In the works of Soviet literature, the image of a doctor is revealed mainly through his attitude to work and the patient, through the conflict between the innovator and tradition, teacher and student, between those who seek to save a person at any cost, help the sick, and people who use medicine as a means of achieving material wealth. well-being. Magnificent images of selfless doctors, devoted to their work, doctors by vocation were created by Yu. German, V. Kaverin, A. Korneichuk, Julius Krelin, V. Aksenov, A. Koptyaeva, .... Their works are well known, many have been filmed.
Soviet literature of the 1950s and 1960s very often idealized doctors, which aroused objections from the doctors themselves. They urged writers and journalists to write more about the everyday side of the work of doctors, and not just about noble and heroic deeds.
Currently, idealization is giving way to a more complex approach. Let us explain this by the example of Y. Krelin's story "The Surgeon". Her hero is the surgeon Mishkin. At work, he is respected for his humanity, genuine intelligence. He is the conscience of the team. Mishkin is appreciated for his high professionalism. “All surgery in the region rests on it,” says the chief physician. Mishkin is trouble-free and absolutely disinterested, alien to any fuss. Despite the worldly disorder, he is happy. His goal is to heal, save people. Work for him is the main necessity of life. And yet, doctor Mishkin is not a scheme, but a living person with whom the author does not always agree... So, the author does not hide the fact that the thinking of his hero is limited to the scope of practical surgery. He does not attach much importance to theory, he does not seek to complete the research he has begun.
An interesting image is drawn in the story "The Sentence" by Vladimir Soloukhin. Academician B.P. Petrov is a scientist of the old school, a major surgeon, a deeply intelligent person. The author admires Petrov's sensitivity, his ability to support the patient. The writer notes that many of the doctors he encountered did not have the patience to question the patient in detail. With this he connects the problem of late diagnosis. Not all of the writer's judgments are indisputable, as was mentioned during the discussion of his work by the medical community, but they are interesting. For example, a conversation about negative emotions that constantly oppress a person, or “time trouble”, even a short one, but detrimental to health, deserves attention. Observations by V.A. Soloukhin largely coincide with the thoughts of other writers.
I would like to draw attention to the notes of the surgeon Fedor Uglov “Under the white mantle”. This is not a work of art. The author tells about the representatives of Soviet medicine V.P. Demikhov, V.K. Kalzine, A.A. Smorodintsev, I.M. Velikanov, M.P. Chumakov, V.N. Shamov, S.T. Zatsepin and others. The main idea of ​​the notes is the affirmation of the ideal of a doctor-creator, a revolutionary in science, a disinterested fighter for human health and a sharp criticism of the so-called "business style", administration, careerism. F. Uglov draws attention to the problem of the leading personnel of health care, on which the improvement of medical and sanitary services for the population in our country largely depends. He also talks about the state of surgery abroad, in particular about the prevention of surgical diseases. Written passionately, truthfully, Uglov's notes are consonant with V.V. Kovanov and prose by V.A. Soloukhin. The books of N.M. adjoin the works of this series. Amosov "Thoughts and Heart", "The Book of Happiness and Unhappiness", revealing the inner world of a major medical scientist.
The images of doctors are also depicted in works of fine art in the form of portraits of prominent and many obscure doctors. They were written by Rembrand, F. Hals, Holbein, Veronese, El Greco, Goya, David, I.E. Repin, Van Gogh, M.V. Nesterov and others. Thanks to this, the names of many well-known and little-known doctors, as well as their appearance in various historical periods, have been preserved. The images of physicians are also revealed in the canvases on the theme “Doctor and the Patient”, painted by such Dutch artists as J. Sten, G. Low, Andrian van Ostade, G. Terborch, Pieter de Goch and others, who left us genre scenes from life doctors. Their usual characters are a patient and a doctor in an office set by the attributes of healing. As a rule, the doctor feels the pulse of the patient or examines the vial of urine. The best works of this series reveal the relationship between the patient and the doctor. Many domestic painters devoted their canvases to this topic. Their paintings give a visual representation of the working conditions of doctors and the peculiarities of health care in peacetime and on the battlefields.
In the books of E.I. Lichtenstein "Manual on Medical Deontology" (Kiev, 1974) and "Remembering the Patient" (Kiev, 1978), the problems of medical deontology are considered on the basis of the works of L.N. Tolstoy, G. Flaubert, A.P. Chekhov, O. Henry, S. Maugham and other classics of Russian and foreign literature. The author notes that in the development of medical deontology as a science, classical art has played a large and not yet fully realized and appreciated role.
In Soviet literature, the problems of medical deontology are attracting more and more attention. V.A. Soloukhin refers to such a phenomenon as patronage treatment. V.M. Shukshin (“Snake Venom”), Y. Krelin, Victoria Tokareva (“Bad Mood”) are outraged by the manifestations of bureaucracy, indifference, rudeness on the part of some doctors, middle and junior medical personnel. The notorious problem of "gifts" was also covered in the periodical press. An analysis of these publications shows that Soviet writers expanded the traditional understanding of the sphere of ethical and deontological problems of medicine, including the attitude towards the patient of auxiliary personnel - receptionists, wardrobe workers, etc. It turns out that not only the theater begins with a hanger...
Yu. Krelin, N.M. Amosov, F. G. Uglov, V.V. Kovanov, N.V. Elstein. I.A. Shamov, L.D. Khundanov, An. Sofronov. It is interesting to compare their reflections with the judgments of, for example, Rene Leriche (“Memories of my past life”), M.L. Gross ("The Doctors") and Madeleine Riffaut ("Hospital As It Is")

The image of a doctor in Russian classics

Anikin A.A.

The image of a doctor in Russian literature is a topic that is little touched upon in literary criticism, but its significance for culture is very great. The motives of illness and healing, in literal and symbolic meanings, permeate both folklore, and religion, and any kind of art in any nation, since they "penetrate" life itself. Literature gives an aesthetic, not worldly, but deeply vital cut of being, therefore here we are not talking about professional information proper, here they do not learn any craft, but only understanding, seeing the world: every profession has its own, special angle of view. And we can talk about the artistic, including semantic, meaning of the depicted case. The task of the history of medicine is to show how the appearance of a doctor and his professional qualities are changing. Literature will touch on this indirectly, only to the extent of reflecting life: what the artist sees in the medical field and what aspects of life are open to the eyes of the doctor.

Literature is also a kind of medicine - spiritual. Poetry has gone far from, perhaps, the first appeals of the word to the cause of healing: in their own way, poetic conspiracies, spells were designed for genuine healing from ailments. Now such a goal is seen only in a symbolic meaning: "Each verse heals the beast's soul" (S. Yesenin). Therefore, in classical literature, we focus on the hero-doctor, and not the author-healer (shaman, medicine man, etc.). And in order to comprehend our topic, its antiquity, which goes back in different variations to the pre-written word, should cause some caution in the analysis. One should not be deceived by light and decisive generalizations, such as what doctors-writers say about medicine, because in general, almost every classic novel contains at least an episodic figure of a doctor. On the other hand, the perspective of the theme suggests unconventional interpretations of familiar works.

