Alexandr Pushkin - The Bronze

Alexandr Pushkin - the Bronze horseman"; "Boris and Gleb" -tail; Alexandr Pushkin - "Boris Godunov"

Before writing plays, Pushkin was an accomplished poet. But then he discovered Shakespeare and his manner of writing changed forever. Although his plays were revolutionary, the state of the theater during Pushkin's time was not favorable to his writings mainly because people went to the theater to see old-fashioned historical tragedies and the French vaudeville that was penetrating the Russian theater scene. Moreover, the theater lacked good Russian plays on Russian themes despite the fact that the Russian theater was never short of good playwrights.

The Bronze Horseman is a poem inspired by the equestrian statue of Peter the Great located in Saint Petersburg. Written in 1883, the poem is considered to be a milestone in Russian literature. The most interesting fact regarding the source of the poem is that the latter was the one which greatly increased the popularity of the statue, and not the other way around. In this sense, one can rightfully notice that Pushkin offered Russia two cultural works of great value, his work and the statue which he reinvented as it was given the name of the poem. The poem tells the story of young Evgeny and his poor family during the flood which severely affected Saint Petersburg in mid-18th century which was actually the largest flood recorded in the city to this day. Even though, similarly to other writers of his era, Pushkin emphasizes the location of the events, i.e. Saint Petersburg, in the Bronze Horseman, the city is not presented as imperialistic and grand in the manner of his contemporaries, but fantastic and somewhat magical in the sense that it followed its own logics that not even the Tsar could control or understand. On the other hand, the flood might also symbolize the cost of lives that the development and expansion projects of Tsar Peter the Great generated. Furthermore, the flood is a metaphor for nature and its unpredictability. Moreover, the flood of 1824 is a symbol for the opposition between the interests of the state - in this case, expansion and greatness - and those of a simple person i.e. The right to life and safety. Evgeny is a simple citizen representing middle class Russian society which is severely harmed by the Tsar's expansionist initiatives. In fact, the simple man suffers the most. Even though Evgeny survives the flood, his fiancee drowns along with all of the inhabitants of one of the islands of the city. Evgeny's hopes for a better life with his loved one are shattered. He is driven into despair and madness and starts blaming Peter, the patron of the city, for his shattered dreams and cruel fate. Despair and pain determine him to curse the Tsar's statue, a symbol of the greatness and wealth of the Empire which had absolutely nothing in common with the lives of the country's citizens. His curse is heard by the status that seems to break free from its pedestal and come to life chasing the young man in search of revenge. Although Evgeny manages to survive and treats the statue with respect from that day on, his fate is merciless. He dies shortly afterwards and is buried out of charity. The passage in question illustrates this point-of-view. Evgeny is hopeless in the face of the flood. He looks at the statue and blames it for his wretched fate. The superiority and detachment of the statue, very much like those of the Tsar, are incredibly hurtful to the simple man who finds himself unable to pursue his dreams and lead his life. In this sense, "the bronze head" is a beautiful metaphor illustrating the status of the statue that is not threatened by the same dangers as the common man. The waves and the water represent the dangers that the simple man is confronted with in imperialistic Russia. The statue rises above these threats; its superiority is threatening to Evgeny. Boris Godunov is a drama written mainly in blank verse that tells the story of the accession to the throne of Boris Godunov who does not hold official power but de facto runs the affairs of the state as regent. Upon the death of Ivan IV "The Terrible" towards the end of the 16th century, the throne passes to his son, Fyodor who becomes Fyodor I. As the latter is uninterested with political matters and dedicates his entire life to spiritual aspirations, the empire is run by Fyodor's brother-in-law, Boris Godunov, a capable powerful noble. When Fyodor dies, Boris is elected tsar by the Assembly of the land, which he more or less controlled. Pushkin's poem becomes even more valuable if one considers the importance of Boris Godunov in Russian history; also, its value increases as it depicts - in a very Shakespearian way - the political tribulations that defined the Russian political scene in the 17th century.

