingness he called,
Filled my soul with passion,
Has your mind been disturbed by doubt?

The question is rather not “Who...”. and for what? “After all, the hero knows from whom a person receives this sacred gift, but for what purpose, will he be able to find a use for it? Some strange feeling overcomes the hero, an unknown storm dominates his soul. “By hostile power” - the motif of hostility appears in the second stanza, which means that there are two worlds at war with each other. Thanks to alliteration, in the second quatrain an image of power appears - God's power, some kind of spiritual power, a voice that can burst in, excite, cry out, as if something is pulling the hero upward from “insignificance.” higher to rethinking, reincarnation, and then, perhaps, to transformation.
The goal is not clear, the meaning has not been found, but the soul is filled with passion, fire is now hidden in it, the mind is agitated by doubt.
At this stage, the hero stands still, life for him is languor, it is dry and monotonous, smothers him and fetters him. "For what? " - he asks this question,
his mind is idle, but not lost, his heart is empty, but is about to be filled with a boiling wave of spiritual thought, as it was already in the “Prophet”.

The reaction to this poem was a poetic response to Pushkin by Metropolitan Philaret, containing an objection to the poet. He says that life was not given by God in vain or by chance, and it was not without his will that he was condemned to execution.
After reading the metropolitan’s message, Pushkin in 1830 wrote the poem “In hours of fun or idle boredom...”. as if leading his hero on the path of finding purpose and meaning in life.

Home > Wiki-textbook > Literature > 7th grade > Pushkin “A vain gift, an accidental gift”: reflections on purpose

Analysis of Pushkin’s poem “A Vain Gift, an Accidental Gift”

The lyrics of the most famous poet of Russia are quite unique, despite their philosophical meaning; they almost always carry an exclusively personal character. Pushkin's lyrics are autobiographical, and this is its uniqueness and originality, since at the same time it personifies the image of a person of that time: his problems, his reasoning and experiences.

In his poems, Alexander Sergeevich incredibly interweaves the motives of his life and the problems of his generation. And yet, the foundation of his work, as the basis of all Russian classical literature, is the eternal questions of existence, the main values in human life and the meaning of his existence.

Analysis of the poem “A vain gift, an accidental gift...”

Pushkin’s poem “A vain gift, an accidental gift...” is permeated with the poet’s deep emotional experiences. He turns to fate itself, to the very basis of life with the eternal question: why was life given to man?

Why a person is born, why he finds himself in certain conditions and circumstances, why he is given exactly such a fate. It is obvious that the poet is acutely concerned about this issue; in heartbreaking words he speaks about life as a gift, but for him this gift is still vain and accidental...

This short poem reveals to us the spiritual organization of Alexander Pushkin, his tireless desire for self-improvement, the desire to know himself and finally understand. He desires to understand the wisdom of life, so he passionately inquires about the purpose of man and how he can be understood or known.

Pushkin's lyrics are characterized by a real spiritual thirst: he longs to live and love, he longs to know everything that fate has prepared for him, but still he constantly finds himself at a crossroads, both internal and external.

The theme of fate and human destiny in the poet’s lyrics

After all, it is known that Alexander Sergeevich was a unique person, and like every true poet, he saw not only with his eyes, but also with his soul, and wanted other people to be able to see what he saw. Therefore, in addition to the simple human purpose, he also talks about the special purpose of the poet.

Pushkin continues the theme of the poem “A gift in vain, a gift fortuitous...” in his famous work “The Prophet,” where the theme of life’s purpose and fate is more significantly revealed. And in “A Vain Gift, an Accidental Gift...” he talks philosophically about the value of life and its fateful course.

And in his lyrics one can feel desperate melancholy, and even mental pain, which Pushkin cannot keep within himself; he needs to embody it in a poem. We see with what persistence the poet asks fate about the reason for his devastation and heartache.

And at the same time he longs to know why he was given this particular life, why he goes through so many trials. Much is contained in the initial lines of the poem, which are the title... A random gift, a wasted gift...

After all, if a person does not know why life was given to him, why he has such a destiny, this gift can truly become in vain, useless for the spiritual development of a person.

“A vain gift, an accidental gift...” A. Pushkin

“A vain gift, an accidental gift...” Alexander Pushkin

A vain gift, a random gift,
Life, why were you given to me?
Or why fate is a secret
Are you sentenced to death?

Who makes me a hostile power
From nothingness he called,
Filled my soul with passion
Has your mind been disturbed by doubt?

There is no goal in front of me:
The heart is empty, the mind is idle,
And it makes me sad
The monotonous noise of life.

Analysis of Pushkin’s poem “A vain gift, an accidental gift...”