And how convenient it would be to focus only on A.P. Chekhov!.. To use the famous aphorism about "wife-medicine" and "literature-mistress" ... Here the word "for the first time" so beloved by literary critics could appear: for the first time in Chekhov's literature fully reflected the appearance of the domestic physician, his selflessness, his tragedy etc. Then came Veresaev, Bulgakov. Indeed, as if thanks to Chekhov, literature looked at life through the eyes of a doctor, not a patient. But there were doctors-writers even before Chekhov, and it would be more accurate to say: it's not about the biography of the author; in the literature of the 19th century, a rapprochement with medicine was prepared. Isn't that why literature appealed too loudly to healers, constantly complaining either about hemorrhoids, or about catarrhs, or about "a breeze"? Not jokingly, it is clear that not a single profession was perceived as meaningful as the position of a physician. Was it so important whether the hero of literature is a count or a prince, an artilleryman or an infantryman, a chemist or a botanist, an official or even a teacher? Another thing is a doctor, such an image-profession is always not only meaningful, but symbolic. In one of his letters, Chekhov said that he "cannot come to terms with such professions as prisoners, officers, priests" (8, 11, 193). But there are specialties that the writer recognizes as a "genre" (Chekhov's expression), and it is the doctor who always bears such a genre, i.e. increased semantic load, even when it appears in the work fleetingly, in a short episode, in one line. For example, in Pushkin's "Eugene Onegin" it is enough for the lines "everyone sends Onegin to the doctors, They send him to the waters in unison", and the flavor of the genre is obvious. Just as in "Dubrovsky", where only once you will meet a "doctor, fortunately not a complete ignoramus": the profession of "teacher" Deforge hardly carries a semantic accent, while in medicine the intonation of the author is clearly embedded, which, as you know, in his time "ran away from Aesculapius, thin, shaved, but alive." The image of a doctor in Gogol is deeply symbolic - from the charlatan Christian Gibner ("The Government Inspector") to the "Grand Inquisitor" in "A Madman's Notes". Werner is important to Lermontov precisely as a doctor. Tolstoy will show how a surgeon, after an operation, kisses a wounded patient on the lips ("War and Peace"), and behind all this is the unconditional presence of the symbolic coloring of the profession: the doctor, by position, is close to the basics and essences of being: birth, life, suffering, compassion, decline , resurrection, torment and torment, finally, death itself (Compare: "I am convinced of only one thing ... That ... one fine morning I will die" - Werner's words from "A Hero of Our Time"). These motives, of course, capture the personality of everyone, but it is in the doctor that they are concentrated as something due, like fate. That is why, by the way, a bad or false physician is so acutely perceived: he is a charlatan of existence itself, and not only of his profession. The perception of medicine as a purely bodily matter in Russian literature also has a negative connotation. Turgenevsky Bazarov only on the verge of his death realizes that a person is involved in the struggle of spiritual entities: "She denies you, and that's it!" - he will say about death as a protagonist of the life drama, and not about a medical lethal outcome. The symbolism of the doctor is directly related to the Orthodox spirituality of Russian literature. The doctor in the highest sense is Christ, who casts out the most ferocious ailments with his Word, moreover, he conquers death. Among the parable images of Christ - a shepherd, a builder, a bridegroom, a teacher, etc. - the doctor is also noted: "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick" (Matt. 9:12). It is this context that gives rise to the utmost exactingness to the “esculapius”, and therefore even Chekhov’s attitude towards the doctor is harsh and critical: he who knows only how to bleed and treat all diseases with soda is too far from the Christian path, if he does not become hostile to it (cf. Gogol : Christian Gibner - the death of Christ), but even the ability of the most capable doctor cannot be compared with the miracle of Christ.

A.P. Chekhov, of course, will stand at the center of our topic, but one cannot fail to note several authors who preceded him, at least giving doctors in Russian literature as the leading heroes of their works. And it will be Dr. Krupov from Herzen's works and Turgenev's Bazarov. Of course, Dr. Werner from A Hero of Our Time meant a lot. So, already before Chekhov, a certain tradition arises, so some seemingly purely Chekhovian finds will most likely turn out to be unconscious, but variations of his predecessors. For example, it will be typical for Chekhov to show the hero's choice of one of two paths: either a doctor or a priest ("Belated Flowers", "Ward No. 6", letters), but this motif will already be found in Herzen; Chekhov's hero has long conversations with the mentally ill - and this is also the motive of Herzen's "Injured"; Chekhov will talk about getting used to someone else's pain - Herzen will also say the same ("Our brother is hard to surprise ... We get used to death from a young age, nerves get stronger, dull in hospitals", 1, I, 496, "Doctor, dying and dead"). In a word, the beloved “for the first time” should be used with caution, and we have so far only touched on particulars, and not the very perception of the medical field, for an example.

Lermontovsky Werner, in turn, was clearly a guide for Herzen. A number of scenes in the novel "Who is to blame?" generally echo the "Hero of Our Time", but we note that it is Herzen, perhaps due to his biography (cruel illnesses and death in his family), who is especially attached to the image of a doctor (see: "Who is to blame?", "Doctor Krupov" , "Aphorismata", - associated with the common hero Semyon Krupov, then "For the sake of boredom", "Injured", "Doctor, the dying and the dead" - i.e. all the main works of art, except for "The Thieving Magpie"). Nevertheless, the presence of just an episodic Lermontov doctor is strong everywhere: a gloomy and ironic state, the constant presence of death in thoughts, aversion to worldly worries and even to the family, a sense of being chosen and superior among people, a tense and impenetrable inner world, and finally Werner's black clothes , which is deliberately "exacerbated" by Herzen: his hero is already dressed "in two black frock coats: one all buttoned up, the other all unbuttoned" (1, 8, 448). Let us recall Werner's concise summary: "He is a skeptic and a materialist, like almost all doctors, and at the same time a poet, and in earnest - a poet in deed always and often in words, although in his life he did not write two verses. He studied everything living strings of the human heart, as one studies the veins of a corpse, but he never knew how to use his knowledge ... Werner surreptitiously mocked his patients; but ... he wept over a dying soldier ... the irregularities of his skull would have struck a phrenologist with a strange plexus of opposite His small black eyes, always restless, tried to penetrate your thoughts... The youth called him Mephistopheles... it (nickname - A.A.) flattered his pride "(6, 74). As is customary in Pechorin's journal, Werner only confirms this characterization. Moreover, his character is the imprint of the profession, as can be seen from the text, and not just the play of nature. Let us add or highlight - the inability to use the knowledge of life, unfolding personal destinies, which is emphasized by the usual familylessness of the doctor (“I am incapable of this,” Werner), but often does not exclude the ability to deeply influence women. In a word, there is some demonism in the doctor, but also a hidden humanity, and even naivety in anticipation of good (this can be seen with the participation of Werner in a duel). Spiritual development makes Werner condescendingly treat both a sick person and the possibilities of medicine: a person exaggerates suffering, and medicine gets off with simple means like sour-sulfur baths, or even promises that, they say, it will heal before the wedding (this is how one can understand from Werner's advice).

Herzen generally develops Werner's character, his "genesis". If Chekhov's doctor Ragin from "Ward No. 6" wanted to be a priest, but because of the influence of his father, as if involuntarily became a doctor, then Krupov's choice of a medical field is not coercion, but a passionate dream: born in the family of a deacon, he was supposed to become a minister of the church , but wins - and already contrary to the father - an obscure, but powerful attraction to initially mysterious medicine, that is, as we understand it, the desire for real philanthropy, embodied mercy and healing of one's neighbor wins in a spiritually excited personality. But the origin of the character is not accidental: the religious spiritual height passes to the real path, and it is expected that it is medicine that will satisfy spiritual searches, and in dreams it may also turn out to be the material reverse side of religion. Not the last role here is played by the unattractive, according to Herzen, church environment, which repels the hero, here people "are struck by an excess of flesh, so that they rather resemble the image and likeness of pancakes than the Lord God" (1, I, 361). However, genuine medicine, not in the dreams of a young man, influences Krupov in its own way: in the medical field, he discovers the "backstage side of life" hidden from many; Krupov is shocked by the revealed pathology of man and even of being itself, youthful faith in the beauty of natural man is replaced by a vision of the disease in everything, the painfulness of consciousness is especially acutely experienced. Again, as would later be in the spirit of Chekhov, Krupov spends everything, even festive time, in a lunatic asylum, and an aversion to life ripens in him. Let us compare Pushkin: the famous testament "morality is in the nature of things", i.e. a person is naturally moral, reasonable, beautiful. For Krupov, man is not "homo sapiens", but "homo insanus" (8.435) or "homo ferus" (1, 177): a crazy man and a wild man. Nevertheless, Krupov speaks more definitely than Werner about his love for this "sick" person: "I love children, but I love people in general" (1, I, 240). Krupov, not only in his profession, but also in everyday life, seeks to heal people, and in Herzen this motive is close to his own pathos of a revolutionary publicist: to heal a sick society. In the story “Doctor Krupov”, Herzen with an obsessive claim presents the essentially shallow and not even witty “ideas” of Krupov, who considers the whole world, the whole history as madness, while the origins of the madness of history are in the always sick human consciousness: for Krupov there is no healthy human brain , just as there is no pure mathematical pendulum in nature (1, 8, 434).

Such a "flight" of Krupo's mournful thought in this story seems unexpected for the readers of the novel "Who is to blame?", where the doctor is shown, in any case, outside world-historical generalizations, which looked more artistically true. There, Herzen showed that in a provincial environment, Krupov turns into a resonant inhabitant: "the inspector (Krupov - A.A.) was a man who became lazy in provincial life, but nevertheless a man" (1, 1, 144). In later works, the image of the doctor begins to claim something grandiose. Thus, Herzen sees the ideal vocation of a doctor in an unusually broad way. But ... broadly in design, not in artistic embodiment, in the outline of a great scheme, and not in the philosophy of a doctor. Here the claims of the revolutionary take precedence over the possibilities of the artist in Herzen. The writer is primarily concerned with the "disease" of society, which is why Krupov is already in the novel "Who is to blame?" He does not heal so much as he thinks about everyday things and arranges the fate of the Kruciferskys, Beltov, and others. His purely medical skills are given remotely, they are precisely "told", but they are not "shown". Thus, the capacious phrase that Krupov "belongs all day to his patients" (1, 1, 176) remains only a phrase for the novel, although, of course, Herzen's doctor is not only not a charlatan, but the most sincere an ascetic of his work - a work, however, which is in the shadow of an artistic design. It is the human and ideological aspects of a doctor that are important to Herzen: without being a charlatan, his hero must reflect Herzen's understanding of the influence of medicine on the doctor's personality. For example, in the episode when Krupov disregarded the requirements of the arrogant nobleman, did not arrive immediately at his capricious call, but ended up taking delivery from the cook, the social, rather than actually medical, perspective is much more significant.