The passage illustrates Fyodor's preoccupation with spiritual matters such as cartography. His father encourages him to study and build a solid education that he thinks will be of help when taking over the affairs of the country. Nonetheless, there is also a more profound meaning to the passage and the talk the two have. The fact that Fyodor draws the map of Russia is not a mere coincidence; this is proof of imperialistic and expansionist pride. "Our realm" is a metaphor for the country that is seen as more than just a country whose territory they inhabit; they are one with it, and Russia is given a sort of symbolical aura. The choice of words is not coincidental either but expresses young Fyodor's fascination with his country of birth. The word 'realm' makes the reader think of a kind of magical land; the geographical landmark, such as the Volga and the city Moscow are the only factors in young Fyodor's speech that give the impression of reality, the reality we all know. The tsar, on the other hand, is hopeful that his son will inherit the kingdom and sees education as means to an end. In order to be able to face the many challenges that running a kingdom involve, the king needs to be educated and to possess knowledge.

The tale of Boris and Gleb is a story of Christian inspiration and morals. It is the story of two brothers who are killed by their oldest brother who wants to be king upon the death of Vladimir I - their father. On his deathbed, king Vladimir expresses his wish that his kingdom be divided among his 12 sons. Nonetheless, Sviatopolk, the first born and thus eldest son, refuses to accept his father's wish which would have granted him control over the city of Kiev, and decides to murder his brothers in order to become king over the entire kingdom. Boris, prince of Rostov, was the most loved and well respected of the 12 sons of the former king. This is why Sviatopolk decides to kill him first. Gleb was also killed that same year when he was going to his younger bother's funeral. The story has it that Sviatopolk also killed him. Some biographers claim that both brothers had been warned about Sviatopolk's intentions to murder them but refused to take action against their brother saying that they could not raise their hand against their brother.

Boris and Gleb are venerated in the Orthodox Church as martyrs and symbols of non-violence because they chose death over hurting their brother. They fully embody Christian values although their martyrdom was not one to faith. Nonetheless, their refusal to harm their brother is indirect proof of their faith. Their voluntary sacrifice, which avoided the suffering of others, is considered a true milestone in the development of the Orthodox religion, and an effort to preserve the Christian ideal. Moreover, their tale had a profound effect on the subsequent development of Christianity in Russia. Whereas in Byzantine Christianity God was often depicted as Pantocrator, that is all mighty and all-powerful, in Russia the emphasis was on Christ as the sacrificial lamb who accepted sacrifice as part of faith. Russian piety came to be characterized by a tender humility and an acceptance of suffering following the example of Christ. In this century Russia's New Martyrs offer a supreme testimony to the enduring influence of this otherworldly orientation which that country first witnessed in the exploit of the two youthful brother princes and passion-bearers, Boris and Gleb.

The passages selected are very significant to the work as a whole. The first illustrates the moment when Sviatopolk decides to kill his brother Boris. Also, it is a very good example of his twisted and dishonest nature. Very much like Satan, Sviatopolk says something and means something completely different. His strategy is to be deceitful and to gain the confidence of his brother whom he plans to kill. He invokes love and claims to want to share their father's kingdom when in fact he wants it all for himself and wished to eliminate any adversaries even if this implies killing his own brothers.

The second passage is very relevant as to the nature of Boris. The opposition between the two brothers is generated by their different approaches to possession, faith, and brotherhood. Sviatopolk plans to kill his own brother whereas Boris refuses even to defend himself from his brother. Also, the two siblings view possession differently. Boris is loved and well respected by his people, and knows how to be a good ruler whereas his older brother is only interested in accumulating wealth and power but does not care about his people as seen in the first selected paragraph when he gives them gifts only in hopes of buying their submission and approval. Last but not least, the difference in approach as far as religion is concerned between the two brothers is overwhelming. Boris chooses death over neglecting Christian morals whereas his brother has no problem killing him. Hence the parallel between Cain/Abel and Sviatopolk/Boris comes naturally. The devil is seen as rejoicing at the fratricide and the thought of having found a second Cain. It is also suggested that Sviatopolk's actions might be the work of the Devil; his voice is evil and his intentions murderous.