“A vain gift, an accidental gift. ", analysis of Pushkin's poem

History of creation

Under the poem “A vain gift, an accidental gift. "The date is May 26, 1828. This is the day when Pushkin turned 29 years old. 1828 was a difficult period in Pushkin’s life. In June of the same year, a commission began its work, which was supposed to make a verdict on the “Gabriiliad” (1821). Pushkin himself long ago abandoned his youthful views and sought harmony in his relationship with God. Perhaps it was the poem “Gift. “and Metropolitan Philaret’s subsequent response to it became a turning point in Pushkin’s worldview.

Literary direction, genre

Theme, main idea and composition

The theme of the poem is a person’s reasoning about the meaning of life.

The main idea: a person must find the purpose and meaning of life, otherwise it will be unhappy, full of despondency and disappointment.

Meter and rhyme

Paths and images

Life in the work is metaphorically called a gift, a gift. But epithets devalue this gift in the eyes of the lyrical hero: gift vain. random. This image of a useless life is further deepened with the help of epithets: takes away life secret fate gives life hostile power. Mystery and hostility are characteristics of some higher power, in whose hands fate and power are. The word God is not pronounced by the lyrical hero. Yes, he is not sure that this is God, because the hostile force filled his soul with passion, and agitated his mind with doubt. The third stanza describes the consequences of the vices of the lyrical hero. Spiritual passions led to emptiness of the heart, and doubts of the mind to idleness. The hero plunges into the abyss of despondency, which is caused by an empty life, metaphorically called “the monotonous noise of life.”

Answer from Metropolitan Philaret

The poem marked the beginning of Pushkin’s poetic correspondence with Metropolitan Philaret, who was not indifferent to the fate of the Russian genius.

Life is not a vain and not an accidental gift, given to us by God, according to His secret will, and taken away by Him. Everything bad in a person’s life comes from himself:

I myself am capricious in power
Evil has called out from the dark abysses,
I filled my soul with passion,
The mind was agitated with doubt.

About Pushkin's poem A vain gift, an accidental gift

"A vain gift, an accidental gift,
Life, why were you given to me?
Or why fate is a secret
Are you sentenced to death?
Who makes me a hostile power
From nothingness he called,
Filled my soul with passion,
The mind was agitated with doubt.
There is no goal in front of me:
The heart is empty, the mind is idle,
And it makes me sad
The monotonous noise of life."

You read this poem by Pushkin and involuntarily begin to empathize with him, so strongly did he reflect his state of mind in it. What was the reason for the poet’s depressive state, and why did he decide that his life was “condemned to execution”?
Pushkin wrote this poem on May 26, 1828, on his birthday. What could have happened to Pushkin at that time that forced him to write these poems, permeated with melancholy and despondency?

Looking through the poet’s life, one can come to the conclusion that the reason for this state of the poet was his blasphemous poem “Gabrieliad”. The poem was written in 1821 in Chisinau and, of course, was intended only for a narrow circle of friends and in no case for distribution. But, as they say, there is nothing secret that would not become obvious.

Copies of the poem multiplied and by 1825 had become widely known. In 1828, the poem reached the highest hierarch of the Orthodox Church, Metropolitan Seraphim of St. Petersburg. He introduced the poem to the king, the latter ordered to find out the author of the poem. A special commission was appointed to investigate this case, chaired by Count P.A. Tolstoy.

The poet was summoned for questioning. Pushkin was seriously frightened and decided to deny his authorship. In an explanatory note, he wrote: “I saw the Gabrieliad for the first time at the Lyceum in the 15th or 16th year and rewrote it; I don’t remember where I took her, but I haven’t seen her since.”

The Tsar ordered to interrogate the poet again, but this time Pushkin continued to deny his authorship: “The manuscript circulated among the officers of the Hussar Regiment,” he wrote in his own defense, “but from which of them exactly I got it, I can’t remember. I probably burned my list in 1920. I dare to add that in none of my writings, even those of which I most repent, are there any traces of a spirit of unbelief or blasphemy against religion. All the more regrettable for me is the opinion that ascribes to me a work so pitiful and shameful.”

Pushkin denied it as best he could. He knew that insulting the church was punishable, at best, by exile to remote places in Siberia, and he had a presentiment of this. This state of his at that time was reflected in another of his poems, “Premonition”:

"The clouds are over me again
They gathered in silence;
Rock envious of misfortune
Threatens me again.
Will I retain contempt for fate?
Shall I carry her towards her?
Inflexibility and patience
Of my proud youth?

Tired of a stormy life,
I wait indifferently for the storm:
Maybe still saved
I will find a pier again.
But, anticipating separation,
The inevitable, menacing hour,
Squeeze your hand, my angel
I'm in a hurry for the last time."