And here Herzen in the story "For the sake of boredom" speaks of "patriocracy", i.e. about the utopian management of the affairs of society by none other than doctors, ironically calling them "general-headquarters-archiatrs of the medical empire." And, despite the irony, this is a completely “serious” utopia - the “state of doctors”, - after all, the hero of the story rejects irony: “Laugh as much as you like ... But before the advent of the medical kingdom, it’s far away, and you have to treat continuously” (1, 8, 459). The hero of the story is not just a doctor, but a socialist, a humanist by conviction ("I am by profession for treatment, not for murder" 1, 8, 449), as if brought up on the journalism of Herzen himself. As you can see, literature persistently wants the doctor to take up a broader field: he is a potentially wise ruler of this world, he has dreams of an earthly god or a generous king-father of this world. However, the utopian nature of this character in the story "Boredom for the sake of" is obvious, although for the author it is very bright. The hero, on the one hand, often finds himself at a dead end before ordinary everyday vicissitudes, on the other hand, he treats the idea of ​​a “medical kingdom” with bitterness: “If people really start to improve, moralists will be the first to remain fools, then who should be corrected?” (1, 8.469). And Titus of Leviathan from "Aphorismata" will even hopefully object to Krupov in the sense that madness will not disappear, will never be cured, and the story ends with a hymn to "great and patronizing madness" (1, 8, 438) ... So, the doctor remains eternal reasoner, and his very practice gives him a quick succession of observations and - sharp, ironic "recipes".

Finally, let us touch on the last feature of Herzen's hero-doctor in this case. The doctor, albeit utopianly, claims to be much, it is the universe (“a real doctor must be a cook, a confessor, and a judge”, 1, 8, 453), and he does not need religion, he is emphatically anti-religious. The idea of ​​the kingdom of God is his spiritual rival, and he treats both the church and religion in every possible way (“The so-called that light, about which, according to my studies in the dissecting room, I had the least chance to make any observations”, 1, 8, 434 ). The point is not at all in the notorious materialism of the doctor's consciousness: he wants to replace all authorities with his career with the most good goal; "Patrocracy" - in a word. In "The Damaged" the hero already talks about the coming overcoming of death (this closest rival for the doctor) precisely thanks to medicine ("people will be treated for death", 1, I, 461). True, the utopian side of Herzen is everywhere associated with self-irony, but this is rather coquetry next to a seemingly such a bold idea. In a word, here too, with the invasion of the motive of immortality into medicine, Herzen predetermined a lot in the heroic doctors of Chekhov and in Turgenev's Bazarov, to which we now turn: the doctor Bazarov will be spiritually broken in the fight against death; Dr. Ragin will turn away from medicine and from life in general, since immortality is unattainable.

The choice of the hero-doctor in the novel "Fathers and Sons" is rather a spirit of the times than an author's credo; Turgenev generally does not have such an excessive passion for the symbolic interpretation of medicine as Herzen: landowners often treat peasants for nothing to do, using their authority according to their position (cf. Lipin in Rudin, Nikolai Kirsanov and others). However, the perception of Bazarov as a doctor is a necessary perspective for understanding the novel as a whole. Moreover, we will have other doctors in the novel, including Vasily Ivanovich Bazarov, which is far from accidental: the doctors are father and son.

In "Fathers and Sons" Turgenev shows how easily the external side of life changes, how the apparent abyss lies between children and their parents, how the new trend of the times seems omnipotent, but sooner or later a person realizes that being remains unchanged - not on the surface, but in its essence: a powerful, cruel, and sometimes beautiful eternity breaks an arrogant person who imagines himself a "giant" (Evg. Bazarov's word) ... What is the connection with the medical field? ..

The vital content embedded both in the novel and in the hero-doctor is so capacious that sometimes the hero's profession remains in vain. The textbook and lengthy article by D. Pisarev "Bazarov" does not seriously concern the professional field of this hero, as if this is not an artistic, but actually a biographical feature: that's how life has developed. "He will engage in medicine partly to pass the time, partly as a bread and useful craft" - this is the most meaningful quote from the article regarding Bazarov the physician. Meanwhile, Bazarov and the doctor are not so ordinary, and most importantly, this character is in many ways due to medicine; again, the point is not in the superficial materialism of the hero of that time, these influences are much more important and subtle.

Unlike Krupov's biography, we do not know how Bazarov came to medicine (although there is a sexton in his family too!); unlike, for example, Zosimov from Crime and Punishment, Bazarov does not value his profession at all, and rather remains an eternal amateur in it. This is a doctor who defiantly laughs at medicine, does not believe in its prescription. Odintsova is surprised at this (“do you yourself say that medicine does not exist for you”), Father Bazarov cannot agree with this (“At least you laugh at medicine, but I’m sure you can give me good advice”), this angers Pavel Kirsanov - in a word, there is an obsessive paradox: the doctor is a nihilist who denies medicine ("We now laugh at medicine in general"). Later we will show, in Chekhov, that there is no place for laughter here for a genuine doctor: dejection at the state of the hospital, the tragedy of the doctor's impotence, delight in achievements and other things, but not laughter. At the same time, not a single hero will recommend himself as a doctor (or doctor) as strongly as Evg. Bazarov. And although the consciousness of this hero is characterized by an inability to resolve both everyday and worldview contradictions, the explanation here is different: the type of doctor is important for Bazarov, the image of a person who influences his neighbor, rebuilds people and who is expected as a savior. Isn't that what a doctor is? However, he wants to be a savior in a wider field (cf .: "After all, he will not achieve the fame that you prophesy for him in the medical field? - Of course, not in the medical field, although in this respect he will be one of the first scientists" (7, 289): an indicative dialogue between Father Bazarov and Arkady Kirsanov at a time when Yevgeny's life is already measured by only weeks, soon, in his own words, "burdock will grow out of him"). Deprived himself of any intuition in the approach of his death, Bazarov holds himself as an unconditional authority, and medicine here plays the role of a constant halo around the hero: touching on the depths of life that medicine reveals, Bazarov obviously surpasses the others who do not dare to so easily throw witticisms about the anatomical theater, hemorrhoids, it’s so easy to practice opening corpses (cf. - just lotions used by patients Nik. Kirsanov). The patient’s appeal to the helpless and “same” bodies in all of them also determines the anti-class position typical of a raznochinets: in illness or an anatomical woman, a man and a pillar nobleman are equal, and the prosector-grandson of a deacon turns into a powerful figure (“after all, I’m a giant,” says Eugene ). From this "gigantomania" - and laughter at a field so necessary for him: medicine itself becomes a kind of rival, which also needs to be destroyed, how to suppress everyone around - from friends to parents.

Is Bazarov good or bad as a doctor? In simple matters, he is a good practitioner, but rather a paramedic (skillfully bandages, tears his teeth), treats the child well ("he ... half jokingly, half yawning, sat for two hours and helped the child" - cf. Zosimov takes care of Raskolnikov "not jokingly and without yawning", is generally capable of not sleeping at night with a patient, without claiming an excessive reputation: every "medical" step of Bazarov has been turned into a sensation). Nevertheless, he treats medicine more as an entertainment, affecting, however, such sensitive aspects of life. So, with his parents, it was out of boredom that Bazarov began to participate in his father's "practice", as always making fun of medicine and his father. The central episode of his "entertainment" - the autopsy and infection - speaks not only of Bazarov's lack of professionalism, but also symbolically - of a kind of revenge on the part of the ridiculed profession. So is Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov wrong when he says that Bazarov is a charlatan, and not a doctor? ..

Professionally, Bazarov will most likely remain a failed doctor, no matter how they exalt him all around (Vasily Ivanovich will say that "Emperor Napoleon does not have such a doctor"; by the way, this is also a kind of tradition: turning to Napoleon (I or III?) reflects on the doctor, such is Lorrey, the doctor of Napoleon I, at Herzen and in the famous episode of wounding Andrei Bolkonsky at Tolstoy; in the latter case, the recovery, almost miraculous, thanks to the icon, at Prince Andrei contrary to the "Napoleonic" verdict of the doctor). So for Turgenev, vital, and not professional, content is important in the novel. Let's return to how the profession leaves its mark on the character. Neither a chemist nor a botanist can so unequivocally reduce a person to corporeality as the failed doctor Bazarov: Marriage? - "We, physiologists, know the relationship between a man and a woman"; Eye beauty? - "Study the anatomy of the eye, what is there mysterious"; Perceptual sensitivity? - "Nerves are dissolved"; Heavy mood? - "I overate raspberries, overheated in the sun, and my tongue is yellow." Life constantly shows that such physiology does not explain anything, but his stubbornness is not just a character trait: reducing everything to physicality, Bazarov always puts himself above the world, only this makes him, like his growth, the notorious "giant". Here, by the way, is the source of Bazarov's unbelief: there is no religion in the body, but the idea of ​​God does not allow one to exalt oneself in a satanic way (remark by Pavel Kirsanov): God is the rival of the Bazarovs.

