Some critics and colleagues of the great Pushkin believed that he had no setbacks in his work, except for one. This failure, in their opinion, was the Dubrovsky novel. The famous Anna Akhmatova noted that by writing this work, the author wanted to save himself from financial problems for a long time, since the creation was clearly designed for success with the public - the notes of the tabloid novel too slipped through it. Of course, we have no right to criticize the work of the ingenious Pushkin with such harsh criticism. But it’s worth it to understand the behavioral features of some of his heroes.
The idea of the novel
According to researchers of the works of Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin, the novel "Dubrovsky" was conceived back in 1832. There is evidence that for the sake of this story, the author suspended the implementation of other, no less grandiose literary plans. Probably, he himself was interested in the reason for the quarrel between Dubrovsky and Troekurov, so the work went very quickly. Perhaps Pushkin was so struck by the history of the real Dubrovsky prototype that writing was progressing at an accelerated pace. The work is based on actual events that took place in Belarus. All the details were told to Pushkin by his longtime friend Nashchokin in Moscow. And since the author could not write about a real character who wore a consonant surname Ostrovsky, the quarrel of Dubrovsky and Troekurov is described in the work.
Characteristic of Troekurov
In order to better understand what kind of people are in question in the work, we need a detailed description of Troekurov and Dubrovsky. Better to start with a negative, according to the author, hero. So, Troekurov, who is he really? Many critics in describing the character of Troekurov give a capacious definition of "tyrant." It is this word that most vividly characterizes the behavior of the hero. Unbridled character, crazy, often dangerous tricks, arrogance and self-confidence - this is a brief listing of the key qualities of his character. There is evidence that Troekurov had a double in real life. It is possible that Pushkin wrote off this character from his cousin uncle, also a landowner, and also a very difficult disposition. To understand the reason for the quarrel between Dubrovsky and Troekurov, you need to pay attention to another hero of the work.
Dubrovsky – senior
It would seem that old comrades who have a similar past should have similar characters. But no, something strikingly distinguishes each other from Dubrovsky the father and Troekurov. The author himself writes many pages, conveying similar features and how fate developed. Both career advancement is mentioned here, and the fact that both married, following the call of the heart, and the fact that they did not enjoy a long marriage of love, had a child. Persistence and temper are inherent in such people; our heroes have them in full measure. But, despite the close proximity, these people are very peculiar, and as a result, a quarrel arises between Dubrovsky and Troekurov. Their property status is divided by the abyss. Dubrovsky’s poverty is proud, envy is not inherent in her, therefore he has more to himself. This hero appears before the readers in a noble light. Here is an approximate description of Troekurov and Dubrovsky, Pushkin’s characters.
How did it go
Pushkin in this work makes us understand that friendship between such different people is possible until a certain point. It becomes clear that the neighbors do not equally value her. The episode of the quarrel between Dubrovsky and Troekurov looks very tragic, and its consequences are even worse. One day, when Troekurov had another reception, he led the guests to his kennel. It so happened that his friend Dubrovsky made a remark to him, as a result of which a quarrel erupted, which forever crossed out many years of friendship. Here a very sad fact is revealed here to the author by the author: Troyekurov is arrogant, arrogant and does not put a penny into an old comrade. For Troekurov offending a friend was not difficult. After all, he only recognizes the language of money, not taking into account the feelings of other people.
Attempts to fix it
Still, Pushkin gave Troekurov the opportunity to rectify the situation and ask for forgiveness. Yes, the eccentric landowner comes home to his old friend and wants to apologize. But by then Dubrovsky was already seriously ill. His son blames Troekurov for everything and does not allow him to get close to the patient, but he drives him away with a scandal. The reason for the quarrel between Dubrovsky and Troekurov is very absurd, but it affected both of them differently. For one it’s just an unpleasant moment, and for another it’s a mental drama that led to a serious illness and death. You can understand the feelings of Dubrovsky Jr.: he is sincerely sorry for his father, who simply turned out to be a devotee. But he still does not know what Troyekurov conceived. Soon the news of a lawsuit will break out like a bolt from the blue. Yes, it’s better to be dishonest at hand if someone is harder, because bribery in the court also needs to put something in his pocket, it’s a huge bribe. Handing them to the right and left, Troekurov ruins just recently a close friend and revels in victory. Meanwhile, Dubrovsky Sr. lies, finally finished off with grief and illness, and soon dies.
Cruelty careless or deliberate?
Death and ruin are not all grave consequences, but meanwhile the reason for the quarrel between Dubrovsky and Troekurov is so banal. This should also include the broken happiness of the daughter of Troekurov Marusi. Very sorry for the young girl, by the will of her father, to marry an elderly landowner. She actually loved Dubrovsky Jr. So because of paternal cruelty, which goes hand in hand with greed, children suffer. Researchers at Pushkin’s work argue that a happy ending was still foreseen in the continuation of this work. Dubrovsky Jr., forced to take the robber path, will leave to hide abroad. But after a few years he will return and reunite with his beloved. Unfortunately, the novel was never completed, but there were several options for the development of events. And we will never know which one is genuine. Only the reason for the quarrel between Dubrovsky and Troekurov remains clear.