.png)
Kapustin Nilolay V.,
Doctor of Philology,
Professor of the Russian Philology Department
Ivanovo State University
e-mail: nkapustin57@mail.ru
At the beginning of the article the author says that false Dmitry, who took the Russian throne in 1605, had to inevitably disguise his lie whilst pretending to be prince Dmitry first and afterwards — a tsar. Prince Shuisky had to conceal his real intentions as well. Shuisky was the main opponent of an impostor and he also dreamt about the throne. The author of the article shows the peculiar ways both of them conceal their lies. Ostrovsky doesn’t sympathize with the impostor’s lies, his disregard of the orthodox rites, national Russian customs, though generally the character of false Dmitry is being shown quite empathetically. As for Shuisky — he is shown as a brave and clever man, who understands the religious foundation of Russian life. On the other hand, the playwright clearly points out that those sacral and other national values are subordinate to Shuisky’s personal autocratic interests. As a result opposition “my (Shuisky) / foreign (false Dmitry, who is seen by Ostrovsky as a Polish nobleman despite of a more complex view of the playwright)” encounters the opposition “lie/truth (sincerity)”. False Dmitry turned out to be more sincere. Finally, “foreign” presented by an impostor attracts more than “my” presented by a hereditary Russian prince Shuisky from the Ruric family.
Keywords: A.N. Ostrovsky, impostor, Shuisky, role-based behavior, lie, truth, axiology
References
1. Alekseev M.P. Boris Godunov i Dmitrii Samozvanets v zapadnoevropeiskoi drame // Pushkin i mirovaia literatura / M.P. Alekseev. Leningrad: Nauka, 1987. S. 362–401.
2. Ermolaeva N.L. Kommentarii // Polnoe sobranie sochinenii i pisem: v 18 t. / A.N. Ostrovsky; pod red. I.A. Ovchininoi. Kostroma: Kostromaizdat, 2022. T. 5. S. 567–611.
3. Zubkov K.Yu. Kommentarii // Polnoe sobranie sochinenii i pisem: v 18 t. / A.N. Ostrovsky; pod red. I.A. Ovchininoi. Kostroma: Kostromaizdat, 2022. T. 5. S. 562–567.
4. Kashin N.P. Dramaticheskaia khronika A.N. Ostrovskogo “Dmitrii Samozvanets i Vasilii Shuiskii” // Zhurnal Ministerstva narodnogo prosveshcheniia. 1917. No. 6. S. 137–197; No. 7/8. C. 1–27.
5. Kostomarov N. Raznye izvestiia: po povodu dramaticheskoi khroniki Ostrovskogo // Golos. 1867. 30 marta (No. 89). S. 3.
6. Kostomarov N. Nazvannyi Dmitrii // Russkaia istoriia v zhizneopisaniiakh ee glavneishikh deiatelei / N. Kostomarov. St. Petersburg: Azbuka: Azbuka-Attikus, 2021. S. 417–444.
7. Milovzorova M.A. A.N. Ostrovsky i N.A. Chaev: dvizhenie stilia // Vestnik gumanitarnogo fakul’teta IGKhTU. 2007. Vyp. 2. S. 184 –190.
8. Moskvina T.V. V sporakh o Rossii: A.N. Ostrovsky: stat’i, issledovaniia. St. Petersburg: Limbus-Press, 2010. 310 s.
9. Ostrovsky A.N. Dmitrii Samozvanets i Vasilii Shuiskii // Polnoe sobranie sochinenii i pisem: v 18 t. / pod red. I.A. Ovchininoi. Kostroma: Kostromaizdat, 2022. T. 5. S. 7–142.
10. Uspensky B.A. Tsar’ i samozvanets: samozvanchestvo v Rossii kak kul’turno-istoricheskii fenomen // Izbrannye trudy. T. 1: Semiotika istorii. Semiotika kul’tury. Moscow: Iazyki russkoi kul’tury, 1996. S. 142–183.