The idea of ​​a sick society or crazy history is logical and simple for a physician (Krupov). Bazarov loves simplifications, and such an idea could not help but arise in him: "Moral diseases ... from the ugly state of society. Correct society - and there will be no diseases." Therefore, he secretly dreams about the fate of ... Speransky (cf. in the novel "War and Peace"), and not Pirogov or Zakharyin (see below in Chekhov). Bazarov will constantly play the role of a healer and diagnostician of the society (instant diagnoses for the entire Kirsanov family and family, almost everyone he meets), because there are patients or "actors" of the anatomical theater around. Of course, Turgenev shows that Bazarov does not cure anything in society, lives only with hints of activity, but his "physiologism" always introduces something sharp, touching, but this is more a boldness of speech than deed. Bazarov's rude, "non-medical" witticisms ("sometimes stupid and senseless," Turgenev notes) introduce some kind of commonplace piquancy, but this piquancy is akin to swearing: this is how Bazarov's "hemorrhoids" sound at the table in a decent Kirsanov's house.

In the image of Bazarov, this angle is also interesting. His healing is always (until the very scene of his death) directed at another, and not at himself. Bazarov himself did not become his patient, although there are plenty of reasons for this. A condescending remark - "Now the cigar is not tasty, the car is stuck" (7, 125) - does not count. For the rest, Bazarov, with unnatural perseverance, creates his image as an exceptionally healthy person (let's cure society, the "other", but not ourselves), healthy both physically and mentally: "than others, but this is not a sin", "that's all, you know , not my part", etc. At the same time, it should be noted that where Bazarov plays "superman", he is uninteresting and monotonous, partly coquettish and deceitful, but all the flavor of the character is in painful states, when some kind of terrible, unhealthy doom blows from Bazarov; feelings of meaninglessness and emptiness of life embrace him, like no other hero of "Fathers and Sons", not even striving to emphasize his absolute health. And this, by the way, is an important medical symptom - only from that area of ​​​​medicine, which Bazarov practically did not touch: psychiatry. Around Bazarov in literature there are heroes-doctors who see in psychiatry, perhaps, the highest medical vocation (Krupov, Zosimov, Chekhov's heroes). Bazarov, on the other hand, is either ignorant of this, or deliberately avoids observations that are dangerous to himself. One day, P.P. Kirsanov is “diagnosed” as an “idiot”: we don’t know if there is a large share of psychiatry here, although Pavel Petrovich’s neuroses will hardly raise doubts, but these are precisely neuroses, maybe a slight paranoia. But wouldn't it be more correct to see features of psychopathy in Bazarov himself? However, Turgenev shows that Bazarov perceives himself far from “adequately”, and the gospel motive “doctor, heal yourself” (Lk., 4, 23) is absolutely alien to this “dokhtur” (until we touch on the scenes of his death). The lively artistic character of Bazarov is dotted with neurotic and paranoid traits: this is not the author's tendency, Turgenev did not force his hero to drink ink or urine, bark like a dog or forget the calendar, but the ground for observations here is the widest, although not entirely relevant to our topic. We will only name a number of details, since the very moment of the doctor’s addressing exclusively to the “other”, and not to himself, is important to us, which we will highlight in Bazarov. So, Zosimova, Krupova or Ragin could not help but be alarmed not only by Bazarov’s feverish and sometimes incoherent * speeches (like “A Russian person is good only because he has a bad opinion of himself” and for some reason: “It is important that twice two - four, and the rest is all trifles", 7, 207; by the way, and the amusing "falling out" of the link that Bazarov himself is Russian, as he insists nearby). The very plot of the novel rests on nervous restlessness, a kind of mania of avoidance, disappearance from Bazarov: he always runs away somewhere unexpectedly: from the Kirsanovs to the city, from the city to Odintsova, from there to his parents, again to Odintsova, again to the Kirsanovs and again from parents; moreover, he always runs to where his nerves are very restless, and he knows it. For the plot, this is the same as getting up and leaving, without saying a word, from Kukshina, among his favorite champagne, or suddenly disappearing abruptly during a conversation with Odintsova: he "looks angrily and cannot sit still, as if something was tempting him "(7, 255); Bazarov is also covered by other seizures - rabies: in conversations with Odintsova, Pavel Kirsanov; the main scene is a conversation with Arkady at a haystack, when Bazarov seriously scares his friend: "I'll grab you by the throat now ... - The face (Bazarova - A.A.) seemed so ominous, such a serious threat seemed to him in the crooked smile of his lips , in burning eyes ... "Bazarov sees painful dreams, very convenient for a psychoanalyst. Actually, Turgenev, as if sensing this line in Bazarov, ends the novel not just with the death of the hero, but with death in a state of insanity (cf.: "after all, even the unconscious are communed"). Such is the “death dream” about the “red dogs” (“It’s like I’m drunk,” Bazarov will say), but the dream before the duel is no “weaker”, where Odintsova turns out to be Bazarov’s mother, Fenichka is a cat, Pavel Petrovich is a “big forest” ( cf. in a dream about "red dogs" Bazarov is pursued by his father in the form of a hunting dog, and also, obviously, in the forest: "You made a stand over me, like over a black grouse"). Sleep is always difficult for Bazarov, is it not because he so painfully demands that they not look at him when he sleeps * - more than a capricious demand in a conversation with Arkady: what is more here - concern for his greatness (motive - "everyone has a stupid face in a dream", to prevent the collapse of the idol), fear of one's dreams, but the demand is schizophrenic categorically. The state of hysteria, depression, megalomania - all this is scattered in the speeches and actions of Bazarov. Such a vividly described delirium on the eve of death: "The butcher sells meat ... I'm confused ... There is a forest here" is partly the key to Bazarov's neuroses: excitement from the flesh, love for meat (cf. in the text the opposition of bread - meat) and again the forest - just like in dreams. The roots of neuroses lie in childhood impressions. The hero himself is very stingy with stories about himself, his childhood is also not covered by the plot, and all the more significant is Bazarov’s strange (and extremely rare) and not quite clear recollection that in childhood the circle of his perception was closed on an aspen and a pit in the parental estate, which for some reason they seemed to him some kind of talisman. This is a picture of some painful, lonely childhood in the mind of a painfully impressionable child. Considering Bazarov's dreams, the motives of childhood "mother - father - home" are overgrown with soreness, while "forest", apparently, is associated with children's fear, "pit" is also a rather negative image. We repeat once again that it is too early to generalize such material in this chapter, but it is necessary to note its presence in the novel and its connection with the line of Bazarov the doctor.

Note that the proposed characterization of the famous hero, of course, is debatable. In addition, the proposed specific assessment cannot reject the established tradition in the interpretation of "Fathers and Sons". .

In the picture of Bazarov’s death, they rightly see a high sound, this is not only nonsense, but also a powerful attempt to play the role of a “giant” to the end, even when the chimeras erected by the hero are collapsing: he is already wavering in godlessness (an appeal to parental prayer), he is already frank in requests about help and recognition of a woman ("It's royal" - about the arrival of Odintsova: where is the "anatomical theater" or contempt for a woman). Finally, Bazarov passes away precisely as a doctor: he is all focused on the signs of a fatal illness, firmly sees the course of death; Bazarov finally turned like a doctor to himself. There is no laughter at medicine, as well as at their three colleagues, although both the German and the county doctor are shown by Turgenev almost as a caricature, the maximum exertion of the will exactly transforms Bazarov (see also about this in the chapter "An Extra Man"), but he is already defeated . In line with our theme, we can say that this is a belated transformation of the hero; mocked medicine seems to take revenge, as the whole life ridiculed and insulted by Bazarov takes revenge.

So, Turgenev considers the doctor both as a social figure and as a source of deep, sometimes unconscious life impressions, inaccessible to other heroes. It is impossible, however, not to note that not every doctor will turn out to be Bazarov (maybe for this his nature, his psyche is not enough?). Thus, Vasily Bazarov, a doctor fascinated by medicine, who, unlike his son, will pass in the background in the novel; county doctors are a reason for indignation and irony for both Bazarovs; as we said, even Nikolai Kirsanov tried to heal, and on this basis he built a marriage with Fenichka ... In a word, the presence of a "doctor" is an active, rich field of artistic observation.