In his heart, he may have hoped that it would carry through, but it didn’t. The Tsar demanded that the commission continue the search for the author of the Gabrieliad. He wrote:
“G. Tolstoy to call Pushkin to himself and tell him in my name that, knowing Pushkin personally, I believe his word. But I wish that he would help the government discover who could have composed such an abomination and offended Pushkin by releasing it under his name.”

The king was cunning! He knew that Pushkin could lie to the commission, but he wouldn’t dare lie to the emperor. And so it happened. Pushkin made a decision: to write a personal letter to the Tsar and acknowledge in it his authorship of the Gabrieliad. Come what may. The protocol of Pushkin’s third interrogation said: “. after contented silence and reflection, he asked (Pushkin - NIK): whether he would be allowed to write directly to the Emperor, and, having received a satisfactory answer to this, he immediately wrote a letter to His Majesty, and, having sealed it, handed it to Count Tolstoy. The commission decided, without opening this letter, to present it to His Majesty.” Here is the text of Pushkin’s letter to the Tsar:
“Being questioned by the Government, I did not consider myself obliged to admit to a prank that was as shameful as it was criminal. - But now, asked directly on behalf of my Sovereign, I declare that Gavriliada was composed by me in 1817. Submitting myself to the mercy and generosity of the Tsar, I am Your Imperial Majesty, loyal subject Alexander Pushkin. October 2, 1828. St. Petersburg."

Why did Pushkin write to the Tsar that he composed “Gavriliad” in 1817, and not in 1821, as it actually was? Most likely, he expected that he would get a discount on his youth. Still, there is less demand for a seventeen-year-old youth than for an already mature twenty-two-year-old man.

The outstanding philologist and Pushkin scholar B. Tomashevsky denies that this letter belongs to Pushkin, but most likely, Pushkin actually recognized the authorship, because the investigation was immediately terminated by the resolution of Nicholas I: “I know the matter in detail and it is completely over.”

Apparently, Tsar Nicholas 1 appreciated Pushkin’s sincere confession, forgave him and ordered the “Gabriiliad” case to be stopped. Pushkin's fame was already thundering throughout Russia, and therefore the tsar did not dare to exile Pushkin to Siberia. But the poet was under supervision until the end of his life.

Pushkin’s friend Vyazemsky said that in the later years of his life Pushkin could not tolerate even the mention of Gavriliada in his presence, it was so unpleasant for him. “I would like to destroy many things,” he wrote, “as unworthy even of my talent, whatever it may be. Others gravitate like a reproach on my conscience.”

This, most likely, was the reason for Pushkin’s decadent mood, which was expressed in the poem “A Vain Gift, an Accidental Gift.”
Later this poem fell into the hands of Metropolitan Philaret of Moscow. Filaret was very smart, educated, well versed in poetry and literature, and wrote poetry himself. As proof, I will cite one of his poems:
"When there is no strength to bear the cross,
When the melancholy cannot be overcome,
We raise our eyes to heaven,
Saying prayer day and night,
So that the Lord may have mercy.
But if after grief
Happiness will smile on us again,
Do we thank you with tenderness,
With all my heart, with all my thoughts
We are God's mercy and love!"

Filaret, having read Pushkin’s verse, responded to it with his own. He writes, as if for Pushkin:
"Not in vain, not by chance
Life was given to me by God,
Not without the secret will of God
And she was sentenced to death.

I myself am capricious in power
Evil has called out from the dark abysses,
He filled his soul with passion,
The mind was agitated with doubt.

Remember me, Forgotten by me!
Shine through the darkness of thoughts -
And it will be created by You
A pure heart, a bright mind."

Pushkin was not left indifferent by this unexpectedly addressed voice of the famous and respected saint. He writes a message to the Metropolitan, in which there is a genuine feeling of gratitude and tenderness:

"In hours of fun or idle boredom,
It used to be that I was my lyre
Entrusted pampered sounds
Madness, laziness and passions.

But even then the strings of evil
Involuntarily I interrupted the ringing,
When your voice is majestic
I was suddenly struck.

I shed streams of unexpected tears,
And the wounds of my conscience
Your fragrant speeches
The clean oil was refreshing.

And now from a spiritual height
You stretch out your hand to me,
And the strength of meek and loving
You tame your wild dreams.

Your soul is burning with your fire
Rejected the darkness of earthly vanities,
And listens to Seraphim's harp
The poet is in holy horror."

The original text of the last stanza, changed at the request of the censor, was as follows:

Your soul is warmed by your fire
Rejected the darkness of earthly vanities,
And listens to Philaret's harp
The poet is in holy horror.

This is the story of Pushkin’s poem “A Gift in Vain. »

“Following the thoughts of a great man is the most entertaining science,” said Pushkin.
Following the thoughts of the great Pushkin is not only entertaining, but also useful. “By reading only Pushkin’s works,” Belinsky said, “you can perfectly educate a person within yourself.”