Now, bypassing a number of secondary characters, let's talk about the doctor in the work of A.P. Chekhov, the main writer of this topic - not only because of his "main" profession (cf. even in the passport O.L. Knipper-Chekhov was called "doctor's wife "): it is in Chekhov's works that we can find a complete picture of the doctor's fate, in its fundamental turns and connections with worldview searches.

It seems to us that Chekhov fully expressed the interaction of existential and Christian motives in the doctor. The connection between medicine and what he called in a letter to E.M. Shavrova the expression "frantic prose" is more obvious: it was about a literary hero-gynecologist, and although this specialty is also not accidental, it seems that we can replace it in the quote simply with the word "doctor ": "Doctors are dealing with frantic prose, which you have not even dreamed of and which you, if you knew it ... would give a smell worse than a dog's" (8, 11, 524). Combining the two fragments, we will single out further: “You have not seen corpses” (ibid.), “I am used to seeing people who will die soon” (AS Suvorin, 8, 11, 229). It should be noted that Chekhov himself not only healed, but also performed forensic autopsies, we would say, got used to the appearance of bodily death, but did not try to treat it dispassionately in the Bazarov way. It is curious that the doctors-colleagues emphasized this in a special way. One zemstvo doctor wrote to a neighboring county near Moscow that "doctor Chekhov is very willing to go to autopsies" (8, 2, 89), suggesting that in such cases he invite his colleague. This "really desires" something more than a desire to practice ... In 1886, the experience of the death of the mother and sister of the artist Yanov, who were treated by Chekhov, forced him to permanently abandon private practice and (a symbolic detail) remove the sign "Doctor Chekhov" from his house . The medical writer was especially worried about the "impotence of medicine" (from a letter about D.V. Grigorovich's attack of illness that occurred in the presence of Chekhov), and, on the contrary, any approximation to the ideal of healing inspired him extraordinarily. Let us recall a characteristic episode in a letter to A.S. Suvorin: "If I had been near Prince Andrei, then I would have cured him. It is strange to read that the wound of the prince ... emitted a putrid smell. What a lousy medicine was then" 531). What an important interweaving of literature, medicine and life itself! Chekhov especially valued in himself the recognized gift of an accurate diagnostician, so in his letters it is repeatedly emphasized: in case of an illness, "I alone turned out to be right."

So, medicine for Chekhov is the focus of truth, and the truth about the most essential, about life and death, and the ability to create life in the most literal and, say, miraculous sense. Is it worth looking for a more significant approximation to the ideal of Christ, and doesn’t this force us to rethink the already familiar idea of ​​Chekhov as a non-religious person, for whom only love for the ringing of bells remains from all religion (see, for example, M. Gromov: 4 , 168 and compare his own consideration that "medicine is perhaps the most atheistic of the natural sciences", 4, 184). In the end, the biography of the artist is created by his works, which do not always coincide with the accessible (and most often completely inaccessible!) for us his worldly appearance.

Chekhov's Christian feelings did not become the subject of broad statements in letters or diary entries, although in a number of cases one can see in equal measure a cooling towards the faith or expressions of faith of the "fathers" (we mean the religiosity of his family), and dissatisfaction with the state of a person who is losing contact with the church. But even in this case Chekhov's artistic world cannot be understood outside of religion. (In parentheses, we note that this turn in the study of Chekhov is already present in modern literary criticism, and we will call the book by I.A. Esaulov "Category of catholicity in Russian literature", 5.) Such works as "Tumbleweeds", "Holy Night" , "Cossack", "Student", "At Christmas time", "Bishop", certainly speak of the depth of Chekhov's religious experience. With our deeper understanding, we see that all of Chekhov's work at first, as it were, does not contradict Christian spirituality, and in the end it is the embodiment of precisely the gospel vision of a person: a person who is mistaken, does not recognize Christ, awaiting revelation and judgment, often weak, vicious and sick. In this sense, the religious disorder of Chekhov himself turns out to be much closer to the gospel revelation than an open sermon on behalf of Christianity or the church. Isn't that why Chekhov so rejected Gogol's Selected Places...? Similarly, in revealing the image of a doctor, the presence of Christ, it would seem, is not at all obvious, not given as an open tendency, but this only convinces us of the secrecy of the most important features of the writer’s spiritual personality: that which cannot be expressed in the style and language of writing, seeks expressions in artistic imagery.

Let us first turn to the school textbook "Ionych". At the end of the story, Chekhov compares the starets’ appearance with the appearance of a pagan god: the red and plump Dr. Ionych and his likeness the coachman Panteleimon ride on a troika, with bells. With a characteristic dichotomy-polytheism, this comparison shows precisely the anti-Christian character of Startsev, immersed in everything earthly, bodily, both in his appearance, in the consolidation of money, real estate, and in his "huge practice" as a doctor. It would be too rough for an artist to lead his hero from Christ to a pagan god. But that's the point of the story. It would also be untrue for his time to endow Startsev with Orthodox features. The meaning, unlike the plot and character, is created implicitly, by all the details of the context. So, in the beginning of the story, a symbolic date is given - the Feast of the Ascension, when Startsev meets the Turkins. By the way, we note that this is Chekhov's favorite trait, and very significant, to date events according to the church calendar (cf .: Nikolin's day, Easter, name day - both in letters and in literary texts). At this time, "work and loneliness" was the motive of Startsev's ascetic life, and therefore the festive mood was so alive. The scene at the cemetery is especially important in the story, when a deeply spiritualized perception of the world develops in Startsev's mind, where death turns out to be a step into eternal life: "in every grave one feels the presence of a secret that promises a quiet, beautiful, eternal life" (8, 8, 327). Peace, humility, withered flowers, a starry sky, a church with a striking clock, a monument in the form of a chapel, the image of an angel are obvious details of the transition of life, time from mortal flesh to eternity. And we will note that for Chekhov, eternal life is not only an attribute of religion, but also an ideal of medicine: this is how he talked about I.I. Mechnikov, who allowed the possibility of extending a person’s life up to 200 years (8, 12, 759). Perhaps it is with this side of Chekhov's worldview that the so often repeated motif of a beautiful, distant, but achievable future should be connected: "We will live a long, long series of days, long evenings ... and there beyond the grave ... God will take pity on us and we will see life is bright, beautiful. We will hear the angels, we will see the whole sky in diamonds," sounds in "Uncle Vanya" as if in response to disappointment in the life of the doctor Astrov (8, 9, 332; cf .: "There is nothing for you to do in the world, you have no purpose in life", 328). Medicine infinitely prolongs life, aspiring to eternity - an ideal that belongs equally to religious and scientific consciousness. However, in Startsev’s mind, the image of eternal life passes fleetingly (“At first, Startsev was struck by what he saw now for the first time in his life and which, probably, will no longer be seen”), quickly losing its depth and religious aspiration, and limited to the experiences of the local, earthly existence: "How badly mother nature jokes on a person, how insulting to realize this!" It seems that it is here that the moment of spiritual breakdown in Ionych lies, and not in some fatal influence on him of the ordinary vulgarities of life. Turning away from the images of eternal life, Chekhov’s “materialist” doctor plunges especially sharply into the world of the flesh (“beautiful bodies”, beautiful women buried in graves, warmth and beauty leaving forever with death), no longer seeing anything beyond this shell of life. Hence - it seemed, unexpected in this episode, Startsev's thought: "Oh, you shouldn't put on weight!"

"Ionych" is a story about how a doctor refuses to feel the meaning of being, if death puts a limit to life, the "beautiful body" becomes decay, but in the world there is nothing but corporality.

Such detachment from the eternal - imagine a hypothetical "Christ" who would not lead to resurrection, but only heal diseases well - leads the Chekhovian doctor to suffering, his own sickness-morbidity, craving for death. True, it will not be superfluous to note that Chekhov has a number of medical heroes who did not join the spiritual abysses at all, even as fleeting as Startsev, the "abysses" of their field, for whom medicine does not outgrow the form of earnings (and rather shameless: paramedic from "Ward No. 6", "Rural Aesculapius", "Surgery", "Rothschild's Violin", etc.), which often has a satirical connotation: for example, in "The Remedy for Binge" healing without any spiritual abysses uses an excellent medicine - a cruel scuffle to which the human body is so responsive. In a number of works ("Lights", "Seizure", "A Boring Story", "A Work of Art", etc.), the professional side of the medical heroes does not play any symbolic role at all, which only sets off significant images and which, probably, could not but be, given that Chekhov used the image of a doctor 386 times (3, 240). Perhaps, in this amount, which is hardly amenable to exhaustive analysis, Chekhov developed all possible variations in the interpretation of the image, so that naturally he did not avoid the “neutral” option? How would it be on a par with other professions?.. Let us also note the image of the doctor from "Duel", derived rather due to the parody genre of the story: the presence of a doctor in "A Hero of Our Time" made Samoylenko become a military doctor, and not just a colonel, which seems to be in the series of Startsev , Ragin, Dymova, Astrov with some defiant absurdity, but among the heroes of the "Duel" another physician does not emerge.

Let us return, however, to the works that reflect Chekhov's medical creed. If for Startsev "living life" has gone from his "huge practice" into capital, into real estate, then in "Ward No. 6" medicine, without the support of Christian values, completely deprives a person, a doctor of vitality, and spiritual experience greater than that of Startsev does not allows you to be satisfied with anything ordinary.

Only at first it seems that the hospital produces an "impression of a menagerie" due to backwardness, lack of funds, and the decline of culture. Gradually, the leading motive becomes the lack of faith, Grace, perversion of the spirit. Chekhov will show both the barrenness of materialism and the especially ugly features of a false or incomplete faith. So, for the insane Jew Moiseyka, praying to God means "knocking his chest with his fist and picking at the door with his finger"! Such a picture of insanity could be portrayed by Chekhov so convincingly after a deep acquaintance with psychiatry and psychiatric hospitals (see: 8, 12, 168): according to some absolutely incredible associative series, prayer becomes "picking at doors." And Chekhov admitted in a letter to his classmate at the medical faculty, the famous neuropathologist G.I. Rossolimo, that knowledge of medicine gave him accuracy in depicting the disease (8, 12, 356), we note Chekhov’s reproaches to Leo Tolstoy, associated with erroneous ideas about the manifestation of the disease 8, 11, 409).

Turning to God becomes a meaningless habit that accompanies the most godless deeds. Soldier Nikita "calls on God as a witness" and takes beggarly alms from Moiseyka and again sends him to beg. Spiritual emptiness also "hardens" the doctor, as Chekhov put it, and he is no longer "different from a peasant who slaughters sheep and calves and does not notice blood" (8, 7, 127). This will be the relatively young doctor Khobotov, as well as the enterprising, full-fledged practicing paramedic Sergey Sergeevich. In this paramedic, with his significance reminiscent of a senator, Chekhov will note ostentatious piety, love for rituals. The paramedic's reasoning differs little from the soldier Nikita's appeals to God, with the name of God, and he and the other only rob their neighbor: "We suffer and suffer need because we pray badly to the Lord the merciful. Yes!" (8, 7, 136).

In Ward No. 6, Chekhov shows that a religious feeling cannot be given to modern man easily and without conflict. The doctor Andrei Efimovich Ragin in his very youth was close to the church, devout and intended to enter the theological academy, but the trends of the times prevent religious formation, so Chekhov will indicate in the text the exact date - 1863 - when Ragin, due to ridicule and categorical demands of his father, entered to the Faculty of Medicine, "I never took the veil as a priest." The very combination of two fields - ecclesiastical and medicinal - speaks volumes, including their incompatibility for a person of the 60-80s. Such inharmony is also expressed in Ragin's appearance, which conveys the conflict of spirit and matter: a rough appearance, a riot of flesh ("reminiscent of a corroded, intemperate and tough innkeeper", cf. Ionych) and obvious mental depression. The medical field deepens the split in him, forcing him to abandon the main religious idea - about the immortality of the soul: "- Do you not believe in the immortality of the soul?" the postmaster suddenly asks. "No ... I do not believe and have no reason to believe." The absence of immortality turns the life and profession of a doctor into a tragic delusion ("Life is an unfortunate trap"): why treat, why the brilliant achievements of medicine, if all the same "death comes to him - also against his will." So the spiritual state of the hero destroys not only his personality, but also his professional field, in which Chekhov will deliberately designate achievements, and even his own, "Chekhovian" quality - the talent of a faithful diagnostician.

Everything loses its meaning in the face of death, and already Ragin does not see the difference between a good clinic and a bad one, between home and "ward No. b", freedom and prison. Everything sublime in a person only enhances the impression of the tragic absurdity of life, and medicine does not save, but only deceives people: “Twelve thousand incoming patients were admitted in the reporting year, which means, simply arguing, twelve thousand people were deceived. ... Yes, and why prevent people from dying, if death is the normal and legal end of everyone?" (8, 7, 134). Chekhov also draws a number of episodes saturated with actual church images - service in the church, worship of an icon - and shows that without a conscious, with a touch of philosophy and science, acceptance of the basic religious provisions, ritualism will turn out to be only a temporary calm, after which longing and longing arise with even greater force. doom: "I don't care, even in the pit."

So, as in "Ionych", the consciousness of the physician leads to the depth of the experience of life and death, which does not enrich, but depresses the personality, if the hero leaves the field of a powerful spiritual tradition. Ragin, unlike Startsev, utterly rejects life, neglects matter itself, the flesh of the world, and eventually goes into oblivion.

Next to Startsev and Ragin, Osip Dymov, the hero of the story "The Jumper", may seem like an ideal image of a doctor. Indeed, the first two characters, each in their own way, turn away from medicine. Dymov is completely absorbed in science and practice. Chekhov here also emphasizes the closeness of the doctor to death, designating Dymov's position - dissector. Dymov is an example of medical dedication, he is on duty with the patient for whole days and nights, he works without rest, he sleeps from 3 to 8, he does something really significant in medical science. Even risks his life; like Bazarov, Chekhov's hero wounds himself during the autopsy, but, and this is symbolic, does not die (this is how the author shows a kind of victory over death). Even Dymov's death will be caused by another, most sublime reason, when he, as if sacrificing himself, cures the child (a very significant opposition - "corpse - child" - at the same time shows that death comes to Dymov from life itself, and not from mortal non-existence) . "Christ and sacrifice" - an analogy suggests itself, but ... Chekhov obviously reduces this image. Dymov turns out to be almost helpless in everything that does not belong to his profession. I would like to recognize his extraordinary meekness, tolerance, gentleness as a moral high, but Chekhov allows this to manifest itself in such comical episodes that he definitely speaks of a different author's assessment (suffice it to recall the episode when "two brunettes and a fat actor ate caviar, cheese and white fish" ,7, 59). Even Dymov's mental suffering is comically conveyed: "Oh, brother! Well, what's up! Play something sad," - and two doctors uncomfortably sang the song "Show me a monastery where the Russian peasant would not moan." Dymov's indifferent attitude to art is deliberately given: "I have no time to be interested in art." This means that Chekhov expects something more from the doctor than Dymov contains, the author writes with greater interest about Ragin's painful and decadent thoughts than about Dymov's spiritual world, moreover, Dymov shows the tragedy precisely in combining the highest qualities with obvious spiritual underdevelopment. The author expects some kind of higher perfection from the doctor: yes, endure, heal and sacrifice himself, like Christ? But then preach like Christ, then again, like Christ, take care of the immortal soul, and not just of the flesh. The context of the story, in Chekhov's way, intimately and impeccably accurately recreates this ideal image of a doctor full of meaning.

It is immediately obvious that, in comparison with Dymov, his wife’s passion for art is contrasting, her exalted and ostentatious passion for any attributes of spirituality, craving for public recognition, and turning to God. Without Dymov's perseverance and some, albeit one-sided, but strength and depth, this looks ugly and vulgar, but, oddly enough, the "jumping girl" makes up for Dymov's one-sidedness: he heals the body, saves for life, but does not heal souls, as if evading Ragin's questions "why live?" - Olga Ivanovna, endowed with an absolutely false consciousness, on the contrary, is all focused on the spiritual. And above all, she is emphatically devout, and not ostentatiously and sincerely in her own way. It is she who is depicted in a state of prayer (an exceptional artistic device), she believes that she is "immortal and will never die", she lives by purely spiritual ideas: beauty, freedom, talent, condemnation, damnation, etc. - this series seems even unexpected for the characterization of Olga Ivanovna, because these ideas are most often extremely perverted, but - they are embedded in this image! Finally, just as Dymov “influences” the patient’s body, Olga Ivanovna imagines that she influences souls: “After all, she thought, he created this under her influence, and in general, thanks to her influence, he changed a lot for the better” (8, 7, 67). It is interesting to compare Dymov and Olga Ivanovna in the episode of the Christian holiday: the second day of the Trinity, Dymov goes to the dacha, incredibly tired after work, with one thought "to have dinner with his wife and fall asleep" (8, 7, 57) - his wife is all passionate about the device the wedding of a certain telegraph operator, in her mind - church, mass, wedding, etc., which unexpectedly gives rise to the question "what will I go to church in?" Nevertheless, we recognize that the features of spirituality are fixed in the mind of Olga Ivanovna, albeit with an invariably false, lightweight connotation. Actually, on the collision of the elements of a healthy body and perverted spirituality, "The Jumper" is built. So, in response to the repentance and suffering of O.I., albeit dark and infrequent, Dymov will calmly say: "What, mother? - Eat hazel grouse. You are hungry, poor thing." Dymov himself will suffer secretly, subtly avoid exacerbations (for example, "allow O.I. to remain silent, that is, not to lie," "8, 7, 66), but in the ideal of a doctor Chekhov sees perfect spiritual experience, sophistication and activity, strengthened by strong faith, which Dymov will be deprived of, and only sparing his hero, Chekhov will remove the heading "The Great Man" from the story.