A.S. Pushkin, "Ruslan and Lyudmila"

Yura, what happened to you?
He decided to examine me, he remembered the sorcerer Chernomor, you’re rolling a cart against Andropov. Did you have a fight with your wife?)

It’s clear that the words were written about Chernomor, but who is this Chernomor, what or who does he represent on the planet?

Your Chernomor was impotent. He really wanted Lyudmila. but he couldn't. He had everything, he could do everything, but he couldn’t do this.

Wow, look at the root. The same is true in global politics. The world rulers from behind the scenes want to rule the entire planet autocratically, but they have begun to lack brainpower. So, Russia has a chance to make the process of governing peoples fair and to do everything according to conscience, that is, without violating the Providence of God.

But I want to continue the unfinished conversation about Pushkin and his poem “Ruslan and Lyudmila”.

The forty-seventh issue of “Arguments and Facts” for 1991 (circulation of about 25 million copies) came out with a “sensational” statement on the first page:
“Pushkin - Russian prophet”

A short note under the heading “For AiF Readers Only” states:
“A world sensation awaits us. The Taganrog newspaper “Mig” has begun publishing “philosophical tables” - mathematical models of human development, according to local experts, written by the great Pushkin. The publication of the material was prepared on the basis of the archive, which Pushkin handed over for storage to his friend, the ataman of the Don Army D. Kuteynikov, in 1829, bequeathing to open them on January 27, 1979. For various reasons this has not been done to date.

According to the custodian of the archive, a descendant of the Kuteynikov family, I. Rybkin, Pushkin’s model of the Cosmos is not only not inferior to the Buddhist, Arab and Christian, but even surpasses them.

Pushkin duplicated his entire archive - “The Golden Chain”, “encoding” the meaning of scientific works into works of art. So, after transferring the archive to Kuteynikov, he wrote a miraculous prologue to the poem “Ruslan and Lyudmila,” which in essence is the testament of the great poet. Every word here is allegorical.”
We are not familiar with the Taganrog archive, although we have no doubt that through Pushkin’s symbolism, the peoples of Russia, in particular, and Humanity as a whole come into contact with new knowledge that can change the entire society. The depressurization of this Knowledge is already underway in accordance with the “law of time” and much of what the poet predicted is coming true.

For the second century, interest in the creative heritage of A.S. Pushkin has not weakened and every reader, encountering one or another work of the poet, tries to understand the reason for their special appeal. In other words, everyone is looking for hidden meaning in them. Why? Yes, because often it is not obvious at the level of the so-called plot; it is closed by a certain system of symbols, either developed by Pushkin himself, or given to him from Above. It was this circumstance that caused open irritation among many of the poet’s contemporaries and even aroused open hostility towards him. Over time, a whole army of professional “Pushkinists” grew up in Russia and abroad, trying to hide this side of our poet’s work.

To understand the peculiarities of Pushkin’s symbolism, we will have to return to Ancient Greece, to the 6th century BC. e. and at the same time answer the question: why did Aesop, the Phrygian slave, use characters from the animal world in his allegorical and moral stories? Most likely, we are dealing here with a very ancient tradition, the origins of which should perhaps be sought in “totemism” or, as they now say, in “stable stereotypes of perception of the surrounding reality.”

“Traditional fable symbolism helps the reader understand, or rather recognize, the “characters” of animal characters. V. Trediakovsky also noted that the fabulist depicts “a sensitive semblance of quietness and simplicity in the Lamb; loyalty and friendship in the Dog; on the contrary, impudence, theft, cruelty in the Wolf, Leo, and Tiger. This is a dumb language that all nations understand."

If we consider the fable as one of the most ancient literary genres, then the question involuntarily arises, why none of the professionals “Pushkinists” paid attention to one strange circumstance: trying their talent in all literary genres (short story, tale, novel, poem, play , epigram), Pushkin did not write a single fable? Or he wrote it, but somehow differently, i.e. so that A.S. Pushkin’s “fables” were not recognized as fables?

To answer this question correctly, you should always remember that Pushkin never copied anyone; he was an innovator, but not so much of the literary genres themselves as of their content. The novelty of the content, in contrast to the novelty of the form, is not so striking; to evaluate it requires the ability to see the “general course of things.” It is almost elusive, but everyone perceives it in their own way thanks to the system of symbols formed by the author in the creative process.

Art in general is symbolic. But some artists, through their system of symbols (perhaps without even realizing it), “raise a person from his knees,” others lower him, sometimes even onto all fours. To understand what we are talking about, it is necessary to make a short excursion into the area of the human psyche, especially into those areas that are usually taken “for granted,” or, in other words, which are not usually discussed in the circles of professional psychologists.

This work was written for 13 reviews. the last one is displayed here, the rest - in the full list .