A surprisingly significant situation for our topic is created by Chekhov in the story "The Princess": the doctor Mikhail Ivanovich is in the walls of the monastery, where he has a permanent practice. Such a rapprochement between a doctor and a clergyman is also reminiscent of the numerous representations of Chekhov himself in the guise of a monk (see: 2, 236), letters with schema names of himself (up to "Saint Anthony"), frequent visits to monasteries (cf. in his father's diary: Anton " was in the Desert of David, laboring in fasting and labors", 2, 474). And as a physician, the hero of the "Princess" is presented flawlessly: "the doctor of medicine, a student at Moscow University, has earned the love of everyone for a hundred miles around" (8, 6, 261), but he is assigned the role of accuser and preacher, as we expect. At the same time, we note in him the features of a churched person, an Orthodox: invocations to the name of God, unconditional respect for the church and its servants, direct participation in the life of the monastery and a pronounced rapprochement with the monks (cf.: "together with the monks at the porch was and doctor", 8, 6, 264), the defense of Orthodoxy and the denunciation of anti-Orthodox trends (spiritualism) - it seemed, all the qualities that Dymov lacked, and in general a rare fullness of personality. But here we note once again that Chekhov does not depict the very grace of spirit and faith, but the present-day reality of an evangelical person who is mistaken even when there are all the attributes of being right (cf. the servants of the Sanhedrin). So is Mikhail Ivanovich: in his moral denunciations of the princess, not only sincerity is visible, but even rightness, there is knowledge of people, the ability to clearly expose, judge, correct vices, as well as diseases of the body. But - at the same time, Chekhov emphasizes the cruelty, gracelessness of M.I. her ears were pounding, and it still seemed to her that the doctor was pounding her on the head with his hat" (8, 6, 261). The doctor's denunciations turn into some kind of frenzy, an intoxication with moral torment: "Go away!" she said in weeping voices, raising her hands to shield her head from the doctor's hat. "Go away!" - And how do you treat your employees! - continued indignant doctor ... "(8, 6, 261). Only a perfect fit of his victim will suddenly make the doctor suddenly stop: “I succumbed to an evil feeling and forgot myself. Is this not good? , and as furious as Mikhail Ivanovich. M.I. he completely repents of his cruelty (“A bad, vengeful feeling”), and the princess, who was so cruelly denounced by him, in the end remained completely unshaken by his speeches (“How happy I am!” she whispered, closing her eyes. “How happy I am!”). So, in addition to the weakness and wrongness of M.I., Chekhov also emphasizes the futility of his sermon. Later, in the story "The Gooseberry", Chekhov will give the role of an accuser, and even calling for everything high (remember the image of a "man with a hammer"), although a doctor, but a veterinary doctor - I.I. Chimshe-Himalayan, whose pathos also leaves his listeners indifferent. As you can see, the ideal of a doctor becomes truly unattainable! But this would be the wrong opinion.

The ideal of a doctor will turn out to be much simpler, more accessible, closer to the ground, to the ordinary. The doctor will not assume the unbearable role of Christ, but will approach him, as if, to the best of human strength, healing both the body and the soul of his neighbor. It turns out that Chekhov's high demands on the doctor will be completely satisfied with the plot of the story "A case from practice."

Again, the color of this story is associated with the Orthodox way of life: the trip of the doctor Korolyov to the patient takes place on the eve of the holiday, when everything is set to "rest and, perhaps, pray" (8, 8, 339). In the story, everything is extremely ordinary: there is no bright search, there is no pointed plot (like betrayal in the family, love, an unfair act, etc.), there is not even a fatal patient (cf. - a terminally ill child in "The Jumper", "Enemies", "Tife"). On the contrary, the patient "everything is in order, the nerves spree." The motifs of the general disorder of life, factory monotony, people and relationships mutilated by capital, are sketched only in a distant background, but this is all the usual earthly circle, and Chekhov clearly reduces the social pathos of Korolev's observations, translating it with one stroke into the eternal layers of religious metaphysics - a remark that would become in another style with the most pathetic gesture: "the main thing for whom everything is done here is the devil" (8, 8, 346). Chekhov recognizes who is the "prince of this world", and leads his hero away from a direct fight with the devil - to sympathy, compassion for his neighbor, whom the doctor will treat as a at himself, equal in the common destiny of mankind, without towering over his suffering "patient". So, the "patient" Koroleva will say: "I wanted to talk not with a doctor, but with a loved one" (8, 8, 348), which in the semantic context of the story sounds exactly like the motive of the merger in the doctor of the physician and, say, "the closest" from relatives (it is no coincidence that a contrasting alienation to each other in the family and in the Lyalikovs' house is shown, and the doctor makes up for this disorder). Korolev heals the soul not by denunciation and is not even ready to preach (“How can I say it?” Korolev pondered. “And is it necessary to speak?”), but sympathy and hope for future happiness (an analogue of immortality), expressed, as the author emphasizes, “in a roundabout way "(8, 8, 349), lead not so much to the resolution of the hardships of life, but to general peace, spiritual humility and at the same time to spiritual mobility, growth: the" roundabout words "of the Queen were a clear boon for Lisa, who finally looked "better celebratory,” and “she seemed to want to tell him something especially important.” Thus, according to Chekhov, the deepest healing of the soul is even inexpressible in words. The enlightened state of man and the world determines the festive finale of the story: "It was heard how the larks sang, how they rang in the church." The upliftment of the spirit also changes the gloomy picture of life: “Korolev no longer remembered either the workers, or the pile buildings, or the devil” (8, 8, 350), and is this not a real victory over the “prince of this world”, the only possible, by Chekhov? More than this tense and enlightened state, the doctor is not given to achieve, here is the highest step of approaching the "zemstvo" - earthly doctor to the ideal of healing Christ.

We do not undertake to unravel the secret of the artist's personal fate, but, perhaps, the pairing of medicine with literature, so characteristic of Chekhov, was a kind of service to Christ: the treatment of the body, the treatment of the soul.

Indeed, even after Chekhov, professional doctors come to literature - up to our contemporaries. But Chekhov will be a kind of completion of the development of the theme in line with Russian classics, saturated with the spirit of Orthodoxy. In other times - "other songs". In this understanding, the path leading from the atheist Krupov to Chekhov's ideal of the healer Christ is the path to the final and at the same time higher, overcoming contradictions and temptations, interpretation of the image of the doctor in the spirit of the Russian tradition.

Bibliography

1 Herzen A.I. Works in 9 vols. M., 1955.

2 Gitovich N.I. Chronicle of life and creativity of A.P. Chekhov. M., 1955.

3 Gromov M.P. Book about Chekhov. M., 1989.

4 Gromov M.P. Chekhov. Series "ZhZL". M., 1993.

6 Lermontov M.Yu. Complete collection. essays. T. 4. M., 1948.

7 Turgenev I.S. Collected works in 12 vols. T. 3. M., 1953.

8 Chekhov A.P. Collected works in 12 vols. M., 1956.

Bibliography

For the preparation of this work, materials from the site http://www.portal-slovo.ru/ were used.

Publications in the Literature section

Physician writers

Many Russian classics had a second profession, often unrelated to literature. We have collected the stories of writers-doctors: why they received a medical education, how they found time for writing and medical practice, and what they eventually chose - read in the publication of the Kultura.RF portal.

Vladimir Dal

Vasily Perov. Portrait of Vladimir Dahl (detail). 1872. State Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow

In 1826, after serving in the Black Sea Fleet, midshipman Vladimir Dal entered the medical faculty of the University of Dorpat (today the University of Tartu). As the surgeon Nikolai Pirogov said, "Dal changed from sailors to doctors". He was one of the best students, even in the years of study he excelled in surgery.

“I felt the need for a thorough study, for education, in order to be a useful person in the world.”

Vladimir Dal

At the beginning of the Russian-Turkish war, Dal graduated from the medical faculty ahead of schedule with the highest rank of doctor of the 1st department. He was sent to the army, where the future writer served as an intern in a mobile hospital.

After the war, Vladimir Dal worked at the St. Petersburg military land hospital. He became a famous surgeon: he performed more than 40 cataract surgeries. In 1837, Dahl, along with several other doctors, tried to treat the dying Alexander Pushkin, he also stated his death. The doctor described the last days of the poet’s life and the results of the autopsy in the article “Death of A.S. Pushkin.

“I ate my teeth and turned gray over medical art”- Vladimir Dal wrote about himself. His knowledge of medicine was highly appreciated by the St. Petersburg medical elite - even after Dahl left surgery. In the 1850s, he led a circle of city doctors, wrote articles on the right way of life, folk medicine, and spoke in favor of homeopathy. Until the end of his life, Vladimir Dal did not stop practicing medicine. In the four-volume Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Russian Language, he explained the meanings of some medical concepts.

Anton Chekhov

Osip Braz. Portrait of Anton Chekhov (detail). 1898. State Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow

Anton Chekhov began to study at the medical faculty of Moscow University named after I.M. Sechenov in 1879. During these years, Chekhov did not give up literature - he managed to do medical work and write books.

The young doctor practiced at a hospital in Voskresensk near Moscow (today the city of Istra). He later described this time in the works "Dead Body", "Rural Aesculapius", "Surgery". Chekhov said that medical and natural science knowledge helped him to reveal the feelings and experiences of literary characters.

“Medicine is my lawful wife, and literature is my mistress. When I get tired of one, I sleep at the other. Although it is disorderly, it is not so boring, and besides, both of them absolutely do not lose anything from my treachery ... "

Anton Chekhov

In Zvenigorod, Anton Chekhov was in charge of the hospital. He received 40 patients a day, went to autopsies, acted as an expert in the courts. But the peak of his medical career fell on the years of his life in Melikhovo near Moscow. The district doctor's possessions included 25 villages, 4 factories and a monastery.

“Medicine is progressing a little. I'm flying and I'm flying. I have a lot of acquaintances, and therefore, a lot of patients. Half have to be treated for nothing, while the other half pays me five and three rubles.

From a letter to brother Michael

The work of a doctor took a lot of time, and sometimes Anton Chekhov could not concentrate on his books. He wrote about this to his publisher Alexei Suvorin more than once: “I am alone, because everything cholera is alien to my soul, and work that requires constant traveling, talking and petty troubles is tiring for me. No time to write. Literature has long been abandoned, and I am poor and miserable ... " Only in 1898 did Chekhov leave medical practice, but continued to follow medical advances.

Vikenty Veresaev

Sergey Malyutin. Portrait of Vikenty Veresaev. 1919. State Literary Museum, Moscow

Vikenty Veresaev defended his PhD at the Faculty of History and Philology at St. Petersburg University (today the Institute of History of St. Petersburg State University), and then entered the Medical Faculty of Dorpat University.

“My dream was to become a writer, and for this it seemed necessary to know the biological side of man, his physiology and pathology; in addition, the specialty of a doctor made it possible to closely converge with people of the most diverse strata and ways.

From the autobiography of Vikenty Veresaev

The doctor began to practice in 1894 in his native Tula. However, two years later he returned to St. Petersburg: he worked as an intern, headed the library at the Botkin hospital and wrote scientific articles that were highly appreciated by the metropolitan medical community.

In 1901, Vikenty Veresaev published the famous Notes of a Doctor. In the work, he described cases from his medical practice, observations, experiences and thoughts of a young doctor. However, colleagues greeted the book with rejection: such revelations could set readers hostilely against medicine.

During the Russo-Japanese War, Veresaev was mobilized to the front. He treated the wounded on the front line, and at the same time made sketches of future works. Later, the doctor-writer published the books "At War" and "Tales of the Japanese War."

“People do not have even the remotest idea either about the life of their body, or about the forces and means of medical science. This is the source of most misunderstandings, this is the reason for both blind faith in the omnipotence of medicine and blind disbelief in it. And both equally make themselves felt with very grave consequences.

Vikenty Veresaev

Michael Bulgakov

In 1909, after graduating from high school, Mikhail Bulgakov entered the medical faculty of Kiev University. There were already doctors in the family: one Bulgakov's uncle treated Patriarch Tikhon, and the second was a well-known doctor in Moscow.

During the First World War, Mikhail Bulgakov went to the front: he served for several months in front-line hospitals in Kamenetz-Podolsk, Chernivtsi, and Kiev. Together with him went the first wife Tatiana Lappa, she became a sister of mercy. Directly from the front, Bulgakov was sent to the Smolensk province - to manage the hospital, where his wife helped him. Bulgakov received 50 patients a day, more than 15 thousand patients came out in a year. About this period of his life, he later wrote an autobiographical cycle, Notes of a Young Doctor.

“Medical debt is what primarily determines his attitude towards patients. He treats them with a truly human feeling. He deeply pities the suffering person and ardently wants to help him, no matter what it costs him. In life, Bulgakov was sharply observant, impetuous, resourceful and courageous, he had an outstanding memory. These qualities also define him as a doctor, they helped him in his medical activities. He made diagnoses quickly, knew how to immediately grasp the characteristic features of the disease, and rarely made mistakes in diagnoses. Courage helped him decide on difficult operations.

Nadezhda Zemskaya, sister of Mikhail Bulgakov

Diploma of Approval "in the degree of a doctor with honors with all the rights and benefits assigned by the laws of the Russian Empire to this degree" the young doctor received only in 1916.

In 1918, Mikhail Bulgakov returned to Kiev, and a year later he left medicine to become a writer. He wrote plays, short stories, articles for the capital's newspapers and magazines.

Vasily Aksenov

Writer Vasily Aksenov worked as a doctor for a very short time. He graduated from the Leningrad Medical Institute (today - the First St. Petersburg State Medical University named after Academician I.P. Pavlov) in 1956.

“The medical path was just accidental. Until the 8th grade, I studied in Kazan, then - 9-10th grades - finished my studies in Magadan. Mom left the camp in 1947 and remained an exile in this city. It was in Magadan that I began to write poetry. I imagined myself as a poet. But he entered the medical faculty. Mom and stepfather persuaded: "It is easier for doctors in the camps."

From an interview with Continent magazine, 1981

Aksenov dreamed of getting a job as a doctor on long-distance ships and seeing the world. Such a prospect was in the Baltic Shipping Company, but due to the political conviction of his parents - Vasily Aksenov's mother Evgenia Ginzburg was repressed - he was not given a visa.

For a year, Aksenov worked as a therapist at the quarantine station of the Leningrad Sea Port, then he was transferred to the position of chief physician in the hospital of the water health department. There Vasily Aksenov began to write his first story - Colleagues.

“As for the material for literary works, they lie precisely in the thick of life, and not in the traveler's window. It was at the medical site that you could get the most valuable material for a novel, novel, story. "Notes of a Russian traveler" - the genre has already become obsolete. "The frigate" Pallada "you are unlikely to write."

From a letter from mother Evgenia Ginzburg to her son, 1956

When he returned to Moscow in 1958, two of his stories were published in Yunost magazine. In 1961, the stories "Colleagues" and "Star Ticket" were first published. After that, Vasily Aksenov left medicine forever.

The image of a doctor in Russian literature

Korsak V.O., Khromenkova Yu.Yu.

State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education Saratov State Medical University im. IN AND. Razumovsky Ministry of Health of Russia

Department of Humanities, Philosophy and Psychology

Doctors are representatives of one of the most difficult professions. The life of a person is in their hands. The essence of the profession of a doctor is most clearly revealed in the works of classical literature. Writers of different eras often made doctors the heroes of their works. Moreover, many talented writers came to literature from medicine: Chekhov, Veresaev, Bulgakov. Literature and medicine are brought together by the deepest interest in the human personality, since it is an indifferent attitude towards a person that determines a true writer and a true doctor.

Since ancient times, the main commandment of a doctor is “do no harm”. Recall the work of Astafiev "Lyudochka". In one of the episodes, we meet a guy who is dying in a hospital. The boy caught a cold in the cutting area, and a boil appeared on his temple. The inexperienced paramedic scolded him for being treated for nothing, squeamishly crushed the abscess with her fingers, and a day later she accompanied the guy, who had fallen into unconsciousness, to the district hospital. Perhaps, during the examination, the paramedic herself provoked a breakthrough of the abscess, and he began to exert his destructive effect. In medicine, this phenomenon is called "iatrogeny" - the negative impact of a medical worker on a patient, leading to adverse consequences.

For comparison, we cite Bulgakov's story "Towel with a Rooster". A young doctor ended up in a provincial hospital after a medical university. He is worried about the lack of professional experience, but he scolds himself for his fear, because the medical staff of the hospital should not doubt his medical viability. He experiences a real shock when a dying girl with a crushed leg appears on the operating table. He never performed amputations, but there is no one else to help the girl. Despite the fact that human weaknesses are not alien to the hero of the story, all personal experiences recede before the consciousness of medical duty. Because of this, he saves human life.

After analyzing these works, we will identify the qualities that a real doctor should have: dedication, dedication, humanity. It is necessary to be a real professional, to treat work responsibly, otherwise the consequences can be tragic. In any conditions, the main thing for a doctor is to save human life, overcoming fatigue and fear. This is what the great words of the Hippocratic Oath are about.